RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/R/53 
22 December 2008 
 (08-6290) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 8-9 OCTOBER 2008 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Table of Contents  
 
Page  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.............................................................................................3  
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS.................................................................................................3  
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS ...........................................................................................4  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... .............4  
(b) Issues previous ly raised ....................................................................................................... .......5  
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received ......................................................................8  
(d) Information on Resolution of Issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.8 ................................................8  
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS..........................................................8  
(a) Mentoring mechanism ............................................................................................................ ....9 
(b) Development of a procedural manual .........................................................................................9  
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ..................9  
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting ......................................................................................9  
(b) Review of the Operation of G/SPS/33 ......................................................................................11  
VI. EQUIVALENCE --  ARTICLE 4..........................................................................................11  
(a) Information from Members on their experiences .....................................................................11  
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations....................................................................11  
VII. PEST– OR DISEASE-FREE AREAS...................................................................................11  
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status .....................................................11  
(b) Information from Members on their Experiences.....................................................................12  
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION .......................................................12  
(a) Chairman's Report on the Workshop ........................................................................................12  
(b) Information from the Secretariat............................................................................................... 13 
(c) Information from Members....................................................................................................... 14 
(d) Information from Observers ..................................................................................................... 14 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. G/SPS/R/53 
Page 2  
 
  IX.
 REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ..15 
(a) Report on Informal Meeting ..................................................................................................... 15 
(b) Use of ad hoc consultations .................................................................................................... ..16 
(c) Preparation for the Third Review .............................................................................................16  
X. MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ...........................16  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... ...........16  
(b) Issues Previous ly Raised....................................................................................................... ....17  
XI. CONCERNS WITH COMMERCIAL  AND PRIVATE STANDARDS............................17  
(a) Report on Chairman's Consultations.........................................................................................17  
XII. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER THE PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE 
PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PE OPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ..............19  
XIII.  MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................21  
XIV.  OBSERVERS – REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS ................................................22  
XV. CHAIRMAN'S ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS .......................................................................................................................... ..........22
 
XVI.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................2 2 
XVII.  DATE AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING..................................................................23  
  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its forty-
second regular meeting on 8-9 October 2008.  The pr oposed agenda for the meeting was adopted with 
amendments (WTO/AIR/3246). 
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS 
2. The representative of Paraguay reported on a numbe r of activities that are further detailed in 
document G/SPS/GEN/876.  The National Animal Quality and Health Service (SENACSA) had 
organized the XIV International Seminar on Harmoniza tion of Registration and Control of Veterinary 
Drugs, which was attended by 152 animal health  professionals from private and public sectors 
throughout the American continent.  The Europ ean Communities had reopened its market to meat 
from Paraguay following the OIE recognition in 2007 of  Paraguay as free of FMD with vaccination.  
The National Plant and Seed Quality and H ealth Service (SENAVE) had established that 
agrochemicals in the "red band" category could on ly be purchased and applied on the basis of a  
prescription by a professional SENAVE-registered agronomist.  In addition, SENAVE was designated as the National Plant Protection Organization for th e purposes of the Internat ional Plant Protection 
Convention (IPPC), with the power to adopt phytos anitary standards.  The FAO/WHO Joint Expert 
Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) had completed its evaluation on Steviol glycoside  (Ka'a He'e),  
a natural sweetener derived from the  Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni plant of Paraguay, and concluded that 
the sweetener is safe and had no adverse effect on health.  Finally, a number of exchanges of 
experience and consultations between Paraguay and Chile had taken place with a view to building up 
the technical capacity of the SPS implementing authorities.   
3. The representative of the United States inform ed the Committee that there was a new US 
Congressional mandate that required the US Depart ment of Agriculture (USDA) Food Safety and 
Inspection Service (FSIS) to develop a new program  for federal inspection of  domestic and imported 
catfish.  Under the law, FSIS was required to implem ent this legislation through the normal notice and 
comment rulemaking process.  Consistent with the obligations on transparency, the USDA would take 
into account comments received from interested parti es, including the trading partners.  The United 
States is willing to provide technical assistance if requested to concerned countries to further explain 
the specific proposed regulations, and to assist official s in gathering the inform ation needed to answer 
the various questionnaires. 
4. The representative of Brazil reported on the FM D status of his country, taking into account 
the measures and activities developed by the Brazilia n public and private sectors for FMD control and 
eradication.  On 29 July 2008, the OIE had recognized the state of Motto Grosso do Sul as FMD-free 
with vaccination.  The FMD-free z one covered approximately 60 per cent of the Brazilian territory, 
around 90 per cent of the cattle population and 86 per cent of the swine population.  The FMD-free 
zone comprised over 120 million bovines within a r ecognized territory of about 5 million square 
kilometres.  Based on the OIE evaluation, Brazil requested other Members to recognize Brazil's FMD 
status and more rapidly conclude their  risk assess ments for imports of Brazilian meat products..   The 
representative of Brazil also reported that his g overnment would sponsor research in the areas of 
animal and plant health and food hygiene in further support of the national sanitary and phytosanitary programmes.  Approximately US$60 million had been designated for this project. 
5. The representative of China stat ed that Chinese Government atta ched great importance to the 
melamine contamination of "SANLU" infant formula.   As a result, testing had been strengthened by 
government authorities on both domestic and exporte d products.  China had informed the WHO and 
trading partners of the testing results.  However, despite its efforts to control the melamine issue, 
some trading partners had banne d or limited imports of Chinese dairy products or food products 
containing milk.  China referred to the WHO stat ement urging national food safety authorities to G/SPS/R/53 
Page 4  
 
  undertake  health risk assessments before taking an y further actions to ban or recall Chinese dairy 
products.  The representative of China called on th ose Members that had taken measures against 
Chinese dairy products to take into account th e WHO guidance and their WTO obligations.  
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
(a) New Issues 
(i) Korea's Livestock Epidemic Prevention Act – Concerns of Canada 
6. The representative of Canada raised concerns th at Korea's Livestock Epidemic Prevention Act 
violated the tenets of animal health and food saf ety principles as its requirements were not based on 
science.  These amendments were not consistent with WTO obligations and did not take into 
consideration the provisions of the BSE chapter of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code.  Korea 
continued to restrict the import of beef products fro m countries with any previous experience of BSE.  
Canada requested Korea to amend its regula tions to comply with the SPS Agreement. 
7. The representative of Korea mainta ined that the Act was consistent with the SPS Agreement,  
and that Korea had conducted the necessary risk assessments.  
(ii) Chinese Taipei's Maximum Level for  Ra ctopamine – Concerns of the United States 
8. The representative of the United States stated th at the US pork industry had suffered for more 
than a year due to the lack of science-based maximum residue limits (MRL) for ractopamine in 
Chinese Taipei.  Chinese Taipei had previously notified the SPS Committee of its science-based 
decision regarding ractopamine but then had fa iled to implement the measure as proposed.  US 
exports had dropped due to the need to source por k from animals not treated with ractopamine in 
order to meet the zero-tolerance requirements.  Th e United States urged Chinese Taipei to implement 
its notified measure, which woul d facilitate US pork exports. 
9. The representative of Canada stated that his authorities had approved the use of ractopamine 
as an ingredient in pigs feed since July 2005 and in the cattle feed since May 2007.  Health Canada 
had concluded that the product was safe to use afte r conducting several tests.  Canada encouraged all 
Members to accept the use of ractopamine as long as residues in edible tissues were within the safe 
levels. 
10. The representative of Chinese Taip ei stated that the use of ractopamine was forbidden by 
many WTO Members.  The Codex Alimentarius Commission had also been unable to make a final decision on MRLs for ractopamine.  
11. The representative of Codex reported that the MRLs for ractopamine had been extensively 
discussed but no conclusion had yet been reached.  He invited Members to submit more information 
regarding ractopamine for consideration by  the next Codex Commission meeting.  
12. The representative of the European Communiti es reported that the European Communities 
had consulted the European Food Safety Authority on the safety of ractopamine including the Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs).  The representative  hoped to have the information by early 2009 
which could be sent to the FAO/WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) for 
further evaluation.  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 5 
 
 
  (iii) European Community's Maximum Residue Levels for Pesticides in Cacao – Concerns of 
Ecuador   
13. The representative of Ecuador reported that th ere had been some concerns regarding the 
MRLs set for the limited number of pesticides used in cacao production.  This level was difficult to 
fulfil and could result in the exclusion of Ecuador ian cacao from the EC market.  For pesticides not 
explicitly identified in the EC Re gulation, MRLs were set at 0.01 mg per kg.  The representative of 
Ecuador requested the European Communities to assess the possibility of establishing a limit of 
0.1 mg per kg for substances such as Diuron, Melath ion, Difenoconozol and Tr ibufos, which were not 
explicitly identified within the regulation. 
14. The representative of the European Communiti es recalled that Members had been fully 
informed of the new EC framework regarding residu es of pesticides in plants.  Third countries could 
also request that an import tolerance be established for any plant protection products that had not been 
approved for use in the European Communities.  He  suggested that Ecuador establish contacts with 
the relevant officials in importing countries of the European Communities to explore the possibilities 
of having such import tolerances established.  
(b) Issues previously raised 
(i) Japan's Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) Enfo rcement System (STC 212) – Concerns of the 
United States 
15. The representative of the United States raised c oncerns about Japan's enforcement system for 
MRLs.  In particular, there were no reasons for Jap an to employ country-wide sanctions where there 
was no indication of a country-wide problem.  In cases of individual company violations, sanctions 
should be applied at the individual company level.  
16. The representative of New Zealand noted that NZ  exports had been subject to testing by 
Japan.  New Zealand asked for further clarificati ons regarding the reasons behind testing products, 
especially asparagus products as these were normally frozen.  
17. China shared the US concerns regarding Japan's testing regime. 
18. The representative of Japan responded that in order to enforce their MRLs, Japan conducted 
monitoring inspection of agricultural chemical re sidues in imported food.  These controls were 
strengthened if imported pr oducts did not comply with the establis hed MRLs.  Multiple violations had 
been detected on imported products from the United States, giving rise to increased monitoring. 
(ii) EC Regulation on Novel Foods (STC 238) – Concerns of Peru 
19. The representative of Peru requested that ther e should be a notification to the SPS Committee 
regarding the modification of the EC Novel Foods  Regulation.  Many exporting Members failed to 
understand the content of the regulation, why some products were banned, wh ile others were not.  
Also, the regulation gave the exporting countries, many of which were developing countries, the 
burden of proof that their products were safe and complied with the EC Regulation. 
20. The representatives of Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay and 
the Philippines shared Peru's concerns re garding the EC Regulation on Novel Foods. 
21. The representative of UNCTAD reported that UNCTAD was contributing to the review of the 
EC Regulation on Novel Foods.  UNCTAD's main objec tive was to contribute to the process in three 
specific areas:  (1) revising the procedure, which re quired more scientific clarification;  (2) facilitating G/SPS/R/53 
Page 6  
 
  dialogue between the European Communities and de veloping countries;  and (3) analyzing legal 
aspects of current regulations in the context of multilateral agreements.  
22. The representative of the European Communities st ated that the existing legislation on Novel 
Foods was too ambitious in covering a whole range of Novel Foods.  For this reason, the European 
Communities planned to revise the regulation, as ha d been notified to the TBT Committee.  This 
proposal had been under negotiation in the EC Pa rliament and Council.  However, there were 
concerns regarding the approval of some products.  For instance, matters b ecame complicated when 
exporters requested the classification of food suppl ements as Novel Foods, rather than whole fruits 
and vegetables.  However, the revised procedure wa s expected to be more flexible, and some Novel 
Foods had already been approved for entry to the EC markets. 
23. The representative of the Europ ean Communities noted that in this specific case, the legal 
advice had been to only notify the proposed revi sion to the TBT Committee since it covered approval 
procedures for Novel Foods in general.  But, this did not preclude that the issue could be discussed at 
the SPS Committee.  In response to his request, the Secretariat clarified that it generally recommended 
that any draft regulations with any SPS content shou ld also be notified to the SPS Committee, even if 
these regulations were also notified to the TBT Committee.  
(iii) Restrictions Due to BSE (STC 193) – Concerns of the European Communities 
24. The representative of the European Communities recalled the concerns previously raised by 
Canada regarding Korea's restric tion on beef imports.  The European  Communities also had concerns 
regarding restrictions maintained by other WTO Members on beef exported from the European 
Communities even though these beef products were c onsidered safe and in compliance with the BSE 
chapter of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code. 
25. The representative of Canada shared the EC concerns and asked Members to base their 
measures on the BSE chapter provisions of OIE Terr estrial Animal Health Code.  In May 2007, 
Canada was officially recognized by the OIE as cont rolled-risk for BSE and this was reconfirmed in 
May 2008.  Canada was grateful to the increasi ng number of WTO Members that restored full or 
partial access for beef and cattle.  The representativ e of Canada urged other Members to resume full 
trade in beef and cattle based on the OIE designation.  
26. The representative of Uruguay supported the concerns of the European Communities and 
Canada.  With regard to animal health regulati ons applied to trade, the representative of Uruguay 
stated that all WTO Members should conform to the OIE designation and to the standards of the three sisters in general.  
27. The representative of Switzerland supported the EC concern on restrictions due to BSE  
28. The representative of the OIE urged Members to abide by the standards en acted by the OIE.  
(iv) India's Restrictions Due to Avian Influen za (STC 185) – Concerns of the European 
Communities 
29. The representative of the European Communities acknowledged India's efforts to remove its 
import restrictions on processed pig meat.  However,  India continued to apply a ban on live animals 
and on a wide range of products of animal origin.  Th is ban had been  based on the risk of entry into 
India of several diseases, in particular avian influe nza.  These restrictions did not conform to the OIE 
standards.  India was also invited to acknowledge th at heat-treated meat and meat products could be 
safely traded regardless of the avian influenza stat us of the exporting country.  Moreover, India had 
not responded to the request for providing scientific justification and its risk assessment on pig meat  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 7 
 
 
  and pig meat products.  The representative of the European Communities urged India to review the 
import restrictions on live animals and di fferent products of animal origin.  
30. The representative of the United States expressed concerns regarding India's extension of its 
emergency measures prohibiting a wide range of products because of avian influenza.  These 
measures were not based on scientific evidence or on  risk assessment.  The United States renewed the 
request to India to provide a copy of their avia n influenza risk assessment.  Finally, India was 
requested to modify its measure to address the concerns expressed by several Members in the 
Committee. 
31. In response to the US request, the representative of India proposed that a technical discussion 
between India and other technical experts be held .  The representative of the United States invited 
India to bring its technical experts to the next meeting of the SPS Committee and again requested a 
copy of India's risk assessment.  
32. The representative of India suggested that inst ead of waiting for the next meeting the experts 
could meet before then, perhaps through a video conference, which could allow a resolution before 
the next meeting. 
33. The representative of India reported that the im port restriction of avian influenza related 
products had been discussed in the OIE, in the SPS Co mmittee, and in various bilateral meetings with 
countries including the European Communities and the United States.  India treated high pathogenic and low pathogenic types of the virus in both poultry or wild birds with equal concern.  Also, India 
did not import pig meat from countries with avian in fluenza outbreaks.  India had been reviewing the 
policy of avian influenza and its trade implications  every six months.  This led to the removal of 
import restrictions on different processed pig produc ts from avian influenza positive countries.  India 
would continue to review its restrictions and keep only those which affected human and animal 
health.  The representative of India suggested that the discussion should stay among experts from India and other concerned partners.    
34. The representative of the OIE stated that countries should notify the presence of avian 
influenza in domestic and wild birds.  However, no tification of the early detection of avian influenza 
in wild birds was requested for purposes of transpar ency and should not lead to trade restrictions.  
Also, the representative urged OIE Members to send thei r scientific evidence to OIE, to be considered 
when making necessary amendments to the st andards established in the OIE codes.  
(v) US Import Restrictions on Cooked Poultry Products (STC 257) – Concerns of China 
35. The representative of China raised concerns regarding US import restrictions on cooked 
poultry products from China, even though there we re no technical problems with these products.  
However, the US Agriculture Appropriations Bill banned the use of federa l funds to allow poultry 
products to be imported from China. 
36. The representative of the United States affirmed  that it would continue to raise China's 
concerns with the appropriate authorities in Wash ington and hoped to resolve the issue as soon as 
possible. 
(vi) US Restrictions on Apples (STC 269) – Concerns of China 
37. The representative of China reported that her c ountry had submitted an application for the 
export of apples to the United States in 1998, with the necessary technical materials for a pest risk 
analysis.  However, the process of pest risk analysis  had been delayed for more than ten years with the 
claim of repeated technical problems.  This had seriously impeded the export of Chinese apples.  G/SPS/R/53 
Page 8  
 
  Chinese apples had similar production areas, disease a nd pest occurrences, and regulations as pears in 
China.  However, the United States allowed the impor tation of pears based on a risk assessment.  This 
showed that there should not be any quarantine pr oblem for Chinese apples to  be exported to the 
United States. 
38. The representative of the United States reported th at since 2004, it had sought to finalize the 
list of apple pests of China.  However, more scientific information was needed from the Chinese 
authorities to know whether some pests occurred in areas of China where apple production was 
concentrated.  
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received 
39. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(d) Information on Resolution of Issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.8 
(i) Information Regarding EC Import Restrictions on Cooked Poultry (STC 256) – Concerns of 
China  
40. The representative of China thanked the Europ ean Communities for the removal of import 
restrictions on cooked poultry prod ucts from Shandong Province of China.  However, this treatment 
was only limited to Shandong Province.  The repres entative of China requested that the European 
Communities also remove the ban on other poultry production areas such as in Jilin Province.  A 
delegation of FAO had visited Jilin  Province and reported their satisfaction with local animal health 
conditions. 
41. The representative of the European Communiti es expressed the intentio n of the European 
Communities to remove import bans of other pr ovinces in China after conducting the necessary 
evaluations. 
(ii) Information Regarding Mexican Import Restricti on on Rice (STC 270) - Concerns of Pakistan 
42. The representative of Mexico reported that th e concern raised by Pakistan regarding 
restriction of rice imports was resolved, however,  Mexico had not yet completed its assessment of 
plant health risks.  The representa tive of Pakistan thanked the Govern ment of Mexico for the efforts 
undertaken to carry out the required pest risk as sessment.  The representative of Pakistan also 
requested a time-line from Mexico for each step of the pest risk assessment process on plant health. 
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS  
43. The Secretariat recalled that the Committee had adopted new procedures for transparency in 
April 2008 that would take effect as of 1 Dece mber 2008 (G/SPS/7/Rev.3).  The Secretariat was 
concerned that Notification Authorities needed to be informed about the new procedures in order to 
use them as of 1 December 2008.  The Secretariat asked Members to en sure the accuracy of the list of 
addresses of Enquiry Points and National Notification Authorities. 
44. The Secretariat also urged Members to provide, when available, unofficial translations of 
notified documents through a supplement so that  other Members could take advantage of the 
translation. 
45. The Chairman reported that documen ts G/SPS/GEN/867, G/SPS/GEN/869 and 
G/SPS/GEN/873 summarized the notifications r eceived since the last Committee meeting   G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 9 
 
 
  (a) Mentoring mechanism 
46. The Secretariat briefed the Committee regarding the operation of the mentoring mechanism.  
The Committee had agreed to the proposal to set up a mentoring mechanism among Enquiry Points and National Notification Authorities.  Document  G/SPS/W/217 provided forms to be used by 
Members interested in the mechanism.     
47. The objective of the mentoring mechanism was to  build a supportive relationship and to share 
experience among Members' Enquiry Points and National Notification Authorities.  The Secretariat had received requests from eleven Members and offers from six Members.  The Secretariat would follow up with all those involved with the mentoring process to be able to provide an update to the Committee by early 2009.  The Secretariat offer inter ested Members to participate in this mechanism. 
48. The representative of Malawi reported that Ma lawi had requested mentoring through the 
Secretariat to improve the operation of the Natio nal Enquiry Point.  Malawi had already been 
informed by the Secretariat that New Zealand would be its Mentor.  However,  Malawi's Enquiry Point 
was still waiting for the mentoring process to begin.   The representative of New Zealand reported that 
New Zealand had agreed to mentor three Members:  Armenia, Ukraine and Malawi.  New Zealand 
had contacted the National Enquiry Points of the thr ee Members but had not yet received any answers.   
49. The representative of Mozambique tha nked Switzerland for providing support to 
Mozambique through the mentoring mechanism. 
(b) Development of a procedural manual 
50. The representative of New Zealand recalled that a draft of a step-by-step manual to assist in 
the establishment and maintenance of the Enquiry  Points and Notification Authorities had been 
provided to Members in October 2007.  New Zealand's Enquiry Point was working to incorporate the 
latest decisions on how to apply the transparency provision of the SPS Agreement into the procedural 
manual, which would shortly be sent to the Secretariat. 
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting 
51. The Chairman reported that during the info rmal meeting held on Tuesday 7 October on 
special and differential treatment, the main focu s was on the proposed revision of the procedure to 
enhance transparency of special and differential treatment in favour of de veloping country Members 
contained in G/SPS/33. 
52. The Chairman had recalled that the procedure contained in G/SPS/33 had been adopted by the 
Committee in October 2004 in response to instruct ions from the General Council to consider the 
proposals referred to WTO bodies in view of st rengthening S&D treatmen t provisions and making 
them more precise, effective and operational.  G/ SPS/33 was developed in part to address a proposal 
originally made by Egypt for enhanced transparency through modification of the notification formats.  
53. At its meeting in June 2008, the Committee has further discussed proposed revisions to the 
procedure, based on a document prepared by the Secr etariat.  This document had been revised, based 
on comments received in June and subsequently by Canada, the European Communities and Japan, 
and had been circulated as G/SPS/W/224/Rev.1.  The Secretariat had introduced document 
G/SPS/W/224/Rev.1 and the changes proposed therein. G/SPS/R/53 
Page 10  
 
  54. Some Members had commented that they were still studying the proposed revision and hence 
were not yet in a position to accept the proposed chang es.  The delegate of Egypt had noted that his 
country had previously submitted a proposal on the issue but had no specific comments at this time.  However, Egypt was concerned with the recommenda tion that this become a permanent procedure 
and would prefer the procedure to be temporary in  order to see what kind of outcomes would derive 
from it.  
55. A number of Members had requested clarifications  on the wording used with regards to time 
limits for the different steps detailed in the proposed  Decision.  Other Members had raised concerns 
that the 60-day time frame for putting forward co mments was often not long enough for most 
developing countries.  In that context it had also been asked whether Step 6 should be modified to 
broaden the 60-day period.  Clarification had also  been sought on Step 3 and on who would decide on 
what was "practical" and the amount of time of dela y.  It had been suggested to include a reasonable 
period of time also in Step 4.  
56. The Secretariat had noted that Steps 1 through 4 were based on the general recommended 
procedures on transparency adopted  by the Committee.  The time-rela ted elements of the proposed  
procedure were taken from the transparency r ecommendations which had been revised by the 
Committee in April 2008.  As for the 60-day comme nt period, it was in fact a recommendation dating 
back to 1995 and had been reviewed on four differe nt occasions.  The Secretariat had also highlighted 
that, in fact, many developing countries found it difficult to give the full 60 days.  Starting on 1 December, the default time period on notifications would be 60 days if not otherwise indicated.  
57. Regarding Step 2, the Secretariat had clarifie d that the Secretariat normally circulated a 
notification 2-3 days after reception of the no tification from a Member.  However, this delay 
depended on a number of factors such as whether th e notification was received in electronic or paper 
form, whether it was complete and correct, whethe r it had arrived on a Friday afternoon or during a 
holiday period.  The Secretariat had also noted that it was in the process of developing a new system for online notifications which should be introduced  during 2009 and which would simplify and speed 
up the circulation procedure.  
58. Some Members had raised queries on how a Member would inform the notifying Member 
and the SPS Committee under Step 9, in particular what would happen if the beneficiary Member was 
not satisfied with the S&D received, and what we re the possible related legal consequences.  The 
Secretariat had clarified that this recommendation di d not change the legal rights and obligations of 
Members under the SPS Agreement.  On the sugg estion to create a link between the importer's 
measure and the exporter's notification qualifying th e treatment received, the Secretariat had noted 
that it could prepare a format for a counter notific ation for consideration by the Committee.  This 
counter notification could be submitted by the receiving Member with information on whether what it received responded to its needs and concerns.  
59. In response to a query on Step 5 and the possible addition of "within the comment period" at 
the end of the second sentence, the Secretariat had cl arified that those same words had been deleted 
from earlier drafts.  It was suggested that th e notifying Member should also respond within the 
comment period, in both steps 5 and 6.  However,  while the suggestion for a timely response made 
sense, problems could arise if the request for S&D came late during a comment period.   
60. It was also clarified that in accordance with  the SPS Agreement, S&D could be provided by 
developed and developing countries alike.  
61. The Chairman had concluded that there did not  yet appear to be a consensus among Members 
on the proposed revision to the procedure and he had suggested that the Committee revert to this 
matter at its next meeting.  In the meanti me, G/SPS/33 remained valid.  However, the new  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 11 
 
 
  transparency formats would take effect on 1 December 2008.  He had encouraged concerned 
Members to work together and see if they coul d reach some common agreement before the next 
meeting. 
62. No other matters related to special and differen tial treatment had been raised at the informal 
meeting. 
63. The representative of Cuba requested the Ch airman to facilitate discussions among Members 
that were interested in this topic.  The Chai rman stressed his willingness to continue to assist 
Members to reach an agreement. 
(b) Review of the Operation of G/SPS/33 
64. The Secretariat recalled that this procedur e had been adopted in October of 2004 and 
reviewed in February 2006, and the Committee had agr eed to review it again in 2008.  In 2008, there 
had been a proposal by Egypt and a number of comments by other Members which wre reflected in G/SPS/W/224 and G/SPS/W/224/Rev.1.  At the informal  meeting proposals had been made to include 
an element of timeliness in steps 5 and 6;  to cl arify step 9, and to provide a format for counter-
notification.  In addition, Egypt had raised the c oncern of making this into a permanent procedure.  
These proposals would be included in the next revision.  Members wishing to include any other 
suggestions in the next revision should submit their s uggestions in writing before the end of the year.   
VI. EQUIVALENCE --  ARTICLE 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
65. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
66. The representative of the OIE elaborated on a new approach whereby two ad hoc groups were 
analyzing various chapters in the terrestrial and aquatic animal health codes.  The new approach 
focussed on the elaboration of new standards that guara nteed the safety of products for trade.  The ad 
hoc terrestrial code group met in June 2008 and addressed issues such as identifying research studies 
on different diseases and getting feedback of Memb ers regarding the safety of traded products.  
Members would receive a report on the work of the ad hoc group.  Another ad hoc group was set to 
work on issues related to aquatic animals.  Severa l major gaps had been identified and there was a 
need for further research on aquatic goods.   
VII. PEST– OR DISEASE-FREE AREAS 
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status 
67. The representative of Sierra Leone reported on the presence of fruit fly in his country.  Noting 
that Sierra Leone had not received any SPS training, he asked for assistance to be provided to his 
country. 
68. The representative of Chile urged Members to follow the guidelines on regionalization, and to 
share information about their progress in becoming disease free.  Information on regionalization could help countries such as Sierra Leone. G/SPS/R/53 
Page 12  
 
  (b) Information from Members on their Experiences 
69. The representative of the Europ ean Communities gave several examples on how the European 
Communities had applied the concept of regionaliza tion.  However, the European Communities was 
concerned that other Members were not applying the concept of regionalization,  which had resulted in 
unnecessary restrictions on trade.   
70. The representatives of Argentina, Brazil and Para guay shared the concerns of the European 
Communities.  However, the representative of Brazi l stated that the European Communities did not 
follow the OIE designation of ar eas free of pests in al cases. 
71. The representative of Brazil announced that his country was working with the OIE on a 
project regarding the practical application of the concept of compartmentalization in poultry 
production.  The project was seeking funding from the STDF.   
72. The representative of the OIE stated that at th is time there were no Members having official 
recognition of a compartment. 
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION 
(a) Chairman's Report on the Workshop 
73. The Chairman provided a brief report on th e Workshop on Good Practice in SPS-Related 
Technical Cooperation, which was held on 6 Octo ber 2008.  The event had been organized by the 
WTO Secretariat in collaboration with the Organi sation for Economic Co-operation and Development 
(OECD), and with funding from the WTO Global Trust Fund and the STDF.  Over 200 participants attended.  The report of the workshop w as subsequently circulated as G/SPS/R/52. 
74. The workshop was based on the findings of re search commissioned by the STDF on projects 
identified by Members as examples of good practice in three regions: East Africa, the Greater 
Mekong Delta Sub-Region and Centra l America.  Presentations had been given by researchers, 
Spencer Henson, Kees van der Meer and Jason Hafeme ister, who looked in depth at the 24 projects 
nominated by Members.  The presentations had been  well-received and promoted a lively discussion 
both in the plenary session and break-out sessions.  An issue which emerged strongly had been the 
need to consider the principles set out in the OE CD Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness in the 
design and implementation of future pr ogrammes of SPS-related assistance.   
75. Members had considered how the conclusions arising from the STDF research compared with 
their own experiences in three break-out sessions.  Discussions were framed around three questions;  
(1) how the OECD Paris Principles could be applied by both donors and beneficiaries;  (2) how to maximize the positive trade impact of SPS-related te chnical cooperation;  and (3) how good practice 
could be replicated more widely. 
76. Nancy Kitonga, Mohammed Sidibe and Edmundo Toro Vallecillo had reported on 
conclusions arising from the three groups.  In  the discussions which followed, Fidelma 
O'Shaughnessy had given a presentation of how the European Communities was seeking to enhance 
the effectiveness of the aid it provided by integra ting the Paris Principles into its operations.   
77. The penultimate session had considered exam ples of SPS technical cooperation projects 
which had been particularly successful in gaining or  maintaining market access.  Examples had been 
given by Guy Stinglhamber, Daniel Orellana and Nguyen Huu Dat.  Linda Fulponi of the OECD 
Secretariat and Michael Roberts, the STDF Secretary, had offered closing remarks.  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 13 
 
 
  78. The STDF research in each of the three pilot re gions, the overview paper prepared by the 
Secretariat in G/SPS/GEN/875, copies of all PowerPoint presentations and an audio recording of the workshop were available on the SPS page of the WTO website.  A summary report of the meeting 
would be circulated to the Committee and also added to the website. 
79. The Chairman outlined his conclusions that afte r the workshop, Members had a clear idea of 
what to avoid.  This included fragmented, supply- driven assistance, with little attention to absorption 
capacity or beneficiary ownership, and little long-te rm sustainability.  What Members wanted for aim 
at was little less clearly defined, although the Pa ris Principles gave a robust framework to work 
within.  One conclusion which emerged was that th e technical nature of SPS issues did not make SPS-
related technical capacity building a distinct category which should be considered outside the 
mainstream of development cooperation.   
80. Where Members perhaps needed more clarity was with respect to how to meaningfully 
achieve the objective of good practice in SPS-related technical cooperation.  On this point, several 
good ideas were put forward which c ould be taken up by the practitione rs in this area, notably the 
STDF.  One point to underline was the development and systematic use of impact indicators.  
81. From an SPS Committee perspective, the idea for a workshop on this topic originated in the 
discussions on special and differential treatment, a nd concerns by developing country Members that 
the technical assistance provided was not always the most appropriate for addressing the real needs of 
beneficiaries.  This workshop should prove usef ul for future discussions in this Committee and 
elsewhere relating to the implementation of Articles 9 and 10 of the SPS Agreement.   
(b) Information from the Secretariat  
82. The Secretariat reported that since the last Committee meeting it had organized two national 
seminars on the implementation of the SPS Agreement, in Rwanda a nd Indonesia.  In addition, it 
participated in a seminar organized by Japan for its officials working on SPS-related issues. 
83. The Secretariat also reported on the upcoming technical assistance activities, which included 
several regional and national seminars .  In particular, regional semina rs would be held in Qatar in 
November and in Lesotho in December.  National seminars were scheduled for India in November 
and China in December. 
84. The Secretariat further underlined the ongoing 4
th Specialized Course on the SPS Agreement 
between 29 September and 17 Oct ober, in Geneva.  The Specialized Course on the SPS Agreement 
was a unique WTO training activity since it was not only focused on transmitting knowledge and 
awareness about the SPS Agreemen t and the SPS Committee, but also on identifying actions to 
address specific implementation challenges and opportunities at the national level.   
85. The representative of Indonesia thanked the Secr etariat for the seminar on the SPS Agreement 
held in July 2008.  Following the recommendations of the seminar, Indonesia would organize an international symposium on the SPS Agreement and th e theme would be the strengthening of capacity 
of the SPS management on food safety and animal and plant health.  The representative invited the 
Secretariat and Members to provide technical support for this symposium. 
86. The Secretary of the STDF dr ew attention to document G/SPS/GEN/877 regarding STDF 
activities, as well as the STDF Newsletter.  Any activities or news worthy items by Members could also be included in the Newsletter.  The STDF S ecretariat reported that there were two information 
sessions held in early 2008.  The first held in March 2008 was on capacity evaluation tools and the 
second held in June 2008 was on private standards.  The STDF was developing a brochure that gave G/SPS/R/53 
Page 14  
 
  an overview of capacity evaluation tools which woul d be circulated to Members providing technical 
assistance.   
87. With respect to forthcoming in formation activities, there were two planned for 2009.  The 
first one was on cost/benefit analysis of SPS capacity  building, and the other was on climate change.  
For the meeting in February 2009, the STDF was in  the process of developing a DVD which would be 
used in training activities to provide information to SPS regulators and others.   
88. The STDF was drawing attention to the SPS issue as a supply-side constraint within the Aid 
for Trade agenda.  The STDF reported to the Committee on Trade and De velopment, UNIDO and 
others.  As for the issue raised by Sierra Leone, fruit fly was an obvious supply-chain constraint for 
trade.  There were some efforts to bring coordinate d responses to the issue of control of fruit-flies. 
89. The Enhanced Integrated Framework was a multi-partner initiated for Least Developed 
Countries (LDCs), trying to improve the perform ance of trade in LDCs.  SPS was also a trade 
constraint for these LDCs.  The STDF was also involve d in project development, for example to help 
Sierra Leone to upgrade its SPS capacity.  There was an on-going evaluation of the STDF, and the 
report of this evaluation which was a  key to  securing new funding, would be available in 
November 2008.  
90. The representative of Zambia reported that po litical leaders in some countries did not 
understand the benefits that come from SPS capacity .  The cost/benefit analysis should address the 
problem of how some countries could use technical assistance in light of political constraints.  
91. The representative of Rwanda thanked the STDF for supporting Rwanda's efforts to comply 
with SPS standards and increasing awareness of both  the private and public sectors regarding SPS 
measures.  This assistance had also helped update  Rwanda's legal system and helped Rwanda to 
become a contracting party of the IPPC. 
92. Recalling Sierra Leone's question regarding t echnical assistance, the Secretariat reminded 
Members of the policy of the WTO whereby each of least-developed country Member could request up to three national seminars in relation to different  agreements in the course of a year.  Developing 
country Members could request up to two seminars per year. 
(c) Information from Members 
93. The representative of Paraguay thanked Ch ile for its cooperation and assistance. 
94. The representative of the European Communiti es reported that a seminar on international 
food standards took place in June 2008, hosted by the Netherlands.  The Pesticides Initiative 
Programme would continue its training activities due  to the need to acquaint ACP countries with the 
pesticide regime of the European Communities. 
95. The representative of Norway drew attention to the activities of his country in the field of 
technical assistance (G/SPS/GEN/879).  Most projects included SPS elements. 
(d) Information from Observers 
96. The representative of the OIE reported that the OIE was working on several programmes.  
One was on capacity building for national laboratori es.  There were nine projects underway including 
the creation of four reference laboratories.  Some programmes dealt with veterinary services to ensure 
they were able to comply with OIE standards.  There were other projects to assist developing countries to update their legislation to comply with OIE standards.  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 15 
 
 
  97. The representative of Honduras thanked the OIE of the support given to Honduras. 
98. The representative of Codex noted earlier reports  on SPS-related technical assistance projects 
developed by FAO and WHO.  The operation of th e Codex Trust Fund had received more funding to 
improve its operation over the next years.  The app lication period to benefit from the Trust Fund in 
2009 was now open.  Finally, following the request of Egypt, Codex was analyzing the capacity of 
developing countries to participate in setting st andards at Codex.  The representative of Codex 
clarified that there were, however, no statistics on th e participation of the developing countries in the 
Codex working groups. 
99. The representative of IICA informed the Comm ittee that it was concluding a phase of the 
development of institutional capacities on SPS measu res.  More information on IICA's technical 
assistance could be found in G/SPS/GEN/882.  Some of  the results of the technical assistance were 
the following;  (1) national committees were devel oped to follow up and manage SPS topics;  (2) SPS 
topics were integrated into the national agenda;  (3 ) trained staff were able to participate in SPS 
Committee meetings;  (4) the financial resources of national budgets were better adapted to participate 
in international activities;  and (5) coordination be tween institutions in capita ls and the representatives 
in Geneva.  These achievements were met in some countries but not in all of them.  More work was 
needed to include as many countries as possible.   
100. The representatives of Argentina, Bahamas,  Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, 
Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatem ala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, St. Lucia, 
St. Vincent and Grenadines, Uruguay and Venezu ela, thanked IICA for the technical support 
initiatives given to their countries.  
101. The representative of UNCTAD reported on two events.  The first event was the twelfth UN 
Conference on Trade and Development held in early 2008, focussed on making sustainability 
standards work for small scale farmers.  The second event was the eighth and final meeting of the International Task Force on Harmonization and Equiva lence in Organic Agriculture.  This event was 
an example of harmonization and equivalence in the areas of private voluntary standards. 
IX. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT 
(a) Report on Informal Meeting 
102. The Chairman reported that at the informal meeting of the SPS Committee on the review of 
the SPS Agreement, the Committee had discussed two outstanding issues from the Second Review, as 
well as the procedures for undertaking the Third Review. 
103. On the use of ad hoc consultations, the United States and Argentina had offered to submit a 
joint proposal for consideration at the next mee ting of the Committee.  Both Members had taken note 
of the concerns raised with regards to the hor izontal mechanism in NAMA and remained confident 
that no conflicts would arise between the two proposals. 
104.  On the relationship between the SPS Committee and Codex, IPPC and OIE, it was agreed 
that the Secretariat would circulate a draft programme  for a special workshop with  the three sisters, to 
be organized in October 2009. 
105. No concerns had been raised regarding the s uggested procedure and timetable for the Third 
Review prepared by the Chairman and the Secr etariat, and contained in document G/SPS/W/228. G/SPS/R/53 
Page 16  
 
  106. In response to a question on the Chairman's report,  the Secretariat clarified that this workshop 
would be useful to discuss the processes, procedures  and participation of Members in the work of the 
three standard-setting bodies.  The workshop w as also intended to focus on strengthening the 
relationship between the work of the SPS Committee and that of the three bodies. 
107. The representative of Chile noted that Members were not submitting documents in a timely 
manner, which made it difficult to consider those at meetings.  The representative of Argentina 
supported the issue raised by Chile;  several matters  had been raised in the Second Review but no 
proposals had been submitted to allow progress on these issues. 
(b) Use of ad hoc consultations  
108. The Secretariat reported that the most r ecent proposal for a mechanism for the rapid 
resolution of disputes dealing with non-ta riff barriers was contained in document 
TN/MA/W/103/Rev.2 and Annex 1.  The proposal w as under consideration in the negotiating group 
on Non-Agricultural Market Access, along with dr aft modalities and had not been adopted.  One 
unresolved issue in the proposal was the scope of the mechanism.  If it excluded agricultural products, 
some products covered by the SPS Agreem ent would be excluded and others not. 
(c) Preparation for the Third Review 
109. The Committee agreed to the procedure for undertaking the Third Review of the SPS 
Agreement, as presented in document G/SPS/W/228. 
110. The Secretariat reported that by the end of th e month of October, the first version of a 
background document would be circulated.  This  document would cover issues that had been 
addressed after the Second Review, and other issues that  needed to be addressed in the Third Review.  
Members were invited to submit written comments on the background document and identify issues 
for the Third Review by 28 November 2008.  Members should submit background proposals on the issues they had identified for the review by 9 Fe bruary 2009.  The Secretary suggested that an 
informal meeting be scheduled immediately prior to  the next formal meeting for an initial discussion 
on the issues identified for the Third Review. 
111. The representative of Chile raised general concerns regarding the implementation of 
guidelines adopted by the Committee.  The representa tive of Cuba shared Chile's concern and asked 
for more time for developing countries to respond to the background document. 
X. MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
(a) New Issues 
112. The representative of China raised concerns rela ting to a draft regional standard of the North 
American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) entitled "Guidelines for Regulating the Movement 
of Ships and Cargoes Aboard those Ships from Areas Infested with the Asian Gypsy Moth".  This 
draft would require NAPPO members (Canada, Mexico and the United States) to impose strict phytosanitary measures on the ships and cargoes fro m Russia, Korea, Japan, Mongolia and China.  
More detailed information was presented in at G/SPS/GEN/880. 
113. The representative of China had the following con cerns regarding the draft standard;  (1) if 
passed and implemented, it would have serious impact s on international trade;  (2) it was inconsistent 
with Articles 2.2 and 5.6 of the SPS Agreement;  and (3) it had ambiguities regarding the technical 
application of the measure in different NAPPO c ountries and in different climatic conditions.  The  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 17 
 
 
  representative of China urged NAPPO members to de lay the implementation of the standard until it 
was recognized by relevant organizations including the IPPC. 
114. The representatives of Japan, Korea and Indonesi a indicated that they shared the concerns 
raised by China regarding the NAPPO draft standard.   
115. The representative of the United States reported that the NAPPO standard pertaining to 
inspection and certification requirements related to the Asian Gypsy Moth was still in a draft form, 
and more changes could be made based on comme nts submitted by concerned countries.  China had 
declined an invitation to participate in a meeting held in October 2008 to allow trading partners to 
present their concerns regarding the standard.  A harmonized standard among the three NAPPO 
members would allow ships to enter any port in a NAPPO country after being approved by the first 
port of call.  Finally, the United States invited Me mbers with concerns to engage in discussions with 
NAPPO members regarding this issue.   
116. The representative of Canada supported the United States and stated that previous incursions 
of the Asian Gypsy Moth had caused serious and co stly problems for Canada.  The representative of 
Mexico also supported the interventions made by the United States and Canada. 
117. The representative of China stated that tec hnical comments had alr eady been sent to the 
NAPPO secretariat and hoped that further meetings  could be held between NAPPO members and the 
concerned countries. 
118. The representative of the European Communiti es reported that they had not taken new 
measures on the Asian Gypsy Moth, but they remained  vigilant to any potential risk.  There were 
parallels between this issue a nd ISPM 15 on wood packaging material that had previously been 
extensively discussed in the Committee.  The Eur opean Communities hoped that similar solutions to 
the Asian Gypsy Moth problem could also be found. 
119. The representative of Norway expressed interest in this issue and its impact on Norway's 
exports. 
120. The representative of Mali asked if there were  quarantine measures against the Asian Gypsy 
Moth and whether the pest existed in the NAPPO countries.  The representative of the United States 
clarified that this pest was not present in NAPPO countries and that it was very invasive.  Based on this information, the representative of Mali agreed  that NAPPO countries should take the necessary 
measures to prevent the entry of Asian Gypsy Moth into their countries. 
(b) Issues Previously Raised 
121. No Member or observer organizations had an issue to raise.  
XI. CONCERNS WITH COMMERCIAL AND PRIVATE STANDARDS 
(a) Report on Chairman's Consultations 
122. The Chairman recalled that at the last regular Committee meeting, in order to start to move 
from talking to action, the Committee had agreed that  the Chairman circulate a questionnaire and that 
those Members who responded to the questionnaire in tim e would be invited to participate in informal 
consultations. 
123. On 5 July 2008, the Chairman had circulated a number of questions seeking proposals on 
what the SPS Committee could and should do to (1) reduce the negative effects that private SPS G/SPS/R/53 
Page 18  
 
  standards had on international trade, especially fo r developing countries, and (2) to enhance the 
potential benefits arising from private SPS standard s for developing countries.  These questions were 
contained in  JOB(08)/58.  
124. Thirty Members had responded to the questionna ire within the deadline, and their responses 
were compiled in document JOB(08)/97.  The Secretariat had then summarized Members' responses, 
and circulated those summaries in document G/SPS/W/230, along with some proposals for possible 
actions. 
125. On Tuesday, 7 October, the Chairman had met with those Members who had responded to the 
questions.  The discussions had focused on th e proposed actions identified in document 
G/SPS/W/230, which were broadly supported by these Members. 
126. The consultative group had considered that it would be useful to invite all Members to 
provide information on any relevant study or analysis  that they had undertaken or of which they were 
aware for consideration by the Committee.  Ho wever, there had not been broad support for 
suggestions that the SPS Committee request UNCT AD or any other organization to undertake a 
specific study on private SPS standards.   
127. The consultative group had also supported the pr oposal that the Secretariat continue to 
organize ad hoc information sessions on private sta ndards, with representatives of private standard-
setting bodies and other related institutions.   
128. Most of the discussions had focused on the propo sed comparative study on products identified 
by Members as affected by private SPS standards.  Th ere had been much support for such a study.  It 
had been suggested that it would be useful if the Secretariat would prepare a format to be circulated to 
all Members of the SPS Committee before the end of this year.  This format would aim at ensuring 
some consistency in the information provided by  Members regarding products and markets of 
concern, the relevant private and international sta ndards, trade effects, costs of compliance and of 
certification, and other elements as described on pages 11 and 12 of G/SPS/W/230. 
129. The Members consulted had not, however, belie ved it necessary or appropriate to limit the 
number of products that each Member could identify to only one or two as proposed in G/SPS/W/230;  
Members should be able to identify as many products as they wished. 
130. Several Members had highlighted the difficult y in getting detailed information from private 
traders regarding specific problems and costs, and it ha d been suggested that the lack of some of the 
requested data should not prevent consideration of the products/standards identified by a Member 
within the comparative study. 
131. In concluding his report, the Chairman stressed  his preference to continue to work with a 
limited number of Members on an informal and flex ible basis, in order to advance the Committee 
work as quickly as possible, but with a commitme nt to keep the Committee as a whole fully and 
continuously informed. 
132. The Committee adopted the proposals in document G/SPS/W/230, with the following 
modifications:  (1) the Secretariat was requested to  prepare a format for the information solicited for 
purposes of undertaking a comparative study (subsequently circulated as G/SPS/W/232);  (2) there would be no limitation on the number of products a Member could identify as affected by private 
standards;  and (3) although Members should make ev ery effort to provide as complete information as 
possible with regard to each product identified, a lack of complete information should not necessarily 
prevent consideration of the product within the comparative study.    G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 19 
 
 
  133. The Secretariat noted that some Members were  concerned about their ability to obtain the 
information needed from the private sector.  The Secretariat offered to prepare a document which 
listed contacts in organizations and other institutions involved in work on private standards that might 
be of assistance to Members (G/SPS/GEN/865). 
134. The Chairman stated that when appropriate, th e Codex, IPPC and OIE would be invited to 
participate in the work related to private standards. 
135. The representative of Codex reported that the subject of private standards was discussed at the 
previous Codex Commission meeting.  The Commiss ion had requested the FAO and WHO to compile 
existing studies on private standards and their implic ations.  The study was expected to be presented 
in the next session of the Codex Commission in July 2009.   
136. The representative of Chile s ought clarification as to whether the composition of the group 
would continue to be the respondents to the initia l questionnaire.  He also expressed the hope that 
sufficient time would be provided in the Codex Commission session to further discuss issues related 
to private standards.  The Chairman confirmed his intention to continue to work with the former 
group. 
137. The representative of UNCTAD expressed his inter est to be part of the discussions on private 
standards due to its activities in helping developing  countries with the implementation of standards. 
XII. TRANSITIONAL REVIEW UNDER THE PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL 
OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
138. The Chairman recalled that in accordance with Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of 
the People's Republic of China, the SPS Committee w as to undertake an annual review for eight years 
of the implementation by China of the SPS Agreemen t.  He first invited the United States to present 
the questions it had submitted in document G/SPS/W/229. 
139. The representative of the United States observe d that the Transitional Review Mechanism 
allowed Members to assess and understand the progr ess that China had made in implementing the 
WTO agreements.  She raised several issues relati ng to restrictions on agricultural trade.  The 
concerns were:  (1) on  how China conducted risk assessments on US origin beef and beef products;  
(2) BSE-related restrictions on protein-free tallow;  (3) pathogen residue standards;  and (4) avian 
influenza.  The representative signalled that several of these issues had been raised in 2007, however, 
China had provided onl y limited responses. 
140. The representative of the United States requested  information on the status of revision to 
China's sampling plans and microbiological criteri a for food-born pathogens.  Moreover, the United 
States was also concerned that China had banned ra ctopamine without conducting a risk assessment.  
The other concern raised was regarding avian influe nza-related bans affecting the states of Arkansas 
and Virginia.  
141. Finally, the United States was interested in the plans to boost food safety regulations in China, 
especially regarding the recent problems with melamine  in milk, the changes that would be made and 
when they would be notified to the WTO.  
142. The representative of the European  Communities shared the concer ns of the United States and 
reiterated that OIE standards should be respected .  The European Communities had specific concerns 
regarding the animal health standards, the micr obiological criteria and the plant health standards 
implemented by China.  Imports of EC beef a nd other bovine products were still banned by China 
despite the fact that 25 EC member States were classified by the OIE as having "negligible" or G/SPS/R/53 
Page 20  
 
  "controlled risk" of BSE.  Also, the European  Communities was concerned regarding certain 
microbiological criteria such as E. Sakazakii , and the zero tolerance leve l applied for products not 
intended for infants.  These standards were not in lin e with Codex.  Finally, compliance with China's 
plant regulatory import system was unjustifiably difficult.  The European Communities welcomed 
recent improvements in communication between th e European Communities and China regarding the 
plant health issue.  
143. The representative of China noted the questions raised by the United States and the European 
Communities.  On BSE-related issues, the repr esentative stated that China has conducted the 
necessary risk assessments on beef imported from the United States and there had been many technical communications on numerous occasions.  The efforts made by the United States to prevent 
BSE contamination were appreciated, but there were  still problems in the implementation of the cattle 
tracing system and the implementation of the feed  ban.  China hoped that the United States could 
address the loopholes and problems in the prevention and control systems of BSE on the basis of the related OIE standards.  China was willing to conti nue working with the United States on this issue. 
144. The representative of China reiterated that he r officials had communicated with the US 
authorities on the issue of trade in protein-fr ee tallow on several occasions.  In March 2008, the 
United States had agreed to send relevant material s but China had not yet received these.  China's 
measures on protein-free tallow were fully consiste nt with the regulations stipulated in the OIE 
Terrestrial Animal Health Code that a product co ntaining specified risk materials (SRM) was not 
tradable worldwide, and protein-free tallow (max imum level of insoluble impurities of 0.15 per cent 
in weight) should enjoy free trade .  The representative stated that China's requirement had taken into 
account the risk assessment results and international standards. China was willing to hold bilateral 
talks at technical level on the interpretation of the relevant articles of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code with the United States to sh are views and address issues of concern.  
145. On pathogen standards, the representative of China stated that China had never set zero 
tolerance requirements for pathogens in raw meat  and poultry products.  China used sampling and 
testing to identify whether the quality of meat pr oducts met relevant standa rds and requirements.  
Such practices had been adopted by many other countries and were fully consistent with Codex 
Alimentarius standards which stipulated that pathog ens should not be detected in meat products for 
human consumption.  The same pathogen standa rds applied to both foreign and domestically 
produced products in China.  China was following the latest progress in the Codex regarding the 
standards for micro-organisms detected in food prod ucts and had started to formulate standards for 
maximum levels of animalcule detected in food products based on this progress and China’s 
monitoring data on food-born diseases. 
146. On residue standards for ractopamine, China restri cted the use of ractopamine in feedstuff to 
protect consumers' health and food safety.  This restriction applied uniformly to import and domestic 
products.  Similar regulations were adopted by ma ny other countries.  China was in the process of 
completing a risk assessment on ractopamine and was willing to communicate with other Members on 
this issue.   
147. With regard to avian influenza (AI), China had lifted the ban on poultry and poultry products 
from six states of the United States including Penns ylvania, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, 
West Virginia and Nebraska, based on risk assessment s of the AI situation in these states.  However, 
with regard to the H5N1 strain of AI in Virginia , according to the technical information available to 
China, it appeared likely that this was the high pathogenic type of vi rus.  Therefore, China requested 
that the United States provide the relevant viral strain  for further study.  The representative said that  
China had not yet received this.  With regard to  the state of Arkansas, China had received the 
application and the related technical materials fro m the United States at the end of September 2008 
and was in the process of undertaking the risk ass essment.  China hoped that the United States could  G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 21 
 
 
  provide the technical materials and virus strain relati ng to avian influenza at an early point in time.  
China also wished to intensify communications w ith the United States to so lve the technical issues 
appropriately.  
148. About the food safety issues, the representative of China had become aware of the concern 
only at this time.  However, the Chinese delega tion had already briefed the Committee on the progress 
regarding the dairy produc ts and the testing results, and on how the Chinese authorities were dealing 
with this issue.  The Chinese Premier had clearly stat ed that in dealing with the incident of milk and 
milk products, China would be transparent.  China would keep the Committee informed regarding this 
matter. 
XIII.  MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS 
149. The representative of the OIE suggested a need  for better coordination between the OIE and 
the WTO Secretariat regarding the organization of regional seminars.  The OIE had been in contact 
with the Secretariat regarding the seminars and the appropriate people that should be involved in the 
seminars regarding animal health.  Finally, the OIE invited the Secretariat to engage actively in the 
special training sessions held after the regional semina rs.  The representative of the OIE also clarified 
that the OIE had also established new standards for aquatic species that were being reviewed by the 
committee.  More information on OIE ac tivities could be found in G/SPS/GEN/878. 
150. The representative of the Codex Alimenta rius referred to its report in document 
G/SPS/GEN/881.  Appendix 1 of the document listed all standards, guidelines and recommendations 
that were adopted in July 2008 by the Codex Al imentarius Commission.  Appendix 2 listed all items 
approved for new work by the Commission in July.  At the last session of the Commission, the issue 
of developing countries' participation was extensiv ely debated.  Finally, the capacity of the Codex 
Secretariat was being evaluated by an external c onsultant due to the fact that its capacity was 
stretched to the limit. 
151. The representatives of Cameroon and Mali expressed  their gratitude to the Codex for helping 
with the conduct of workshops for developing countri es.  The representative of Codex in turn thanked 
those who made possible the seminars in developing countries. 
152. The representative of Chile noted the active involvement of the Codex secretariat in many 
activities and stressed that Codex needed strong support to continue to work effectively.  
153. The representative of the IPPC reported on sever al activities that took place after the meeting 
of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM ) held in 2007.  The CPM had identified 
priorities for setting standards.  Since then, th e IPPC had progressed on setting some of these 
standards.  Also, there was a meeting organized by  the IPPC regarding pest-free areas.  Finally, the 
IPPC was collaborating with STDF to work on sever al projects and workshops related to capacity 
building. 
154. The representative of Senegal thanked the IPPC  for assisting his country, but expressed his 
concerns as a French speaking Member regarding the use of English only in the meetings of technical 
committees.  The representative of the IPPC stated  that the lack of finances did not allow the 
translation of all working documents into other languages. 
155. In response to a query from the representativ e of Burundi, the representative of the IPPC 
indicated that the IPPC assisted Members based on their request. G/SPS/R/53 
Page 22  
 
  XIV.  OBSERVERS – REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS  
156. The Committee agreed to invite all of the ad hoc observers to participate in its next meeting, 
including  the informal meetings on the Review  and on special and differential treatment.   
157. There was no change in the position of Members with respect to the pending requests for 
observer status from the Asian and Pacific Coc onut Community (APPC), Convention on Biological 
Diversity (CBD), International Vine and Wi ne Office (OIV) and the Gulf Customs Council 
Standardization Organization.  These outstanding re quests would be considered at the next regular 
meeting.   
XV. CHAIRMAN'S ANNUAL REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS  
158. The Chairman indicated that he would submit a brief, factual annual report on the activities of 
the SPS Committee in 2008 for consideration by th e Council for Trade in Goods.  The Chairman 
would report on the number of meetings held in  2008 and on the main work undertaken at these 
meetings.  In particular, the report would highlight  the adoption by this Committee of new guidelines 
on the implementation of Article 6 of the SPS Ag reement, on the revised recommended procedures on 
transparency, on the agreed proce dures for the Third Review and finally on the decision on how to 
move ahead on the issue of private standards.  The report would draw attention to the workshop on 
good practices in SPS-related technical assistance, as well as to the information session on private 
standards and the workshop early in the year on cap acity evaluation tools.  The report would also 
mention the large number of specific trade c oncerns discussed, and provide an overview of 
discussions under other agenda items.  The repor t was subsequently circulated as G/L/866. 
XVI.  OTHER BUSINESS  
159. The representative of Mali raised the concerns regarding private standards and the difficulty 
of LDCs to adopt these standards. 
160. The representative of Ecuador informed the Committee that in October 2008, Panama and 
Ecuador had signed a phytosanitary protocol which resu lted in Panama lifting the import restrictions it 
had applied on flowers and foliage.  The representativ e of Panama described the procedure that led to 
the removal of the ban.  
161. The representative of Canada raised again th e issue of Greece's excessive inspection and 
testing requirements of imported cereals, including Canadian wheat exports, for the presence of genetically modified organisms even though ge netically modified wheat is not commercially 
produced in Canada.  The issue had been raised for the fourth time, and the matter had not been 
resolved.  The representative of the Europ ean Communities stated that although there was 
harmonization among the EC member States, there was a degree of differences in the testing regimes 
of different countries.  The European Communities w ould make every effort to resolve this issue. 
162. The representative of Cuba noted that her count ry Cuba had been affected by many natural 
phenomenon in September, which along with some ot her difficulties, had meant that Cuba had not 
responded to the questions on private standards with in the required deadline.  The representative of 
Cuba asked nonetheless to be accepted as  part of the informal group working on the issue.  Several 
Members recalled the interest in keeping the inform al group small, and that the Committee had agreed 
to the procedure regarding the inclusion of t hose who replied to the questionnaire on time. The 
Chairman stressed that all Members were invite d to provide information on specific examples and 
information for inclusion in the compar ative study agreed by the Committee.   G/SPS/R/53 
 Page 23 
 
 
  XVII.  DATE AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING 
163. The Chairman recalled that the next meeting was tentatively scheduled for 25-26 February 
2009.  Informal meetings on the Review a nd S&D were scheduled for 24 February 2009. 
164. The Secretariat stated that th e first Committee meeting in 200 9 would be held earlier than 
usual to avoid conflicts with ot her meetings and activities.  Members were asked to be vigilant 
regarding submitting reports within the specified deadlines.   
165. The Committee agreed on the following tent ative agenda for the next meeting: 
1. Proposed agenda 
2. Activities of Members 
3. Specific trade concerns 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received 
(d) Information on resolution of issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9 
4. Operation of transparency provisions 
5. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
(a) Report on informal meeting 
(b) Review of operation of S&D transparency procedure (G/SPS/33) 
6. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
7. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
(a) Information from Members on their pest or disease status 
(b) Information from Members on their experiences in recognition of pest- or 
disease-free areas 
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
8. Technical assistance and cooperation 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(b) Information from Members 
(c) Information from observers 
9. Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement 
(a) Issues arising from the Second Review 
(i) Use of ad hoc consultations 
(ii) Relationship between the SPS Committee, Codex, IPPC and OIE 
(b) Third Review 
(i) Report on informal meeting 
10. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues G/SPS/R/53 
Page 24  
 
  (b) Issues previously raised 
11. Concerns with private and commercial standards 
(a) Report on Chair's consultations 
12. Matters of interest arising from th e work of observer organizations 
13. Observers – Request for observer status 
14. Election of Chairperson 
15. Other business 
16. Date and agenda of next meeting 
166. Members were asked to take note of the following deadlines: 
(i) For written comments on the background document and identify issues for 
the Third Review:  Friday, 28 November 2008
.  For submission of 
background proposals on the issues identified for the review:  Monday, 
9 February 2009  
(ii) For identifying new issues for consideration under the monitoring procedure, 
AND for requesting that items be put on the agenda :  Thursday, 
12 February 2009;  
(iii) For the distribution of the airgram:  Friday, 13 February 2009.  
__________