The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code consists of standards, guidelines, and recommendations developed by a commission that uses the expertise of internationally renowned specialists. Member countries agree to use recommended health measures in export and import regulations to avoid the spread of serious diseases in animals while avoiding unjustified barriers to trade. Since the OIE codes are now the foundation of WTO and most bilateral trade agreements, it’s much more important that valid science and practical trade considerations be used in their development. It’s also much more important that the affected industries be involved in analyzing proposed changes in the code and provide input to government officials who represent the United States at the OIE.
The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission met in July 2004 to review various issues. Among them was the code’s bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) chapter and associated appendices. These documents have been re-written considering comments from member countries and the OIE ad hoc group of BSE experts that met in Paris in April 2004. The drafts are now available for review and additional comment before the next commission meeting in December 2004. The proposed drafts and committee reports can be viewed on the Internet at www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/ncie/oie.
The National Renderers Association (NRA) has met with other affected animal agriculture groups to analyze the proposed changes in the code’s BSE chapter and to prepare comments for consideration by the official U.S. representatives. In our analysis, most of the proposed revisions to the current BSE chapter provide more clarity in the chapter and recognize new advances that have significantly improved the understanding of the disease.
The commission is also offering the option of a new simplified BSE chapter that would reduce the five existing BSE risk categories down to three while maintaining the science-based requirements contained in the revised existing BSE chapter:
• Negligible BSE Risk without Mitigating Measures – delineated in Article 3 of the new BSE chapter, merging two articles in the current code;
• Negligible BSE Risk with Mitigating Measures – delineated in Article 4 of the new BSE chapter, also merging two articles in the current code;
• Undetermined BSE risk – delineated in Article 5 of the new BSE chapter, and not described in the current code.
In order to be “negligible BSE risk,” a combination of surveillance and risk assessment would be required, and criteria for the categories would need to be in place for an appropriate period of time. With the three proposed categories being risk-based, there would be less opportunity for subjective interpretation by countries, and with specified surveillance requirements, a country could not claim they were free of BSE or controlling BSE while not actively looking for it. The NRA and other U.S. industry groups support the simplified chapter, but are unsure if enough countries will agree to ensure its adoption. On the other hand, the proposed changes in the existing chapter bring it reasonably in line with most U.S. positions on BSE control and trade rules and it is acceptable if the simplified chapter is not adopted.
Proposed changes the U.S. industry endorses include changing requirements for small intestine removal so that only the distal ileum need be removed, and requiring surveillance and risk assessments as part of documentation of negligible BSE risk.
The U.S. industry would like to see these additional changes or clarifications:
• Recommend criteria to determine a country’s enforcement of a feed ban, such as necessary regulation, level of compliance, frequency of inspections, and evidence of actions based upon inspections.
• The BSE code should offer guidance on the design of statistically valid and science-based surveillance programs. Many countries seem to believe they must conduct extremely large surveillance efforts indicating a misunderstanding of these concepts.
• “Protein free tallow” should be clearly defined as tallow with less than 0.15 percent insoluble impurities, and required analytical methods for determining insoluble impurities should include the method widely used in industry and spelled out by the AOAC International (formerly known as the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists) rather than the expensive and cumbersome Codex method.
• When the code refers to meat and bone meal, it should be clear that it refers to ruminant products.
• Clarification of language requiring identification, monitoring, and tracking of cohorts and herd mates of BSE cases. The suggested language seems to unnecessarily require destruction of these animals in the end. The commission probably intended the destruction of these animals if BSE risk is indicated after continued observation and testing.
• Temperature and pressure minimums for rendering should be required only in countries where BSE is known to exist in domestic populations of cattle.
We are optimistic that international BSE standards are heading in the right direction, even if change in the OIE code takes a long time. However, each country is still the ultimate gatekeeper of their imports. Many current embargos of products currently based on BSE or low pathogenic avian influenza concerns do not follow the OIE guidelines. There are still far too many trade barriers disguised as food safety or animal health actions. Disciplined adherence to the OIE guidelines, and enforcement of these points of trade agreements, are the only way to ensure free and fair trade in these SPS matters. This means the United States as well. We must resist the urge to use another country’s animal disease status as a chance to boost domestic prices when appropriate (meaning OIE-sanctioned) measures are being followed.
International Report - December 2004 Render