STC Number - 1
  Generate document   Go back   New search

Shelf-life requirements

Maintained by: Korea, Republic of
Raised by: Australia; Canada; United States of America
Supported by: Argentina; European Union
First date raised: June 1995 G/SPS/R/2 paras. 39-40
Dates subsequently raised: November 1995 (G/SPS/R/3 paras. 7-8)
May 1996 (G/SPS/R/5 paras. 42-44)
March 1997 (G/SPS/R/7 paras. 20-21)
July 1997 (G/SPS/R/8 paras. 8-9)
October 1997 (G/SPS/R/9/Rev.1 (EN), paras. 6-7; G/SPS/R/9 (FR, ES), paras. 6-7)
July 2001 (G/SPS/GEN/265 para. 17)
July 2001 (G/SPS/R/22 para. 127)
Number of times subsequently raised: 7
Relevant documents: G/SPS/N/KOR/9 G/SPS/W/27 G/SPS/W/41 G/SPS/W/43 G/SPS/GEN/40 G/SPS/GEN/265 WT/DS5/5; WT/DS20/6; RD/SPS/114; G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.1
Products covered: 0401 Milk and cream, not concentrated nor containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.; 0402 Milk and cream, concentrated or containing added sugar or other sweetening matter.; 2201 Waters, including natural or artificial mineral waters and aerated waters, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter nor flavoured; ice and snow.; 2202 Waters, including mineral waters and aerated waters, containing added sugar or other sweetening matter or flavoured, and other non-alcoholic beverages, not including fruit or vegetable juices of heading 20.09.
Primary subject keyword: Food safety
Keywords: Food safety; Good Offices/Consultations/Dispute Settlement; Human health
Status: Resolved
Solution: Dispute settlement DS5. Consultations requested on 3/05/1995 (WT/DS5/1). Mutually agreed solution notified on 20/07/1995 (WT/DS5/5). In July 2001, the United States (G/SPS/GEN/265) and Canada indicated that the issue had been resolved. Canada's complaint against Korea's restrictions on treatment methods for bottled water. Consultations requested on 8/11/1995 (WT/DS20/1). Mutually agreed solution notified on 24/04/1996 (WT/DS20/6). In October 2020, information was received from Australia on the resolution of this STC (RD/SPS/114, 29 October 2020).
Date reported as resolved: 05/11/2020

Extracts from SPS Committee meeting summary reports

In June 1995, the representative of the United States informed the Committee that his country had held consultations with the government of the Republic of Korea under the provision of Article 4 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding with regard to two matters relevant under the Agreement, the first relating to inspection and testing methods and the second concerning government mandated shelf-life (WT/DS3/1 of 26 April 1995 and WT/DS5/1 of 3 May 1995, respectively). The delegate also noted that Canada had joined the consultations related to shelf-life measures.

The representative of Korea informed the Committee that although the consultations had been productive and useful there remained a high degree of ambiguity and lack of clear guidance in the actual implementation of the Agreement. He noted that on most of the issues discussed during the consultations the parties had been unable to identify relevant international standards. Furthermore, there appeared to be a range of diverse practices maintained by different countries. Korea stressed that it was the task of the Committee to shed light on such aspects in the implementation of the Agreement, taking due consideration of the different levels of development among Members.

In November 1995, the delegate from the United States expressed serious concern that the Korean government had not, in its opinion, implemented the United States-Korean settlement on shelf-life as notified on 20 July (G/SPS/W/27). The full statement made by the United States, as well as the response from Korea, are reproduced in G/SPS/W/41 and /43, respectively. The Canadian and European Community representatives also expressed concern regarding access to the Korean market in this respect. Canada informed the Committee that it had requested Article XXII consultations with Korea relating to shelf-life determination for bottled water and the prohibition of the use of ozonation.

The Korean representative confirmed that bottled water was excluded from the United States Korea settlement. Korea was, however, willing to enter into consultations with Canada to solve the issue to the mutual benefit of both countries

In May 1996, the representative of Australia expressed serious concern with regard to Korea's sanitary regulations on ultra heat treated milk in consumer packs(UHT milk). Australia informed the Committee that Korea had agreed to move to a manufacturer's determined shelf life for approximately 50 products, including dairy products, as of 1 July 1996. However, shelf life for UHT milk remained government mandated at a substantially shorter period of time compared to the period commonly applied by most countries. Australia was unaware of any scientific justification for the limited shelf life period mandated in Korea. Korea was requested to treat UHT milk in the same way as other like products and permit a manufacturer's determined shelf life by 1 July 1996. Several delegations shared the Australian concern. One delegation pointed out that manufacturers' determined shelf life was consistent with Codex standards.

On a separate but related issue, the representative of Canada informed the Committee about a similar concern regarding bottled water, also in relation to Korea. Although a formal understanding had been reached with regard to some aspects of the issue, concerns on shelf life of bottled water remained outstanding. In this regard, Korea had not offered any time-table for moving to manufacturer determined shelf life on bottled water.

The representative of Korea informed the Committee that it would convey the concerns raised to the relevant authorities in Korea.

In March 1997, the representative of Australia recalled the on-going bilateral discussions between Australia and Korea regarding shelf-life requirements for Ultra Heat Treated (UHT) milk. Although the issue had first been raised at the Committee's May 1996 meeting, Korea had yet to implement a manufacturers' determined shelf-life for UHT milk. He reiterated that the current government-mandated shelf-life period of seven weeks was too short and not based on sound scientific evidence. In November 1996, the Australian government had provided a further submission of scientific nature to the Korean authorities, which had not been accepted. Subsequently, upon request, another submission had been provided and he urged Korea to process the recent submission in an expedient manner.

The representative of Korea informed the Committee that his authorities were reviewing the information provided by Australia. He noted that Korea's new system for shelf-life determination, which had been initiated in 1995, set a time frame for the implementation of manufacturers' determined shelf-life period for UHT milk.

In July 1997, the representative of Australia recalled the on-going bilateral discussions between Australia and Korea regarding shelf-life requirements for Ultra Heat Treated (UHT) milk. Australia expressed profound dissatisfaction with the current situation. It was noted that Korea's apparent deferral of action to bring certain of its measures into line with the requirements of the SPS Agreement had gone significantly beyond the two-year grace period in the implementation of certain provisions by developing countries. The Codex Alimentarius did not specify shelf-life for any food product and it was therefore assumed that manufacturers would determine shelf-life based on individual processing conditions. The representative of Australia noted that most importing government authorities accepted that the shelf-life of UHT milk could vary between 6 to 12 months, based on well-established scientific information. Korea had not provided any justification for its non-acceptance of manufacturers' determined shelf-life for UHT milk. Although Australia had received some tentative advice from Korea in 1996, there had been no progress on the issue by mid-1997. A number of delegations shared Australia's concerns. The representative of Canada reminded the Committee that his government had previously raised concerns regarding government mandated shelf-life requirements with respect to bottled water. The matter had been pursued bilaterally, but no resolution had been found.

The representative of Korea noted that his country's system for shelf-life determination, which had been initiated in 1995, set a time frame for the implementation of a manufacturer's determined shelf-life regime (notification G/SPS/N/KOR/9). Korea's manufacturers' determined shelf-life system was already applied to 260 out of 350 products and, according to plans, manufacturers' determined shelf-life would be applied to UHT milk by the end of 1998. The representative of Australia requested, in accordance with Article 5:8 of the SPS Agreement, a formal explanation from Korea as to why it was not possible to move immediately to manufacturers' determined shelf-life for UHT milk.

In October 1997, the representative of Australia indicated that his country had formally requested an explanation of the reasons why the Republic of Korea had not accepted Manufacturer Determined Shelf-Life (MDSL) for UHT milk. He expressed his authorities' disappointment with the Korean response, which did not meet the requirements of Article 5.8 of the SPS Agreement. He emphasized that Korea had accepted MDSL for a range of other products, including bulk UHT milk, and therefore must be cognizant of the scientific basis for this widely accepted practice. While Australia had submitted detailed information with respect to its own industry and consumer packages of UHT milk, Korea had not provided any justification for its non-acceptance of MDSL for this particular product. He requested that Korea give further consideration to its response and provide, at the earliest possible opportunity, a response which met the requirements of Article 5.8. The representatives of the United States and Argentina supported the Australian position, in particular in regard to Article 5.8 obligations.

The representative of Korea indicated that, as explained in previous occasions, the Korean government would apply Manufacturers Determined Shelf-Life to UHT milk by the end of 1998. However, his authorities were now reviewing the possibility of extending the current mandatory determined shelf-life of UHT milk, in accordance with the guideline on extension of food shelf-life, even before the end of 1998. To this end, the Korean authorities had already requested Australia to submit the data required under that guideline. Upon receipt of this data, the Korean government would make a thorough review of the issue. His government was fully aware of Article 5.8 and would possibly provide an explanation of the reasons for the measure now in place, when it made a final decision on this matter taking into consideration the requested supplementary data.

In July 2001, the United States indicated that it considered the trade concern to be resolved (G/SPS/GEN/265).

The representative of the United States introduced an update to the Secretariat document on specific trade concerns (G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.1). The United States had examined the issues it had raised in the Committee to determine whether the issues had been resolved. This exercise had shown that the SPS Committee was a useful forum to address and resolve trade issues. The US document presented the US view on the status of the relevant issues, and the United States was prepared to discuss other Members' views on this status.

In November 2020, the Secretariat informed that in September 2020 it had contacted all Members who had raised specific trade concerns (STCs) that had not been discussed in the previous year, to request an update on their status. In furtherance of this request, information was received from Australia on the resolution of this STC. The Secretariat indicated that the information received had been circulated in document RD/SPS/114 of 29 October 2020, and that the SPS IMS would be updated on this basis, using the date of the November 2020 SPS Committee meeting as the date of resolution of the relevant STCs.