RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/SPS/R/2
18July1995
ORGANIZATION(95-2030)
Committee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures
SUMMARY OFTHE MEETING HELD ON
26-27 JUNE 1995
Note bytheSecretariat
1. TheCommittee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures (the"Committee") helditssecond
meeting on26-27 June1995 under thechairmanship ofAmbassador KariBergholm (Finland).
2. Withadditions regarding points toberaised under Other Business, theagenda ofthemeeting,
contained inWTO/AIR/103, wasadopted.
Rules ofProcedure
3. Pending finalization oftheRules ofProcedure bytheCouncil onTrade inGoods, theCommittee
decided tocontinue tooperate onthebasis oftheworking procedures (G/SPS/1) agreed upon atthe
Committee 'sprevious meeting on29-30 March 1995.
Observers
4. TheCommittee agreed toencourage observer governments participating inthework ofthe
Committee toprovide information relevant totheimplementation oftheAgreement ontheApplication
ofSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures (the"Agreement") (G/SPS/3).
5. Concerningobservershipofintergovernmentalinternationalorganizations,theCommitteeagreed,
onanadhocbasis pending adoption offormal guidelines bytheGeneral Council, toinvite theFood
andAgriculture Organization (FAO) andtheWorld Health Organization (WHO) toparticipate as
observers inthepresent andsubsequent meetings oftheCommittee untilafinaldecision istaken on
thematter. TheCommittee agreed torevert totherequest forobserver status from theOECD and
theInter-American Institute forAgricultural Cooperation (IICA) atitsnextmeeting.
6. Therepresentative ofCanada suggested thattheCommittee should consider inviting the
International Standards Organization (ISO) toparticipate asanobserver given thatthework ofthe
ISOwasofincreasingimportanceandrelevancetotheCommittee.TheEuropeanCommunitysupported
thisview, andfurthermore, noted thesignificant amount ofwork, particularly intheplanthealth area,
which wascarried outbyregional organizations. TheCommittee agreed toconsider thequestion of
observer status onacase-by-case basis.G/SPS/R/2
Page2
Notification
7. TheCommittee agreed onclarifications totherecommended notification procedures
(G/SPS/12/Rev.1) andonaformat foremergency measures (G/SPS/4).
8. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Community presented apaper (G/SPS/W/14) onthe
implementation ofSPSnotification requirements bytheEuropean Community anditsMember states.
Hestressed thatallcomments byWTO Members should beaddressed toboththeCommunity Enquiry
Point andthecontact point intherelevant Member state. Further clarifications willbeprovided by
theEuropean Community inarevision ofitsdocument.
9. With regard toindividual notifications, itwasagreed thatquestions orconcerns relating to
anySPSmeasures which hadbeennotified inadvance ofameeting oftheCommittee would normally
beconsidered tobe"ontheagenda" ofeachmeeting. Members whowished todiscuss aparticular
notification wereurged, totheextent possible, tosoindicate totheSecretariat andthecountry concerned
asfaraspossible inadvance ofameeting. Shortly before eachmeeting theSecretariat willcirculate
adocument listing allnotifications received since theprior twomeetings; however copies ofall
notifications would notnormally beintheroom ateachmeeting. Delegations were reminded that
notifications were distributed onlytolocaldelegations andmissions.
10. TheNewZealand delegate raised anumber ofquestions about thelarge number ofMexican
SPSnotifications issued inlateMay1995. While alsoconcerned about thereason behind thehigh
volume ofnotifications themselves, NewZealand 'smain concern regarded thefactthatmany ofthe
notifications (either emergency standards orordinary SPSregulations) hadbeencirculated onlyafter
theentry intoforce ofthemeasures inquestion. Thelatesubmission ofnotifications hampered the
basic transparency objective oftheAgreement (Annex B),and,particularly, theopportunity forWTO
Members tocomment effectively ontheproposed measures. Furthermore, hepointed outthatparagraph
sixofAnnex BoftheAgreement required thatemergency measures benotified immediately andinclude
anexplanation ofthereasons forurgency. TheNewZealand delegate alsowondered whytheextension
(invalidity) ofexisting emergency measures could nothavebeennotified inadvance. Lastly, the
Committee wasinformed thatNewZealand wassubmitting bilateral comments toMalaysia withrespect
toSPSnotification G/SPS/N/MYS/1.
11. TherepresentativeofMexicoinformedtheCommitteethatthebulkofthenotificationssubmitted
wereaimed attheelimination ofvarious pestsanddiseases inMexico. Thenotifications wereextensions
ofmeasures applied in1994andhadbeennotified totheCommittee onlyforthesakeoftransparency.
TheMexican delegate doubted whether themeasures inquestion hadsignificant effects ontrade.
12. TheEuropean Community noted thattherecommended timeperiod tobeallowed forcomments
onnotifications, sixtydays, hadnotbeenrespected inallcases byMembers. Furthermore henoted
thatsome notifications were incomplete orincorrectly presented. Heinformed theCommittee that
theEuropean Community would shortly beproviding anumber ofnotifications intheveterinary field
asaresult oftheprocess ofharmonizing import requirements among Member states.
13. Asrequested bytheCommittee atitsMarch meeting, theSecretariat presented adocument
indicating problems arising withnotifications received (G/SPS/W/17).
14. TheSecretariat wasrequested toprepare alistofnational notification bodies, given thatEnquiry
Points were notnecessarily thenational authority designated asthenotification body.G/SPS/R/2
Page3
Monitoring ofUseofInternational Standards
15. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 12:4oftheAgreement requires theCommittee todevelop
aprocedure tomonitor theuseofinternational standards. Inthiscontext, following arequest bythe
Committee atitsMarch meeting, thestandard-setting organizations provided thelistsofinternational
standards contained inG/SPS/W/18 andCorr.1 (Codex); G/SPS/W/21 (OIE) andG/SPS/W/23 (IPPC).
TheCommittee expressed itsgratitude forthecooperation offered bytheabove-mentioned standard-
setting organizations.
16. Therepresentative oftheFAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission noted thatanyrelevant
information arising attheCodex Commission 'ssession during thefirstweek ofJuly1995 would be
conveyed totheCommittee, including thedecisions taken withregard tothose standards presented
foradoption atthemeeting. Heprovided aCodex document "Implementation oftheUruguay Round
ofMultilateral Trade Negotiations" (ALINORM 95/7Part2)containing information ontheacceptance
procedure forCodex standards.
17. Therepresentative oftheOIEpresented document G/SPS/W/21 andbrought totheCommittee 's
attention therecent adoption inMay1995 ofaninternational health codeforaquatic animals which
coveredfish,molluscsandcouldinthefutureincludecrustacea.Furthermore,hestressedtheprocedures
adopted bytheInternational Committee oftheOIEtorecognize countries freefrom certain animal
diseases, particularly Foot-and-Mouth Disease (FMD) andrinderpest. Finally, theOIErepresentative
informed thattheInternational Committee would consider atitsmeeting inMay1996thewayinwhich
OIErecommendations were applied byitsMembers inthecontext ofinternational trade.
18. Therepresentative ofUruguay proposed thateachMember submit alistofthose standards
andrecommendations which theyconsidered tobeofmajor trade importance. TheSecretariat could
thencompile asummary ofthese standards which could beputforward forMembers todetermine
theirposition inrelation tothese norms. TheUruguayan delegate suggested thatthiscould beafirst
stepindeciding which international standards were most important forthework oftheCommittee.
19. TheEuropean Community informed theCommittee thatitwasintheprocess ofpreparing a
document onthesubject ofmonitoring international standards andthatthedocument would beissued
inadvance ofthenextCommittee meeting.
20. Anumber ofdelegations suggested theCommittee should await thepaper being prepared by
theEuropean Community before taking anydecision onhowwork inthisareashould beadvanced.
TheEuropean Community wasurged tosubmit thepaper wellinadvance ofthenextmeeting aswell
astotakeintoconsideration thepoints discussed. TheChairman noted thatitwould beuseful ifthe
paper were notonlyareflection ofprinciples butalsoincluded concrete proposals onhowtotackle
theproblem onapractical basis.
RiskAssessment
21. TheChairman recalled thatattheMarch meeting therepresentatives oftheOIE, Codex and
IPPChadprovidedinformationregardingtheuseofriskanalysisintheirwork(G/SPS/W/8,G/SPS/W/9
andG/SPS/W/10, respectively). TheCommittee again thanked thestandard-setting organizations for
theircontributions andencouraged themtoproceed inthedevelopment ofinternational riskmanagement
methodologies andtokeeptheCommittee uptodateontheirresults.G/SPS/R/2
Page4
22. NewZealand submitted apaper onitsuseofriskassessment procedures (G/SPS/W/20). This
paper exemplifies procedures within theareaofanimal quarantine (salmon imported from Canada),
plant materials (pestintroduction), andfoodsafety.
23. Therepresentative ofCanada indicated theneedtodistinguish between thebiological aspects
ofrisk,asdescribed inNewZealand 'spaper, andtheassociated political concerns. Healsonoted
thatCanada andArgentina were intheprocess ofundertaking quantitative riskassessment (Canada
onfoot-and-mouth disease inArgentina andArgentina onporcine respiratory syndrome inCanada).
TherepresentativesofUruguayandArgentinaindicatedthattheywereinvolvedinbilateralworkrelevant
totheAgreement withrespect tobeefexports destined totheUnited States.
24. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Community agreed thatnon-quantitative riskassessment
could be"objective, repeatable andtransparent" (asstated intheNewZealand paper), andnoted the
importance ofquantitative riskassessment inSPSmeasures. Furthermore, heinformed theCommittee
thattheEuropean Community wasintheprocess ofestablishing apestriskanalysis ontheintroduction
ofpine-wood nematode fromNorth America. Thiswork would represent amodel onhowpest-risk
analysis could becarried outinthefuture using themostrecent guidelines which havebeendeveloped
bytheIPPC andFAO.
25. Therepresentative ofArgentina raised aquestion regarding theroleoftheCommittee inthe
areaofriskassessment. Hisconcern wasthatthework oftheCommittee wasbecoming tootechnical
andthattheissues stilltobesettled should more appropriately beaddressed bythestandard-setting
organizations. Itwasobserved thatitwasnotthetaskoftheCommittee todevelop riskassessment
methodologies; however, itwasuptotheMember Stategovernments tobasetheirdecisions onrisk
assessmentwhiletakingintoaccountriskassessmenttechniquesdevelopedbytherelevantstandard-setting
organizations (Article 5:1oftheAgreement). Considering theCommittee 'searly stage ofwork and
thatriskassessment wasanemerging discipline where theconcepts builtintotheAgreement andused
inatradeenvironment werenew,itwasuseful tomany Members oftheCommittee toshare knowledge
andexperiences withregard tohowgovernments applied riskanalysis procedures. Itwasagreed that
theCommittee would, forthetimebeing, andwiththeobjective ofenriching mutual understanding
inthearea, keeptheissue ofriskassessment onitsagenda.
26. TheAustralian delegation tabled apaper onriskassessment andmanagement insetting food
standards inAustralia fordiscussion atthenextmeeting oftheCommittee (G/SPS/W/24).
Consistency inRiskManagement
27. TheChairman recalled thatArticle 5:5oftheAgreement requires theCommittee todevelop
guidelines tofurther theimplementation ofconsistency inriskmanagement. AtitsMarch meeting,
theCommittee initiated adiscussion ofthisissuebased onanote(G/SPS/W/5) provided byAustralia.
Asrequested atthatmeeting, theSecretariat hadprepared abackground paper describing thenegotiating
history ofthisprovision (G/SPS/W/16). Theobjective ofthepaper wastofurther Members '
understanding ofthereasons whythisprovision wasincluded intheAgreement andtoaddress the
tasks before theCommittee inthisarea.
28. Therepresentative oftheUnited States noted thatthere could besome confusion ofterms,
andthatitmight beuseful todevelop acommon understanding ofthemeaning oftheterms frequently
usedintheCommittee.
29. Thedelegate ofArgentina indicated thatthere wereseveral levels ofconsistency andnotall
ofthemwererelevant tothework oftheCommittee. Inconsistencies inthewaysacountry interpretedG/SPS/R/2
Page5
aninternational standard, orthewayriskassessment methodologies andprocedures weredeveloped,
weretechnical issues better dealtwithatregional levelorbytherelevant international standard-setting
organizations. However, withregard totheapplication ofaninternational standard, theCommittee 's
rolewasclearasaninconsistent approach inthewayacountry applied aninternational standard could
wellleadtoabarrier totrade. Shestressed thattheapplication ofaninternational standard perse
didnotensure consistency inriskmanagement. There wasaneedtodistinguish between thesedifferent
levels, ortypes, ofconsistency inorder tobetter direct thework oftheCommittee. Riskassessment
wasatechnical toolwhich would produce anumber ofalternative options forthedecision-making
powers toactupon. Argentina proposed thattheCommittee request allMembers toreport ontheir
current practices toensure consistency intheapplication ofinternational standards.
30. Therepresentative ofJapan stressed thatthecriteria forhuman lifeandhealth, andthatfor
animal andplantlifeandhealth, should bekeptseparate asstipulated intheAgreement. Hesuggested
thattheCommittee should firstdiscuss consistency onanational level before continuing ontothe
international level. Theimporting country always boretheriskofintroduction ofpests ordiseases;
soitwasessential thattheexporting country provides theimporting country withtheinformation
necessary fortheimporting country toconduct anappropriate riskassessment. Furthermore henoted
thatriskassessment washighly technical andthatclose cooperation withtherelevant standard-setting
organizations wasimportant.
31. TheCommittee agreed thattheheading oftheagenda item"Consistency inriskmanagement"
bechanged to"Consistency intheapplication oftheconcept oftheappropriate levelofprotection"
forthenextmeeting.
Identification ofPractices forExchange ofInformation
32. TheChairman recalled thatattheMarch meeting thediscussion under thisagenda itemhad
beenbased onaninformal paper fromtheUnited States, which hadbeendistributed totheCommittee
inarevised form(G/SPS/W/25). Thispaper described howtheexchange ofinformation isundertaken
withrespect toplant-related commodities, animal products andliveanimals. NewZealand announced
thatitwould circulate asimilar paper regarding bilateral quarantine agreements asapplied intheplant
area.
33. TheChairman noted thattheAgreement covered several provisions requiring theexchange
ofinformation, including requirements concerning approval procedures andrecognition ofpest-and
disease-free areas, aswellastheexchange ofinformation concerning thedetermination ofequivalence.
34. TheAustralian delegate raised thequestion regarding whatinformation would bereasonable
foranimporting country torequest, and,secondly, whatobligations theexporting country would have
tosupply suchinformation. Hepointed outthatinformation ontheconventional practice between
countriesinthisregardcouldtoalargeextentbeattainedfromtherelevantstandard-settingorganizations,
andagreed todraftsucharequest. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Community agreed withthe
needfordiscipline regarding howmuch information anexporting country would beobliged tosupply
inorder tosatisfy animporting country 'sdemands.
35. Therepresentative oftheOIEsuggested thattheCommittee carefully consider thenature of
therelationship between therelevant standard-setting organizations andtheCommittee andhowwork
between these organizations should beconducted inthefuture.G/SPS/R/2
Page6
Technical Assistance
36. TheChairman recalled thatobserver organizations hadreported ontheirtechnical assistance
activities attheMarch meeting andthatthesestatements hadbeencirculated asdocuments G/SPS/W/8
andG/SPS/W/11. Inthisregard, theSecretariat made abriefpresentation concerning WTO activities,
other thantheday-to-day Geneva-based technical assistance, aimed atproviding information and
assistance tothose seeking it:
(i) Regional Technical Seminars fordeveloping countries .These weredescribed bytheSecretariat
attheMarch meeting oftheCommittee (G/SPS/R/1, page4).InMay1995 aseminar was
heldinMexico andtwoarescheduled forNovember 1995 inAfrica. Thefirstofthese will
beheldinPretoria, South Africa andtheother inDakar, Senegal. Again itwasstressed that
funding posed aserious problem withregard totheparticipation ofAfrican countries.
(ii) Seminar organized byOIE.Atthisseminar concerning riskanalysis withregards toanimal
health andtrade heldon23May1995, theWTO Secretariat addressed SPSquestions, with
particular emphasis onimplications fordeveloping countries.
(iii) Special Session onNotification Requirements .Asession onallWTO notification requirements,
including those related totheAgreement, hadbeenheldon16May1995 inGeneva.
37. TheKorean delegate underscored thedifficulty experienced bydeveloping countries infully
understanding theconcepts, terms andconditions oftheAgreement. Referring toArticle 9ofthe
Agreement, heurged Members toreinforce theiractivities intheareaoftechnical assistance.
Other Business
Internal Regulatory Processes
38. TheJapanese delegation presented apaper onitsregulatory framework andprocesses for
development ofsanitary andphytosanitary measures (G/SPS/W/26).
Consultations
39. Therepresentative oftheUnited States informed theCommittee thathiscountry hadheld
consultations withthegovernment oftheRepublic ofKorea under theprovision ofArticle 4ofthe
Dispute Settlement Understanding withregard totwomatters relevant under theAgreement, thefirst
relating toinspection andtesting methods andthesecond concerning government mandated shelf-life
(WT/DS3/1 of26April 1995andWT/DS5/1 of3May1995, respectively). Thedelegate alsonoted
thatCanada hadjoined theconsultations related toshelf-life measures.
40. Therepresentative ofKorea informed theCommittee thatalthough theconsultations hadbeen
productive anduseful thereremained ahighdegree ofambiguity andlackofclearguidance intheactual
implementation oftheAgreement. Henoted thatonmostoftheissues discussed during theconsultations
theparties hadbeenunable toidentify relevant international standards. Furthermore, there appeared
tobearange ofdiverse practices maintained bydifferent countries. Korea stressed thatitwasthe
taskoftheCommittee toshedlightonsuchaspects intheimplementation oftheAgreement, taking
dueconsideration ofthedifferent levels ofdevelopment among Members.G/SPS/R/2
Page7
Other
41. TheChairman drew theCommittee 'sattention toapaper entitled: "Decisions taken bythe
OIEInternational Committee anthe63rdGeneral Session Related totheSPSAgreement", provided
bytheOIE(G/SPS/W/22).
Date andProposed Agenda ofNext Meeting
42. TheChairman noted thatconsultations werecontinuing withregard tothespecial meeting on
transparency, which theCommittee hadsuggested beorganized jointly withtheTBTCommittee to
discuss thetechnical implementation ofthetransparency provisions. Theintention remained tohave
suchajointmeeting inOctober 1995.
43. ThenextregularmeetingoftheCommitteewastentativelyscheduledfor15-16November1995.
44. TheChairman proposed thatsome newitems beadded totheagenda forthenextmeeting.
Members could beinvited toprovide information regarding theirimplementation oftheAgreement,
suchasthatprovided byJapan andother Members ontheirregulatory procedures. Itmight alsobe
useful toregularly request therelevant standard-setting observer organizations toprovide information
onanymatters ofparticular interest totheCommittee which mayarisefrom theirwork butnotbe
covered under other items oftheagenda. Itwasalsosuggested thatissues regarding Enquiry Points
beconsidered bytheCommittee, particularly anymatters which might arisefromtheproposed special
meeting ontransparency.
45. Thefollowing provisional agenda wasagreed:
A. Adoption oftheagenda
B. Observers
C. Implementation oftheAgreement --information from Members
D. Matters ofinterest arising from thework ofobserver organizations
E. Transparency:
Enquiry Points
Notification -Consideration ofspecific notifications received
F. Monitoring ofuseofinternational standards
G. Riskassessment
H. Consistency intheapplication oftheconcept oftheappropriate level of
protection
I. Identification ofpractices forexchange ofinformation
J. Technical assistance
K. Other business
L. Dateandagenda ofnextmeeting