WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/38 
1 November 2005 
 
 (05-5160) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
  
REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
ON CHINA'S TRANSITIONAL REVIEW 
  
 
 The present report is submitted under the responsib ility of the Chairperson, as agreed by the 
Committee at its meeting of 24 October 2005.   
_______________ 
   1. The Committee held its fourth annual Transiti onal Review under Paragra ph 18 of the Protocol 
of the Accession of the People's Republic of China at the regular meeting commencing on 
24 October 2005 (WT/L/432 refers). 
2. Prior to the meeting, the European Communiti es and the United States submitted questions in 
writing to China, which can be found in docum ents G/SPS/W/178 and G/SPS/GEN/594, respectively. 
3. Statements made at the Committee meeting in the context of this transitional review by 
Australia, China, the European Communities and the United States will be reflected in the Summary 
Report of the meeting, to be circulated as G/SPS/R/38 (excerpt attached).   
 
  
_______________ 
 
 G/SPS/38 
Page 2  
 
 ATTACHMENT - EXCERPT FROM G/SPS/R/38  
AGENDA ITEM:  TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE 
PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
 
1. The Chairman recalled that in accordance with Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of 
the People's Republic of China, the SPS Committee is to undertake an annual review for eight years of 
the implementation by China of the SPS Agreement.   He opened the floor for comments or questions 
from Members. 
2. The representative of the European Commun ities noted with satisfaction the increased 
cooperation between China and the European Co mmunities on SPS issues and mentioned that a 
Memorandum of Understanding with China on SPS issues was being finalized.  However, the 
European Communities would welcome further improve ment in the currently limited access to the 
Chinese market for EC food products.  Although the number of SPS notifications made by China to 
the WTO was increasing, Chinese regulatory measures s till appeared sometimes to be non-transparent 
due to the lack of a formal legal framework.  
3. The representative of the European Communities indicated two market access areas where 
enhancement of cooperation was needed:  removal of the current BSE-related ban on certain ruminant 
derivative products from the EC and a greater flexib ility on the approval procedure for listing of EC 
establishments eligible to export products into China. 
4. The European Communities had welcomed on previous occasions at this Committee the 
compliance of China's import policy for EC bovine semen and embryos with the World Organization 
for Animal Health's (OIE) standards on BSE.  The European Communities wanted to take the 
opportunity of this Transitional Review to re mind China that at the 2005 OIE annual meeting 
significant changes to the  OIE Terrestrial Animal  Health Code chapter on BSE had been made, in 
particular to the recommendations for the trade in beef and blood and blood products.  Based on 
scientific information provided by world experts,  the OIE Code Commission had recommended that 
deboned skeletal muscle meat be in the list of co mmodities which, under certa in conditions, could be 
safely traded regardless of the BSE status of the exporting country.  The European Communities 
invited China to implement these new OIE recommendations. 
5. China's current system of approval of EC es tablishments eligible to export bore some 
similarities with the EC system with one major exce ption:  China's request for a veterinary inspection 
mission to take place for every EC establishment, not only meat establishments but also bovine semen 
and embryo production sites, wishing to export to China for the first time.  The European 
Communities did not require that an inspection mi ssion be sent to China every time the Chinese 
authorities wished to add a new establishment to the list of establishments eligible to export to the 
European Communities.  The Eur opean Communities applied to China (and other WTO members) a 
procedure based on the guarantees provided by th e competent authorities of the exporting country 
regarding the safety of the food chain (from farm to  fork) rather than based  on individual exporting 
establishment inspection.  The Eur opean Communities invited China to  take a reciprocal approach 
and allow EC establishments to apply for pre-listi ng of establishments once the entire EC food safety 
system was assessed as satisfactory by the Chinese competent authorities.
1 
6. The representative of the United States reca lled that this was the SPS Committee's fourth 
annual transitional review of China's efforts to impl ement the commitments it has made in its Protocol 
                                                      
1 See document G/SPS/W/178.  G/SPS/38 
 Page 3 
 
 
 of Accession to the WTO.  The transitional review  remained an important and useful mechanism, 
serving both the interests of China and the inter ests of other WTO Members as it provided Members 
with the opportunity to seek clarifications regardin g China's policies and practices.  China, in turn, 
had the opportunity to clarify these policies and prac tices in order to prevent misunderstandings that 
could lead to trade frictions.  The transitional re view mechanism also allowed Members to convey to 
China their views, expectations and concerns re garding China's efforts to comply with its WTO 
obligations.  China then had the opportunity to expl ain its views and to inform Members about how it 
had addressed their expectations and concerns.  Th e transitional review mechanism was therefore an 
important and useful exercise of transparency, one of the fundamental principles underlying the WTO Agreement.  
7. The representative of the United States further i ndicated that in its submission for the 2005 
transitional review (G/SPS/GEN/594), the United St ates had presented China with written questions 
covering a number of areas, including (1) China's BS E-related bans on US beef and low-risk products;  
(2) China's fire blight restrictions on US apples,  pears and plums;  (3) quarantine inspection permit 
procedures;  (4) China's zero pathogen requirement s on meat and poultry products;  (5) inappropriate 
avian influenza restrictions on US poultry and (6) inadequate regulatory transparency.  The themes 
underlying these questions continued to be the same  as those underlying the submissions made at the 
three previous transitional reviews.  As shown in documents G/SPS/W/126, G/SPS/W/139 and 
G/SPS/W/153, the United States had consistently ra ised concerns regarding (1) China's failure to 
notify numerous SPS measures;  (2) the lack of tran sparency in China's application of SPS measures 
and (3) China's imposition of requirements that appear  to have no basis in science.  These concerns 
were most evident in two issues raised in th e United States 2005 submission, namely China's BSE-
related bans and China's fire blight restrictions. 
8. The representative of the United States further not ed that, with regard to BSE-related issues, 
the United States' strongest concern involved Ch ina's BSE-related ban on US beef.  China had 
provided virtually no information to the United St ates on the basic regulatory framework under which 
it would make science-based decisions to consider the US request for China to lift this ban.  Dozens of 
countries had lifted their bans on US beef.  Each of them had, at a minimum, provided the United States with a detailed explanation of the regulatory steps necessary to make a decision on the US request to lift the ban.  It was now 22 months si nce China had imposed its ban on US beef, and China 
had still not offered any explanation of its actions or the necessary regul atory steps for lifting the ban.  
The United States strongly urged China to take steps to ensure that its regulatory authorities quickly 
address this problem. 
9. The United States was also concer ned that China maintained a de facto  BSE-related ban on 
low-risk, non-ruminant origin products from the United States, including pe t food, rendered products, 
porcine proteins and spray-drie d blood, although these products s hould never had been banned under 
existing OIE guidelines.  The General Administra tion of Quality Supervision, Inspection and 
Quarantine of the People's Republic of China (AQSIQ) had issued a notice in September 2004 
conditioning the lifting of this ban on the conclusi on of an import protocol.  The United States and 
China had signed an import protocol shortly ther eafter in November 2004, but China had since 
insisted on a series of additional information requi rements that were onerous, detailed, unnecessary, 
not science-based and still inconsistent with OIE gui delines.  They also contrasted sharply with US 
requirements for products of animal origin fro m China.  The United States urged China to 
immediately remedy this situation. 
10. Another important concern of the United States related to China's continuing fire blight-
related ban on imports of US apples, pears and plums.  As stated in the June 2005 Committee 
meeting, the United States encouraged all Members to review carefully their restrictions on these US 
fruit products in light of the decision of the Appellate Body in Japan – Measures Affecting the 
Importation of Apples  (WT/DS245/AB/R).  China was one of the Members that maintained these G/SPS/38 
Page 4  
 
 restrictions.  It was important that China moved qui ckly to modify its ban to allow the importation of 
mature symptomless fruit, consistent with the Japan-Apples  decision. 
11. In its written questions, the United States had also expressed ongoing concerns on several 
other matters which had been raised previously in  this Committee including:  (1) onerous quarantine 
inspection permit procedures;  (2) zero pathogen requirements on meat and poultry products;  (3) 
inappropriate avian influenza restrictions;  and (4) inadequate regulatory transparency, especially with 
regard to regulations of major scope.  The United States noted that it would like to see more progress in these areas.  
12. The representative of Australia noted that Austra lia valued its strong relationship with China 
and continued to make efforts to strengthen co mmunication and cooperation with China on SPS 
matters.  Australia appreciated China's efforts to  develop and improve its quarantine and inspection 
systems and to ensure that quarantine procedures we re based on risk assessment and sound scientific 
evidence.  While Australia understo od the challenges China faced, it c ontinued to encourage China to 
bring its systems fully into compliance with th e SPS Agreement as quickly as possible, including 
ensuring consistency and transparen cy in its development and administration of SPS measures, at both 
a national and provincial level, as well as conf ormity with notification obligations under the SPS 
Agreement.  This would benefit China and all WTO Members. 
13. The representative of Australia further observed that Australia had been pleased to offer a 
significant amount of technical assistance to China,  to assist development of its SPS capabilities and 
systems, and would continue to do so.  Australia was continuing to pursue a number of bilateral SPS 
issues with China, some of a long-standing nature.  Australia looked forward to early resolution of 
these issues to allow bilateral trade to expand to the mutual benefit of China and Australia. 
14. The representative of China thanked the Eu ropean Communities, the United States and 
Australia for their comments and questions.  He e xpressed his appreciation for the technical assistance 
provided by Australia in the SPS area and welcomed an y further technical assistance in this area.  He 
further mentioned that, in response to the call from the chairperson of the General Council, China, as 
many other WTO Members, had shifted its resour ces and efforts to the new negotiations.  As a 
consequence, no capital-based delegation was available to assist him today.  However, he was willing 
to provide the following information and responses to the comments and questions raised by the 
European Communities and the United States under the framework of Paragraph 18 of China's 
Protocol of Accession.  
15. In relation to transparency, since its acce ssion to the WTO China had notified 140 SPS 
measures promulgated before China's accession to the WTO.  From 2002 to 2005, China had 
circulated 94 notifications to the WTO Secretaria t which provided Members with a comment period 
of 60 days calculated from the date of circulation of  the notification by the S ecretariat, as requested in 
China's proposal on transparency (G/SPS/W/131 and corrigendum).  In China, the Ministry of Commerce of the People's Republic of China (MOF COM) had established mechanisms to enhance 
coordination among ministries and agencies responsib le for SPS measures and had already organized 
various meetings, workshops and training courses on no tifications for officers from relevant ministries 
and agencies.  These actions had greatly improved the SPS measures notification process in China.  
Moreover, MOFCOM, together with AQSIQ, had dr afted and adopted guidelines on notification of 
SPS measures. 
16. With regard to the seven decrees promulga ted by the State Environmental Protection 
Administration (SEPA), they were not SPS measures but  some sort of regulat ions on registration of 
dangerous chemicals.  Therefore, China ha d not notified them under the SPS Agreement.   G/SPS/38 
 Page 5 
 
 
 17. Regarding BSE-related interna tional standards, China's SPS measures were drafted in a 
manner fully compliant with the SPS Agreement and were harmonized with the international 
standards of the three international standard-setting bodies of reference.  China had lifted its previous 
bans on importation of bovine semen, bovine embr yos and non-protein fat from countries affected by 
BSE, according to Chapter 2.3.13 of the OIE Te rrestrial Animal Health Code, on the basis of 
scientific studies carried out together with other countries, such as Canada.  Since China did not 
participate in the drafting of OIE standards, Chin a's decision to adopt a new OIE standard was based 
on the results of a Chinese experts' study of the sta ndard.  Chinese experts were currently studying the 
new OIE standard on BSE adopted at the 2005 OIE annual meeting.  China would review its current measures on the basis of the outcomes of this study. 
18. Concerning pathogen rules, China had no crite ria to require zero pathogens on fresh and 
frozen poultry products.  China's national sta ndard on fresh and frozen poultry products was 
GB16869-2005 rather than GB16869-2002.  As far as China knew, the OIE had no new standard on 
Salmonella , E. coli  and Listeria  in cooked products.  Should the United States provide China with 
detailed information on this topic, China would carry  out a study on the new OIE standards.  In the 
national standard (GB16869-2005), China did set the tolerance criteria for E. coli  in fresh and frozen 
poultry products but did not set any specific tolerance criteria for Listeria.   
19. In relation to food safety, although China w as of the view that the European Communities 
misunderstood some aspects of China's food safet y management system, including management of 
food manufacturing enterprises, China appreciated th e technical assistance provided by the European 
Communities and other Members in the area of food safety management.  China welcomed any 
further initiative by the European Communities and ot her Members to share their experiences on food 
safety management and the management of food manufacturing enterprises.  China would make reference to these good experiences when reviewing its current regulations.  
20. Concerning quarantine inspection permits, China had already explained its system to some 
Members on different occasions.  However, China was willing to take this opport unity to reiterate that 
its quarantine inspection permit granting system was a unified system throughout the country.  It was 
open to all applicants and transparent.  Applicants received a fair and quick service free of charge.  In 
order to facilitate the application procedure, app lications were also accepted through Internet since 
last year. 
21. Regarding bilateral cooperation.  China had already set up good cooperation mechanisms in 
the SPS area with numerous Members including the United States.  China would also sign a 
Memorandum of Understanding with the European Communities to enhance b ilateral cooperation in 
the SPS area.  China was of the view that these coope ration mechanisms were very useful and helpful 
in bettering the understanding of both sides and f acilitating the settlement of specific issues.  China 
highly valued technical exchanges and cooperati on with WTO Members and was ready to further 
explore and strengthen coopera tion mechanisms with them.  
22. As to the specific questions mentioned by the representative of the United States, some 
progress had already been made through b ilateral discussions and negotiations.  
23. The representative of China concluded by e xpressing hope that his statement had covered 
most of the comments and questions raised by the United States and the European Communities and 
that the information he had provided was useful and helpful to Members.  
24. The Chairperson thanked the representative of  China for the very thorough response and 
asked if any other Member wished to take the floor.  G/SPS/38 
Page 6  
 
 25. The representative of the United States thanke d the representative of China for his detailed 
responses and expressed appreciation of how China and the United States had been able to work 
together on issues.  He noted that, as no capita l-based delegation from China was attending this 
meeting, he might not get responses to his follow-up  questions.  He pointed out, however, that some 
of the US questions, although submitted about one m onth in advance of the meeting, had not been 
answered today.  He specifically mentioned the US  questions about the BSE-related ban on low-risk 
products and fire blight restrictions.  With regard  to quarantine inspection permits, the United States 
had specific questions about AQSIQ Announcemen t 111 and AQSIQ Decree 73 which had not been 
answered.  No responses had been provided to questi ons on the remaining avian influenza restrictions.  
Should China have further responses, the Un ited States would welcome hearing them.  
26. The representative of the Eur opean Communities supported the US statement that all the 
issues might not have been addressed, in particul ar the issue on the new OIE guidelines for beef 
exports.  
27. The Chairman expressed some empathy for the representative of China not benefiting from 
the support of a capital-based delegation and mentione d that the representative of China might not be 
in a position to respond. 
28. The representative of China mentioned that, with regard to the US questions on fire blight, 
China had already carried out a risk assessment on fi re blight which also extended to all other pests 
and diseases.  On the basis of this risk assessment,  China had already approved importation of apples 
from the United States.  As to US plums, Chin a was undertaking a risk assessment in a smooth 
manner with friendly cooperation from the United Stat es.  The risk assessment covered fire blight as 
well as other quarantine pests.  China was hoping that  both sides could further work and cooperate to 
improve their risk assessment procedures.  As to avian influenza, China had already unsuccessfully 
requested the United States to provide information on the Avian Influenza control system in place in 
the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island.  Ch ina urged the United States to provide relevant 
information in order to allow further discussi ons.  Regarding AQSIQ Decree 73 for quarantine 
inspection permits, China had already answered this question last year and the representative of China 
invited the United States to refer to the 2004 Repor t to the Council for Trade in Goods on China's 
Transitional Review (G/SPS/34). 
29. The Chairman stated that he would make a shor t factual report on the transitional review to 
the Council for Trade in Goods, G/SPS/38. 
__________