import measures on apples due to fire blight in july 2001 the united states maintained that japans requirements for imported apples were unduly restrictive. the united states and japan had agreed on joint scientific research on apples and fire blight and the united states was disappointed that japan had not relaxed its import restrictions in accordance with the results of the research. new zealand agreed that japans phytosanitary measures with respect to fire blight were not technically justifiable and should be modified accordingly. new zealand intended to engage japan in further bilateral discussions on this issue. chile requested that the follow-u to this situation be reported to the committee. japan confirmed that the joint research had been completed and indicated that a risk analysis was being conducted based on the results. there were some difficulties in finalizing the evaluation based solely on these results. japan desired to continue the technical discussion between plant health authorities of both countries. in october 2001 the united states reported on bilateral discussions on japans quarantine procedures on us apples. although joint scientific research demonstrated that mature symptom-less fruit was not a pathway for the transmission of fire blight a mutually acceptable technical solution had not been found. the united states was considering what further steps including dispute settlement it could take on the matter. new zealand announced it would also seek bilateral discussions with japan on its import requirements for apples. japan stated that in order to complete the technical evaluation additional information had been requested from the united states. further bilateral contacts between the us and japanese experts were considered appropriate. in march 2002 the united states recalled that japans quarantine restrictions prohibited apple imports from orchards in which any fire blight had been detected and required three annual inspections of us orchards for the presence of fire blight disqualification from export if fire blight were detected in a 500-meter buffer zone around the orchard and post-harvest treatment with chlorine. the united states considered that these restrictions were not consistent with japans obligations under article 11 of the gatt or under the sps agreement. the united states had requested consultations under articles 1 and 4 of the dispute settlement understanding on 1 march 2002. new zealand and the european communities also expressed the view that japans restrictions on apples were more trade restrictive than necessary and stated their interest in a resolution of this issue. japan explained that the risk from the entry of fire blight was very serious. the united states had not provided japan with sufficient scientific evidence to amend its phytosanitary measures. at a bilateral expert meeting in october 2001 japan had identified the data that was needed and japan hoped that the technical data would be provided by the united states so as to allow a resolution of this issue. in june 2002 the united states reported that his country had requested the establishment of a dispute resolution panel with respect to japans measures related to fire blight. new zealand indicated that japans measures lacked scientific justification and limited nz exports of horticultural products. new zealand and the european communities indicated that their countries shared the us concerns and would participate in the dispute resolution procedure as third parties. japan indicated that during the bilateral consultations held following the us request japan had indicated its willingness to consider relevant data submitted by the united states however nothing had been provided. fire blight was a serious plant quarantine disease which did not occur in japan and which could severely damage the production of apples pears and other fruits. japans measures were indispensable in order to prevent the entry of fire blight and