VZCZCXYZ0032
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHMO #3525/01 3401403
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 051403Z DEC 08
FM AMEMBASSY MOSCOW
TO RUEHRC/USDA FAS WASHDC PRIORITY 5412
INFO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1004
RUEHVI/AMEMBASSY VIENNA 4693
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 5245

UNCLAS MOSCOW 003525 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
USDA FAS FOR OCRA/KUYPERS; OSTA/HAMILTON, BEAN; 
ONA/SALLYARDS, MURPHY 
PASS FSIS/JONES, DUTROW 
PASS APHIS/MITCHELL 
STATE FOR EUR/RUS, EB/ATP/SINGER 
STATE PASS USTR FOR CHATTIN 
BRUSSELS PASS APHIS/FERNANDEZ 
VIENNA PASS APHIS/TANAKA 
GENEVA FOR USTR 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAGR ETRD TBIO WTO RS
SUBJECT: RUSSIAN VET SERVICE REQUESTS 
CONSULTATIONS WITH USDA 
 
REF: A) HANSEN/DUTROW EMAIL 12/4/08, B) MOSCOW 
3181, C) MOSCOW 2949 
 
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: Russian Chief Veterinary 
Officer Nikolay Vlasov has requested, via 
official letter, consultations with USDA's Food 
Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) in Moscow 
before December 20, 2008 to discuss Russian 
concerns with the quality and safety of U.S. meat 
and poultry shipments to Russia.  In addition, 
Russian Federal Veterinary and Phytosanitary 
Surveillance Service (VPSS) reps would like to 
discuss issues with the interpretation of the 
agriculture-related November 2006 bilateral 
agreements, including the side letter on 
inspections that granted FSIS the authority to 
independently certify that U.S. meat and poultry 
plants meet Russian requirements and are eligible 
for export.  An original scanned copy and 
courtesy translation of the letter were sent to 
FSIS and FAS (REF A). An informal embassy 
translation of the letter follows.  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (SBU) BEGIN TEXT: 
December 4, 2008 
FS-NV-2/12318 
 
Assistant Administrator 
Office of International Affairs 
USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) 
Dr. Ronald K. Jones 
 
The Federal Veterinary and Phytosanitary 
Surveillance Service (VPSS) extends its warm 
regards to the Food Safety and Inspection Service 
(FSIS).  In response to your letter November 10, 
2008, I inform you of the following: 
 
VPSS supports FSIS' point of view regarding the 
importance of trade of meat and fresh meat 
products between the Russian Federation and the 
United States and the necessity to continue the 
dialogue on actual issues in the realm of 
veterinary surveillance. 
 
VPSS has concerns about the validity of FSIS' 
guarantees that U.S. meat producing 
establishments are compliant with Russian 
veterinary requirements and norms.  We base these 
concerns on the results of recent joint audit of 
poultry and pork establishments and also on the 
results of monitoring tests for prohibited and 
harmful residues.  The relevant information has 
repeatedly been sent to FSIS. 
 
According to international standards, the 
veterinary services of the importing country has 
the right to be sure that the export certificates 
are issued with the appropriate level of safety 
guarantees and the official veterinarians who 
issue the veterinary certificates should know 
everything about the products subject to 
certification. 
 
In this connection, VPSS collected some data that 
cause much concern.  For instance, in your letter 
of November 10, 2008, information was presented 
that FSIS specialists do not require that Russian 
veterinary requirements and norms are met.  Apart 
from causing us to doubt the competency of FSIS 
specialists, it results in detention of U.S. 
animal-origin products by federal control 
agencies of the Russian Federation. 
 
According to international veterinary norms, an 
importing country has the right to require 
 
guarantees that the information being provided by 
the veterinary services of the exporting country 
are impartial, reliable and precise.  Therefore, 
the general meaning of basic statements in export 
certificates and the checklists of audited 
establishments that have been negotiated between 
Russia and the United States do not prevent the 
procedure of inspection of the relevant entities 
(manufacturers of animal-origin products, 
farms/suppliers of animals for slaughter, and the 
initial documents at the plants and farms).  It 
is the only way to evaluate the overall level of 
animal health control, ability to trace back to 
the origin of meat products, overall capabilities 
of laboratory tests, quality of treatment of 
animals, control of the administration of 
veterinary medicines, and the implementation of 
other important aspects of the chain which are 
critical in maintaining trust between our 
services.  The majority of issues that were 
raised in your letter of November 10, 2008 would 
be solved this way. 
 
The maximum residue levels of prohibited 
and harmful substances in products of animal 
origin are stipulated in the actual legislation 
of the Russian Federation for products of Russian 
and foreign suppliers.  Products of animal origin 
that arrive to our ports that do not comply with 
those requirements are not allowed in the market. 
Therefore, we completely follow the equivalency 
principle regarding imported goods. 
 
In spite of affirmations by FSIS representatives 
that U.S. meat-processing establishments eligible 
for the export of products to the Russian 
Federation are certified as meetiBc .R.TcXQQce with the Russian norms.  Therefore, we 
cannot be sure that veterinary products imported 
from the United States to the Russian Federation 
comply with the Russian norms and regulations 
even if we receive FSIS guarantees.  We do not 
understand what specific documents/criteria are 
used as a basis for FSIS officials to sign 
veterinary certificates on meat and meat products 
exported from the United States to the Russian 
Federation guaranteeing the complete 
implementation of Russian veterinary-sanitary 
requirements and norms. 
 
In this connection, we consider it is necessary 
to discuss the problems mentioned above during a 
face-to-face meeting. In our letters FS-NV-2/9932 
of October 1, 2008 and FS-AS-2/10864 of October 
24, 2008, we informed FSIS that VPSS is ready to 
conduct consultations in Moscow after November 
20, 2008.  Unfortunately, we have not received 
proposals from the American side regarding the 
matter. 
 
At the same time, VPSS thanks FSIS for the 
invitation to visit Washington on December 4-5, 
2008, as was stated in your letter of November 
25, 2008, to discuss issues of concern with the 
bilateral agreements that were signed in Hanoi on 
November 16, 2006, including issues on audits of 
meat-processing establishments. 
 
However, we plan such meetings in advance, making 
it impossible to conduct them this year after our 
business trips to Argentina, Chili, and Brazil. 
Therefore, we propose that an FSIS delegation 
come to Moscow anytime before December 20, 2008. 
 
 
Dr. Jones, let me assure you of my highest 
esteem. 
 
Deputy Head 
N.A. Vlasov 
END TEXT. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Post strongly encourages FSIS to send a 
team to Moscow for consultations with VPSS 
officials before December 20.  VPSS has already 
unilaterally backed out of the bilateral 
agreement on inspection that gave FSIS the 
authority to independently certify that U.S. meat 
and poultry plants meet Russian requirements and 
are eligible to export to Russia (REF B).  VPSS 
has also, on numerous occasions, questioned FSIS' 
competency to guarantee that U.S. meat and 
poultry shipments to Russia are safe and 
wholesome (REF C).  Progress on resolving the 
numerous sanitary and phyto-sanitary issues 
raised by VPSS are not likely to be resolved 
through further exchanges of letters, and, at 
this juncture, are better addressed through face- 
to-face meetings. 
 
BEYRLE