12-3574  JOB/ACC/30                        4 July 2012 
 
 
Working Party on the              Original:  English  
Accession of Kazakhstan         
 
   
WORKING PARTY ON THE ACCESSION OF 
KAZAKHSTAN TO THE WTO 
 
Submission by the Republic of Kazakhstan 
  
 The following submission is being circulated to Members of the Working Party, at the request 
of the Delegation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.    
_______________ 
 JOB/ACC/30 
Page 2  
 
   - Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(a) Legislative Framework  
1. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e legislative basis for the regulation of the 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) regime in Kaza khstan was established by the following:  Eurasian 
Economic Community (EurAsEC) and Customs Un ion (CU) Agreements and EurAsEC and CU 
Decisions.  The EurAsEC Agreement on Implementa tion of Coordinated Policy in the Field of 
Technical Regulation, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of 25 January 2008 and the EurAsEC 
Agreement on Establishing the EurAsEC Informative System in the Field of Technical Regulation, 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of 12 December 200 8.  On the Sanitary side, the legislative basis 
was found in the CU Agreement on Sanitary Measu res of 11 December 2009 (as last amended by 
Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 39 of 21 May 2010), Decision of the Interstate 
Council of the EurAsEC No. 83 of 19 May 2011 "On Entering into Force of Protocols of 
21 May 2010 in the Sphere of Implementation San itary, Veterinary-and-Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures" and CU Commission Decision No. 299 of 28 May 2010 "On the Application of Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" (as last am ended by CU Commission Decisions No. 342 of 
17 August 2010, No. 455 of 18 November 2010, and No. 622 of 7 April 2011).  The veterinary 
framework could be found in the CU Agreement on Veterinary and Sanitary Measures of 11 December 2009 (as last amended by the Inte rstate Council of EurAsEC Decision No. 39 of 
21 May 2010), CU Commission Decision No. 317 of 18 June 2010 "On the Application of 
Veterinary-Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union"  (as last amended by CU Commission Decisions 
Nos. 342 of 17 August 2010, 455 of 18 November  2010, 569 of 2 March 2011, 570 of 2 March 2011, 
623 of 7 April 2011, 724 of 22 June 2011, 726 of 15 July 2011, 810 of 23 September 2011, 830 of 18 October 2011, 831 of 18 October 2011, 834 of 18 October 2011 and 893 of 9 December 2011), 
CU Commission Decision No. 607 of 7 April 2011 "O n Common Forms of Veterinary Certificates on 
Imported Goods Subject to Veterinary Control in to the Customs Union Territory" as amended by 
CU Commission Decision No. 832 of 18 October 2011 "On Amendments to the Forms of Common Veterinary Certificates for the Importing to the CU Customs Territory of the Controlled Goods from 
Third Countries" and CU Commission Decision No . 892 of 9 December 2011  "On Amendments to 
the Forms of Common Veterinary Certificates for th e Importing to the CU Customs Territory of the 
Controlled Goods from Third Countries", CU Commission Decision No. 624 of 7 April 2011 "On the Regulation on the Procedure of Development and Maintenance of the Register of Companies and Persons which Carry out Production, Reprocessing a nd (or) Storing Products Subject to Veterinary 
Control (Surveillance) and Imported into the te rritory of the Custom Union", CU Commission 
Decision No. 625 of 7 April 2011 "On Harmonization of  CU Legal Acts in the Field of Sanitary, JOB/ACC/30 
Page 3 
 
 
  Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures with Intern ational Standards" as amended by CU Commission 
Decision No. 722 of 22 June 2011, CU Co mmission Decision No. 721 of 22 June 2011 
"On Application of International Standards,  Recommendations, and Guidelines", CU Commission 
Decision No. 724 of 22 June 2011 "On Amendmen t of the Regulation on Common Procedure for 
Conduct of Veterinary Control at the Customs Bord er of the Customs Union and within the Customs 
Territory of the Customs Union", CU Commission Decision No. 726 of 15 July 2011 "On Veterinary 
Measures", CU Commission Decision No. 801 of 23 September 2011 "On Regulation on the Uniform 
Procedure of Carrying Out Examination of Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of 
Implementation of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Measures", CU Commission Decision 
No. 830 of 18 October 2011 "On Amendments to th e Common Veterinary (Veterinary And Sanitary) 
Requirements Applicable to the Goods Subject  to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" and 
CU Commission Decision No. 893 of 9 December 20 11 "On Amendments to the Common Veterinary 
(Veterinary And Sanitary) Requirements Applicable  to the Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
(Surveillance)" and CU Commission Decision No. [xxx] of [xxxxx] 2012 "On Amendments to the 
Common Veterinary (Veterinary And Sanitary) Requi rements Applicable to the Goods Subject to 
Veterinary Control (Surveillance)", CU Co mmission Decision No. 831 of 18 October 2011 
"On Amendments to the Common List of Goods S ubject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance)" and 
CU Commission Decision No. [xxx] of [xxxxx] 2012 "On Amendments to the Common List of 
Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Sur veillance)", CU Commission Decision No. 33 of 
18 October 2011 "On Equivalence of Systems of Inspection of Objects of Veterinary Control 
(Surveillance)", CU Commission Decision No. 835 of 18 October 2011 "On Equivalence of Sanitary, 
Veterinary or Phytosanitary Measures and Condu ct of Risk Assessment", and CU Commission 
Decision No. 834 of 18 October 2011 "On Regulati on on Common System of Joint Inspections of 
Objects and Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to  Veterinary Control (Surveillance)".  On the 
phytosanitary side,  the CU Agreement on Plant Quarantine of 11 December 2009 (as last amended by 
the Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsEC No. 83 of 19 May 2011) and CU Commission Decision No. 318 of 18 June 2010 "On Assurance of Plant Quarantine in the Cu stoms Union" (as last 
amended by CU Commission Decision No. 528 of 28 January 2011, the Decision of the Interstate 
Council of EurAsEC No. 76 "On the Process for Transf er of Control from the Russian-Kazakh Border 
to the External border of the Customs Union" of 15 May 2011). 
2. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that  national legislation remained in effect to 
the extent that it did not contradict the CU Agre ements and CU Commission Decisions.  She further 
explained that issues not specified by the above -mentioned Agreements and Decisions of the 
Commission of CU were dealt with the national legislation, in particular – Law No. 339-II 
"On Veterinary" of 10 July 2002, Government Resolution No. 407 of 28 April 2003, which approved JOB/ACC/30 
Page 4  
 
  the following:  (1) Regulation on the State Veterinary  and Sanitary Control; (2) Rules for Compulsory 
Seizure and Destruction of Animal s, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute 
High Danger to Animal and Human Health, or Ma ndatory Decontaminati on (Disinfection) and 
Processing Without Withdrawal Thereof, (3) Rules and Conditions of Compensation to Legal and Natural Persons of the Value of Removed and Destroyed Infected Animals, Products and Raw 
Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health, (4) List of 
Highly Contagious Animal Diseases, when Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of Animals, Products 
and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Cons titute High Danger to Animal and Human Health 
are to be Held, (5) List of Highly Contagious An imal Diseases, Prevention, Diagnosis and Eradication 
of which are Implemented at the Cost of the Budg et, (6) Rules of State Veterinary and Sanitary 
Control During Movement of Objects Across the State Border of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 
(7) Rules of Organization of Veterinary Control Po sts at the State Border and Customs Checkpoints; 
Government Resolution No. 1754 "On Approval of Organization of Slaughtering of Agricultural 
Animals Intended for Subsequent Sale" of 4 November 2009; Government Resolution No. 2331 
"On Approval of Identification of Agricultura l Animals" of 31 December 2009, Government 
Resolution No. 132 "On Approval of Rules of Issu ance of Permits for Exportation, Importation and 
Transit of Objects with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 
19 January 2012, No. 149 "On Approval of Rules of Transportation (Movement) of Objects on the 
Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 21 January 2012, Government Resolution No. 165  
"On the Approval of the Rules for Entry (Importati on) of Food Products Subject to Veterinary 
Control" of 19 February 2008, the Law No. 301 "On Food Safety" of 21 July 2007, Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 
18 September 2009, Government Resolution No. 125 "On Approval of the Rules for Assignment of 
Registration Numbers to Entities Produci ng Food Products" of 11 February 2008, 
Government Resolution No. 2267 "On Approval of the Rules for Refusal for Entry, as well as for 
Production, Use and Sale of Produc ts Intended for Human Consumption, on the Territory of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as for Use in Business and (or) Other Activities" of 
30 December 2009, Law No. 344-I "On Plant Quaran tine" of 11 February 1999, Law No. 331-II 
"On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002, Government  Resolution No. 1295 "On Approval of the List of 
Quarantine Facilities, Alien Species and Extrem ely Dangerous Pests" of 10 December 2002, 
Government Resolution No. 1287 "On Approval of the Rules on Withdrawal and Destruction of 
Quarantine Products, Infected by Quarantine Objects,  Not Subject to Decontamination or Processing" 
of 3 November 2011, Government Resolution No. 17 30 "On Approval of the Rules for Protection of 
the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from Plant Quarantine Objects and Alien Species" of 
30 October 2009, Government Resolution No. 1674 "On Approval of Phytosanitary Requirements to JOB/ACC/30 
Page 5 
 
 
  Imported Quarantine Products" of 30 Decemb er 2011, Government Resolution No. 1396 
"On Approval of the Rules on Registration Tests and State Registration of Pesticides (Chemical 
Insecticides) in the Republic of K azakhstan" of 30 November 2011. 
(b) Competent Authorities for the Regulation of Trade in Agricultural Products  
 (i) Customs Union Authorities and Responsibilities 
3. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  within the CU institutional framework for 
regulating in the sphere of SPS measures, the role of the CU Commission had been to coordinate the 
development and implementation of SPS measures by  CU Parties, which involved their respective 
sanitary, veterinary, and phytosanitary authorities.  The CU Commission laid out common general 
principles and adopted common safety requirements for goods marketed within the territory of the 
Customs Union.  These safety requirements covere d sanitary and epidemiological, veterinary, and 
phytosanitary regulations that governed production and trade of the CU.  These CU functions had 
been transferred to the newly created the EurAsi an Economic Commission (EEC), which became the 
successor of the CU Commission as of January 2012.  The EEC would now coordinate the 
development and implementation of SPS measures by the CU Parties.   
4. The EEC was established as a single permanent re gulatory body of the CU and the Common 
Economic Space (CES) by the Treaty on Eurasian Economic Commission of 18 November 2011.  The EEC consisted of a Council and a Collegium.  The competences of the Council and Collegium 
were stipulated by the "Regulation of the Work  of the EEC", approved by the Decision of the 
Supreme Eurasian Economic Council No. 1 of 18 Nove mber 2011.  The Council had a right to veto 
the decisions adopted by the Collegium.  The Counc il had the following competences with respect to 
SPS measures: 
- adoption, introduction of amendments and adde nda into the Common Lists of Goods subject 
to Sanitary-Epidemiological Surveillance, Vete rinary and Quarantine Phytosanitary Control; 
- adoption and introduction of amendments and ad denda into the Regulation of Sanitary and 
Epidemiological Control, Regulation on Comm on Procedure for Conduct of Veterinary 
Control, Regulation on Common System of Join t Inspections of Objects and Sampling Goods 
(Products), Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance), and the Regulation on Common 
Procedure for Conduct of Quarantine Phytosanitary Control. 
 The Collegium had responsibility for the rest  of the issues, including the adoption and 
introduction of amendments and addenda into the Common Veterinary Requirements and Common 
Forms of Veterinary Certificates, the Co mmon Sanitary Requirements, and the Common 
Phytosanitary Requirements. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 6  
 
  5. Currently, drafting of the CU documents was conducted by the working and expert groups 
established under the auspices of the CU Commission.  The groups meet not more than once a month.  
The draft documents were then submitted to th e Consultative body which approved them before 
submission to the Collegium.  The Collegium either  adopted the CU documents which were under its 
competence or approved the drafts for Council adop tion.  The representative of Kazakhstan further 
explained that this mechanism will be working on a temporary basis until establishment of a 
permanent mechanism within the EEC.  The permanen t mechanism was expected to be established as 
of 1 July 2012.   
 (ii) National Authorities 6. Kazakhstan's veterinary service consisted of the Di vision of Veterinary a nd Food Safety at the 
Ministry of Agriculture, and the Committee of Vete rinary Control and Supervision under the Ministry 
of Agriculture.  The Division of Veterinary and Food Safety was the in charge of strategic planning in 
the sphere of veterinary safety, including budge ting.  The Committee of Veterinary Control and 
Supervision was in charge of developing of ru les and regulations in this area and conducting 
veterinary control and surveillance of the objects of  veterinary and sanitary control and surveillance, 
including on the State border, epizootic welf are, as well as the veterinary surveillance of 
establishments.  In addition, the veterinary contro l framework included (i) ve terinary control posts; 
and (ii) the oblast, city and raion territorial br anches of the Committee on Veterinary Control and 
Supervision; (iii) subordinated State veterinary  organizations (Nationa l Reference Center for 
Veterinary, Republican Anti-Epizootic Entity, Republican Veterinary Laboratory.  Executive 
functions in the sphere of veterinary were tr ansferred to local executiv e bodies of the respective 
administrative-territorial units (oblast, city, raion, et c.), which included veterinary branches, as well as 
State veterinary organizations to  conduct veterinary measures.  
7. The Committee of State Sanitary and Epidemiologi cal Surveillance of the Ministry of Health 
was the authorised body responsible for issues rela ted to sanitary and epidemiological welfare.  
Functions of the Committee of State Sanitary and Ep idemiological Surveillance were specified by the 
Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 193-IV "On Public Health and Healthcare System" of 
18 September 2009.  The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Division of Phytosanitary Safety 
was in charge of strategic planning in the sphere  of phytosanitary safety, including budgeting.  
The Committee on State Inspection in the Agro-Industri al Complex of the Ministry of Agriculture of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan was in charge of de veloping rules and regulations in this area and 
conducting phytosanitary control including border c ontrol, measures on protection of plants from 
pests, monitoring of agricultural lands against plant pests and diseases. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 7 
 
 
  8. With regard to participation in international organizations in this sphere, she said that as a 
member of the World Organisation for Animal He alth (OIE) since 1993, Kazakhstan followed the 
provisions of the Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal H ealth Codes.  For the purpose of application of 
OIE Code, Kazakhstan had ratified In ternational Agreement on Establis hment the OIE (the Law of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 109-IV of 24 December 2008).  In addition, Kaza khstan had ratified the 
Convention for the Establishment of the European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, 
in March 2004 and the International Plant Prot ection Convention, in April 2010.  She further 
explained that Kazakhstan was a member of Code x Alimentarius Commission since 2005.  Finally, 
pursuant to Kazakhstan's legislation the internati onal standards, recommendations and guidelines of 
the Codex Alimentarius could be applied in Kazakhstan. 
- (c) Trade in Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
9. The representative of Kazakhsta n stated that, as noted above, the CU Commission had issued 
several decisions which provided the legal framework  for protection of animal and human health.  
CU Commission Decision No. 317 of 18 June 2010 "O n the Application of Veterinary-Sanitary 
Measures in the Customs Union" (as last amended by CU Commission Decision No. 893 of 
9 December 2011) established the legal basis for veterinary measures in the Customs Union and 
entered into force on 1 July 2010.  CU Commis sion Decision No. 317 established a list of goods that 
could be subject to veterinary control, and adopted provisions on:  (i) on the common procedure for 
carrying out of veterinary inspection at the customs border of the Customs Union; (ii) on the common 
procedure for carrying of joint inspections of f acilities and sampling of goods (products) subject to 
veterinary control(surveillance); (iii) the common veterinary (veterinary and sanitary) requirements 
for goods subject to veterinary control (surveillance); (iv) the common forms of veterinary certificates 
(for movement within the Customs Union); and, (v) the common List of goods subject to veterinary 
control (surveillance).  The representative of Kazakhstan noted that CU Commission Decision 
No. 834 of 18 October 2011 "On Regulation on Common System of Joint Inspections of Objects and 
Sampling Goods (Products), Subject to Veterina ry Control (Surveillance)" had approved a new 
procedure for conduct of inspections and repealed th e previous regulation on inspections adopted by 
the CU Commission Decision No. 317.  The Co mmon Sanitary-Epidemiological and Hygiene 
Requirements to Goods Subject to Sanitary-Epide miological Control (supervision) as contained in 
CU Commission Decision No. 299 of 28 May 2010 " On the Application of Sanitary Measures in the Customs Union" (as last amended by CU Commission Decision No. 829 of 18 November 2011) established the sanitary requirements, including maximum residue levels for controlled goods. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 8  
 
  10. The following basic national regulatory legal act s constituted the legal framework to protect 
human and animal life and health are:  the Law "On Veterinary" of 20 July 2002 (as last amended of 
12 January 2012), Law "On Food Safety" of 27 July  2007, as well as subordinate legal acts in the 
sphere of veterinary, had been  approved for the purpose of implementation of these Laws:  
Government Resolution No. 407 of 28 April 2003, wh ich approved the following:  (1) Regulation on 
the State Veterinary and Sanitary Control; (2) Ru les for Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of 
Animals, Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Animal 
and Human Health, or Mandatory Decontamin ation (Disinfection) and Processing Without 
Withdrawal Thereof; (3) Rules and Conditions of Compensation to Legal and Natural Persons of the 
Value of Removed and Destroyed Infected Animals,  Products and Raw Materials of Animal Origin, 
which Constitute High Danger to Animal and Human Health; (4) List of Highly Contagious Animal 
Diseases, when Compulsory Seizure and Destruction of Animals, Products and Raw Materials of 
Animal Origin, which Constitute High Danger to Anim al and Human Health are to be Held; (5) List 
of Highly Contagious Animal Diseases, preventi on, diagnosis and eradication of which are 
implemented through the budget; (6) Rules of State Veterinary and Sanitary Control During 
Movement of Objects Across the State Border of  the Republic of Kazakhstan; (7) Rules of 
Organization of Veterinary Control Posts at the State Border and Customs Checkpoints; Government 
Resolution No. 1754 "On Approval of Organization of  Slaughtering of Agricultural Animals Intended 
for Subsequent Sale" of 4 November 2009; Go vernment Resolution No. 2331 "On Approval of  
Identification of Agricultural Animals" of 31 December 2009; Government Resolution No. 132 
"On Approval of Rules of Issuance of Permits fo r Exportation, Importation and Transit of Objects 
with Regard to Evaluation of Epizootic Situation in the Territory" of 19 January 2012, Government 
Resolution No. 149 " On Approval of Rules of Tran sportation (Movement) of Objects on the Territory 
of the Republic of Kazakhsta n" of 21 January 2012. 
- (i) Veterinary Certificates 
11. Members requested information on CU requi rements related to the development and 
implementation of veterinary certificates.  Members sought to ensure that such certificates would be 
consistent with international standards, recomme ndations, and guidelines.  Members also requested 
information on the continued validity of current bilate ral certificates agreed with Kazakhstan.  In their 
view, these bilateral certificates should remain va lid until a replacement was agreed with the 
CU Parties. 
12. [With respect to veterinary certificates, th e representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
40 CU common forms of veterinary certificates fo r import into the CU territory from any third JOB/ACC/30 
Page 9 
 
 
  country had been adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 607 of 7 April 2011, for each of the 
categories of goods subject to veterinary control as established in CU Commission Decision No. 317.  
These certificates were subsequently updated pur suant to CU Commission Decision No. 892 of 
9 December 2011.  She confirmed that in acco rdance with CU Commission Decision No. 726 of 
15 July 2011 "On Veterinary Measures", veterina ry certificates between exporting countries and 
Kazakhstan finalized prior to 1 July 2010 would be valid for import into the territory of the 
Customs Union at least until 1 January 2013.  Furthe rmore, the Decision provided that the competent 
authorities of the CU Parties could negotiate and agree to veterinary certificates with requirements 
that differed from the CU common form and speci fic CU Common Requirements, if an exporting 
country made a substantiated request prior to 1 Ja nuary 2013 to negotiate such a veterinary export 
certificate.  The decision also provided that bila teral veterinary export certificates, in case an 
authorised body of a CU Party received request  to negotiate a veterinary certificate before 
1 January 2013, initialled by one of the CU Partie s before 1 July 2010, as well as any subsequent 
amendments to such certificates ag reed with the authorised body of such CU Party, would remain 
valid for exports from the relevant country into the customs territory of the CU until an export 
certificate was agreed with a CU Party based on th e agreed positions of the other CU Parties.  
Bilateral veterinary export certificates initialled by  one of the CU Parties between 1 July 2010 and 
1 December 2010 would remain valid for import and circulation of relevant goods, only in the 
territory of the CU Party that initialled the certificat e, in case an authorised body of exporting country 
submitted its request to an authorised body of a CU Party before 1 January  2013 until a bilateral 
veterinary export certificate was agreed with a CU Party based on the agreed positions of the other 
CU Parties.  While a bilateral veterinary export  certificate could contain requirements that differed 
from the CU Common Form and Common Requireme nts, such certificates had to ensure the 
appropriate level of protection as determined by the CU Parties.  These new certificates were also 
required to include terms, includi ng provisions on the relevant produc t, that were no less favourable 
than those in an international treaty that was conc luded prior to 1 July 2010 between a CU Party and 
the third country.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
13. Asked to provide more information on the use of  veterinary certificates, she said that the CU 
legal framework allowed for nego tiating veterinary certificates differing from 40 CU common forms 
of veterinary certificates and specific CU Common Requirements with a competent body of exporting country.  If a third country sought to export to a CU Party a commodity for which veterinary certification was required according to the CU Common List of Goods subject to veterinary control, 
but for which no CU Common Form of certificat e and no CU Common Requirements existed, a 
bilateral certificate with the interested country co uld be developed based on a coordinated position of 
the CU Parties, and such a bilateral certificate w ould be based on relevant international standards, JOB/ACC/30 
Page 10  
 
  guidelines and recommendations as provided for in CU Commission Decision No. 721 of 
22 June 2011 "On Application of  International Standards, Guid elines and Recommendations".  
If, according to the CU Common List of Goods s ubject to veterinary control, no veterinary 
certification was required for a commodity, or if  the commodity was not included in the said 
CU Common List, Kazakhstan would not require a veterinary certificate.   
14. A Member requested information on the lat est amendments to the common veterinary 
requirements, noting that certain provisions of these requirements did not appear to be in accordance 
with OIE recommendations.  This Member asked whet her the intent of these amendments was to align 
these requirements with the OIE. 
15. Some Members expressed concern that th e CU Commission had adopted the 40 common 
forms of veterinary certificates and 38 chapters  of common veterinary requirements that did not 
conform to international standards, recommendations  and guidelines, in particular OIE standards, 
recommendations and requirements.  These Members al so raised concerns that contrary to the 
requirements of the WTO SPS Agreement, interested parties, including Members had not been accorded an opportunity to provide comments on these measures before they were adopted.  
The representative of Kazakhstan responded that CU Commission Decision No. 625 of 7 April 2011 
now provided a CU process for receiving comme nts from the public on proposed SPS measures.  
16. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that amendments of the common veterinary 
requirements and to the common forms of certificates were being prepared in parallel so as to ensure 
compatibility with international standards, r ecommendations and guidelines in particular OIE 
standards.  She confirmed that the amendments to the common veterinary requirements and to the 
common forms of certificates would enter into force simultaneously no later than the date of the 
accession of [the first CU Party] [Kazakhstan] to  the WTO.  The Working Party took note of these 
commitments.] 
17. Some Members noted that Kazakhstan had draf ted proposed amendments to a few of the 
CU common veterinary requirements.  These Me mbers expressed concerns that these proposed 
amendments were extremely limited, failed to take  into account Members' comments, were not based 
on scientific principles, could result in arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination, and, most importantly, 
failed to bring the CU common veterinary requirement s into conformity with international standards, 
recommendations and guidelines, e. g., by requiring conditions for animal diseases which were not 
listed in the OIE Code.  Members noted Kazakhstan' s commitments in paragraph [xxx] regarding the 
CU common veterinary requirements and common  forms and expressed concerns that Kazakhstan 
would not adopt all of the necessary amendments to achieve compatibility with international JOB/ACC/30 
Page 11 
 
 
  standards, guidelines and recommenda tions in particular OIE standards by the date of the accession 
first CU Party to the WTO or that these amendm ents would not enter into force as provided in 
paragraph [14].  These Members urged Kazakhstan to  engage in serious efforts, including through 
consultations with WTO Members, with a view  to ensure the timely implementation of the 
commitments in paragraph [14]. 
18. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, if an exporting Member believed that the 
SPS requirements of the CU or Kazakhstan resulted in a higher level of protection than would be 
achieved by measures based on the relevant interna tional standards, guidelines or recommendations, 
Kazakhstan was prepared to consult with the expo rting Member on such SPS requirements and, if 
necessary, would, as a result of such consultations , modify requirements included in the relevant 
certificate to bring them into compliance with inte rnational standards, guidelines, or recommendations 
consistent with the WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
19. [Some Members stated that a veterinary certificate should not require certification of 
provisions that were not mandatory requirements unde r CU acts or in the absence of CU mandatory 
requirements, under international standards, reco mmendations, and guidelines, e.g., to certify for a 
disease which was not the object of a CU act or w as not subject to the same level of surveillance 
within the CU or Kazakhstan's territory as required in the certificate.  If Kazakhstan or the CU sought 
to have stricter animal health requirements than those set-out in the OIE, Kazakhstan or CU must 
demonstrate that, based on risk assessment, as well as active and passive surveillance in Kazakhstan 
or the CU territory for animal diseases that could be present on the territory of Kazakhstan or the CU, 
the animal health status of Kazakhstan or the CU for the disease concerned was such that it justified 
such stricter requirements.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that veterinary certificates would not require certification of provisions that were not justifie d based on mandatory requirements 
applicable and surveillance carried out within the territory of Kazakhstan or the CU.  The Working 
Party took note of this commitment.] 
- (ii) Establishment Approval, Registry and Inspections 
20. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that according to CU Commission Decision 
No. 317, many of the goods included in the list of goods  subject to veterinary control were subject to 
three requirements:  (i) the exporting establishment ha d to be included in the Register of Entities and 
Persons Producing, Processing and/or Storing of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control Imported into 
the Customs Territory of the CU (hereinafter – the Register); (ii) the good had to be accompanied by a 
veterinary certificate; and (iii) an import permit ha d to be issued for importation of goods from an 
establishment in the Register.  However, the repr esentative noted that pursuant to CU Commission JOB/ACC/30 
Page 12  
 
  Decision No. 830 of 18 October 2011, the CU had agreed to remove certain veterinary control 
measures for specific goods in order to minimize th e overlapping control mechanisms.  In addition, 
CU Commission Decision No. 831 of 18 October 20 11, removed some goods from veterinary control 
completely.  [The representative informed Memb ers that Kazakhstan was considering additional 
amendments to the list of goods.] 
21. The representative of Kazakhstan emphasised that according CU Commission Decision 
No. 830 of 18 October 2011, producers of certain imported goods were exempted from the registry 
requirements, such as producers of live animals, fe ed grain, natural honey, oil-seed flour for feed, 
animal fat and oil, unprocessed grain straw, extract s and juices from meat, pasta stuffed with fish and 
invertebrates and processed meat.  The Register was published on the website of the Customs Union 
www.tsouz.ru (Section TBD).  
22. A Member requested the scientific basis for main taining some specific products in the list of 
goods subject to veterinary control.  Specifically, the Member requested information on the inclusion 
of products of plant origin.  In addition, the Member requested information on the requirement for 
including the names of establishments exportin g processed dairy products in the registry.  
This Member requested that Kazakhstan eliminate any requirements that did not have a scientific 
justification and a risk assessment. 
23. In response to a request from a Member fo r further information on the requirements and 
procedures for an establishment to be included on th e list of establishments authorised to export a 
product to Kazakhstan and the CU, the representa tive of Kazakhstan explained that, prior to 
1 July 2010, Kazakhstan did not maintain a regi stry requirement for establishments of exporting 
countries.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that, as of 1 July 2010, imports of products 
subject to veterinary control, as established in  CU Commission Decision No. 317, were required to 
come from establishments approved by the CU  Parties and included in the Register.  
24. [The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that the CU Commission Decision No. 830 of 
18 October 2011 amended CU Commission Decisi on No. 317 to specify, for each type of good 
included in the list of goods subject to veterinary c ontrol, which veterinary measures (import permits, 
veterinary certificates and/or listing of establishments) applied to that particular good.  In some cases, 
the form of veterinary control had been modified or eliminated.  For example, for some products the 
requirement for veterinary certificates and/or impor t permits had been eliminated.  Similarly, the 
requirement for an establishment to be included in a Register had been eliminated or amended to require only the provision of the name and/or num ber of the final establishment dealing with the JOB/ACC/30 
Page 13 
 
 
  goods prior to export to the territory of the CU, which was included in the import permit and/or 
veterinary certificate.] 
25. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that pr oducts of plant origin were excluded from 
the List of Goods subject to Veterinary Control, and the requirement of inclusion of third country 
producers exporting dairy products to  Kazakhstan into the Register was replaced by the requirement 
to indicate the number and name of the producer in the import permit and veterinary certificate. 
26. [With regard to the list of goods as set-out in  Table [xx], the representative of Kazakhstan 
confirmed that categories of goods would be added to the list of goods subject to veterinary control or 
the form of veterinary control applied to categor ies of goods on the list would be modified only if 
such action was in compliance with the provisions  of the WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party 
took note of this commitment.] 
27. Members noted that Kazakhstan had never main tained a listing requirement prior to the 
establishment of the CU and that many of these re quirements were not based on scientific evidence or 
proportionate to the risk and would represent an unj ustified burden on trade, and were in their view, 
inconsistent with the WTO SPS Agreement.  In re sponse, the representative of Kazakhstan explained 
that, in her view, the listing requirement itself coul d not be a burden on trade.  The burden on trade 
could result from the application of the wrong mechanism for including an establishment on the 
Register, for example, if the required actions that had to be done by the competent authority of an exporting country and/or establishment were not b ased on a risk analysis or were more trade 
restrictive than necessary.  CU Commission Deci sion No. 317, as amended, allowed the use of 
different mechanisms for listing establishments th at provided the possibility of minimizing the 
application of a more burdensome process than necessary for including an enterprise on the list by basing actions on the results of a risk analysis.  The representative of Kazakhs tan also explained that 
the requirement to be in the Common Register of Establishments approve d to export particular 
controlled products was a means to ensure co mpliance with CU veterinary requirements. 
28. In response to a question from a Member, the re presentative of Kazakhstan explained that in 
accordance with a transitional period provided unde r CU Commission Decision No. 317, trade could 
continue from establishments not on a "list" in the Register - when there was no requirement for such 
a "list" prior to 1 July 2010.  Such trade could take  place on the basis of an import permit.  She further 
explained that according to point 11 .3 of the CU Regulation "On Veteri nary Checks at the CU Border 
and on the CU Territory" (CU Commission Decision No. 317 as amended by CU Commission Decision No. 342), a transitional period for listi ng establishments had been established, for the 
following products:  animals; genetic  material; apicultural products; raw material of animal origin JOB/ACC/30 
Page 14  
 
  (skins, fur, feather, etc.); feed additives of animal or igin; feed of plant origin, etc., to permit trade to 
continue until common or unified lists were establis hed.  In response, some Members highlighted that 
this transitional period did not cover all commoditi es, such as composite products and gelatine, which 
were not subject to listing requirements before the entry into force of CU Commission Decision No. 317.  The representative of Kazakhstan expl ained that pursuant to CU Commission Decision 
No. 317, as amended by CU Decision No. 724 of 22  June 2011, gelatine a nd composite products had 
been included in the list of products subject to a tr ansition period.  In such cases, the duration of the 
transition period would be not less than 18 months from 22 June 2011 . 
29. The representative of Kazakhstan further explai ned that since 1 July 2010, establishments 
could be added to the list of establishments authorised  to export to the CU following an on-site joint 
inspection conducted by the three CU Parties or  following the delivery of guarantees as regards 
conformity with the CU requirements by the expor ting country, if the three CU Parties commonly 
agreed to rely on such guarantees.  Indeed, as of 1 July 2010, the "Regulation of a Common System of 
Joint Inspections of Sites and Sampling of Goods  (Products), Subjected to Veterinary Control 
(Supervision)" approved by CU Commission Decisi on No. 317 of 18 June 2010 had entered into 
force.  This Decision outlined two possibilities fo r exporting countries' estab lishments to become 
eligible to export to the CU.  The first option was that the competent authority of the exporting 
country provided guarantees to the CU that the es tablishment met the requirements of the CU.  
The second option was through a joint inspection conduc ted by all CU Parties.  She explained, 
however, that if a third country had never exported pr oducts of animal origin to any of the CU Parties 
before, and wanted to export to the CU for the fi rst time, exporting establishments proposed by this 
third country would have to be inspected by the CU  Parties before being added to the Register, in 
order to confirm the reliability of the veterinary cont rol system of this country.  Pursuant to the new 
Regulation on joint inspections approved by th e CU Commission Decision No. 834 starting on the 
date that the first CU Party became a WTO Member, the CU provided a third way for an 
establishment to be included into the Register, name ly through a systems audit.  (See paragraph [xx] 
below.) 
30. Some Members asked on which basis CU Parties could decide to rely on the guarantees of the 
exporting country.  Another Member sought clarifi cation as to the processes available to exporting 
countries to have facilities added to the Register.  In this Member's view, it was unclear whether all 
options were available to all Members.  A Member expressed concern that, in practice, the listing of new establishments was no longer accepted on the basi s of written guarantees of the exporting country 
since the entry into force of the CU.  In this Member's view, Kaza khstan and the other CU Parties did 
not have the resources to carry out inspections for any new establishment reques ting to be listed by an JOB/ACC/30 
Page 15 
 
 
  exporting party and some establishments, even already exporting, could not be listed due to this lack 
of resources.  In this Member's view, this represented an unjustified barrier to trade.   
31. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan st ated that the competent authorities of the 
CU Parties had to have confidence that the co mpetent authorities of the exporting country would 
effectively ensure that exporting establishments in that country met CU requirements.  He added that 
more detailed criteria on foreign guarantees were  included in the new Regulation "On Common 
System of Joint Inspection of Objects and Sampling Goods (Products) Subject to Veterinary Control 
(Supervision)" adopted by CU Commission Decisi on No. 834 on 18 October 2011 which replaced the 
regulation of the same name adopted on 18 June 2010.  Most of that regulation was now in effect and 
the remainder of its provisions, including the provi sions for accepting the guarantees of the competent 
authority of a third country and systems audits would go into effect on the date that the first CU Party 
became a WTO Member. 
32. Some Members expressed continuing concerns th at CU Parties could require inspection of 
each facility as a precondition for accepting guarantees, even in the case where Kazakhstan or another 
CU Party had previously accepted guarantees from a Member's competent authority.  In these 
Members' view, requiring inspections was contrary  to the concept of accepting guarantees which were 
based on confidence in the third country's competen t authority.  Members requested Kazakhstan to 
eliminate the requirement for inspection of a f acility as a precondition for acceptance of a Member's 
guarantee for that facility. 
33. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that CU Commission Decision No. 317 had 
allowed for joint inspections by th e three CU Parties of all establis hments in third countries that 
sought to be permitted to e xport goods to the CU that are subject to veterinary control in the CU.  
Inspections must be carried out on the basis of a request by the competent authority of the exporting 
country.  She further explained that it was possibl e that the representatives of the other CU Parties 
could delegate their authority to another CU Party to carry out an inspection.  However, before an 
establishment could be included in the approved est ablishment list, all CU Parties had to concur. 
34. Some Members expressed concern about the pr ocess of approving an establishment by each 
of the CU Parties as set out in CU Commission De cision No. 317.  For example, one Member of the 
CU could approve the addition of an establishment to  the Registry, but the establishment would not be 
added to the Registry due to a lack of response from the other CU Parties.  Further these Members expressed concern that approval, to be added to the Registry, was by consensus and rejection was 
subjective and did not appear to be based on any criteria.  These Members requested information on 
what would constitute a valid reason for refusal to be added to the Registry, by CU Parties and for JOB/ACC/30 
Page 16  
 
  other (non-auditing) CU Parties to refuse to lis t an establishment or any timeframes for such a 
decision.  In some Members' view, these decisi ons could be arbitrary and discriminate against 
Members where the same conditions prevailed. 
35. Members of the Working Party also expressed concerns that the CU Regulation "On Joint 
Inspections of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control" (CU Commission Decision No. 317) was not in line with Codex Guidelines for th e design, operation, assessment and accreditation of food import and 
export inspection and certification systems (CAC/GL 26-1997), which recommended that:  
assessment activities by the importing country in th e exporting country "should concentrate primarily 
on evaluating the effectiveness of the official insp ection and certification systems rather than on 
specific commodities or establishments in order to  determine the ability of the exporting country's 
competent authority(ies) to have and maintain control and deliver the required assurances to the 
importing country".  Members requested that K azakhstan amend the CU Regulation so that it 
conformed to international standard s, guidelines and recommendations.   
36. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan e xplained that with respect to the registry 
requirements of third country establishments, faci lities/establishments of third countries could be 
included into the Register in accordance with th e procedures established by the "Regulation of a 
Common System of Joint Inspections of Sites and Sampling of Goods (Products), Subjected to Veterinary Control (Supervision)" approve d by CU Commission Decision No. 834 of 
18 October 2011 (hereinafter – new Regulation) which replaced the regulation of the same name 
adopted by the CU Commission Decision No. 317 of 18 June 2010.  The new Regulation provided 
three ways for a country to have establishments loca ted on its territory included into the Register of 
establishments authorised to export to the Customs Un ion.  At the request of the competent authorities 
of the third country, the CU Parties would conduct a systems audit to determine if the official system 
of supervision of that third country was capable of  providing a level of protection at least equivalent 
to that provided by CU requirements.  If this audit of the official system of supervision was 
successful, the CU Parties would include establishmen ts of the audited country on the Register in 
accordance with a list of establishm ents that the competent authority of the third country provided to 
the CU Parties.  If an audit of a third country's o fficial system of supervision was not carried out or 
was not completed or if, as a result of such audit, the third country's official system of supervision was 
not recognised as being capable to provide a level of pr otection at least equivalent to that provided by 
CU requirements, the CU Parties could agree to incl ude establishments of that country on the Register 
on the basis of joint inspections or guarantees pr ovided by the competent authority of the third 
country.  The new Regulation also established the procedures for conducting a systems audit, 
including provisions on visits to establishments located in the thir d country.  In connection with a JOB/ACC/30 
Page 17 
 
 
  systems audit, the purpose of the visit was to ensure  that, within the framework of the third country's 
regulatory system, related to production, processing,  transporting and storage of the relevant goods, 
all of the country's laws, regulations and other re quirements on inspection and certification, which the 
CU Party(ies) recognised as capable to provide a le vel of protection, at least equivalent to that 
provided by CU requirements at the stage of analys is of documentation, were  properly implemented.  
If the CU provided a third country the authority to list establishments located on its territory in the 
Registry, based on guarantees, the CU Parties coul d conduct joint inspectio ns of a representative 
percentage of establishments to check and confirm th e operation of the third country's official system 
of supervision that was the basis for the guarantees.  Establishments could al so be included on the 
Register based on a joint inspection of the establishment. 
37. In response to Members' further questions, the representative of Kazakhstan explained that the 
new Regulation provided that the basic principle for ensuring veterinary safety of controlled goods 
was conducting an audit of foreign official system  of veterinary control (systems audit) as 
recommended by Codex Alimentarius [and the OIE].  As such, the new Regulation provided three 
ways for a country to have establishments located  on its territory included on the Register of 
establishments authorised to export as described in paragraph [xx] above.  
38. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that , in this Regulation, CU requirements were 
defined as international standards, guidelines and recommendations within the meaning of 
CU Commission Decision No. 721 of 22 June 2011 "O n Application of International Standards, 
Recommendations and Guidelines", related to Vete rinary and Sanitary Requirements for Goods, 
CU Technical Regulations for Goods, CU Common Veterinary Requirements, or the different 
requirements that CU Parties have agreed with the third country in veterinary export certificates, as 
provided in CU Commission Decision No. 726 of  15 July 2011 "On Veterinary Measures", and 
mandatory national requirements for goods. 
39. The representative of Kazakhstan further expl ained that the new Regulation established 
CU procedures, including timeframes, for every aspect  of organising and taking decisions on systems 
audits, on-site visits, and includi ng establishments on the Register in each of the cases described in 
paragraph [xx] above.  The competent authorities of CU Parties were notified of requests for audits, 
requests for authorisation to provide guarantees, and for joint inspections of establishments and 
invited to participate.  If a CU Party declined to  participate or did not respond within the prescribed 
time, that CU Party authorised the participating CU  Party or Parties to act on its behalf and accepted 
the decision of the participating CU Pa rty or Parties on the relevant matter. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 18  
 
  40. Finally, the representative of Kazakhstan explai ned that the new Regulation authorised and 
provided criteria for accepting guarantees from the competent authorities of third countries on the 
compliance of goods produced by an establishment located on its territory.  These criteria were the 
following: 
- Level of development of the competent authority of the third country; 
- Level of justification of guarantees of the competent authority of the third country; - Risk of entry into and spread of pathogens of infectious anim al diseases in the third country, 
including those common to humans and animals; 
- Epizootic situation in the third country; 
- Results of monitoring tests of goods subject  to veterinary control imported into the 
CU territory from the third country; 
- Data from monitoring of relevant goods done by the competent authority of the third country; - Compliance with CU requirements with regard to importing relevant goods into the territory 
of the CU from the third country; and 
- Results of inspections by the competent authorit y of a CU Party or Parties of establishments 
located on the territory of the third country. 
41. [The representative of Kazakhsta n confirmed that the new Regulation provided for removal of 
an establishment from the Registry (delisting) in only two cases:  at the request of the relevant 
establishment, and at the request of the competent au thority of the third country.  Instead of delisting 
an establishment, the CU could, in line with inte rnational standards or based on risk assessment, 
temporarily suspend imports from the establishment and/or subject imports from that establishment to 
intensified monitoring.  Except in  emergency situations, understood in the sense provided for in the 
OIE, a temporary suspension of imports from an establishment could be applied only: 
- upon the request of the establishment or the competent authority of the third country; or  
- based on repeated non-compliances with CU requirements either detected during on-site 
inspection and/or re-inspection of the establishm ent by the competent authority of a CU Party, 
or as a result of monitoring and enhanced laboratory testing of the establishment's goods, which have been notified to the competent authority of the third country, if such 
non-compliances represented a significant threat to human or animal life and health.   
 The Working Party took no te of these commitments.] 
42. In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, 
currently, the Committee of Veterinary Control and Supervision was not entitled to delist an 
establishment on the basis of minor non-compliances with CU requirements or requirements included 
in the certificate not affecting the safety of th e products, observed during on-site inspection or 
laboratory analysis at the border or based on issues which fall outs ide of the Committee's field of 
competence (e.g. controls on potable water).  
43. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, except in case of serious risks of animal or 
human health, its competent authority would not suspend imports from establishments based on the JOB/ACC/30 
Page 19 
 
 
  results of on-site inspection before it had give n the exporting country the opportunity to propose 
corrective measures.  As required under the new Re gulation, the preliminary report would be sent to 
the competent authority of the exporting country for comments before the report was finalised.  
She noted again that the CU Parties had develope d criteria and reasons for a decision to suspend 
imports from an establishment.  Minor errors woul d not be valid grounds for suspending imports from 
an establishment and she reminded Members that th ere would be an administrative procedure for 
appealing such decisions as well as recourse to the courts.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.] 
44. [Regarding emergency situations, the represen tative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the 
decisions and procedures for the suspension of est ablishments would be in accordance with the 
WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
45. [The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that in extraordinary cases, the 
CU Commission could take a decision to suspend a group of establishments or all establishments of a third country as the result of the detection of a ser ious systemic failure of the official system of 
control, as specified in the new Regulation.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, upon 
taking such a decision, the CU Commission would ha ve to provide the Competent Authority (CA) of 
the third country with the technical information a nd scientific justification on the risk detected.  
The third country would be requested to take corre ctive measures within a specified timeframe for 
their adoption.  Any suspension would not be impl emented before the expiration of the specified 
timeframe.  Once the corrective meas ures were taken, the CA of the third country would send a report 
on the corrective measures to th e CU Commission.  The CU Commission would evaluate the report 
and it would decide if the corrective measures were  effective and sufficient.  The suspension, if 
implemented, would be lifted within five working da ys after the decision.  In case corrective measures 
were not taken or were considered ineffective by the CU Commission, the decision on a temporary 
suspension of imports from a group of establishments or  all establishments of a third country could be 
implemented.  The representative of Kazakhstan conf irmed that such temporary suspensions would be 
proportionate to the risk to human health or life an d not more restrictive to trade than necessary, as 
provided in the WTO SPS Agreement.  The Work ing Party took note of these commitments.] 
46. Members of the Working Party expressed concer n that the draft inspection guidelines for 
meat, poultry, fish, and dairy were stricter than international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations, in particular they were overly pr escriptive and in many cases would be difficult to 
respect in other cases than the CU context.  Requi ring establishments to meet these overly prescriptive 
structural and functional requirements would, in practice, preclude most non-CU establishments from JOB/ACC/30 
Page 20  
 
  passing inspection.  Furthermore, Members highlighted  that these draft guidelines did not take into 
account the possibility for exporting countries to concl ude specific certificates with CU Partners, as 
provided for in CU Commission Decision No. 726 of 15 July 2011, and thus to be subjected to 
specific requirements.  Members asked how equi valence could be recognised when the specific 
standards set in these inspection guidelines could not be met. 
47. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan st ated that the new Regulation recognised the 
principle of equivalence.  Specifically, inspectors we re instructed to evaluate whether establishments 
were complying with relevant CU requirements or th e relevant international standards, guidelines, and 
recommendations, and in such cases, the establishm ent would be considered in compliance with 
CU requirements based on the principle of equivalence.  She further explained that if there were cases where a CU act or mandatory national requirement wa s more stringent than the international standard, 
the inspector would evaluate compliance with  international standards, guidelines, and 
recommendations, unless a scientific justification for the more stringent measure, as provided for in the WTO SPS Agreement, had been presented to the competent authority of the third country.  The competent authority could then propose an e quivalent measure.  If an establishment was included 
on the Register based on guarantees from the compet ent authority of the exporting country, inspectors 
were bound to check and evaluate whether the guaran tees in the export certification applicable were 
met. 
48. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that as of the date of accession of [the first 
CU Party][Kazakhstan] to the WTO, specific guide lines on inspection that would reflect the principles 
of equivalence and reliance on international st andards, guidelines and recommendations, as such 
principles were described in para graph [xx], would be adopted to ensure the implementation of the 
new Regulation by CU inspectors, in accordan ce with the WTO SPS Agreement.  Under these 
guidelines, inspectors would be instructed in partic ular to verify the compliance of establishments 
with relevant Codex Alimenta rius recommended codes of practices such as CAC/RCP 1-1969, 
recommended International Code of Practice General Principles of Food Hygiene, the 
CAC/RCP 58-2005 Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat, the CAC/RCP 57-2004 Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products, the CAC/RCP 52-2003 Code of Practi ce for Fish and Fishery 
Products and other Relevant International Stan dards, Recommendations and Related Texts.  
Moreover, inspectors would be provided information and training on the application of the principle 
of equivalence as provided in the WTO SPS Agreement,  in the context of the new Regulation and the 
guidelines.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] JOB/ACC/30 
Page 21 
 
 
  49. Some Members expressed concern that the new Regulation set-up a detailed and prescriptive 
system for auditing third-country systems for supervis ion of products subject to veterinary control, 
while it appeared that the requirements for CU Par ties and their respective establishments appeared to 
be less detailed and stringent in some respects.  These Members asked whether and how it would be 
ensured, for example, that the frequency and requireme nts related to on-site visits as applied to third 
countries and their establishments and to CU Pa rties and their establishments for purposes of 
determination and maintenance of equivalence, would be no less favourable to third countries and 
their establishments, and not discriminate against such countries or establishments. 
50. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that, in her view, the new Regulation and 
the procedures and requirements for the conduct of audits and inspections applied in respect of 
Members, their products or establishments were in  compliance with the WTO rules and requirements. 
51. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at, by the date that[the first CU Party] 
[Kazakhstan]became a Member of the WTO, the ne w Regulation, as described in the Working Party 
Report, would be applied in compliance with the WTO SPS Agreement, including Article 2.3 thereof, 
and the GATT 1994.  In particular, she confirmed th at the new Regulation would not arbitrarily or 
unjustifiably discriminate between Members, where id entical or similar conditions prevail, including 
between CU Parties which were Members and othe r Members, with regards to requirements for 
on-site inspections, including for purposes of dete rmination and maintenance of equivalence of the 
systems of control of products; and that the new Regulation would not be applied in a manner which 
would constitute a disguised restriction on internatio nal trade.  The Working Party took note of this 
commitment.] 
- Import Permits 
52. As for import permits, the representative of Kaza khstan explained that since July 2010, the 
legal framework for the import permit regime of th e Customs Union was set-out in Section VI of the 
Regulation on Veterinary Controls at the Customs Border of the Customs Union, adopted by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 317.  This Regulation sets-out the following principles:  
- Imports into the CU of certain goods subject to veterinary controls  must have an import 
permit issued by the competent authority of th e CU Party which was the point of destination 
for the imports; and 
- The permit was valid for a calendar year, for quantities which are specified in the permit.  
 The permit was issued taking into account the epizootic situation of the place of production 
and where there was a registry of enterprises authorised  to export the relevant goods to the territory of 
the CU, whether the enterprise was on that list of enterprises. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 22  
 
  53. She further explained that an import permit c ould be requested for any amount of goods and 
that the amount requested could not be the basis fo r refusing to issue the pe rmit.  Import permits had 
three functions:  first, to ensure that the impor ter was in a position to handle the imported goods in a 
safe manner that complied with domestic, e.g., quaran tine requirements; second, to take into account 
the epizootic situation of the exporting country; and th ird, to ensure that specific conditions, adapted 
to the epizootic situation of the exporting country,  were met at the time of importation.  The first 
function, in her view, was not discriminatory since the conditions required to be met by the operator 
were also checked in case of intern al trade within the CU territory.  The second function was that of a 
legal instrument to block or restrict imports in case of dangerous animal disease outbreaks in the 
exporting country.  The third function could be used , for example, to require that certain imported 
animal products from countries with a specific ep izootic situation be processed in designated 
facilities.  In this case, import permits would be gr anted only to those importers who were able to 
channel the consignments to such facilities.  Impor t permits also optimised logistics for importers and 
provided a means to coordinate activities of regulatory agencies. 
54. As established in Government Resolution No. 132 of 19 January 2012, import permits were 
issued by the authorised body in the sphere of veterinary (the Committee of Veterinary Control and 
Supervision under the Ministry of Agriculture) upon request of its territorial branches.  The Chief 
State Veterinary Inspector of a particular region was in charge of the epizootic and veterinary-sanitary 
safety of that region.  Therefore, to obtain an impor t permit, traders applied in writing to the relevant 
oblast/region branch of the authorised body wher e the imported goods were being shipped. This was 
done for the convenience of importers.  Applicati ons had to contain a description of the goods' 
characteristics, country and place (establishment) of origin, purpose, transport type, route, the border 
entry point(-s) of Kazakhstan, place of destination in Kazakhstan with indication of the name and 
registration number of production or storage facility).   In addition, Kazakhsta n intended to amend the 
Resolution and add requirements including the locati on of the establishment, quarantine conditions, 
processing, and the establishment's registration num ber, where required, and (or) name of the 
establishment in the country of exportation.  Oblast  branches verified the co mpliance of transportation 
and storage facilities with veterinary rules, while th e central authorised body verified (i) whether the 
exporting country was subject to a temporary ban due to an outbreak of an infectious disease, 
(ii) whether non-compliance with the CU veterina ry and sanitary requirements had occurred, and 
(iii) presence of exporting establishment in the Register.  In cases where the requirements for 
obtaining import permit were not met, the exporter c ould re-apply after fulfilling the requirements.  
The authorised body issued the import permit within ten days, but could also refuse a permit by 
written justification.   JOB/ACC/30 
Page 23 
 
 
  55. A Member of the Working Party asked Kazakhstan to clarify what constituted a 
non-compliance and whether the permit would be deni ed if the information provided by the trader 
would not comply with import permit requirements, e.g., storage.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that pursuant to the "Rules of Issuing of Permits for Importation, Exportation and Transit of 
Goods Taking into Account Epizootic Situati on of the Corresponding Territory" approved by the 
Government Resolution No. 132 of 19 January 2012 , import permits could be refused only for the 
following reasons:  (i) restrictions with respect to  certain countries (regions) introduced with regard to 
unfavourable epizootic situation in expor ting country; (ii) non-compliance with 
CU veterinary-sanitary requirements; or (iii), absen ce of an exporting establishment in the Register of 
Exporting Third Countries, where such a requirement applied.  Hence, an import permit would be 
denied, inter alia , if an importer did not comply with the CU veterinary requirements.  Kazakhstan 
being a Party of the Customs Union followed Common Veterinary (Veterinary and Sanitary) 
Requirements, to Goods Subject to Veterinary Control (Surveillance), approved by CU Commission 
Decision No.  317 of 18 June 2010, as amended. 
56. Some Members requested that when Kazakhstan' s authorities denied an application for an 
import permit, they informed each applicant of  the detailed reasons for the rejection.  
The representative of Kazakhstan explained that the authorised body reviewed applications within 
ten working days.  Within this pe riod, the authorised body either issued import permit or provided the 
applicant the written explanation of denial. 
57. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that  it had made available to importers, as well 
as to third-country exporters through the we bsite of the Ministry of Agriculture 
[www.minagri.gov.kz] full detailed conditions for im port of specific products.  However, Kazakhstan 
intended at some time in the near future to inte grate its information into the CU common website.  
The representative of Kazakhstan fu rther confirmed that to this end, it would publish a list on the 
website of the National Enquiry Point in English of  the products which were permitted to be imported 
into its territory; the countries a nd establishments authorised to expo rt to Kazakhstan and the territory 
of the CU; and the conditions for import.  Where an  application for an import permit was denied, the 
relevant authority would inform the applicant of the reasons for this rejection within ten working days 
of the decision.  The Working Part y took note of these commitments.] 
58. Some Members asked Kazakhstan to confirm that its import permit system would comply 
with OIE rules, i.e., permits would not be refu sed on grounds not recognised by the OIE for the 
animal diseases concerned.  Further, with regard  to the discovery of unauthorised substances in 
cargos, Kazakhstan would comply with the principle of applying an SPS measure only to the extent JOB/ACC/30 
Page 24  
 
  necessary to protect human or animal life and health.  In the view of these Members, a refusal to issue 
import permit after single findings of non-compliances with no immediate risk for the consumer 
would not comply with this principle.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan confirmed that its procedures 
for considering applications for import permits  would comply with these two principles.  
The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
59. A Member of the Working Party expressed concerns regarding the import permit process for 
products under veterinary control. In light of othe r veterinary and sanitary import requirements (e.g., 
an agreed veterinary certificate), the Member c onsidered the import permit process as an unnecessary 
requirement that could result in a barrier to trade in  violation of the SPS Agreement.  This Member of 
the Working Party noted that when developing SPS measures to protect human, animal or plant life or health within a country, the SPS Agreement required that Members take into account the objective of 
minimising negative trade effects and that such measures were not more trade-restrictive than required 
to achieve an appropriate level of SPS protecti on.  The Member of the Working Party questioned 
compliance of the Kazakhstan's measure s with the SPS Agreement obligations. 
60. The representative of Kazakhstan replied that use of import permit system in veterinary 
import control was not prohibited by the SPS Agreem ent.  Further, the representative of Kazakhstan 
emphasised that import permit was important el ement of ensuring safety of the imported goods 
en-route since veterinary authorities of exporting co untries could ensure safety of exported goods only 
within the territory under its control.  She noted th at import permits contained information outside of 
the competence of veterinary authority of exporting country, such as: purpose, transport type, route, 
the border entry point(-s) of Kazakhstan, place of d estination in Kazakhstan with indication of the 
name and registration number of production or stor age facility, where required, and in the case of 
importing goods falling under CITES - the relevant import permitting number.  This information was 
not present in veterinary certificates. 
61. [In response to a question from a Member, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that 
minor documentation errors which did not alter the basic data contained in the document were not a 
basis for refusing an import permit.  The legal ci rcumstance that served as grounds for starting this 
administrative procedure for revocation of an impor t permit was the discovery of systematic (e.g., 
liable to administrative or criminal prosecution) violations, by the importer of the regulated cargo, of 
CU Decisions and other CU Acts and the laws of Kazakhstan in the field of veterinary medicine 
(including the presentation of forged veterinary doc uments or the discovery of inconsistency between 
the presented documents and the regulated cargo).  Furthermore, she confirmed that the reasons for suspension, cancellation, or refusal of an import permit would be consiste nt with international JOB/ACC/30 
Page 25 
 
 
  standards, recommendations, and guidelines and th e WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party took 
note of this commitment.] 
62. [Further, the representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession of the 
Kazakhstan to the WTO, the import permit regime a pplicable to goods subject to veterinary and 
quarantine control would be operated under CU Deci sions, other CU Acts, and provisions of the Law 
of Kazakhstan that were publishe d and available to the public and that these measures would be 
developed and applied in compliance with the WT O Agreement.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
also confirmed that information requirements for the purposes of applying for an import permit would 
be limited to what was necessary for appropriate  approval and control procedures and that any 
requirements for control, inspection and approval of individual specimens of a product were limited to 
what is reasonable and necessary as provided for in Annex C of the WTO SPS Agreement.  Moreover, 
she confirmed that her Government would mainta in and notify the public of a clearly defined 
procedure under which an applicant for an import pe rmit could appeal the suspension, cancellation, or 
refusal of an application, have that appeal ad judicated, and receive a written response explaining the 
reasons for the final decision and any further action required to obtain a permit.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
63. Pursuant to CU Commission Decision No. 317,  at the border, a veterinary inspector 
conducted (i) a documentary check and (ii) a ph ysical inspection the goods being imported.  
Samples at the border were taken only in case a vete rinary inspector detected visible organoleptic 
changes.  The veterinary inspector informed the relevant oblast branch  of the authorised body (at the 
border) about the results of the inspection of the pr oduct subject to veterinary control and about the 
final destination of the product.  Imported goods were then transporte d to their final destination where 
they were subjected to a visual inspection of th e consignment.  After passing the inspection, the 
veterinary certificate issued by the competent bod y of the foreign country was replaced with the 
veterinary certificate of the Customs Union.  Th e accompanying documents were stamped with the 
sign "Release permitted" or "Release forbidden".  T hus, the imported goods that passed the veterinary 
control where considered as Customs Union goods and subsequently were subject to the same 
treatment as domestically produced goods.  She adde d that, pursuant to paragraph 2 of Article 17 of 
the Law No. 339-II "On Veterinary", Law No. 399 -II of 10 July 2002, (as last amended on 
12 January 2012) if a cargo owner was not satisfied with  the results of veterinary control, he or she 
could appeal the actions (or failure to act) of veteri nary inspectors to higher State veterinary officials 
and/or in court.   JOB/ACC/30 
Page 26  
 
  64. A Working Party Member requested that Kazakhstan guarantee that there would not be such 
procedures in place which caused undue delays and ensure treatment in no less favourable manner for 
imported products than for like dom estic products.  The Member stated that the control system 
seemed to be kind of double checking - first at the border and then under customs control.  In this 
respect, this Member asked the representative of Kaza khstan to confirm further that there would be no 
undue delays with this system in place.  This Me mber of the Working Party expressed the view that 
additional testing appeared excessive given that a shipment had to be accompanied by a veterinary 
certificate and import permit and come from an appr oved facility and had been inspected prior to 
exportation.  This Member further noted that K azakhstan's requirements for inspection at the border 
and then a full re-inspection for all shipments when  clearing customs appeared to be unjustified for 
SPS reasons, a burden on trade, and inconsistent with national treatment Another Member of the 
Working Party enquired if and how Kazakhstan wa s planning to introduce the mechanism of random 
inspections instead of samples of each sp ecific shipment (the current system).  
65. In reply, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that pursuant to paragraph 6.5. of the 
Regulation on Veterinary Control as adopted by CU Commission Decision No. 317, after 
documentary checks, physical inspections were carri ed out on a random basis as follows:  not more 
often than one consignment per ten consignments of meat or fish originating from a specific country, 
except for live animals, where each consignment wa s subject to physical inspection.  Physical 
inspection on the border could be conducted by checking of accessible part of the consignment.  
Laboratory tests were conducted only in cases of revealing visible organoleptic changes during 
physical checks (paragraph 3.14.3.).  Kazakhstan had removed the requirement of laboratory checks 
of each imported consignment and replaced it with the system of keeping a register of exporting 
facilities of third countries. In her view, such a practice was widely used in the most advanced 
WTO Members and was not contradictory to the WTO SPS Agreement 
- Transit Permits 
66. With respect to transit, the Re presentative of Kazakhstan stated that since 1 July 2010, the 
legal framework for the issuance of transit permit wa s set in Decision No. 317 of the CU Commission, 
in Chapter VII of the "Regulation on the Single Syst em of Veterinary Control at the Customs Border 
of the Customs Union" as amended by CU Commission Decision No. 724 of 22 June 2011.  
The principles set at CU level were the following: 
- A transit permit was required only for transit of  live animals and raw materials of animal 
origin.  The transit permit was issued by th e CU Party whose territory was the first entry 
point; JOB/ACC/30 
Page 27 
 
 
  - Veterinary control of controlled goods at entr y points was carried out after the submission of a 
waybill and (or) veterinary certificate; 
- After completion of documentary control, vete rinary inspection of animals was carried out, 
including:  identification numbers of animals were compared (tattoos, chips, ear tags, stamps, etc.) with numbers indicated in veterinary cer tificates, conditions of carriage were verified, 
and the condition of animals and possibility of their further transportation were examined; 
- Examination during transit of controlled goods  (except for animals) was performed only by 
State regulatory authorities at a checkpoint or in the presence of information about 
non-conformity of controlled goods to the declared goods; 
- According to the results of monitoring, the Border Control Inspection Post Officer made a 
decision and put a stamp on the shipping documents and on the veterinary certificate, in 
accordance with the form of Annex No. 3:  "T ransit enabled" or "Tra nsit prohibited", and at 
the point of exit from the customs territory of  the CU, a stamp "Transit Completed", then 
assured it by the seal and signature, indicating such Officer's name and initials; 
- All necessary data was entered in the register  of transit in the form in accordance with 
Annex No. 9 of that Regulation and entered in to the system of electronic records; and 
- The owner of the controlled goods, who receive d the permit of transit of controlled goods 
through the territory of the CU, had to comply  with the veterinary legislation of the CU. 
67. Transit permits were issued within 30 worki ng days upon written application with indication 
of the following information: 
- for juridical persons carrying transited goods: name, address and registration number of the 
production facility, for physical persons carryi ng transited goods: family name, given name, 
patronymic (if any), address and registra tion number of the production facility; 
- type of the transited good; - quantity of transited good and its measurement unit; 
- exporting or importing country and country of origin; 
- type of transport; - list of border check points of Kazakhstan through which the goods will be transited; 
- transit route via Customs Union: places of stopping, loading-unloading, places of animal 
feeding, conditions of animal or goods transfer  coordinated with a chief veterinary inspector 
of territorial administrative unit throug h which the goods will be transited. 
68. Some Members expressed concerns regarding the re quirement that controlled goods in transit, 
which had been inspected and were conveyed un der seal, had to comply with CU veterinary 
requirements.  From these Members' perspective, th is requirement could not be justified as a safety 
measure and restricted trade with third countries. 
69. [The representative of Kazakhstan noted con cerns from Members regarding the requirement 
for controlled goods in transit to comply with CU veterinary requirements and confirmed that 
CU Commission Decision No. 317 had been amended by CU Commission Decision No. 724 of 
22 June 2011 to eliminate this requirement, so that , controlled goods transiting through the territory of 
the CU under customs seal would not be subject to CU veterinary requirements.  In addition, the 
representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that the re levant provisions of CU Commission Decision 
No. 317, and any administrative regulations and othe r measures relating to the transit of goods subject JOB/ACC/30 
Page 28  
 
  to veterinary control through the territory of K azakhstan would be applied in compliance with the 
OIE Code and the WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Trade in Goods Subject to Phytosanitary Control 
70. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Decision of the Interstate Council of 
EurAsEC No. 30 of 11 December 2009 "On the Agreem ent on Plant Quarantine" (last amended by the 
Decision of the Interstate Council of EurAsECNo 83 of19 May 2011) provided the legal framework 
for plant quarantine in Kazakhstan.  This Decision s tipulated that regulations must take into account 
the "rules and principles" of the IPPC and the WTO SPS Agreement.  Customs Union plant 
quarantine measures were further established in CU  Commission Decision No. 318 of 18 June 2010 
"On Ratification of Agreement of the Customs Uni on of the Plant Quarantine" (as last amended by 
Decision No. 528 of 28 January 2011 and Decision No. 894 of 9 December 2011).  Decision No. 318 
included the following documents: 
- The list of products under quarantine (regul ated goods, regulated articles of regulated 
products), i.e., which are subject to quarantine phytosanitary control (supervision) at the customs border of the Customs Union and in th e customs territory of the Customs Union; 
- Regulations on the implementation of quarantin e phytosanitary control (supervision) at the 
customs border of the Customs Union; and 
- Regulation on the implementation of quarantin e phytosanitary control (supervision) at the 
customs territory of the Customs Union. 
71. The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that the CU did not have common 
phytosanitary requirements and that these were deve loped and implemented at the national level.  
The representative explained that further harm onization among the CU Pa rties was ongoing.  
For example, the CU Parties were in the process of  reviewing and conducting pest risk assessments in 
order to harmonize the quarantine pest and di sease list by 1 January 2013, with subsequent 
introduction of common phytosanitary requirements to  regulated products.  The draft of a common list 
of quarantine pests and diseases had been develope d and was published on the CU website for public 
comment on 21 May 2012.  Until the CU Parties had harmonized their quarantine pest and disease list 
and introduced common phytosanitary requirements, th e national quarantine pest and disease lists and 
phytosanitary requirements for regulated products would remain valid. 
72. A Member of the Working Party asked Kazakhstan to clarify whether Kazakhstan's 
legislation was based on internationa l standards developed by the IPPC.  In reply the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that legislation of the Republic of  Kazakhstan on plant quarantine to a large extent 
was based on the provisions and principles stipul ated by the WTO Agreement on Application of 
SPS Measures, the International Plant Protec tion Convention and the Convention for the JOB/ACC/30 
Page 29 
 
 
  Establishment of the European and Mediterranean  Plant Protection Organization.  For instance, 
Article 13 of the Law "On Plant Quarantine" and the Government Resolution No. 1730 "On Approval 
of the Rules for Protection of the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from Plant Quarantine 
Objects and Alien Species", of 30 October 2009,  which provided for the procedures of issuing 
documents, inspections and control complied with  IPPC standards such as No. 12 "Guideline on 
phytosanitary certificates", No. 23 "Guideline on in spections" and No. 7 "Certification system for 
exports".  Kazakhstan accepted phytosanitary certifi cates that complied with the requirements of IPPC 
Standard No. 12.  She also added that the timefra mes of laboratory expertise on pests and weeds were 
reduced to up to three working days, and plant di seases – ten working days.  In addition, within the 
framework of the Customs Union, quarantine impor t permits on import of quarantine products were 
abolished 
73. Trade in regulated products on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan  in addition  to 
CU regulations was regulated by  the following national legislation: Government Resolution No. 1295 
"On Approval of the List of Quarantine Facilities, Alien Species and Extremely Dangerous Pests" of 
10 December 2002, Government Resolution No 1287 "On Approval of the Rules on Withdrawal and 
Destruction of Quarantine Products, Infected by Qu arantine Objects, Not Subject to Decontamination 
or Processing" of 3 November 2011, Government Re solution No. 1730 "On Approval of the Rules for 
Protection of the Territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan from Plant Quarantine Objects and Alien 
Species" of 30 October 2009, Government Resolu tion No. 1674 "On Approval of Phytosanitary 
Requirements to Imported Quarantine Products" of  30 December 2011, Government Resolution 
No. 1396 "On Approval of the Rules on Registrati on Tests and State Registration of Pesticides 
(Chemical Insecticides) in the Republic of Kazakhstan" of 30 November 2011. 
74. The representative of Kazakhstan said that the Divi sion of Phytosanitary Safety was in charge 
of strategic planning in the sphere of phytosanita ry safety, including budgeting.  The Committee on 
State Inspection in the Agro-Industrial Complex of th e Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan was in charge of developing rul es and regulations in this area and conducting 
phytosanitary quarantine control (surveillance) on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
including phytosanitary qu arantine border control (surveillance) , measures on protection of plants 
from pests, monitoring of agricultural lands agai nst plant pests and diseases.  In addition, the 
phytosanitary control framework included (i) State quarantine institutions; (ii) the State enterprise 
"Phytosanitary"; (iii) State inspection branches of oblasts and Astana and Almaty; (iv) phytosanitary inspectors of the raion (region)(or city) territori al administrations; and (v) border checkpoints and 
posts of phytosanitary control.  The State enterpri se "Republican Center of Phytosanitary Diagnostics 
and Prognosis" conducted surveys of Kazakhstan's territory to determine the location of an outbreak.  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 30  
 
  State enterprise "Republican Quarantine Laborator y" identified species composition of quarantine 
pests and diseases.  State enterprise "Republican Plan t Introduction Nursery of Fruit and Berry Crops" 
and "Republican Plant Introduction Nursery of Field Crops" were in charge of detection of hidden 
infections or contaminations of  plant products (seed and planting stock).  State enterprise 
"Phytosanitary" conducted localisation and exterm ination of outbreaks of quarantine pests and 
diseases. 
75. [In response to a question from a Member, the re presentative of Kazakhstan explained that the 
appropriate level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection was defined as the required level of 
protection established by a technical regulation fo r products and phytosanitary requirements to 
regulated products, produced on the territory of Kazakhstan aimed at prevention of factual scientifically grounded risks.  The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that CU Agreements, 
CU acts, and Kazakhstan's legislation did not and would not in future establish additional 
SPS requirements for imported products that ex ceeded the requirements established for CU or 
domestic products.  The Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
76. The existing list of products under quarantin e (regulated goods) that were subject to 
quarantine phytosanitary control at the customs bor der of the CU and the territory of the CU was 
divided into two groups:  (i) quarantine products of high pest risk; and (ii) quarantine products of low 
pest risk.  The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that imports of quarantine products of high pest 
risk would need to be accompanied by a phytosanita ry certificate.  No phytosanitary certificate was 
required for imports of regulated pr oducts of low pest risk.  The list of quarantine products with their 
HS codes was included in CU Commission Decision No. 318, as most recently amended by CU Commission Decision No. 859 of 9 December, 2011.   She further explained that a number of 
products were now excluded from the high pest risk list, such as raw cane sugar, sugar from beets, 
natural sands of all kinds, gravel, sand, fish meal, meat meal or meat by-products, protein 
concentrates, protein-vitamin concentrates and protei n pre-mixes.  The up-to-date list of goods subject 
to quarantine phytosanitary control was avai lable to the public on the CU website at 
http://www.tsouz.ru/Pages/norma.aspx?IDCL=23bc1acc- 9a25-4060 77.  In line with international 
practice, when products subject to phytosanitary c ontrol were imported from countries with registered 
cases of quarantine spread areas, imports of pr oducts under plant quarantine control from pest-free 
areas were still allowed, if appropriate informat ion in additional declaration of phytosanitary 
certificate was provided.  In cases when during phyto sanitary control it was detected that regulated 
products subject to phytosanitary c ontrol were infected by quarantine organisms, or were in some way 
inconsistent with existing rules and regula tions, these products could undergo disinfection 
(decontamination) at the destination points or at th e border.  In case, if regulated products did not JOB/ACC/30 
Page 31 
 
 
  undergo decontamination, they would be destroyed or  returned to the exporting country.  Any natural 
or juridical person could appeal the actions (or inaction) of Government officials regarding this issue.  
77. In urgent situations (outbreak) the authorised body, depending on the phytosanitary 
conditions of the exporting country , could introduce provisional restri ctions or bans importation of 
products subject to phytosanitary control.  In such  circumstances, the authorised body would provide 
all pertinent information about its actions to the relevant service of the exporting country.  
Where repeated supply of infected products subject to  phytosanitary control had been registered, a ban 
the importation of the relevant pr oduct could be imposed.  She added that contentious issues were 
normally open for negotiation.   
78. She noted that, in specific cases, where large amounts of products were imported from 
countries with phytosanitary conditions that had not  been adequately examined, the authorised body 
on plant quarantine could send an expert to the exporting country for inspection of the places of 
production, processing, packaging and dispatch of the product.  In addition, goods subject to 
phytosanitary control could onl y be imported through border ch eckpoints equipped in accordance 
with Kazakhstan's plant qua rantine rules and norms. 
79. [The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at when taking phytosanitary measures, 
Kazakhstan's authorities followed the relevant intern ational practice and provisions established in the 
IPPC and the WTO SPS Agreement, including con ducting a risk assessment.  She confirmed that, 
from the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the WTO, if the phytosanitary requirements of 
Kazakhstan resulted in a higher level of protectio n than would be achieved by measures based on 
relevant international standards, recommendati ons or guidelines, Kazakhstan would apply its 
phytosanitary requirements in accordance with the WT O SPS Agreement.  She also confirmed that the 
authorities of Kazakhstan would consult with e xporting Members on the measures in question, if 
requested.  Furthermore, from the date of accessi on of Kazakhstan to the WTO, if phytosanitary 
requirements applied in Kazakhstan resulted in a high er level of protection th an would be achieved by 
measures based on relevant inte rnational standards, recommenda tions or guidelines, Kazakhstan 
would provide explanations of the reasons for such phytosanitary measure, including the relevant risk 
assessment, on a bilateral basis following receipt of  a request from an exporting Member pursuant to 
Article 5.8 of the WTO SPS Agreement.  The Wo rking Party took note of these commitments]. 
80. Pursuant to the Law No. 331-II "On Plant Prot ection" of 3 July 2002, pesticides had to 
undergo registration and pr oduction trials, carried out by resear ch and other organizations of 
Kazakhstan; subsequent registration foll owed in case of favourable trial results .  The tests had to be 
carried out under the control of the territorial br anches of the Committee of State Inspection in the JOB/ACC/30 
Page 32  
 
  Agro-Industrial Complex, in accordance with the "Rules on Registration Tests and State Registration 
of Pesticides (Chemical Insecticides) in the Republ ic of Kazakhstan" approv ed by the Government 
Resolution No. 1396 of 30 November 2011.  Registrati on trials were carried out to (i) determine the 
biological effectiveness of pesticides; and (ii)  detect recommended doses and methods of use for 
production purposes, which were intended for Kaza khstan's soil-climatic conditions and cultivated 
crops.  Production trials represented field trials of  the recommendations that had been elaborated 
during the registration trials.  Registration a nd production tests took two to three years.  
The Ministries of Health and Environment Protecti on examined pesticides subject to registration for 
the purposes of protection of human health and the en vironment.  Pesticides included into the Register 
of Potentially Hazardous Chemical Substances Pr ohibited for Use in Kazakhstan could not be 
registered. 
- Sanitary 
81. The representative of Kazakhstan explaine d that CU Commission Decision No. 299 
established the "Common List of Goods Subject to Sanitary-and-Epidemiologic Supervision (Control) 
at the Customs Border and on the Customs Territo ry of the Customs Union" (hereinafter – the 
Common List) (Part I) as last amended by CU Commission Decision No. 859 of 9 December 2011 
(as last amended by EEC Council Decisions Nos. 36 and 37 of 15 June 2012) , and established food 
safety requirements for corresponding goods.  Products produced in, or imported into the customs territory of the CU for distribution to the populatio n, use in industry, agriculture, civil construction 
development, transportation with direct human invol vement, or for private and household use, had to 
conform to the relevant requirements of sanitary  and epidemiological rules, norms, and hygiene 
regulations.  She further explained that the conformi ty to the safety requirements for certain groups of 
goods was to be confirmed by a State Registration certificate, as provided for in CU Commission Decisions and domestic law.  The CU Commi ssion had approved a list of goods for which 
State Registration Certificates must be supplied during customs clearance. 
82. The Committee of State Sanitary and Epidemiologi cal Surveillance of the Ministry of Health 
was the authorised body responsible for issues rela ted to sanitary and epidemiological welfare.  
The sanitary and epidemiological service was a single system consisting of (i) the authorised body and 
its border and territorial branches and (ii) organiza tions of sanitary and epidemiological services (the 
Republican Sanitary and Epidemiological Station, State organizations for sanitary and epidemiological expertise).  When  developing and approving regulator y acts related to the production, 
importation, turnover, use, and destruction of subs tances/processes that could potentially affect human JOB/ACC/30 
Page 33 
 
 
  health, Government agencies sought the consent of the authorised body on sanitary and 
epidemiological welfare.   
83. In addition to CU regulations, the national legisl ation in the sanitary sphere was comprised of 
the following acts:  Code of the Republic of Kaza khstan No. 193-IV "On Public health and Healthcare 
System" of 18 September 2009, Law No. 301 "On Food Safety" of 21 July 2007, Government Resolution No. 125 "On Approval of the Rules for Assignment of Registration Numbers to Entities 
Producing Food Products" of 11 February 2008, Government Resolution No. 2267 "On Approval of 
the Rules for Refusal for Entry, as well as for Production, Use and Sale of Products Intended for Human Consumption, on the Territory of the Repu blic of Kazakhstan, as well as for Use in Business 
and (or) Other Activities" of 30 December 2009. 
84. Some Members noted that under CU Commission Decisions, the State Registration procedure 
applied only to certain groups of goods included in Part II of the Common List was approved by the 
CU Commission Decision No. 299.  Members requested information on whether domestic provisions still applied, and, if so, what criteria were used for determining that a product was marketed for the 
first time in the territory of the CU or the territory of Kazakhstan. 
85. In response, the representative of Kazakhstan e xplained that national legal acts were applied 
to the extent that they did not contradict CU Commission Decision No. 299 of 28 May 2010.  Such provisions in national law re lated to the determination of the competent authority, the order of 
involvement of organizations and experts into th e procedure of State Registration, the order of 
appellation of refusal of State Registration, and keep ing of the national part of the Register of State 
Registration Certificates.  CU Commission Decision No. 299 specified the list of products subject to 
State Registration.  Thus, only products listed in  CU Commission Decision No. 299 were subject to 
State Registration.  The representative of Kazakhsta n explained that the State Registration procedure 
applied: 
- only to certain groups of goods, which were liste d in points 1 to 11 of Part II of the Common 
List of Goods Subject to Sanitary and Epidemiological Control, set-out in CU Commission 
Decision No. 299 (these include:  mineral water, bottled drinking water packaged in containers, tonic beverages, alcoholic beverages; specia lised foodstuffs, including food 
products for children, food products for pre gnant and nursing women, dietary products; 
biologically active dietary supplements, raw ma terials for production of biologically active 
dietary supplements, organic products; foodstu ffs derived from GMO, GMO; food additives, 
flavourings, technological aids including enzymes; and food contact material); 
- only if the goods were covered by CN codes liste d in the table of Part II to the Common List 
of Goods Subject to Sanitary Controls (CU Commission Decision No. 299); and 
- if the goods were manufactured for the first time on the territory of the CU or imported for the 
first time into the CU territory, and no prior State Registration had occurred, or in cases where JOB/ACC/30 
Page 34  
 
  the introduction of CU requirements necessitate d the issuance of a new State Registration 
Certificate. 
86. The representative of Kazakhstan specified that these three cumulative criteria, to determine 
whether a State Registration Certificate was required, were specified in the last paragraph of point 11 
in Part II to the Common List of Goods Subject to Sanitary and Epidemiological Control ("Goods 
specified in points 1 to 11 of the present Part, in cluded in the following comprehensive headings of 
the FEACN CU, manufactured for the first time on the Customs Union customs territory, as well as 
imported for the first time to the Customs Union cust oms territory, are subject to State Registration"). 
87. The State Registration Certificate was issued for a given type of product and was valid for 
exports from the relevant country without time limitati on, provided there had been no violations of the 
regulations during the preceding period.  If there were violations found during surveillance at the 
border, the State Registration Certificate could be temporarily revoked.  Applications for evaluations 
were to be submitted to Committee of State San itary and Epidemiological Surveillance or its 
territorial bodies.  State Registration Certificates we re valid throughout the entire territory of the CU.  
For domestically produced produc ts, sanitary and epidemiological surveillance was conducted by the 
territorial authorities of Committee of State Sanitary  and Epidemiological Surveillance at the stage of 
distribution of products on the Kazakhstan's dom estic market.  In response to questions from a 
Member of the Working Party, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the State Registration Certificates for domestic products were also issued for a given type of product and were valid for an 
unlimited time period.  In her view, the respectiv e procedures and requirements did not discriminate 
between domestic and imported products.  The pro cess for issuing a State Registration Certificate 
could not exceed 30 days after application was recei ved.  If the application was rejected, Committee 
of State Sanitary and Epidemiological Surveillan ce sent a letter to the applicant explaining what 
needed to be changed.  After corrections were made, the applicant could re-submit the application. 
88. The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at, since 1 July 2010, a State Registration 
Certificate was issued in  accordance with the common CU form  and was valid throughout the customs 
territory of the CU.  The certificate confirmed that the controlled goods conformed to CU Common 
sanitary and epidemiologic and hygienic requirements.  The period of validity of the State 
Registration Certificate covered the whole period of manufacture or delivery of controlled goods to 
the territory of the Customs Union.   The representative of Kazakhstan further explained that the State 
Registration Certificate was harmonized among the CU  Parties and that each Party recognised the 
right of each other Party to issue this certificate and that a State Registration Certificate would be 
valid throughout the territory of the CU. JOB/ACC/30 
Page 35 
 
 
  89. In response to a specific question, the representa tive of Kazakhstan stated that the term "new 
products" meant products developed an d industrially manufactured for the first time on the territory of 
Kazakhstan and also products imported into the territo ry of Kazakhstan for the first time, i.e., which 
were not on sale in Kazakhstan before.  The absence of a prior State Registration indicated that the product was new to the market of Kazakhstan and Stat e Registration was required.  She also explained 
that the producer, supplier, or importer could subm it an application for State Registration of products. 
90. Some Members noted that points 1 to 11 of Part II of the Common List of Goods Subject to 
Sanitary and Epidemiological Control included Non-Food Products, such as disinfectants, cosmetics or hazardous chemical substances.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan clarified that CU Commission 
Decision No. 299 covered the protection of human health in general from risks derived from both 
food and non-food products. 
91. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that some commodities were also subject to 
mandatory confirmation of conformity to CU requireme nts.  The list of such commodities, which also 
contained references to quality standards and quality requirement s for these products, was approved 
by the Decision of the Customs Union Commission No . 620 of 7 April 2011 wh ich replaced the list in 
the CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 2010, and included the following food and 
feedstuffs:  (i) canned food products (fish, caviar, seafood); (ii) coffee and coffee products; (iii) tea; 
(iv) sugar (cane and beet); (v) spices; (vi) fat -free dry milk; and (vii) feeds for animals, including 
formula feeds, pre-mixes, protein feed additiv es, such as oilseeds meal  and cake, fish meal, 
protein-vitamin additives, dry milk for feeding a nd dry milk replacements.  Until 1 January 2011, 
confirmation of conformity for these food produc ts was carried out in accordance with national 
legislation of each CU Party.  From 1 January 20 11, the declaration of conformity was provided upon 
assessment by the certification bodies and testing laboratories (centres) included into the Single Register of Certification Bodies and Testing Labo ratories (centres) of the CU.  With regard to 
feedstuffs, from 1 July 2010, self-declaration of conformity could be made on the basis of an 
assessment provided by the producer.  Foreign manufacturers, located outside the territory of the CU, could apply for a certificate/declaration of confor mity that was issued in  accordance with national 
legislation of a CU Party or for a CU unifo rm certificate of conformity, as approved by 
CU Commission Decision No. 319 of 18 June 20 10.  The representative of Kazakhstan further 
explained that references to quality standards and qu ality requirements with regard to products on the 
List of Commodities Subject to Mandatory Confirmation of Conformity would be revised as the CU Parties adopted CU technical regulations on specific products.  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 36  
 
  92. She further noted that pursuant to the Regulation of Conduct of State 
Sanitary-Epidemiological Control adopted by th e CU Commission Decision No. 299, food products 
included into Part II the Common List and produced  or imported in the CU territory had to be 
accompanied with a document confirming safety of the products, i.e. State Registration Certificate, 
issued upon results of testing conducted by the laboratories included into the Common List of Certification Bodies and Laboratories of the CU.  Su ch testing had to be conducted by exporters for 
the purposes of compliance with the Common Sanitary Epidemiological Requirements.  
Food products included into Part I of the Common Li st but not included into Part II the Common List, 
and produced or imported into CU, had to be acc ompanied with a document of producer (or its 
authorised supplier) certifying the safety of produc ts.  The representative of Kazakhstan, however, 
noted that these requirements were applied as an inte rim system of safety control of food products 
which would gradually be replaced with the requirements of technical regulations for respective food 
products.  
- Harmonization 
93. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirme d that CU Commission Decision No. 721 of 
22 June 2011 "On Application of International Standards, Recommendations and Guidelines" 
required that:  in cases in which no mandatory re quirements on veterinary, or phytosanitary, or 
sanitary epidemiological and hygienic requirements, had been established at CU or national level, the 
CU Parties would apply standards, recommendati ons and guidelines of the OIE, IPPC and the 
Codex Alimentarius respectively.  Similarl y, if CU veterinary, phytosanitary and 
sanitary-epidemiological and hygienic mandatory requi rements in effect in the territory of the CU 
were more stringent than relevant internationa l standards, guidelines and recommendations, in the 
absence of scientific justification of risk to human, an imal, or plant life or health relevant international 
standards, guidelines, and recommendations, or parts thereof, would be applied.  The Working Party 
took note of these commitments.] 
94. The representative of Kazakhstan informed Members of the Working Party that the 
CU Commission had adopted Decision No. 625 of 7 April 2011 "On Harmonizati on of CU Legal Acts 
in the Field of Sanitary, Veterinary and Phytosan itary Measures with International Standards" as 
amended by CU Commission Decision No. 722 of  22 June 2011.  CU SPS measures that, after 
examination, were recognised as more stringent th an international standards, without scientific 
justification for such restriction or risk to human, an imal or plant life or health would be brought into 
conformity with international standards.  She noted  that foreign governments could bring measures to 
the attention of the CU Parties and participate in the examination.  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 37 
 
 
  95. The representative further informed Members of the Working Party that in connection with 
implementation of CU Commission Decision No. 62 5, the CU Commission had by Decision No. 801 
of 23 September 2011, adopted the Regulation "On the Uniform Procedure of Carrying Out 
Examination of Legal Acts of the Customs Union in the Sphere of Implementation of Sanitary, 
Veterinary, and Phytosanitary Measures" whic h entered into effect  on 29 October 2011.  
Some Members of the Working Party expressed concern that the implementation procedure was 
unnecessarily burdensome and lengthy.   
96. Some Members expressed concerns about CU MR Ls for tetracyclines that were much more 
stringent than international standards and no justif ication for these stringent requirements in the form 
of a risk assessment and scientific justificati on consistent with inte rnational standards and 
recommendations had been provided.  These Me mbers requested that Kazakhstan and other 
CU Parties apply the Codex standards for MRLs for tetracyclines.  These Members noted that it 
appeared that some form of risk  assessment was now being done a nd expressed concern regarding the 
timing and procedures being followed.  Members of  the Working Party noted that the harmonization 
process for MRLs of veterinary drugs should also in clude elimination of non-tolerance or very low 
tolerance in food of veterinary substances when thes e substances are authorised in use in the Customs 
Union under similar conditions to those in place in exporting countries.  Finally, these Members 
recalled CU Commission Decision No. 625 of 7 Ap ril 2011 on Harmonization with International 
Standards and requested that Kazakhstan fu lly adopt and implement this Decision. 
97. One Member requested Kazakhstan to confirm th at, in application of Article 3.1 of the 
WTO SPS Agreement, Kazakhstan would review a ll of its existing sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures to ensure that, by the date of accession,  they were based on international standards, 
guidelines and recommendations or, in the event that  Kazakhstan or the Customs Union considered 
that international standards did not meet its appropr iate level of protection, they were scientifically 
justified in accordance with Article 3.3 of th e WTO SPS Agreement.  In cases where relevant 
scientific evidence was insufficient,  he requested that Kazakhstan confirm that it would comply with 
Article 5.7 of the WTO SPS Agreement. 
98. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that , as of the date of accession, in application 
of Article 3.1 of the WTO SPS Agreement, all san itary and phytosanitary measures, whether adopted 
by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU , would be based on international standards, 
guidelines or recommendations as provided for in the WT O Agreement.  Further, the representative of 
Kazakhstan confirmed that measures which were not based on international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations, where they exist, would not be applied in Kazakhstan without providing Members JOB/ACC/30 
Page 38  
 
  a scientifically based justification of the meas ures, in accordance with the WTO SPS Agreement, 
including Article 3.3.  In cases where relevant scien tific evidence was insufficient, he confirmed that 
any measure adopted, whether by Kazakhstan or th e competent bodies of the CU would comply with 
the WTO SPS Agreement, in particular with Article  5.7 thereof.  In the event that international 
standards were not considered to meet the appropr iate level of protection,  Kazakhstan would provide 
scientific justification for measures applied in Ka zakhstan, in accordance with Article 5.8 of the 
WTO SPS Agreement.  The Working Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Risk Assessment 
99. The representative of Kazakhstan explained that  the CU Commission had adopted a Decision 
"On Equivalence of Sanitary, Veterinary, or Phytosanitary Measures and Conduct of Risk 
Assessment, CU Commission Decision No. 835 of 18 October 2011 (hereinafter "Decision on 
Equivalence and Risk Assessment").  Under this Decision, CU Parties were required, consistent with 
Article 5 of the WTO SPS Agreement, to ensure th at sanitary, veterinary, or phytosanitary measures 
were based on an assessment, as appropriate to the circumstances, of the risks to human, animal or 
plant life or health, taking into account risk asse ssment techniques developed by the relevant 
international organizations, including Codex, OIE,  and the IPPC.  She further explained that the 
CU requirements for conducting risk assessments corr esponded to the provisions of Article 5 of the 
WTO SPS Agreement, including a requirement that, as provided in Article 5.3 of the WTO SPS Agreement, in assessing the risk to animal  or plant life or health and determining the 
measure to be applied for achieving the appropriate  level of sanitary, veterinary or phytosanitary 
protection from such risk, the CU Parties would take into account as relevant economic factors:  
the potential damage in terms of lo ss of production or sales in the event of the entry, establishment or 
spread of a pest or disease, the costs of control or eradication in the territory of the Parties, and the 
relative cost-effectiveness of altern ative approaches to limiting risks.  
100. Some Members of the Working Party noted the requirement applied to certain goods on the 
Common List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control that imports come from establishments on the Unified Registry, as described in paragraph [xx].  These Members expressed concern that applying 
this requirement to certain of the products on the Common List of Goods Subject to Veterinary 
Control was not based on science or a risk assessment.  In addition, th ere could also be a requirement 
for an establishment to be included in the Registry  prior to being permitted to  export products to the 
territory of the CU where a veterinary certificate, import permit and State Registration which appeared to be more trade restrictive than required to achieve the appropriate level of protection of the 
CU.  Moreover, these Members recalled their concer ns about the absence of risk assessments and JOB/ACC/30 
Page 39 
 
 
  science to justify measures maintain ed by the CU and Kazakhstan that were more stringent than 
international standards, gui delines, and recommendations. 
101. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that , as of the date of accession of [the first 
CU Party to the WTO] [Kazakhs tan], goods would be included on th e Common List of Goods Subject 
to Veterinary Control in Kazakhstan only if app lication of veterinary measures was in compliance 
with international standards, guidelines and reco mmendations, or if science and a risk assessment 
justified, consistent with the WTO SPS Agreemen t, subjecting a category of goods to veterinary 
measures.  Similarly, the veterinary measures app lied to each category of goods would also be in 
compliance with international standards, recomme ndations and guidelines or based on science and a 
risk assessment.  Furthermore, the representative confirmed that Kazakhstan would remove products 
from the List of Goods Subject to Veterinary C ontrol by the date of [its accession to the 
WTO][the accession of the first CU Party to the WTO][Kazakhstan], if a risk assessment or scientific 
justification had not been provided.  Moreover, th e representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that risk 
assessments would be conducted in accordance with th e methods of scientific evaluation set by the 
Codex Alimentarius.  The Working Pa rty took note of these commitments.] 
- Equivalence 
102. The representative of Kazakhstan explained th at the appropriate le vel of protection was 
determined by the CU bodies with regard to sanita ry and veterinary measures and by each CU Party 
on the national level with regard  to phytosanitary measures, and were reflected in technical 
regulations for products produced on the territory of th e CU and individual CU Parties, respectively.  
Furthermore, the representative recalled that the CU Commission had adopted CU Commission Decision No. 835 of 18 October 2011 "On Equivale nce and Risk Assessment", which provided:  
- for CU Parties to recognise equivalence if an  exporting country objectively demonstrated that 
its measures achieved the appropriate level of san itary or veterinary protection of the CU or 
the appropriate level of phytosanitary pr otection of an individual CU Party;  
- the procedure to follow as regards consultations  with the exporting country(ies) and relevant 
information to be provided by the exporting country(ies);  
- procedural and substantive requirements as regards the judgement on recognition of 
equivalence; and 
- the possibility of inspection, testing or audit in the exporting country(ies) upon a request by 
the CU Parties.   
103. In addition, under the CU Commission Decisi on "On Equivalence and Risk Assessment", 
CU Parties committed to apply the same approach to  requests for national recognition of equivalence 
in the phytosanitary field addressed to individual CU  Parties.  He also noted that the CU Commission 
Decision "On Equivalence and Risk Assessment" pr ovided for the possibility for exporting countries JOB/ACC/30 
Page 40  
 
  to request equivalence recognition by the CU or its  Parties (depending on respective competences) of 
their control or inspection systems.  He explained that CU Commission Decision No. 835 of 
18 October 2011 "On Equivalence and Risk Assessme nt", and all procedures necessary to apply this 
Decision, would be in effect prior to the da te of accession of K azakhstan to the WTO.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, the CU Decision "On Equivalence and Risk 
Assessment" foresaw the following procedure: 
- submission of a request for equivalence recogn ition to a competent authority of a CU Party, 
including, inter alia , information on the type and scope of equivalence agreement requested, 
description of product(s), measure(s) or system(s) of control and inspections concerned, an evaluation of how the measure(s) or system (s) of the exporting country achieved the 
appropriate level of prot ection of the CU or a CU Party, and information on the feasibility and 
performance of the measure(s); 
- interactions between the CU Party and the expor ting country in the context of the determination 
of equivalence; 
- prior to taking a decision on equivalence, th e CU Party would, upon request, provide to the 
requesting exporting country an explanation of the CU's or its level of protection; and 
- notification by the CU Commission or a CU Part y to the exporting country of its judgement as 
regards recognition of equivalence in a timely manner and with appropriate explanation where 
it was found that the measure was not equivalent. 
104. Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan specified that, in applying this 
CU Commission Decision, CU Parties would fo llow international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations developed by the relevant international organizations, including the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission, the International O ffice of Epizootics and the relevant international 
and regional organizations operating within the fra mework of the International Plant Protection 
Convention.  Members noted that, as set-out in the Decision of the WTO SPS Committee, the 
importing Member had certain responsibilities:  to provide an explanation of the objective and 
rationale of the sanitary or phytosanitary measure and identify clearly the risks that the relevant 
measure intended to address.  Moreover, the impor ting Member should indicate the appropriate level 
of protection which its sanitary or phytosanitary me asure was designed to achieve and should provide 
a copy of the risk assessment on which the sanitary or  phytosanitary measure was based.  As stated in 
the WTO Committee Decision, an importing Member was to consider the relevant information and 
experience that the sanitary and phytosanitary servi ces had on the measure(s) for which recognition of 
equivalence was requested.  A key element for consideration was the historic knowledge and 
confidence that the competent authority of the im porting Member had of the competent authority of 
the exporting Member.   
105. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed th at Kazakhstan, from the date of its accession 
to the WTO, would ensure compliance with Artic le 4 of the WTO SPS Agreement.  He further 
confirmed that, as provided for in Article 4 of the WTO SPS Agreement, sanitary, veterinary, and JOB/ACC/30 
Page 41 
 
 
  phytosanitary measures of other Members, even wh en they were different from measures of the 
Kazakhstan or the CU, would be accepted as equi valent, if the exporting country objectively 
demonstrated that its measures achieved the a ppropriate level of SPS protection applied in 
Kazakhstan.  The representative also confirmed that , as of the date of accession of Kazakhstan to the 
WTO, procedures for recognition and determina tion of equivalence, consistent with the 
WTO SPS Agreement, including Article 4 thereof, whether applied by Kazakhstan or competent 
bodies of the CU, would be based on relevant international standards, guidelines and 
recommendations, namely the Decision of the WTO SPS Committee (G/SPS/19/Rev.2), Codex Guidelines on the Judgment of Equivalence of Sanitary Measures Associated with Food 
Inspection and Certification Systems (CAC/GL 53- 2003), Codex Guidelines for the Development of 
Equivalence Agreements Regarding Food Import a nd Export Inspection and Certification Systems 
(CAC/GL 34-1999); Chapter 5.3 of the OIE Terrest rial Animal Health Code "OIE Procedures 
Relevant to the Agreement on the Application of  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the 
World Trade Organization" and ISPM 24 "Guide lines for the Determination and Recognition of 
Equivalence of Phytosanitary Measures".  The Wo rking Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Non-discrimination 
106. Some Members also requested clarification of whether SPS measures applied in Kazakhstan 
established similar treatment fo r domestic and foreign like produc ts.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that, in her view, non-discrim inatory treatment was provided by the current 
legislation of Kazakhstan and CU  Agreements, CU Commission Decisions, and other CU Acts.  
CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions and other CU Acts did not set-out separate SPS measures 
for imported goods.  Sanitary-epidemiological, veterina ry and phytosanitary rules, criteria, measures 
and requirements were applied uniformly and without discrimination to all foreign, CU, and domestic 
products and suppliers.  She stated that SPS require ments were implemented with respect to goods 
originating from foreign countries in the same way, th ey were applied in respect  of similar products of 
Kazakh origin.  CU Agreements, CU Commission Decisions, and other CU Acts, as well as the 
current legislation of Kazakhstan in the veterinary/ sanitary sphere (Article 23 of the Law of Republic 
of Kazakhstan "On Veterinary") we re uniform and established identi cal requirements for both foreign, 
CU, and domestic goods and manuf acturers, including requirements  for putting products on the 
domestic market.  Finally, phytosanitary requirement s applied to regulated products originating from 
a foreign country in the same manner as they applied to  the same regulated products of Kazak origin.   
107. [The representative of Kazakhs tan confirmed that all SPS measu res developed and applied in 
Kazakhstan, whether by Kazakhstan or compet ent bodies of the CU, would comply with the JOB/ACC/30 
Page 42  
 
  non-discrimination provisions of the WTO SPS Agreem ent, including those relating to the principles 
of national and most-favoured nation treatment.  Th e Working Party took note of this commitment.] 
- Transparency, Notification and Enquiry Point Obligations 
108. With regard to the transparency requirement s of the SPS Agreement, the representative of 
Kazakhstan said that a single TBT/SPS enquiry point had been in operation since July 2005.  The enquiry point notified WTO Members of SPS measures in effect, as well as on measures that 
were still in preparation.  The enquiry point u pon receipt notifications from the WTO Secretariat, 
EurAzEC member states and other international orga nizations published them quarterly in the official 
publication of the authorised body (Bulletin of the Enquiry Point) and monthly in the common information system (www.memst.kz or www.wto.memst.kz).  Notifications would be prepared in accordance with the "Rules and Procedures for Preparation of Notifi cations on Pending 
(Being Adopted) Technical Regulations  and Standards".  These rules had been developed in line with 
the notification provisions of the SPS and TBT Agre ements and ensured that notifications took place 
at an early stage when comments could be ta ken into account and prior to the adoption and 
enforcement of these proposed regulations.  The Enquiry Point could be contacted at: 
Address: Orynbor, 11 
  Left Bank 
  010000 Astana   Republic of Kazakhstan  Telephone: +(771) 7222 6482 Tel/fax:  +(771) 7220 5640 
E-mail:  enquirypoint@mail.ru 
Website: www.wto.memst.kz 
109. A Working Party Member asked the representative of Kazakhstan to clarify as to whether the 
phrase "get familiar with intention" in paragraph 2. 3. of the Rules of Completion and Submission of 
WTO Notifications included the opportunity to co mment.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that in general, the scope of the Rules is onl y the methodology of filing of SPS notifications.  
The possibility to comment was provided in the Go vernment Resolution No. 718 of 11 July 2005 as 
last amended in September 2010.  In particular, paragraph 11 provided that the Enquiry Point, upon 
request of the WTO Secretariat, EurAsEC member s and other internationa l organizations had to 
present information (clarifications), standards, conformity assessment procedures, SPS measures.  
110. This Member, with regard to provision 2.8 and the Order included in the Annexes, noted that 
the Order was very similar to the notification format used for notifications under the SPS and 
TBT Agreements; however, there were some differen ces.  For instance, the Order did not include a JOB/ACC/30 
Page 43 
 
 
  section for the comment deadline.  In this regard , this Member enquired why Kazakhstan developed 
its own format instead of using the formats devel oped by the SPS and TBT Committees.  In reply the 
representative of Kazakhstan said that the mentioned notification format was related to notifications 
on emergency measures in technical regulations, SPS measures, or amendments to them.  The purpose of such notifications was to inform interested WTO Members about urgent measures, implemented in 
order to protect human and animal life and health , ensure plant and/or environment protection.  
She emphasised that emergency notification forms developed by the WTO SPS and TBT Committees 
do not have a section for comment deadline.  The re gular notification format – also included in 
Annex 1 of the Rules of completion and submission – contained the section for the comment deadline.  
111. This Member commented that with  regards to the operation of the enquiry point, one of the 
issues discussed by WTO Members in the Committee is  the importance of inter-agency coordination.  
The enquiry point for both SPS and TBT was established in the Committee on Technical Regulation 
and Metrology of the Ministry of Industry and New Technology (MEMST).  In this regard, this Working Party Member asked how MEMST would coordinate with other agencies involved in 
developing SPS measures.  
112. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the SPS/TBT Enquiry Point was established by 
the Government Resolution No. 718 of 11 July 2005,whi ch authorised the Enquiry Point to coordinate 
the Ministries Agriculture and Health on the issu es of SPS notifications, including comments of 
WTO Members.  Pursuant to this Resolution, Government agencies (including the Ministry of 
Agriculture and Ministry of Healthcare) provided appropriate information to the Enquiry Point upon 
adoption and application of TBT and SPS measures w ithin the two-days time limit in order to send 
such information to the WTO Secretariat, Eu rAzEC member states and other international 
organizations.   
113. She added that, pursuant to Government R esolution No. 1627 of 30 October 2000, the 
Ministry of Agriculture had established an Inform ation Marketing System to enhance transparency 
through regular exchange of analytical marketi ng information between agri cultural producers, public 
bodies, and other participants on the agricultural market; and through enhanced interaction with 
international organizations.  All relevant drafts, amended and fi nal SPS and (agriculture-related) 
TBT regulations and rules were available from the Mi nistry's website, www.minagri.gov.kz as well as 
from www.memst.kz.  All interested parties could send questions and comments to the Ministry at 
strategy@minagri.kz.  The Enquiry Point also publis hed a quarterly bulletin of  all draft amended and 
final SPS measures..  The Ministry of Agriculture i ssued an analytical bulletin "Agroinform", which 
contained all legal acts, approved by the Ministry of Agriculture, including legislation on veterinary, JOB/ACC/30 
Page 44  
 
  quarantine and plant protection.  In addition, the State sanitary and epidemiological control system 
maintained a regularly updated database on the in cidence of infectious diseases and on the results of 
random laboratory tests of drinking water and food products.  This information was available to all 
interested parties.   
114. In response to a question from a Member rega rding the existence of a process for public 
participation in the development of rules and re gulations, she said that Law No. 124-III "On Private 
Entrepreneurship" of 31 January 2 006 provided for the participation of the private sector in the 
development of regulatory acts that would affect the interests of private entrepreneurs.  In her view, 
the provisions of this law ensured that the public could put forward proposals for the consideration of 
the relevant authorised body.  Besides, in accord ance with the above-mentioned law, a draft law had 
to be examined by accredited Businessmen Associ ations.  In response to specific questions, the 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that Kazakhstan' s legislation contained no restrictions on foreign 
participation in the development of sanitary and phytosanitary standards (e.g. participation in 
technical committees meetings, providing comments) .  Proposals and comments should be submitted 
through the enquiry point.  Furthermore, Customs Union Commission Decision No. 625 of 
7 April 2011 provided for publication of draft SPS m easures with a public comment period of at least 
60 days. 
115. [The representative of Kazakhstan conf irmed that Kazakhstan would notify its 
SPS notification authority and enquiry point to the WTO SPS Committee.  S PS measures, including 
those relating to inspection, were published in publications, such as those mentioned in 
paragraph [xx].  Information on all proposed SPS measures and those in effect, as foreseen in Annex B of the WTO SPS Agreement, could also be  obtained from the SPS notification authority or 
from Kazakhstan's SPS enquiry point.  The Workin g Party took note of these commitments.] 
- Conclusion 
116. [The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that, from the date of accession of Kazakhstan 
to the WTO, all SPS measures would be developed, whether by Kazakhstan or the competent bodies of the CU, and applied in Kazakhstan in accordance  with the WTO Agreement and in particular, the 
WTO SPS Agreement.  In particular, SPS measures w ould be applied only to the extent necessary to 
protect human, animal, or plant life or health; would be based on scientific principles and, where they 
exist, on international standards, guidelines, a nd recommendations; and, would not be more trade 
restrictive than required to achieve the appropria te level of protection a pplied in Kazakhstan.  
SPS measures would not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate between Members where identical or 
similar conditions prevail, including between the terr itory of Kazakhstan and that of other Members.  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 45 
 
 
  SPS measures would not be applied in a manner whic h would constitute a disguised restriction on 
international trade, and would not be maintained  without sufficient scien tific evidence, except as 
provided for in Article 5.7 of the WTO SPS Agreem ent.  The Working Part y took note of these 
commitments.] 
  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 46 Table [...] - List of Goods Subject to Veterinary Control 
CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0101 Live horses, donkeys, mules and hinnies  Veterinary certificate or 
veterinary passport for sport 
horses Yes No 
0102 Live cattle Veterinary certificate Yes No 
0103 Live swine Veterinary certificate Yes No 
0104 Live sheep and goats Veterinary certificate Yes No 
0105 Live poultry, i.e. chicken ( Gallus domesticus ), ducks, 
geese, turkey and guinea fowl Veterinary certificate Yes No 
0106 Other live animals(1) Veterinary certificate, except 
for two or less dogs or cats 
for personal needs 
For two or less dogs or cats 
for personal needs – 
veterinary certificate or veterinary passport Yes, except for two 
or less dogs or cats 
for personal needs No 
0201 Fresh and refrigerated cattle meat   Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0202 Frozen cattle meat  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0203 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen swine  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0204 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen lamb or goat's meat  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0205 00 Fresh, refrig erated or frozen meat of horses, donkeys, 
mules or hinnies  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0206 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen food by-products of cattle, 
swine, sheep, goats, horses, do nkeys, mules and hinnies   Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0207 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen meat and by-products of 
poultry, stated in product item 0105 Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0208 Other fresh, refrigerated or frozen meat and food by-
products  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0209 00 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen, salted*, in brine*, dried* or 
smoked swan fat, separated from the lean meat, and poultry fat, not melted or otherwise extracted Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0210 Meat and food by-products salted*, in brine*, dried* or 
smoked*; flour from meat or meat by-products* Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0301 Live fish Veterinary certificate Yes Yes  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 47CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0302 Live or refrigerated fish, except filleted fish and other 
fish of product item 0304  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0303 Frozen meat, except filleted fish and fish of product item  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0304 Fresh, refrigerated or frozen filleted fish and other fish 
(including mincemeat)  Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0305 Dried, salted or in brine fish; hot smoke or cold smoke 
fish; fish flour of fine grinding and meal and granules, 
ready for consumption* Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0306 Shellfish in shell or without shell, live, fresh, chilled, 
frozen, dried*, salted* or in br ine*; crustaceans in shell, 
steamed* or boiled*, chilled or non-refrigerated, frozen , 
dried*, salted* or in brine*; Flours of fine grinding and 
meals and pellets of crustaceans, ready for consumption* Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0307 Mussels in shell or without shell, live, fresh, chilled, 
frozen, dried*, salted* or in brine*; other aquatic 
invertebrates, different from  crustaceans and mollusks, 
live, fresh, chilled, frozen, dried*, salted* or in brine*; 
Flours of fine grinding, meals and pellets of other aquatic 
invertebrates, ready for consumption* Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0401 Raw milk and raw cream, not concentrated and without 
sugar-added or other sweetening substances Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
0402 Milk and cream, concentrated and with added sugar or 
other sweetening substances* Veterinary certificate Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 48 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0403 Buttermilk, curdled milk and cream, yogurt, kefir and 
other fermented or acidified milk and cream, 
concentrated or unconcentrat ed, with or without added 
sugar or other sweeteners in flavored or without them, 
with or without the additional fruits, nuts or cocoa * Veterinary certificate Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
0404 Whey, concentrated or unconcentrated, with or without 
added sugar or other sweetening matter; products made 
of natural components of milk, with or without added sugar or other sweetening substances, elsewhere not 
specified or included * Veterinary certificate Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
0405 Butter and other fats and oils, made from milk; dairy 
pastas* 
 Veterinary certificate Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. 
In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 49CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0406 Cheese and cottage cheese* Veterinary certificate Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
0407 00 Birds' eggs in shell, fresh, canned* or boiled* 
 Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is required  only for processed egg products. 
0408 Birds' eggs without shell and egg yolks, fresh, dried, 
steamed* or boiled in hot water*, molded*, frozen or 
preserved otherwise*, with or without added sugar or 
other sweetening substances Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Yes 
0409 00 000 0 Natural honey  Veterinary certificate 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods destined to the 
territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan No 
0410 00 000 0 Food products of animal orig in, not elsewhere specified 
or included Veterinary certificate 
 Yes No 
0502 Bristles pork or Cabaña; badger or other hair, used in 
production of brushes; their waste Veterinary certificate 
 Yes No  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 50 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0504 00 000 0 Guts, bladders and stomachs of animals (except fish), 
whole or in pieces, fresh, chilled, frozen, salted, in brine, 
dried or smoked Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Measure to be applied in respect of 
goods destined from third States to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
0505 Skins and other parts of birds with feathers or down, 
feathers and parts of feathers (cut or uncut edges) and 
down, cleaned, disinfected or treated for stor age, but not 
further prepared; powder and waste of feathers or their 
parts Veterinary certificate 
 Yes No 
0506 Bones and horn-core, raw, low-fat, dominated by 
primary treatment (without shap ing), treated with acid or 
degelatinised; powder and waste of these products Veterinary certificate 
 Yes No 
0507 Ivory, tortoise-shell, whalebone or other marine 
mammals, horns, antlers, hooves, nails, claws and beaks, 
unworked or subjected to primary processing without 
shaping; powder and waste of these products Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
0510 00 000 0 Ambergris, castoreum , civet and musk; cantharides; bile, 
whether or not dried; glands and other animal products 
used in the preparation of pharmaceutical products, 
fresh, chilled, frozen or otherwise provisionally preserved Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
0511 Products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or 
included; dead animals of 01 or 03 group, unfit for 
human consumption Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 51CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
0511 99 809 2 Horse hair and its waste, including in the form of 
paintings on the substrate or with or without it Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
from 0511, from 
9601, from 9705 00 000 0 Hunting trophies, stuffed animals, including pasting 
through taxidermist processing or canned Veterinary certificate only 
for unprocessed hunting trophies No for trophies, which passed the full taxidermic 
processing. Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but the name of the taxidermic manufactory (shop) where 
the first processing was made or 
hunting farm  should be indicated in the import permit and in the veterinary 
certificate when thes e are required  
1001 10 000 0 (only 
feed grain)** Hard wheat Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1001 90 990 0 (only 
feed grain)** Soft wheat  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1002 00 000 0 (only feed grain)** Rye  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1003 00 900 0 (only feed grain)** Barley  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1004 00 000 0 (only feed grain)** Oats  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1005 90 000 0 (only feed grain)** Other corn Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 52 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
1201 00 900 0 (only 
feed grain)** Soybeans  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
from 1208** Flour of fine grinding and meals of seeds or fruits of 
oilseeds (except mustard seeds), used for animal feed Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
from 1211** Plants and their parts (including seeds and fruits), used in 
insecticidal or similar purposes, or in veterinary 
medicine, fresh or dried, whole or chopped, crushed or ground Veterinary certificate, only  
when declaring for use in 
veterinary, including for animal feed Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
from 1212 99 700 0 Others (bee-bread, ambrosia)  Veterinary certificate 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1213 00 000 0** Straw and chaff of grain, raw, chopped or 
uncomminuted, beaten or not milled, pressed or in the 
form of granules Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1214** Swede, beet leaf (Swiss chard) , root feeding, hay, alfalfa, 
clover, sainfoin, forage kale, lupines, vetches and similar 
forage products, granular or granulated Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
from 1301 90 900 0 Others (Propolis) Veterinary certificate 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1501 00 Swine fat (including lard) and poultry fat, except fat of 
product item 0209 or 1503 Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for food and feed without 
disinfection process Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 53CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
1502 00 Fat of cattle, sheep or goats, except fat of product item 
1503 Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for food and feed without 
disinfection process  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1503 00 Lard stearin, lard oil, oleostearin, oleo- oil and tallow oil, 
not emulsified or mixed or otherwise prepared Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of animal origin intended for 
food and feed without 
disinfection process  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods destined to the 
territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1504 Fats, oils and their fractions, from fish or marine 
mammals, whether or not refined, but not chemically 
modified Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for 
food and feed without disinfection process  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1505 00 Wool grease and fatty substances derived therefrom 
(including lanolin) Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for 
food and feed without 
disinfection process  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1506 00 000 0 Other animal fats and oils and their fractions, whether or 
not refined, but without altering chemical composition Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for 
food and feed without disinfection process Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1516 10 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, 
partly or wholly hydrogenated, inter-esterified, 
re-esterified or elaidinized, whether or not refined but not further prepared Veterinary certificate – only 
for controlled goods of 
animal origin intended for food and feed without 
disinfection process Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1516 20** Fats and vegetable oils and their fractions 
 Veterinary certificate – only 
when declaring for use in animal feed purposes Yes No   
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 54 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
1518 00 Animal or vegetable fats and oils and their fractions, 
boiled, oxidised, dehydrated, sulfonated, oxidized by air 
blown, polymerized by heat in vacuum or in inert gas or 
chemically modified in another way other than products 
of product item 1516; unfit for human consumption of 
mix or preparations of animal or vegetable fats and oils 
or fractions of different fats and oils of this group, not 
elsewhere specified or included Veterinary certificate (when 
declaring for use in 
veterinary, including animal feed) in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of 
Belarus and Kazakhstan  Veterinary certificate 
(declaring for veterinary 
purposes, including for feed production), except for 
vegetable fats, except for 
products containing less than 50% of products of animal 
origin other than meat in 
respect of goods destined to the territory of the Russian 
Federation Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan 
Measure is applied in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation, 
except for vegetable 
fats Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate, except for 
vegetable fats. 
1521 90 Beeswax and other insect waxes and spermaceti, whether 
or not colored, refined or unrefined Veterinary certificate Yes No 
1601 00 Sausages and similar pr oducts of meat, meat by-products 
or blood; ready food products, made on their basis* Veterinary certificate Yes Yes 
1602 Prepared or preserved meat products, meat by-products 
or blood of other  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Yes 
1603  Extracts and juices from m eat, fish or crustaceans, 
mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated 
in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
1604 Prepared or preserved fish; caviar and its substitutes, 
made from fish eggs  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Yes 
1605 Prepared or pr eserved crustaceans, mollusks and other 
aquatic invertebrates* Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Yes  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 55CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
1902 20 Pasta stuffed, whether or not cooked or otherwise 
prepared, containing fish, cr ustaceans, mollusks or other 
aquatic invertebrates, sausag es, meat, meat offal, blood 
or blood products of group 04, or any combination of 
these products*** Veterinary certificate, except 
for products containing less 
than 50% of products of animal origin 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan, 
except for goods containing less than 
50% of animal 
origin components  Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
1904 20 Cereals (except maize) in the form of grain or flaked 
grains or processed in any other way (except for a thin 
flour and meal), pre-boiled or cooked in any other way, 
containing fish, crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic 
invertebrates, sausages, meat, meat offal, blood or blood 
products of group 04, or any combination of these 
products*** Veterinary certificate, except 
for products containing less 
than 50% of products of 
animal origin  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan, 
except for goods 
containing less than 50% of animal 
origin components  Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated 
in the Veterinary certificate 
From 20 Processed vegetables, fruits, nuts or other parts of plants 
and their mixtures, containing sausage, meat, meat 
by-products, blood, fish or crustaceans, mollusks or other 
aquatic invertebrates or products from group 04, or any 
combination of these products*** Veterinary certificate, except 
for products containing less 
than 50% of products of 
animal origin  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan, 
except for goods 
containing less than 50 % of animal 
origin components  Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated 
in the Veterinary certificate 
From 2102 20** Inactive yeast; other dead single-celled microorganisms 
that are used for animal feed Veterinary certificate Yes No  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 56 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
From 2104 Soups and broths and b illets for its preparation (except 
vegetables); homogenized composite food products, that 
contain sausage, meat, meat  by-products, blood, fish, 
crustaceans, mollusks or other invertebrates or products 
of group 04, or any combination of these products*** Veterinary certificate except 
for products containing less 
than 50% of products of animal origin 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan, 
except for goods containing less than 
50% of animal 
origin components  Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated in the Veterinary certificate 
From 2105  Ice cream, except ice cr eam, made on the basis of fruits 
and berries, fruit and edible ice*** Veterinary certificate in 
respect of goods destined to 
the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan Veterinary certificate, except 
for products containing less 
than 50% of products of animal origin, in respect of 
goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian 
Federation Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the 
territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan  
 Measure is applied in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan. 
In respect of goods destined to the territory of the Russian Federation 
inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the establishments should be indicated 
in the Veterinary certificate 
From 2106 Processed cheese and other food products, containing 
sausage, meat, meat offal,  blood, fish, crustaceans, 
mollusks or other invertebrates or the products of 
group 04, or any combination of these products*** Veterinary certificate in 
respect of goods destined to the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan 
Veterinary certificate, except for products 
containing less than 50% of 
products of animal origin, in respect of goods destined to 
the territory of the Russian 
Federation Measure is applied 
in respect of goods destined to the 
territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan   Yes, in case producers of sausages, 
meat, meat offals, blood, fish, 
crustaceans, mollusks or other 
invertebrates or the products of 
group 04, or any combination of these 
products are not included into the 
Register of third countries 
2301 Flours, meals and pellets of meat or meat offal, fish or 
crustaceans, mollusks or other aquatic invertebrates, 
unfit for human consumption; greaves Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 57CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
From 2302** Bran, sharps and other remains from sifting, milling or 
other methods of processing cereals or legumes, 
granulated or not granulated, used for animal feed Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
From 2303** Remains of starch manufacture and similar residues, beet 
pulp, bagasse, or sugar cane bagasse and other waste 
from sugar production, grains and other waste from 
brewing or distilling, granulated or not granulated, used 
for animal feed Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
From 2304 00 000** Oilcake and other solid residues, obtained by extracting 
soybean oil, unbeaten or ground, granulated or not 
granulated, used for animal feed Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
From 2306** Oilcake and other solid residues, obtained by extraction 
of vegetable fats or oils, except waste of commodity 
items 2304 or 2305, unbeaten or ground, granulated or 
not granulated, used for animal feed  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
2308 00** Products of vegetable origin and vegetable waste, 
vegetable residues and byproducts, granulated or not 
granulated, used for feeding animals, not elsewhere 
specified or included Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
2309 Products used for animal feed Veterinary certificate in 
respect of goods destined to 
the territory of Belarus and Kazakhstan  
Veterinary certificate only if 
the products contain animal products, in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of 
the Russian Federation Yes 
(except feed for 
cats and dogs heat treated and in retail 
packaging) Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in the 
Veterinary certificate 
From group 29** Organic chemical compounds (for the use in veterinary 
medicine) No Yes No 
  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 58 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
From group 30 Pharmaceutical products (for the use in veterinary 
medicine) No 
 Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan, as 
well as not registered 
pharmaceutical 
products, destined to the territory of 
the Russian 
Federation Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but for non-registered 
pharmaceutical products names and/or numbers of the final establishments 
should be indicated in the import 
permit and in the quality certificate for additives of chemical or 
microbiological synthesis 
 
3101 00 000 0 Fertilizers of animal  or vegetable origin, mixed or 
unmixed, chemically treated  or untreated; fertilizer 
obtained by mixing or chemical treatment of products of 
vegetable or animal origin Veterinary certificate in 
respect of goods destined to 
the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan  Veterinary certificate only if 
the products contain animal 
products, in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of 
the Russian Federation Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate, if the 
products contain animal products 
From 3501 Casein, caseinates and other casein derivatives Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Measure is applied in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan. 
In respect of goods destined to the territory of the Russian Federation 
inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
3502 Albumin (protein) (including concentrates of two or 
more whey proteins, containing more than 80 wt.% of 
whey proteins in terms of dry substance), albuminates 
and other derivatives of albumin Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 59CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
3503 00 Gelatin (including rectangular (including square) sheets 
with a surface treatment or wi thout treatment, or colored) 
and gelatin derivatives; isinglass; glues of animal origin, except for casein of heading 3501 Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Measure is applied in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus and 
Kazakhstan. In respect of goods destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation 
inclusion to the Register is not required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
3504 00 000 0 Peptone and their derivatives; other protein substances 
and their derivatives, in no t elsewhere specified or 
included; powder from the skin or pelt, chrome or not chrome Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
From 3507** Enzymes, enzyme prep arations, not elsewhere specified 
or included (for the use in veterinary medicine) No Yes No 
From 3808 Insecticides, rodenticid es, means of disinfectants and 
similar to them, put up in forms or packing for retail sale, 
or presented as finished products or articles (for use in veterinary medicine) No Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan, as 
well as goods are not registered in 
CU destined to the 
territory of the Russian Federation No 
From 3821 00 000 
0** Environments for cultivation of microorganisms for the 
use in veterinary No No No  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 60 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
From 3822 00 000 0 Diagnostic or laboratory reagents on a substrate, 
prepared diagnostic or laborat ory reagents on a substrate, 
or without it, except for goods of heading 3002 or 3006 
(for the use in veterinary medicine), certified reference 
materials (for the use in veterinary medicine) No  Measure is applied 
in respect of goods 
destined to the territory of Belarus 
and Kazakhstan.  
In respect of the goods destined to 
the territory of the 
Russian Federation the measure is 
applied until the 
adoption of the technical regulation No 
4101 Raw hides and skins of bovine (including buffalo) or 
equine animals (fresh, or salted, dried, limed, pickled or 
otherwise preserved, but not tanned, parchment-dressed or further prepared), whether or not dehaired or split 
 Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
4102 Raw skins of sheep or lambs (fresh, or salted, dried, 
limed, pickled or otherwise preserved, but not tanned, 
parchment- dressed or further prepared), whether or not 
with wool on or split, other than those excluded by Note 1c to this Chapter  Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
4103 Other raw hides and skins (fresh, or salted, dried, limed, 
pickled or otherwise preserved, but not tanned, 
parchment- dressed or further prepared), whether or not dehaired or split, other than those excluded by Note 1b 
or 1c to this Chapter Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
4206 00 000 0 Products from guts (except silkworm gut), Sinuga, 
bladders or tendons Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate  
  JOB/ACC/30
Page 61CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
4301 Raw fur (including heads, tails, paws and other pieces or 
cuttings, suitable for  manufacture of fur), except raw 
hides and skins of heading 4101, 4102 or 4103 Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
5101 Wool, not carded or combed  
Veterinary certificate  Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
5102 Animal hair, fine or coarse, not carded or combed  
Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in the Veterinary certificate 
5103 Waste of wool or of fine or coarse animal hair, including 
yarn waste but excluding garnetted stock Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but names and/or numbers of 
the final establishments should be 
indicated in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
From 9508 10 000 0 Animals in the zoos and mobile circuses and mobile 
menagerie Veterinary certificate 
 Yes Inclusion to the Register is not 
required, but the numbers of farms, 
quarantine bases, names of zoo, 
dolphinariums  and etc. and/or  names 
of the establishments  should be 
mentioned in the import permit and in 
the Veterinary certificate 
From 9705 00 000 0 Collections and collectors' items in zoology, anatomy 
and paleontology of animals (except exhibits in museum 
storage) Veterinary certificate 
 Yes No  
  JOB/ACC/30 
Page 62 CN Description of goods Accompanying Documents Import permit 
(yes/no) Register of establishments of third 
States (yes/no) 
From 3923, 
From 3926, 
From 4415, From 4416 00 000 0, 
From 4421, 
From 7020 00, From 7309 00, 
From 7310, 
From 7326, From 7616, 
From 8436 21 000 0, 
From 8436 29 000 0, From 8436 80 910 0, 
From 8436 80 990 0, 
From 8606 91 800 0, From 8609 00, 
From 8716 39 800 Machinery and equipment for transportation, farming, 
temporary overexposure animals of all kinds, as well as 
equipment for transportation of raw materials (products) 
of animal origin, that were used   No (document of the 
competent authority 
exporting country in case of difficult epizootic situation) Yes, in cases of 
unsafe epizootic 
situations additional conditions will be 
included into the 
import permit No 
Notes: 
(1) Camels are also included in this group. 
* As part of epizootic wellbeing 
** In respect of goods destined to the territory of the Russian Federation veterinary control is not exercised and none of the measures set-out in columns "Accompanying 
Documents", "Import permit", "Register of establishments of third States" is applied.   
*** Ready-made food products that contain no raw meat components or containing less than 50 per cent of another processed produ ct of animal origin, that are securely 
packaged or sealed in clean containers, and that are shelf stab le at ambient temperature or have clearly undergone in their man ufacture a complete cooking or heat 
treatment process throughout their substances so that any raw pr oduct is denatured, are not subject to veterinary control when destined to the territory of the 
Russian Federation. 
 
 
 
 
__________