restrictions on us poultry exports in october 2006 the united states raised concerns regarding the delay by the european communities to finalize and implement a draft regulation that approved antimicrobial treatments amts on poultry subject to certain restrictions. the united states recalled that in august 1997 the european communities stopped imports of us poultry meat on the basis of the use of amts in its production. however in january 2006 the european food safety authority efsa had concluded that the antimicrobial washes at issue were safe confirming an april 2003 opinion by the ec scientific committee on veterinary measures related to public health. despite the decision by the european communities to propose new legislation that provided the framework to approve these products for use on poultry the european communities had yet to approve importation of poultry treated with these products. the united states urged the european communities to authorize these products so that us poultry exports which met rigorous us safety standards could also meet ec standards. the european communities appreciated the us concerns regarding the delay but noted that it was important that the genuine and long-standing concerns in the european communities over the use of amts were taken fully into account in the approval process. the circumstances that led to the effective ban on poultry meat from the united states in 1997 did not relate exclusively to amts. the use of amts in food of animal origin was not permitted at present in the european communities inter alia because of concerns that the use of such treatments could disguise other hygiene problems. the european communities expressed disappointment that while it was possible for us exports to meet ec hygiene requirements without the use of amts the united states was still insisting on the use of these products. the european communities was in the process of finding a solution and this included a recent decision in principle that amts could be used to tackle surface contamination. a draft regulation had been prepared which allowed for the use of such substances under specific conditions. the european communities was still identifying the specific conditions to accompany the draft regulation in order to ensure that amts were not used to hide other problems. however the european communities expressed hope that bilateral information exchanges with the united states could lead to a mutually agreeable solution. in february 2007 the united states reported that despite a positive risk assessment by the european food safety agency efsa the european commission had not yet authorized the imports from the united states. the european communities responded that the ec market was open to imports of poultry meat and substantial quantities were imported from brazil and thailand. the european communities was also open for us exports but had difficulties with the us insistence on the use of anti-microbial treatments amts . the us poultry industry worked to high standards but refused to export poultry that had not been treated with amts. one solution would be for the united states to change its system and export without amts which it refused to do. the other solution was for the european communities to adapt its system which was very sensitive because these products were banned for use in europe. the use of amts was very controversial with ec member states and consumers who considered these products unnecessary if appropriate hygiene was used from farm to table. the european communities had taken constructive steps and adopted framework legislation to allow for possible authorization of amts. efsa had evaluated their safety and discussions were underway with member states to develo implementing legislation to allow their use. in june 2008 the united states recalled that its poultry exports faced restricted access to the ec market since 1997 based on a ban on the use of pathogen reduction treatments