. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/GEN/631 
30 January 2006 
 (05-0399) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures Original:   English 
  
 
  
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON ARTICLE 6 OF THE SPS AGREEMENT –  
ADAPTATION TO REGIONAL CONDITIONS 
 
Communication from the United States of America
 
   The following communication, received on 27 January 2006, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States of America. 
 
_______________ 
 
 1. The United States has previously shared with Members the observations that it has gleaned 
from its experiences with regionalization, both from th e standpoint of an exporting country and as an 
importing country (G/SPS/GEN/477, 16 March 2004).  We are taking this opportunity to expand on 
our earlier communication, with a particular fo cus on the questions raised by Brazil in the 
Committee’s informal discussion on regionalization in June 2005 (G/SPS/W/177). 
Recognition by international standard-setting bodies
 
 
2. While useful and important, the recognition by an international standard-setting body of the 
disease and pest-free status of a region is not a substitute for a Member’s consideration and 
recognition of this status. 
3. The World Organization for Animal Health (O IE) has developed criteria and procedures 
whereby Members may declare dis ease-free status to the OIE.  After approval of a Member’s 
declaration by the OIE General Assembly, the OI E subsequently publishes a list of Members who 
have made this declaration for each of the animal diseases covered by these procedures.  To date, four 
diseases are covered by these OIE procedures.  Th e International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) 
has no procedures for official recognition by the IPPC of plant pest-free areas or areas of low 
prevalence.  Rather, the guidelines developed by th e IPPC set out the procedures which may be used 
by Members to establish and maintain pest or di sease free areas.  These are significant and important 
differences which must be taken into account as Me mbers implement the provisions of Article 6. 
4. The applicability of international recognition ma y be further limited in instances where the 
provisions of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code – the standard which is applied by the OIE to make 
its disease-free status determination – does not provi de the level of protection being sought by an 
individual Member.  Article 3.3 establishes Members’  rights and obligations in such situations. 
5. Since 1995, the disease-free standard applied by the OIE has resulted in a listing of disease-
free countries or zones through issuance of a ser ies of resolutions adopted by OIE Members. 
However, none of the resolutions specify whether or  how Members shall take this official recognition 
into account in the development and implementa tion of sanitary measures. Furthermore, each G/SPS/GEN/631 
Page 2  
 
  resolution contains a caveat that implies that this of ficial recognition by the OIE in and of itself is not 
a substitute for measures that must be determin ed by the importing Member:  "The OIE is not 
responsible for inaccurate publication of country disease status based on inaccurate or incomplete 
information or changes in epidemiological status or  other significant events which were not promptly 
reported to the Central Bureau subsequent to the time of declaration of freedom" (e.g., paragraph 10, 
Resolution XX, List of Foot and Mouth Disease Free Countries, OIE, 24 May 2005).  The individual 
Member is responsible for developing and enforci ng its measures and for meeting the obligations of 
the SPS Agreement.   
6. The United States notes that the OIE has progressed  further than the IPPC in establishing a 
guideline on how an importing country may recognize the declared status of an exporting country.  
However, the OIE and the IPPC have not specified  how a Member’s declaration of freedom from a 
specified animal disease or pest may be used by othe r Members.  In the view of the United States, the 
OIE and IPPC are the most appropriate fora to discu ss of the use and application of these declarations. 
Enhancing transparency of regionalization decisions
 
 
7. While the OIE and IPPC have guidelines that pr ovide information for exporting regions in the 
establishment and maintenance of pest or disease-fre e areas, parallel guidelines do not yet exist for 
importing countries.  In response to the discussions  in this Committee, the OIE and IPPC have 
undertaken as part of their current work programs to develop guidelines for the importing country to use in evaluating a regionalization request. 
8. The United States strongly supports the development of these guidelines by the OIE and the 
IPPC as we believe they will be very useful in en hancing the transparency of national procedures for 
recognition of disease or pest freedom.  They can likewise increase the consistency of such procedures among Members through harmonization of  national measures based on international 
standards and guidelines.  The United States and ot her Members have pointed out that the OIE and 
IPPC possess the technical expertise necessary to deve lop such guidelines.  The existing standards of 
the OIE and IPPC related to risk assessment ar e the appropriate basis for this work.   
9. In the United States, decisions on regionalizati on are considered to be SPS measures and are, 
therefore, subject to all of the obligations of the SPS Agreement and the requirements governing the 
development and implementation of US regulations .  Due to various aspects of these requirements 
aimed at ensuring transparency of decision-making with interested parties, it is not possible or appropriate to prescribe specific timeframes for technical analysis, internal review, public comment 
and response to comments.  Timeframes vary and are determined case-by-case basis.   
 
__________