UNITED

NATIONS

Distr.

GENERAL

TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/13

25 July 2001

ORIGINAL : ENGLISH

ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE

COMMITTEE FOR TRADE, INDUSTRY AND

ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT

Working Party on Standardization of

Perishable Produce and Quality Development

Specialized Section on Standardization of Meat

25-27 April 2001, Geneva

REPORT ON ITS TENTH SESSION

Executive summary

UNECE Standard for Bovine Carcase and Cuts: A colour version of the standard was published in cooperation with AUS-MEAT. The secretariat will publish black and white versions of the standard as addenda to this report. Working groups for the promotion and maintenance of the standard were formed.

Numbering system: A harmonized numbering system for all UNECE Standards for meat was agreed.

Draft UNECE Standard for Ovine Carcase and Cuts: The text was reviewed and a number of suggestions collected for the rapporteurs. The rapporteurs will submit a revised document for the next session. A meeting of rapporteurs will be held in Buenos Aires/Brussels from 1-2 October 2001.

Draft UNECE Standard for Poultry Meat: The draft standard was discussed and several suggestions made. Delegations were invited to send further comments to the Secretariat by 30 September 2001. A meeting of rapporteurs on poultry meat will take place in the United States (near Washington) from 29 to 31 October

UNECE Trademark for Meat: There was no consensus concerning the document presented by Australia. Some delegations questioned the usefulness of a trade mark. It was mentioned that information from the relevant Codex Alimentarius committee should be taken into account. Delegations were invited to send further comments to the secretariat before 30 September 2001

New work: Colour chips/ marketing cards, discussion on standards for other species (Turkey, Veal, Lama, Camel), discussion on products with added ingredients or size reduction.

GE.01-

Opening of the session

1.	The meeting was held in Geneva from 25 to 27 April 2001.

2.	The session was opened by the Deputy Director of the UNECE Trade Division, Mr. Hans Hansell, who welcomed the delegations to Geneva and congratulated them on the work that had been achieved especially the finalization of the UNECE Standard for Bovine Carcase and Cuts. He said it was a high quality publication which was sure to facilitate trade of bovine meat products. He thanked the delegation of Australia for their offer to publish the standard. He also congratulated the group on the cooperation with EAN International on the definition of a coding system for bovine products. He said that this opened new possibilities to include the products into a supply chain of electronic commerce.

3.	He informed delegations that standards to facilitate electronic commerce were developed in the United Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Commerce (UN/CEFACT) which was also serviced by the UNECE Trade Division.

4.	He also congratulated the delegations for the progress made on the ovine and poultry meat standards and thanked Mr. Pedro de Felicio from the State University of Campinas, the delegations of EAN International and EAN Brazil for the organization of the highly successful meeting of rapporteurs held in São Paulo last year. He wished the group all success for their deliberations.

Participation

5.	The session was attended by delegations of the following countries: Australia; Austria; Bolivia; France; Germany; Greece; Hungary; New Zealand; Poland; the Russian Federation; Switzerland; the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and Uruguay.

6.	Representatives of the following non-governmental organizations also participated: EAN Brazil and EAN International.

7.	A list of participants will be published on the home page of the Agricultural Standards Unit (http://www.unece.org/trade/agr).

Item 1:	Adoption of the Agenda

Document: TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/1

8.	The Meeting adopted the Provisional Agenda with the following comments:

-	document TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/4 was deleted;

-	documents TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/9 and 11 will only become available during the session due to problems with translation.

-	documents TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/7 and 10 were supplemented by consolidated versions containing the explanatory photographs and drawings.

Item 2:	Matters of Interest Arising Since the Ninth Session

Discussion of the work of the Specialized section by the Working Party and the Committee for Trade, Industry and Enterprise Development

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/2 (Secretariat)

9.	The Meeting took note of document TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/2 summing up the relevant outcome of the fourth session of the Committee for Trade, Industry and Enterprise Development and the fifty-sixth session of the Working Party on Standardization of Perishable Produce and Quality Development.

Summary report from the meeting of rapporteurs

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/3 (United States)

10.	The delegation of the United States introduced their document summing up the outcome of the meeting of rapporteurs on standardization of meat which was held in São Paulo, 24 to 27 September 2000.

Item 3:	UNECE Standard for Bovine Carcases and Cuts

Background documents:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2000/7/Add.1 (General requirements)

TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2000/7/Add.2 (Bovine specific section)

TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2000/7/Add.3 (Bovine specific cuts descriptions)

11.	The UNECE Standard for bovine carcases and cuts was adopted by the Working Party as presented in the Addenda to the report of the 9th session of the Specialized Section. Editorial amendments which have been made to the final publication will be reflected in the addenda to this report. These addenda will make reference to the page numbers in the colour publication (which is in English only) to facilitate its use to French and Russian speaking readers.

12.	It was agreed that for the Russian translation the UN translators would through the secretariat contact the Russian industry to ensure the quality of the translation (a similar procedure had been adopted with the French translators).

(a)	Publications issues

13.	Taking into account the different possibilities for publication of the colour version of the standard discussions were held between the bureau of the Specialized Section and the secretariat. In order to ensure a speedy high-quality publication and efficient promotion of the standard it was decided to accept the offer from AUS-MEAT to publish the standard on behalf of the Specialized Section. Free copies will be available to each participant as well as each member of the UNECE. Further copies can be obtained from AUS- MEAT on a cost recovery basis.

14.	The group congratulated the delegation of Australia for the excellent publication of the standard. The group agreed that it was very important that all countries promoted the use of this standard in their countries and that a version of the standard should be published on the Internet.

15.	The delegation of Poland enquired about the status of the standard. To them it seemed to be a draft because it was lacking an official publication number. They also pointed out that there was an inconsistency in the title pages of the three parts of the standard.

16.	A member of the secretariat clarified that the standard published by Australia contained the official version of the UNECE Bovine Carcase and Cuts Standard which had been contained in documents TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2000/7/Add.1-3 and subsequently adopted by the Working Party. Only small editorial amendments had been made which would be reflected in the addenda to this report (see also para. 11). He also said that a reference to the official report containing the adoption of the standard was included in the publication produced by Australia.

17. It was agreed that in the future all parts of the standard should have an ISBN number and that they should also bear an identification number according to the principles laid out in the General Requirements section 0.2.0. The titles of the different publications should be harmonized as follows:

-	UNECE Standards for Meat, Section 0, General requirements, MEAT:0/01/2001

-	UNECE Standards for Meat, Section 1a, Bovine Specific Requirements, MEAT:1a/01/2001

-	UNECE Standards for Meat, Section 1b, Bovine Carcase and Cuts descriptions, MEAT:1b/01/2001

-	UNECE Standards for Meat, Section 4a, Ovine Specific requirements, MEAT:4a/01/2001

-	etc.

18.	It was agreed that two working groups should be formed. One to discuss questions of promotion, publication and other language versions (Australia, Bolivia, EAN International, the United States and Uruguay) and a second dealing with the further development and maintenance of the bovine standard (Australia, EAN International, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States).

19.	The delegation of Bolivia announced that a great part of the standard had already been translated into Spanish.

20.	The delegation of Germany said that in order to use the standard it would be necessary to have the colour chips for meat colour, marbling and fat colour. The delegation of the United States said that their marbling cards were available from the United States Department of Agriculture. The delegation of Australia said that they were working on a computerized system for correlating colours.

21.	Following a question from the delegation of the Russian Federation it was clarified that provisions concerning mass of carcases had been taken out of the standard because they were felt to be too restrictive. The delegation of the Russian Federation acknowledged this information.

Item 4:	Draft UNECE Standard for Ovine Carcases and Cuts

Draft Ovine Carcases and Cuts Descriptions

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/7 (Australia, New Zealand)

22.	The draft was discussed on the basis a consolidated version (including) the photographs and drawings supplied by the rapporteur from Australia. The document contains the outcome of the discussions held at the last meeting of rapporteurs and subsequent bilateral discussions between Australia and New Zealand.

Foreword

23.	It was agreed that the foreword should be aligned to the foreword of the Bovine Standard - the new numbering according to para. 16 should be used. Duplications contained in the foreword of the bovine standard should be eliminated. The list of countries participating should be maintained because this served as indication for the credibility of the document.

24.	It was suggested by the delegations of France and the United Kingdom to consider a loose leaf format for the publication but it was indicated by the secretariat and the delegation from Australia (who declared themselves prepared to serve as publisher of the ovine standard should this be requested by the Specialized Section) that this would increase printing costs dramatically (mainly because thicker paper would have to be used for printing). It was decided that the publications working group would look at this issue.

Ovine Carcase and Cuts overview

25.	The delegation of the United Kingdom requested that cuts with different rib numbers should be assigned different item numbers. They also said that muscles should be numbered and referenced in the cuts descriptions (the numbering could be the same as in the bovine standard; the references in the cuts descriptions are not yet included in the bovine standard).

Table of cuts names in different languages

26.	All delegations were encouraged to supply additional language versions for this page.

Review of the cuts descriptions

27.	The Specialized Section reviewed the cuts descriptions one by one. The following general comments were made to be taken into account by the rapporteurs:

(a)	the drawings and photographs should be consistent; it should be clear what has been removed;

(b)	it was mentioned that there were many similar cuts included and asked if some of them could be removed for simplification; it was agreed to review the cuts but it was also mentioned that in trade the number of cuts used is increasing and the standard should reflect trade practice;

(c)	there should be some logic in the order of the item numbers.

(d)	it was decided that whenever possible, defaults for points requiring specification should be defined by the rapporteurs to facilitate establishment of a contract; if diverging from these, buyer and seller would have to mention them explicitly in the contract;

(e)	muscles should be mentioned and referenced whenever useful;

(f)	rib length is an important commercial information; it should be clearly defined how to measure it; a default should be specified;

(g)	frenching of ribs merits a different item number;

(h)	if the same cut is commercialized with different numbers of ribs there should be separate item numbers; a reasonable range for the number of ribs should be specified;

(i)	when an item is subdivided make sure that all resulting items have item numbers.

(j)	there should be a general description how ribs are counted (e.g. it should be specified that counting for ribs starts at the 13th rib);

(k)	different methods of cutting (knife or mechanical) might require different specifications;

(l)	all descriptions should be clear and contain sufficient detail to avoid confusion of the market

(m)	the angle of photographs should be harmonized to make them comparable.

28.	Items 4500, 4505,4720: provisions should be made for split carcases (in the European Union all ovine carcases of animal older than 12 months have to be cut in sides to remove the spinal cord).

29.	Item 4720: in the points requiring specification: add "or removed" to each point.

30.	Items 4957, 4900, 4955, 4960: these items had been added on request from the French delegation. The descriptions needed to be improved before discussing them in more detail.

31.	Item 4800: this item is half of item 4816 and should thus have the same points requiring specification

32.	Item 4830: the cut should be parallel to the cutting line that removes the shank.

33.	Item 4802: should be called: "leg shank off aitch bone removed"; the cutting line for shank removal should be parallel.

34.	Item 4806: should be called: "leg shank off chump off aitch bone removed"; the cutting line for shank removal should be parallel.

35.	Item 4821: delete "Inside retained or removed" from the points requiring specification; it should be mentioned that femur and leg tendon are removed.

36.	Item 4805: the specification "chump removal distance from hip joint"needs to be clarified; a new wording is needed.

37.	Item 5060: delete "heel muscle retained or removed" from the points requiring specification.

38.	Items 5061, 5070: identify lymph nodes to be removed; clarify these items.

39.	Item 5074: rename to "chump boneless".

40.	Item 4790: rename to "chump bone in".

41.	Item 5130: delete.

42.	Items 5030, 5031: a problem with the Russian translation of these items needs to be solved.

43.	Item 4910: there should be different pictures for the different items; item 4900 (saddle set) should be put closer to this item.

44.	Items 4935, 4938: the muscle name should be "longissimus"; the items should have the option not to be frenched.

45.	Item 5101: correct the french translation (it should not be "ligament"). The name of this cut should be reviewed and the muscle names included.

46.	Item 5150: "eye of short loin" was omitted; should be included in the next version.

47.	Item 5036: list the item numbers of the cuts mentioned in the description.

48.	Item 4840: the cut line needs to be specified.

49.	Item 4972: this item is obtained by splitting item 4960; it should be included in the overview at the beginning of the standard.

50.	Item 4960: the upper left photograph should be removed.

51.	Item 4990: more detail on the direction of the cut should be included; make sure it is square and not trapezoid;

52.	Item 4995: include "shank joint severed" in points requiring specification; it should be clarified that the main difference between 4980 and this item stems from dressing differences (neck string requirement)

53.	Items 5151, 5152: should be combined and called "eye of the forequarter"; length of eye muscles should be specified; different item numbers for different lengths should be defined;

54.	Item 5015: should be moved in association with items 5010/ 5011.

55.	Boneless ovine manufacturing bulk pack definition: the measure for lean meat (CL) should be explained and different internationally agreed methods to measure this values should be indicated. the choice of the method would be left to buyer and seller. Visual determination of lean content should be discouraged. Item numbers should be provided.

56.	Portion cuts: should have item numbers.

Draft Ovine Specific Standard

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/6 (Australia, New Zealand)

57.	The document was reviewed in detail by the Specialized Section. The following general comments were made:

-	The document should be numbered "Section 4a". The section s should be numbered 4.1.0, 4.2.0, etc.

58.	Section 4.1.0:	Will be harmonized with the foreword of the bovine standard.

59.	Section 4.2.0:	Delete the words "demonstrating a characteristic red colour". This text comes from the bovine standard and was considered not appropriate here.

60.	Section 4.4.0:	The footnote was deleted. The delegation of France said that the word "certification" according to ISO 8402 was reserved to denote accreditation in the area of quality assurance/improvement. In order avoid any conflict it was decided to use the expression "conformity assessment throughout the standards as the goal was to allow buyer and seller to agree on an independent authority for controlling conformity with the provisions of the standard. It was mentioned that consequently footnote 8 in 0.4.8 and footnote 1 in 1.4.0 should be deleted. Additionally the last pages of the bovine and ovine cuts descriptions should be rewritten to reflect this change (see Annex).

61.	Section 4.4.1:	The alternative was deleted to avoid confusion with the classes mandatory in the European Union. It was decided that there should be a maximum of 10 categories. The indication of a range was not considered necessary. The rapporteurs will prepare a new proposal.

62.	Section 4.4.2:	The text of the paragraph was replaced with the words: "These provisions are subject to agreement between buyer and seller."

63.	Section 4.4.3:	Replace "4.8" by "0.4.8".

64.	Section 4.4.3.1: In the first sentence "four categories" was replaced by "the following categories". It was mentioned that an ISO Standard (3914) form 1974 existed, defining ovine categories but that it was never updated. The paragraph on ovine secondary sexual characteristics was deleted.

65.	Section 4.4.3.3: There was a lengthy discussion on the naming of the slaughter system "stunning prior to bleeding" which is at present called "traditional" in the standards. Some delegations felt that the word "traditional" had connotations of quality and could be confusing. It was proposed to name this system "conventional" or not to give any name. The last word under "kosher" was changed to "specified" and under "Other" the beginning was amended to read "any other authorized".

66.	Section 4.4.3.4: It was decided to include a new bullet concerning "neck strung

carcases".

67.	Section 4.4.3.5: The rapporteurs will draft a sentence for this section.

68.	The delegation of the Russian Federation said that the temperature range for "chilled" was very large (-1.5 to 7 C ). In their opinion there might be problems with this large range because 7 C was quite a high temperature. They informed the meeting that in Russia the storage temperature for chilled was 0 C.

69.	The concern was shared by other members of the group but it was said that the standard tried not to impose but describe current practice in all continents. The 7 C maximum was used in the European Union and was useful if meat was processed directly after slaughter. It was decided to leave the range as it is so that buyer and seller agree on the temperature.

70.	It was decided to review the remaining text at the next session when more blanks had been filled by the rapporteurs.

Item 5:	Draft UNECE Standard for Poultry Meat

Proposed species-specific standard including product lists

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/9 (United States)

71.	The document contains the outcome of the initial discussions held at the meeting of rapporteurs in Brazil. Rapporteurs for this draft are Brazil, France, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Section 7.1.0:	The foreword will be aligned with the foreword in the bovine standard. Some text concerning the scope will be moved to 7.3.0.

72.	Section 7.4.0:	"certification requirements" was replaced by "conformity assessment".

73.	Section 7.5.0:	"traditional" was replaced by "conventional". The delegation of France said that the definitions contained in the European Commission directive for poultry meat were more complete and he reserved his position on this section until comments were received from the European Commission. It was mentioned that the last sentence in sub-sections (B) to (I) had been included so that buyer and seller could include any specific definition e.g. the one coming from the European Commission directive.

74.	Section 7.6.0: "traditional" was replaced by "conventional".

75.	Section 7.7.0:	The Russian delegation provided the correct translation of this section into

Russian.

76.	Section 7.8.1:	It should be clear in all languages that this is a chicken standard not a general poultry standard.

77.	Section 7.8.2:	The word "chickens" was replaced by "birds" (3 replacements).

78.	Proposed species-specific standard including product lists (continued)

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/9 (United States)

79.	Section 7.8.5:	Add at the end: " The name of the third party and the standard to be used shall be specified under additional product options." This information needs to be specified under additional product options as there is no space in the codes.

80.	Section 7.8.6:	Rewrite, because the term "certification" caused problems for several delegations.

81.	Section 7.8.8:	See also comments made under 7.5.5. it should be made clear that this standard is not superseding existing regulations. Input should be sought from the European Commission.

82.	Section 7.8.11:	This section specifies defaults for weight ranges for different pieces but does

not preclude buyer and seller from agreeing on different figures.

83.	Section 7.8.12:	The group felt that the inclusion of products with added ingredients and size reduction was a new approach (up to now only fresh meat had been discussed) and needed a thorough reflection. The delegation from the United States said that this was a common trading item in the United states and in South America and the products were added in the processing plant.

84.	Several delegations had firm reservations about including these items now but were not against discussing them in the future. They felt that it would be regrettable to delay the chicken standard which was well advanced because of lengthy discussions on these items.

85.	It was decided that for the moment the text for 7.8.12 and 7.8.13 would read: "This section will be further developed. Until that time buyer and seller may specify information related to these issues in the additional product options."

Chicken product description pages

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/10 (United States)

86.	A document containing the color photographs of the products had been prepared by the rapporteurs and was distributed at the meeting.

87.	The delegation of the United States introduced the document and said that:

-	it included all cuts commonly used in trade. Any other cuts were unusual and would have to be specified between buyer and seller;

-	throughout the document the drawings for cuts had been color coded to indicate the view (blue for dorsal; yellow for lateral; orange for breast);

-	the product code contained 4 digits, the first two coding the product and the second two coded the style;

-	there exists no objective method to measure skin color which depends on feeds and does not seem to be a big concern;

88.	The following comments were made:

-	the presentation and format should be aligned to the other standards;

-	the specification of the skin color should be stated once and not be repeated for each item;

-	the drawing for item 71501 should be corrected (it shows a neck instead of a tail).

-	all styles concerning mechanically deboned meat were deleted from the draft.

Revisions to the General Requirements adding sections for poultry

Document for this session:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/8 (United States)

89.	The delegation of the United States introduced their document. They said that efforts had been made to integrate General Requirements for poultry into the existing General Requirements. It had been realized though that their were only few common provisions.

90.	The delegation of Poland proposed to divide the standards for meat into separate parts: "UNECE Standards for mammalian/ red/ meat" and "UNECE Standards for poultry meat" to facilitate drafting of the general requirements.

91.	Because the general requirements needed for red meat and poultry meat are very different it was decided to have separate general requirements for poultry meat. These will be integrated into the overall numbering system.

92.	It was also mentioned that it might be necessary to define separate requirements for processed products.

93.	Section 0.5.1:	The delegation of France asked about regulatory requirements exact definitions and tolerances concerning these provisions. It was mentioned that a detailed regulation existed in the European Community but that it might be better to be not too specific here and to leave a range which could be closer defined by buyer and seller.

94.	Section 0.5.2:	(C)	It was mentioned that the presence of dry ice might lead to lower temperatures in products close to the packaging wall;

(D)	The section was renamed "lightly frozen". The rapporteurs will look into the question of reducing the temperature range after discussions with the industry. The Russian translation of this item needs to be corrected.

(H)	It has to be mentioned what measures can be used to avoid fraud (e.g. labeling provisions for the amount of water added) The rapporteurs will look at this item

95.	Section 0.5.3:	The delegation of the United States introduced this section which included a new approach. It had been realized that packaging issues were more complex in poultry meat than for bovine or ovine meat. It had not been possible to include the subject into the existing coding. The rapporteurs proposed therefore to define an additional packaging code, in which all properties of packagings could be included.

96.	This proposal was welcomed by the group. It was mentioned that packaging issues were also complex and important for processed products.

97.	The delegation of the Russian Federation mentioned that they were developing a film for

over wrapping. They will provide more information to the rapporteurs.

Conclusion

98.	The draft standard will be further discussed by the rapporteurs. Delegations were invited to consult with their technical experts and send any further comments to the secretariat before 30 September 2001.

Item 6:	UNECE trade mark for meat

Documents for this meeting:	TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/11(Australia)

TRADE/WP.7/GE.11/2001/12(United Kingdom, European Community)

99.	Initial discussions on preparing a draft protocol on conformity assessment (trade mark) have been held at the last sessions of the Specialized Section. The principle of the co-operation between the Specialized Section and the Working Party on Technical Harmonization and Standardization Policies (WP.6) was agreed by WP.7.

100.	The delegation of Australia presented their document. In each country buyer and seller should be able to agree on an authority which would verify that the standard was adhered to. In case of positive verification the UNECE trade mark could be awarded. They said that the document described the criteria an conformity assessment authority had to fulfill in order to be registered by the UNECE Specialized Section. They said that it described not any kind of legislation per se but an option which could be used by buyers and sellers.

101.	The delegation of the United Kingdom explained that in their view the use of a UN logo might lead to confusion in the market place. They said that they were not in principle against the option in the standard that buyer and seller can agree on an authority for conformity assessment.

102.	The delegation of the United States said that the Australian document followed ISO 61/65 and basically says what is expected of a certification authority.

103.	It was mentioned by other delegations that it was not clear how the process of registration would work. Additionally it was said that there were many legal issues to be solved to clarify to what extend the United Nations could be involved in this registration. Legal advice might be sought from the legal counsel of the United Nations. The work done by the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Import and Export Food Inspection and Certification System should be taken into account.

104.	The delegation of the United States said that in their country first the authority in question has to supply a manual. On this basis a desk review is done and then an onsite audit.

105.	Delegations were invited to reflect on this issue and to provide comments to the secretariat until 30 September 2001.

Item 7:	Preparation of the meetings of rapporteurs and the next session of the Specialized

Section

(a)	Date and place

106.	The next sessions of the meetings of rapporteurs and the Specialized Section are planned as follows:

-	Ovine meat: Buenos Aires (with a parallel meeting in Brussels), 1-2 October 2001

-	Poultry meat: Washington 29-31 October 2001

-	Specialized Section: Geneva, 8-10 April 2002

(b)	Future Work

107.	The following items will be put on the agenda of the next session of the Specialized section:

-	finalization of the ovine and poultry standards

-	development of colour chips/ marketing cards with the goal of achieving a harmonized standard in the future;

-	review of the porcine coding (rapporteurs: United Kingdom, EAN International);

-	elaboration of standards for other species (e.g., Turkey, Veal, Lama, Camel) - interested delegations were invited to prepare discussion papers for the next session.

-	UNECE trademark

-	Publication, promotion and application issues

-	Maintenance of the standards

-	products with added ingredients and size reduction.

Item 11:	Election of officers

108.	The Specialized Section reelected Mr. Barry Carpenter (United States) as its Chairman and Mr.

Ian King (Australia) as its Vice-Chairman.

Item 12:	Adoption of the report

109.	The Specialized Section adopted the report of its tenth session on the basis of a draft prepared by the secretariat.

Task list

Task	Responsible	Date
Establish contact between the Russian delegation and the Russian translators to ensure quality of the translations	Secretariat	asap
Publish a web version of the standard as well as black and white versions in other languages	Secretariat, Australia	asap
Comments on the poultry standard to the secretariat	all delegations	30 September 2001
Comments on the trade mark to the secretariat	all delegations	30 September 2001
Meeting of rapporteurs on ovine meat: Buenos Aires/ Brussels, 1-2 October 2001
Meeting of rapporteurs on poultry meat: Washington, 29-31 October 2001
Submit a revised draft standard for ovine carcases and cuts	Rapporteurs	28 January 2002
Submit a revised draft standard for poultry	Rapporteurs	28 January 2002
Provide information on a film for over wrapping	Russian Federation	28 January 2002
Discussion papers on standards for other species (e.g. Turkey, Veal, Lama, Camel)	all delegations	28 January 2002
Proposals for a revision of the porcine standard	United Kingdom, EAN International	28 January 2002
Proposals for colour chips/ marketing cards	all delegations	28 January 2002
11th session of the Specialized Section on Standardization of Meat (GE.11): Geneva, 8 to 10 April 2002