67. VVithin the tast 3 years, from which couratries die Argent'sna irnport tive 

FMD-susceptibte animats? 

See Annex 1X Imports. 

68. What specific activities(e.g. inspection, disinfection, etc.) are carried 

out at each of the inspection posts or points of entry? 

At every border post physical controls are carried out, also of documents and 

identity, of the merchandise we are handling in export-import operations, and in 

transit to other countries. In addition to the restrictions and prohibitions on 

animals, farm products and agricu{tural goods which enter the country in 

people's luggage and vehicles, and also the denature and destruction of the 

confiscated goods. 

To perform these controls direct methods are used by inspectors, 

complemented in the more important points of entry with special equipment for 

detecting organic matter plus dogs trained for this specialtyr. 

If an emergency or ristcy situation arises, a series of actions foreseen in 

SENASA resolution n° 1505/00 is activated, implying more personnel, control 

intensification, vehicle disinfection and other actions. 

69. F9ow have the inspection posts on the border been strengthened in 

iight of the recent introductions of FMD? 
SENASA's resoiution n° 1505/2000 was adopted on a!l borders characterized 

as risky, with extraordinary measures of control and prevention necessary to 

avoid the entrance of ethiological agents connected with exotic diseases or high 

risk diseases. These measures incfude: 

a) reinforcement of personnei on the control posts and risky border areas, 

b) intensification of physical controls, documents and identity controls on 

commercial shipments of animal products authorized to enter the Argentine 

Republic, 

e) greater restriction on vehicies entering our National territory, 

f) instailation of controi posts on routes considered strategic for the prevention 

of the above mentioned zoo-sanitary risks. 

These measures, or any other considered necessary according to the 

emergency situation, will be determined by the Bureau of Epidemiology which 

belongs to the National Bureau of Animai Health and the Bureau of International 

Traffic belonging to the National Bureau of Agri-food Inspection, coordinating 

their impiernentation with the 4ocal authorities of this organ'ssm, together with the 

Security Forces belonging to each determined area. 

.. _ .. _ 11- 

1. 1. _ 

when they are loaded for shgpment on the farm? 
All sanitary documentation accompaning the animals being shipped is issued by 

SENASA's official personnel. As to the previous clinical inspection before 

shipment, this is only demanded in the case of animals to be slaughtered for 

some export markets (such as the EU), transport from tick-infected areas, or 

from risk areas (border zones), etc. In these cases inspections are carried out 

by official personnel. In the case of export products to the EU, these inspections 

can aiso be performed by private veterinarians registered at SENASA for this 

work. They must issue a pre-dispatch certificate which goes together with the 

Animal Transit Document (DTA) and is necessary for its emission. 

71. Is direct movement to slaughter subject to the same kind of movement 

restrictions as other shipments? 

Shipment of animais for siaughter belonging to a certain sanitary area (intraarea movements) is conditioned by SENASA's resoiution n° 178/01 which 

estabiishes that the cattle be protected by the Animal Transit Document (DTA), 

wear a visible brand, carry the corresponding Cattle Guideand be transported 

by a SENASA approved vehicle together with a certificate which proves that it 

has been properly washed and disinfected, previous to its loading, besides 

having its doors sealed. 

Direct shipments for slaughter to the North S and South Patagonia regions, 

coming from the North of the country, are prohibited. 

Only shipments for slaughter are allowed into the North A Patagonia region and 

into slaughtering establishments approved by SENASA which show certain 
previousiy assessed conditions of biosecurity, and also after complying with 

SENASA resolution n° 58/01 and 178101. 

In these cases it must be made clear that the produce from slaughtered animals 

from the Northern Patagonia region must be commercialized free from long 

bones, without ganglions. (See Annex V! Requisites of Standards SENASA 

resolution n° 58/01 and complementary dispositions). 

72. Are animais that are n7oved identifiable as to the owner or farm of 

origin? 

Yes, by means of the Animal Transit Document and the RENSPA. 

73. What import restrictions are applicable to FMD-susceptibie materials 

(meat and meat products) in passenger baggage? Piease provide detaiis 

concerning the enforcement process. 

Control procedures at the arrival of peopfe, their luggage and vehicles, are 

regulated by SENASA resolution n° 295199, which offers a list of positive 

products which are allowed entrance into the country, provided they corne in 

small quantities for personal or family use and are properly identi#ied. As to 

meat and meat-products, these are prohibited, as they are not foreseen in the 

list of positive products referred to above. 

As to animals, oniy cats and dogs as pets or family animals carrying their 

respective sanifiary certifications are admitted. Other animals require a previous 
authorization from SENASA and they are admitted only when such a certificate 

is approved and accompanied by the corresponding sanitary certifications 

issued by sanitary authorities of the country of origin. 

The inspectors adjust their actions according to SENASA resolution n° 299/99 

which is approved by the corresponding Proceeding Manual. 

a • • ntina's import requirements• ' • s rk meat s R not appear : ,R. 

prohibit commingling, and d :• not appear to address transit through 

r country. - i• such requirements •i other 

meat • te 

SENASA applies the OIE Code recommendations for the import of pork meat 

and by-products or the import of products of other susceptible species and 

transit. 

The OIE Code recommendation contains the country situation related this 

disease and entry conditions of this product. 

75. Argentina appeao-s to irnport skin, offai and dairy products frorro 

countries the llnited States considers affected with EM®. What safeguards 

are in place to prevent potential transmission of the disease to A.rgentine 

livestock? 

The important of skin, offal and dairy-products is carried out after a risk anafysis 

by the QNSA taking into account Intemationa! Organisms such as OIE and 

others' recommendations, and the mitigation methods indicated, if necessary. 
Could you provide us with your' •. u • r the importationo .- 

semen n:• live animals into A ! ' 

Sanitary requirements in force for import of bovines, sheep, goats, pigs on the 

hoof and for semen of these species to the Republic of Argentina are attached. 

VVith regards to pig semen, it is important to make clear that only 60 doses of 

fresh pig semen coming from Finland vdith the attached protocol, opportunefy 

agreed for this operation, entered in 1999. Annex Xi9 

~ t;- ~~ '... ~ , k ~ ;-♦ ~~ • x ~ F; 

m= 

77. Is there a mandatory system for anima9 identification? 

Every cattle ov✓ ner is obliged to identify his animals by means of branding or 

ear-marking (according to the cattle being respectively old or young), and to 

register this brand or marking into his jurisdiction's Registry of Markings and 

Brands (according to regional laws). 

Nationvaide, and according to Resolution n° 178l01, animals on the move 

tov,rards any destination must be easily identified for which they must present, 

according to species, clearly visible brands or markings, legibie and identifiable, 

in accordance with the design described in the Animal Transit Document (DYA). 
In the case of cattle for export to the EU, there exists an obligatory system 

called "Identification System of Bovine Cattle for Export", created by SENASA 

resolution n° 15 dated February 5, 2003, and applied to all rural establishments 

rgistered in the "Registry of rural establishments, providers of export cattle for 

slaughter", according to SENASA resolution n° 49612001 and to all rural 

establishments registered in the "Registry of corral-fattened livestock 

establishments, providers of bovine caftle for slaughter destined for export", 

according to SENASA resolution n° 2/2003. Besides, SENASA resolution n° 391 

dated August 8, 2003, deciares that the name "Rural establishments of origin" 

belongs to those who provide bovine cattle bom and grown on the place and 

destined to "Rural establishments providers of export cattle for slaughter°. 

By means of the Animal Transit Document, one can trace the herd of origin. 

In the case of bovine caftle, by means of the Identification System of Bovine 

Cattle for Export, one can also trace the animals back to its herd of origin. 

79. How is your census data updated? 

The National Sanitary Registry of Land-and-cattle producers (RENSPA) 

registers all National Territory landodvners. The registry shovvs the total amount 

of estates, their geographic location, number of animals and physical and 

productive characteristics. This information permits a statistical analysis to 

support sanitary control and epidemic surveillance, strategically useful in case 
of emergencies. Every time a landowner ships animals, he must require the 

Animal Transit Document (DTA) issued by SENASA's Local Offices all over the 

country, which automatically updates RENSPA. At the same time, the FMD 

Eradication Plan implemented by Resolution 5/2001, in the areas where 

vaccination is mandatory twice a year, this also updates de registry. 

80. What demographic information is available for backyard versus 

commercial livestock? 

Every cattle-owner or herder, no matter the number of animals owned, must be 

registered in the SENASA local office of his jurisdiction, in RENSPA. Another 

source of information is the National Statistics and Census Institute (INDEC) 

which generates a National land-and-cattle census every 10 years, 

approximately. 

81. Are biosecurity measures in place to ensure separation of small 

(backyard) and large-scale farms and to prevent disease transmission 

between them? If so, could you provide us with those measures? 

Biosecurity measures are the same for everyone, be it rural establishments or 

big or small farms. They refer to sanitary conditions, identification of the 

livestock, control and registration of the movements, etc. 

82. Does Argentina have farms that extend across international borders or 

across borders separating vaccinated regions from non-vaccinated 
regions or across production areas? Is it common for individuals or 

groups to own farms across local or international borders? 

The answer is the same to both questions. 

Yes, there are farms or rural establishments which extend across borderlines 

which separate regions with systematic vaccination programs against FMD from 

those which do not have systematic vaccination programs, for instance, in the 

Patagonia North A and North B areas. In these areas greater control is carried 

out in the sanitary barriers installed. There are also farms extending across 

international borders, where there is a stricter control. 

There is also the case of landowners between two provinces, in other words, 

who possess farms in two provinces (interior borders) but this poses no 

epidemic risk except in the case of provinces with different vaccination 

programs, although this is cared for, as we have mentioned, by the control 

posts on access routes and the natural limits separating the different areas. 

83. How many slaughter facilities are there in Argentina? 

There are approximately 430 cattle-slaughtering establishments in Argentina. 

84. How many are Federally inspected? 

The 430 establishments are officially inspected, 180 controlled by SENASA. 

85. How many have been certified for export to the United States? 
Today, there are 27 qualified establishments which export to the United States, 

of which 18 are cattle-slaughtering farms. 

86. What is the location of each? What requirernents are in place for 

animal slaughter for export? What are the procedures for approving 

slaughter facilities for export? 

LIST OF APPROVED ESTABLISHMENTS WHICH EXPORT TO THE UNITED 

STATES. 

Include in list: Estab. N° Of. 1237 — FCO. H.V.S.A. (as from 08/10/04) 

Updated on the 08/10/2004. 

0013 SWIFT ARMOUR S.A. ROSARIO-STA. FE 1 2 3 4 5 

ARGENTINA 

0018 QUICKFOOD S.A. MARTINEZ-BS.AS. 2 

0152 P& O COLS LOGISTICS PILAR-BS.AS. 6 

ARGENTINA S.A. 

0249 FINEXCOR S.A. NELSON-STA. FE 1 2 

0267 FRIAR S.A. DESVIO ARIJON 6 

1014 QUICKFOOD S.A. 

1067 FCO. MIRAB S.A. 

1113 QUICKFOOD S.A. 

1237 FCO. H.V. S.A. 

SANTAFE 

SAN JORGE-STA. FE 1 2 

PILAR-BS.AS. 3 

V.MERCEDES-SAN LUIS 1 2 

LOMAS DEL MIRADOR- 2 

BS. AS. 
1311 FRIAR S.A. SANTA FE 2 3 5 

1352 CEPA S.A. ALEJANDRO KORN- 1 2 

BS. AS. 

1373 CEPA S.A. V. TUERTO - SANTA FE 1 2 3 5 

1378 CONSIGNACIONES BERAZATEGUI- 1 2 

RURALES S.A.C.A.I.F. BS. AS. 

1399 RAFAELA ALIMENTOS CASILDA-STA. FE 1 2 3 5 

S.A. 

1920 FCO. RIOPLATENSE GRAL. PACHECO-BS.AS.1 2 

S.A.I .C.I. F. 

1921 SADOWA S.A. MAR DEL PLATA-BS.AS. 1 2 3 

1930 SWIFT ARMOUR S.A. SAN JOSE-ENTRE RIOS 1 2 3 4 

I ARGENTINA 

1970 FRIAR S.A. RECONQUISTA-STA. FE 1 2 

2025 FCO. GORINA S.A.I.C. GORINA- BS.AS. 1 2 

2062 FINEXCOR S.A. BERNAL-BS.AS. 1 2 3 

2065 ESTANCIAS DEL SUR UNQUILLO-CORDOBA 1 2 

S.A. 

2067 CEPA S.A. PONTEVEDRA-BS.AS. 1 2 3 4 5 

2082 ARRE BEEF S.A. PEREZ MILLAN-BS.AS. 1 2 

2520 EXPORTACIONES SANTA ROSA-LA PAMPA1 2 

AGROINDUSTRIALES 

ARGENTINAS S.A. 

2685 SURMAR S.A_ CAPITAL FEDERAL 2 

3062 CAMPOS DEL PILAR S.A. PILAR-BS.AS. 4 

3540 CINA S.R.L. PUEBLO ESTHER. 6 
SANTAFE 

1. SLAUGHTER 2. CUTTING 3. COOKED MEAT 4. PRESERVES 

5. EXTRACT 6. MEAT STOREHOUSES 

(°) CERTIFICATION DISCONTINUED 

Up-to-date requisites for animal slaughter for export, both from farms or from 

concentration markets, are shipped for slaughter carrying their respective 

documentation: D.T.A. issued by SENASA and the SHIPPING GUIDE issued by 

the Municipal authorities. 

To certify an establishment for animal slaughter for export to the USA, they 

must not only comply vvith the Product and By-products of Animai Origin 

Inspection Regulation (Decree 4238/68), but also with the lefters published with 

requirements, speciaEly from the FSIS and APHIS, to conform to requirements 

of Section 327.2 (a) from Title 9 of the Federal Code of Regulations of the 

Agricultural Department of the Unites States. 

4.._ •

I 

qs-~ j —-~. ~ aList of countries approved for fresh Argentine bovine meat (83). 

EU (25): Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, United Kingdom, Greece, 

Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Austria, Finland, 

Sweden, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Slovakia, SEovania, Estonia, Hungary, 

Letonia, Lithuania, Malta and Poland 
Other countries: Chile, Uruguay, Saudi Arabia, Russian Federation, 

Switzerland, Norway, Bulgaria, Albania, Kosovo, Brazil, Uruguay, Bolivia, Peru, 

Paraguay, Ecuador, Venezuela, Aruba, Curagao (Dutch Antilles), Guinea, 

Equatorial Guinea, Saint Marteen, Singapur (South of Parailel 42), Thailand, 

Hong Kong, Vietnam, Egypt, Iceland, Angola, Gabon, Democratic Republic of 

the Congo, Pop. Rep. of the Congo, Senegal, Comoro Islands, Congo Rep. (exZaire), Qatar, Nigeria, Argelia, Oman, Kuwait, Israel, Guadalupe Is{and (French 

Antilles), Malasia, Martinica, Reunion Island, Kenya, Colombia, Jordania, 

Macedonia, Morroco, South Africa, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leona, Cuba, Lebanon, 

Libia, South Ireland, North Korea, Ucrania. 

88. In the event that the t3nited States allows importation of beef from 

;Argentina, which provinces wouid be the most 8ikeiy soaarces of the beef? 

The Provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, La Pampa, Cordoba, San Luis, and 

Entre Rios, in that order. 

: • O . page 59, your, . _ _ existence F: national . . 

international reports on FMD-related information issued by DNSA. 

provide copies of the most recent report.s. 

Report presented to OIE (October 2004) for Request to Regain Status of Foot 

and Mouth Disease Free Area with Vaccination (the annexes of Sampiings 

2004 and Project of Border Receipt they are not annexed to be the same ones 
that are attached with the present questionnaires) and Reporrt correspondent at 

times to the European Union of the epidemic 2000-2001 are sent. (Annex X) 

90. Regarding laboratory testing of suspicious animals, your submission 

states that when epithelial samples do not meet the minimum standards, a 

representative number o€ blood samples are collected (page 63)o How is 

the number of samples determined? 

According to the °Procedure Manual for the attention to a FMD center of 

infection", and in case one may not have a good sample of tissue (ephitelium) 

from the diseased animal, a serum extraction must be made andlor LEF of 16 

animals of the affected type and category. 

91. In your serologic survey, please define what is meant by "focal", 

"perifocal / surveillance" and `bother areas". Describe what categorization 

these areas represent and indicate the disease staus of farms within these 

areas. 

Serologic survey 2001: 

The survey was carried out at the end of 2001, 6 months after the FMD 

epidemic 2000-2001 reached its maximum peak, when cases were still being 

reported in the country. Objectives of this study were to measure prevailing 

cases of Ac against NSP of the FiVlD!!, as indicators of infection, in affected 

areas, and to detect the vinas' presence where no clinical cases happened. 
In affected areas, the establishments surveyed were put into different 

categories, according to the occurrence or not of the disease and their distance 

from a confirmed focal epidemic area: 

a. located in focal regions; 

b. located near focal regions, in a subregion or surveillance area; 

c. located out of these areas (rest); 

where: 

Focal region: is the one in which the estabiishment presents diseased animais 

and direct contact (this may include neighbour farms according to their 

extension); 

Subregion: formed by immediate neighbours, in a radio of 3 Km; focal regions 

and subregions are considered affected areas; 

Surveillance area: outside the former, up to a distance of 10 Km. 

Survey design 2001: 
This was done in 2 stages: the first defined the amount of establishments to be 

surveyed, and the second, the amount of animals to be tested in each. 

To determine the size of each sample the statistica4 criteria of "CSURVEY° 

software was used, and the suppositions were established for each region. 

There were different survey objectives for each region, due to the way the 

disease presented itself during the recent epidemic: 

• Estimated prevalence in estates and infected animals, in those regions 

affected by the epidemic (central Mesopotamia) 

• Qetection of the disease in areas not affected or in which the number of 

cases were few and confined to few estates 

• Immunity estimation after vaccination, in all regions where vaccination is 

carried out. 

. . ;

111111 7111111,► 

- .... 

Suppositions: 

Estimated prevalence in cattle: 5% (1) 

Estimated prevalence in sheep: 2%(2) 

Confidence level: 95% 
(1) This percentage was reached considering the amount of animals exposed in 

the focal areas (2,4 million) respecting the total bovine population in both 

regions (49 million). 

(2) This percentage was reached considering the amount of sheep exposed in 

the focal areas (80000) respecting the total ovine population in both regions (4 

million). 

Premises to be sampled: 190 

Animals to be sampled: 2.850 cattle 

1.900 sheep 

North Vllest A Regions ! Cuyo: 

Suppositions: 

Prevalence of affected areas: 2% 

Prevalence inter-areas (infected animals): 5% 

Confidence level: 95% 

Premises to be sampled rveyed: 200 

Animals to be sampled: 3000 cattle 

2000 sheep 

„ , > .. 

Suppositions: 
Prevalence of affected areas: 2% 

Prevalence inter-areas (infected animals): 5% 

Confidence level: 95°10 

Premises to be sampled: 200 

Animals to be sampled: 2000 cattle (3) 

2000 sheep 

(3) In this area a smaller quantity of cattle were tested due to the greater 

quantity of existing sheep, as compared to other areas. 

In every case the establishments sampled were selected at random. 

As to pigs, they are not considered in systematic samples as these are carried 

out on susceptible species predominant in every region in which the studies are 

stratified. For this reason only cattle, sheep and goats are sampled, depending 

on the areas and epidemic situations. In case of directed sero9ogical surveys 

(those effected during risk situations) the existing susceptible species are taken 

into account at the time and the place. For instance, in August 2003 FNlD was 

suspected and later confirmed, in Tartagal, Salta, where most of the animals in 

the area were pigs, so these were sampled. 

93. Tables 4 to S presented clata on protective antibocty titers. Please 

provide a rationale for the category of protection (very high, high, 

aver-age, low) that is considered sufficient to protect a vaccinated anima[ 
against FMD. We noticeet lower protection percentages for the new strains 

A2000 and A2001 compared to other strains, particularly in the lovv 

protection category. Please clarify. 

Concerning the rational category of protected animals, it is considered sufficient 

that at least 80% of the susceptible population have an equal or superior titer of 

1.80al Elisa fl.(high and very high protection) against each virus contained in 

the vaccine. 

As to the Antibodies titers against A 2000 and A 2001 strains, it is important to 

know that these strains were incorporated as vaccine strains in 2001 because 

of their homologation with field strains at work at this moment, they were not 

selected because of their adaptability to vaccine production systems. The ample 

immunogenic range of the vaccine used, guarantees satisfactory protection 

expectations. 

•! your submission, operational.l'l..i ..e ' duringsamplecollection 

n .R identification . t: • 'temperatureproblems thatoccurred 

laboratorywerementioned. ) e _ d. . -R' these problemsi'explain 

the ' • s or measures taken:: ocorrect and prevent such R • •,': e 

This comment belongs, as do the follovving ones, to the serological survey 

2002. At the time the former survey vvas being developed, the final analysis of 

all details had not been finished and the information was not complete. For this 

reason the ° Serologicai Survey 2002 — Evaluation of the epidemiological