RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/LIC/M/4
9December 1996
ORGANIZATION(96-5097)
Committee onImport Licensing
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING
HELD ON23OCTOBER 1996
Chairman: Mr.JanMichalek (Poland)1
1. TheCommittee onImport Licensing helditsfourth meeting on23October 1996.
2. Theagenda proposed forthemeeting, circulated inWTO/AIR/451, wasadopted asfollows:
Page
A. Draft Understanding onProcedures forReview ofNotifications 2
B. Notifications:
(a) Invocation offootnote 5toArticle 2.2bydeveloping countries 3
(b) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) 3
(c) Notifications under Article 7.3 3
(d) Notifications under Article 5 5
C. Simplification ofdatarequirements andstandardization offormats 5
D. Procedures forcirculation andderestriction ofCommittee Documents 5
E. Report toSingapore Ministerial Conference 6
F. FirstBiennial Review oftheImplementation andOperation ofthe
Agreement under Article 7.1 8
G. Tentative dates formeetings in1997 8
3. TheChairman noted thatinaccordance withtheagreement reached atthethirdmeeting held
on8March 1996(G/LIC/M/3, paragraph 1),theIMF, UNCTAD andtheWorld Bankhadbeeninvited
onanadhocbasistothismeeting. Heproposed thatpending thefinalization oftheongoing consultations
bytheChairman oftheGeneral Council ontheapplication of"Guidelines forObserver Status for
International Intergovernmental Organizations intheWTO", thesame organizations beinvited asad
hocobservers toitsnextmeeting.
1Mr.JanMichalek, Vice-chairman oftheCommittee, presided inplace oftheChairman, Mr.Calson Mbegabolawe
(Zimbabwe).G/LIC/M/4
Page2
4. TheCommittee soagreed.
A. Draft Understanding onProcedures forReview ofNotifications
5. TheChairmanrecalledthatatitsmeetingon8March1996,theCommitteehadabriefdiscussion
onaproposal made byMr.Mbegabolawe onhowtodealwithsubstantive issues arising from
notifications submitted under theAgreement, andagreed torevert tothismatter atthepresent meeting
onthebasis ofarevised text(G/LIC/M/3, paragraphs 7-9). Thematter wasfurther discussed atan
informal meeting oftheCommittee on1October 1996. Taking intoaccount thecomments made by
delegations atboththeformal andinformal meetings, arevised texthadbeen circulated forthe
consideration oftheCommittee indocument G/LIC/W/6, which readasfollows:
"TheCommittee discussed thematter ofsubstantive issues arising fromnotifications ofimport
licensingprocedureswhichcouldberaisedbyMembersandreachedthefollowingunderstanding:
"Onthebasis ofArticle 4oftheAgreement, itwasrecognized thatMembers could express
views onnotifications ofimport licensing procedures asrequired under various Articles of
theAgreement, andrequest clarifications, asmaybenecessary, fromotherMembers onmatters
related totheAgreement onImport Licensing Procedures. Itwas,however, agreed thatsuch
views, andrequests forclarification, should becommunicated, inwriting, tothedelegations
concerned withcopies forinformation totheSecretariat preferably 21days, butatleastten
working days, inadvance ofthemeeting atwhich theywould beraised. Replies tothequestions
should alsobeforwarded tothedelegations having raised thequestions, inwriting, withcopies
forinformation totheSecretariat. Thequestions andreplies thusreceived would becirculated
bytheSecretariat.""
6. TheCommittee agreed totherevised textcontained indocument G/LIC/W/6.2
7. Therepresentative ofCanada informed theCommittee thatthereplies toquestions posed by
Australia, theEuropean Communities andtheUnited States atthelastmeeting onCanada 'sreplies
totheQuestionnaire would beprovided inwriting tothedelegations andtotheSecretariat shortly.
8. TheChairman informed theCommittee thatsubsequent totheclarifications sought atthelast
meeting bytheUnited States onreplies totheQuestionnaire submitted byseveral Members (namely,
Barbados, Canada, Cyprus, Costa Rica, Ecuador, India, Hong Kong, Norway andMauritius), Australia
andtheEuropean Communities hadalsorequested clarifications onArticle 7.3notifications submitted
bysomeMembers. Australia 'squestions related toreplies totheQuestionnaire fromBarbados, Canada,
Costa Rica, India, Malta andMauritius; theEuropean Communities 'questions wereonthenotifications
submitted byCanada, Costa Rica, India andNorway. Copies ofthese requests forclarification had
beensentforinformation totheSecretariat. Similarly, replies tothese queries fromIndia, Malta and
Mauritius toAustralia; from India andNorway totheEuropean Communities; andfrom Malta and
Norway totheUnited States hadalsobeencopied totheSecretariat forinformation. Onthebasis
ofthedecision theCommittee hadjustreached hesuggested thattheSecretariat berequested tocirculate,
asfrom thismeeting, allquestions andreplies communicated toitforinformation ofMembers.
9. Therepresentative ofJapan requested theSecretariat tocirculate thequestions andreplies which
hadalready beensubmitted totheSecretariat since thelastmeeting.
10. TheCommittee soagreed.
2Theagreed textwassubsequently circulated asdocument G/LIC/4.G/LIC/M/4
Page3
B. Notifications:
(a) Invocation offootnote 5toArticle 2.2(delayed application ofcertain provisions by
developing countries)
11. TheChairmaninformedtheCommitteethatsincethelastmeeting,twomoredeveloping-country
Members -Cameroon andtheUnited ArabEmirates -hadinvoked thedelayed application provisions
ofsubparagraphs2.2(a)(ii)and(a)(iii)oftheAgreementthusbringingthenumberofdevelopingcountries
invoking these provisions to24(G/LIC/1/Add.3).
12. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheinvocation ofdelayed application provisions byCameroon
andtheUnited Arab Emirates.
(b) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) (publications and/or legislation)
13. TheChairman saidthatsince thelastmeeting, theSecretariat hadreceived notifications under
Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) from thefollowing 19Members: Australia, Barbados, Chile, Cyprus,
theEuropeanCommunities,HongKong,Jamaica,Malta,Morocco,NewZealand,Nicaragua,Pakistan,
Romania, Swaziland, Turkey, Uganda, United States, Uruguay andZimbabwe. These notifications
were circulated intheG/LIC/N/1/- series. Inaddition, theSecretariat hadalsoreceived twomore
notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b) from Norway andtheUnited States. Copies of
publications andlawsandregulations referred tointhenotifications wereavailable forconsultation
intheSecretariat. Inaddition, Hong Kong, Hungary andSingapore hadrecently notified publications
andlegislation. Hesuggested thatthenotifications submitted byHong Kong, Hungary andSingapore
beconsidered atthenextmeeting. Copies ofpublications andlegislation submitted bythese three
Members were alsoavailable forconsultation intheSecretariat.
14. TheChairman stated thatthesituation withrespect tonotifications under Articles 1.4(a) and
8.2(b) wasnotsatisfactory. Henoted thatoutofaMembership of125,only30Members (European
Communities andMember States counted asone)hadsubmitted notifications ofpublications andlaws
andregulations. Theremaining 80Members hadnotmade notifications under thisprovision. This
wasdespite thedeadline of12January 1995 established bytheCommittee forthese notifications. In
addition tothisdeadline, theAdministrator oftheCentral Registry ofNotifications hadissued letters
toMembersremindingthemofthesenotificationrequirements,andhadprovideddetailstoeachMember
oftheunfulfilled notification requirements for1995andnotification requirements for1996. Heurged
Members thathadnotyetprovided anyinformation concerning thelawsandregulations andpublications
relevant tolicensing tosubmit theirnotifications without anyfurther delay.
15. TheCommittee tooknoteofthenotifications made.
(c) Notifications under Article 7.3(Replies toQuestionnaire onImport Licensing Procedures)
16. TheChairman informed theCommittee thatsince thelastmeeting, thefollowing 12Members
hadsubmitted replies totheQuestionnaire: Australia, Chile, Cyprus, Hong Kong, Hungary, Morocco,
Nigeria, Norway, Peru, Romania, Turkey andUruguay. Therelevant notifications hadbeencirculated
intheG/LIC/N/3/- series. Inaddition, theSecretariat hadreceived notifications from Japan and
Singapore, which would besubject toreview atthenextmeeting. Aswiththenotifications relating
topublications andlegislation, thesituation withrespect tonotifications under thisprovision wasalso
disappointing. Todate, outofaMembership of125,onlyatotalof25hadsubmitted replies tothe
Questionnaire. Theremaining 100Members hadnotmade notifications under thisprovision. This
wasdespite theannual deadline of30September fornotifications under thisprovision. Inaddition,
theAdministrator oftheCentral Registry ofNotifications hadissued letters toMembers remindingG/LIC/M/4
Page4
them ofthese notification requirements, andhadprovided details toeachMember oftheunfulfilled
notification requirements for1995 andnotification obligations for1996. Heurged those Members
which hadnotyetcomplied withthisnotification requirement todosowithout further delay.
17. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities informed theCommittee thatasherdelegation
wascurrently focusing allitswork toprepare itsnotification under Article 7.3oftheAgreement, she
wished toreserve therighttoposequestions onnotifications submitted sofarunder Article 7.3ata
laterstage.
18. Therepresentative ofJapan informed theCommittee thatduetothefactthattheofficial language
ofJapan wasJapanese, allnational lawsandregulations existed onlyinJapanese. Therefore, agreat
dealofwork wasinvolved inthepreparation oftheArticle 7.3notification, particularly intranslation
ofthetextfromtheoriginal Japanese language intoEnglish. TheJapanese authorities werecautious
regarding theinterpretation ofthelegalterms inthenotification. Hequestioned whether incaseof
alegalinterpretation ofthenotification, which waspresented inanofficial language oftheWTO, the
English terms usedinthenotification would beconsidered apriori valid, orwhether hisauthorities
could request thattheoriginal legislation inJapanese beinterpreted.
19. Therepresentative oftheSecretariat explained thatsince thiswasanissue which hadtobe
looked atinthecontext ofthedispute settlement procedures, hewould seekaclarification from the
Legal Division. Inthiscontext, herecalled thatinsome cases submissions todispute settlement panels
hadbeenmade intheoriginal language asanadditional source ofinformation, where theoriginal
language wasnotanofficial language oftheOrganization. However, theofficial procedures were
carried outinthethree official languages.
20. Therepresentative ofJapan, further clarifying hisquestion, asked whether Japan might reserve
itsrights which would enable hisdelegation tocorrect anyterminology usedinthepresent notification,
based ontheoriginal Japanese text.
21. Therepresentative oftheSecretariat clarified thattheSecretariat would relyonthenotification
provided bytheJapanese authorities inanofficial language oftheWTO. Incaseofanerror inthe
translation fromJapanese intoEnglish ofanyoftheprovisions, clarifications could besought bythe
Panel orprovided byJapan. Thiswould depend onthetypeofdispute thatwould come up.Hewished
toseekclarification from theLegal Division onthispoint.
22. Therepresentative ofArgentina saidthatthespecific question raised byJapan wastaken as
awarning thatthenotification referred tocould leadtoadispute settlement case. Asregards the
language usedinthenotification, heclarified that,incaseofadispute, apanel would lookintothe
legislation. Thenotification wasmerely aninitial element thathelped other Members understand the
legislation; assuch, therewasnoreason fortheJapanese delegation tobeconcerned about thelanguage
ofthenotification.
23. Therepresentative ofChile agreed withthedelegate ofArgentina. Hebelieved thatthereply
tothequestion requested byJapan hadimplications forallother Committees, andtherefore thiswas
amore general issue.
24. Therepresentative ofKorea explained thatduetodifficulties intranslation, Korea toowas
unable tosubmit thenotification induetime. Korea intended tosubmit thereplies totheQuestionnaire
shortly.
25. Therepresentative ofthePhilippines informed theCommittee thatherdelegation would submit
itsnotification thatday.G/LIC/M/4
Page5
26. TheCommittee tooknoteofthenotifications aswellastheissues raised bythedelegation of
Japan andthecomments made.
(d) Notifications under Article 5(institution ofnewimport licensing procedures orchanges)
27. TheChairman informed theCommittee thatsincethelastmeeting, notifications under Article 5
hadbeenreceived from Argentina, theEuropean Communities, Japan, Nigeria andPakistan. The
notifications hadbeencirculated intheG/LIC/N/2/- series.
28. TheCommittee tooknoteofthenotifications.
29. TheChairmanfurtherinformedtheCommitteethattheSecretariathadalsoreceivedanotification
from Hong Kong, which would beconsidered atthenextmeeting oftheCommittee.
30. TheCommittee soagreed.
C. Simplification ofdatarequirements andstandardization offormats
31. TheChairman referred todocument G/LIC/W/3 which contained aletter addressed tothe
Chairman oftheCommittee onImport Licensing bytheChairman oftheWorking Group onNotification
Obligations andProcedures. Theletter requested theidentification offormats/questionnaires currently
inusewhich sought information going beyond thespecific requirements ofthisAgreement; and
suggestions astoanyadditional areas where formats/questionnaires could bedeveloped. Thismatter
wasdiscussed attheinformal meeting ofthisCommittee heldon1October 1996. Herecalled that,
withaviewtoagreeing ontheprocedures fornotification under theAgreement onImport Licensing
Procedures, theCommittee onImport Licensing, atitsfirstandsecond meetings in1995, hadcarried
outareview oftheprovisions intheAgreement relating tonotification. Inthiscontext, theCommittee
hadexamined theappropriateness oftheQuestionnaire onImport Licensing Procedures referred to
inArticle 7.3oftheAgreement andadopted minor revisions toit.Asconcerned theobligation to
notify theinstitution ofimport licensing procedures orchanges intheseprocedures under paragraphs 1
and3ofArticle 5,theelements tobeincluded insuchnotifications werelisted inparagraph 2ofthat
Article. Asregards therequirements fornotification contained inArticle 1.4(a) (theobligation tonotify
publications) andArticle 8.2(b) (theobligation tonotify lawsandregulations), theCommittee didnot
consider thatthesewereareas where formats orquestionnaires appeared necessary tosimplify thedata
requirements.
32. TheChairman recalled thatsince theformal meeting would takeplace afterthefinalmeeting
oftheWorkingGrouponNotificationObligationsandProcedures,theCommittee,atitsinformalmeeting
on1October 1996, hadauthorized theChairman tosendareplytotheChairman oftheWorking Group,
toconvey theabove conclusions prior tothepresent meeting. Heinformed theCommittee thatthe
reply totheChairman oftheWorking Group hadbeensentaccordingly.
33. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheabove information.
D. Procedures forCirculation andDerestriction ofCommittee Documents
34. TheChairman referred totheprocedures forcirculation andderestriction ofWTO documents
adopted bytheGeneral Council contained indocument WT/L/160/Rev.1. Notifications submitted
tothisCommittee circulated intheG/LIC/N/- series were nowbeing circulated asunrestricted
documents, subject toparagraph (g)oftheAppendix ofthisDecision, which concerned therightofG/LIC/M/4
Page6
aMember, when submitting adocument, torequest thatitbeissued asrestricted. Hesuggested that
theCommittee takenoteofthisDecision.
35. TheCommitteetooknoteoftheDecisionoftheGeneralCouncilcontainedinWT/L/160/Rev.1.
E. Report toSingapore Ministerial Conference
36. TheChairmanrecalledthattheCommitteewasunderobligationtosubmitareporttotheCouncil
forTradeinGoodsinconnectionwiththeSingaporeMinisterialMeeting.Hedrewattentiontodocument
G/LIC/W/4 which contained adraftreport prepared bytheSecretariat inaccordance withthestatement
bytheChairman oftheGeneral Council, atitsmeeting of16April 1996, concerning reporting
procedures totheSingapore Ministerial Conference (WT/L/145). Thedraftreport wassubsequently
revised totakeintoaccount comments made bydelegations during informal consultations ofthe
Committee heldon1October 1996. Hedrew attention totherevised report circulated indocument
G/LIC/W/4/Rev.1 forconsideration andadoption atthepresent meeting andsaidthatthereport would
beupdated toreflect thediscussions atthepresent meeting andtoincorporate notifications received
sofar.
37. Therepresentative ofJapan stated thathisdelegation could accept therevised draft report.
However, withregard toparagraph 13,hewished toreiterate Japan'sunderstanding onthequestion
oftheapplicability oftheAgreement onImport Licensing Procedures totariffratequotas. Herecalled
thattherehadbeenadiscussion intheCommittee onthisissueandthattherewasnoagreement reached.
Inaddition, theissuewasreferred totheWorking Group onNotification Obligations andProcedures,
butnoagreement hadbeenreached intheWorking Group either. Therefore, hisdelegation accepted
thepresent draftontheunderstanding thatthere hadnotbeenanagreement onthissubject inthis
Committee.
38. Therepresentative oftheUnited States, referring toparagraph 13ofthedraftReport which
stated that"allimport licensing procedures thatfallunder thisAgreement should benotified tothe
Committee onImport Licensing", saidthattheJapanese intervention innowayindicated thatthere
wasnoagreement onthatpoint. With respect totheadministration ofthetariff ratequotas for
agriculturalproducts,hesaidthattheUnitedStatescontinuedtomaintainthatthesewereimportlicensing
procedures thatrequired notification tothisCommittee. Inhisview, thisissuehadbeenfullydiscussed
atthesecond meeting oftheCommittee aswasreflected intheminutes ofthatmeeting.
39. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland stated thatherdelegation joined theconsensus toadopt the
revisedparagraph13oftheReport,aswellasthenewparagraph5ofG/LIC/W/5/Rev.1,theBackground
Working Document fortheFirstBiennial Review. Shenevertheless wished toclarify theposition of
herdelegation regarding thisissue andsaidthatthequestion oftheapplicability oftheAgreement on
Import Licensing Procedures toagricultural quotas wasnotyetclear either inthisCommittee orin
certain capitals, including hers. Waiting forthisimportant problem tobesettled, Switzerland, for
thesakeoftransparency, would notify itsagricultural tariffquotas totheCommittee through reference
toitsnotification made totheCommittee onAgriculture. Sheemphasized thatthisnotification would
bemade forreasons oftransparency andthatitinnowayprejudged thequestion oftheactual
applicability oftheAgreement toagricultural tariffquotas. Inherview, theAgreement contained useful
provisions bywayofguidelines forallimport licensing procedures, including theadministration of
agricultural tariff quotas. Therefore, itwould beessential todetermine whether ornotagricultural
tariffquotas came under thecoverage oftheAgreement onImport Licensing Procedures. Ifnecessary,
thequestion would havetobeaddressed whether thisAgreement required additional information to
benotified ascompared totheinformation already provided under theAgreement onAgriculture.
Shesuggested thatthisCommittee carry outamore detailed analysis ofthese issues in1997 inorder
tofindadefinitive answer.G/LIC/M/4
Page7
40. Therepresentative ofArgentina saidthatheagreed withthetextofparagraph 13.Ashad
beenstated byhimintheinformal consultations onthisissue, Argentina believed thatthiswasasubject
thatwasclosed. Itwashisview thatinformation onimport licensing linked toagricultural quotas
should benotified tobothCommittees. Inresponse tothedelegation ofSwitzerland, hesaidthatthe
information contained innotifications ontheadministration ofagricultural tariff quotas which were
submitted totheCommittee onAgriculture wasdifferent fromtheinformation which hadtobeprovided
tothisCommittee under Article 5.2. Theinformation which wasrequired tobenotified tothis
Committee wasmore complete when compared withtherequirements fornotification totheCommittee
onAgriculture concerning theimplementation ofmarket access opportunities laiddown inpoint (b)
ofTable MA:1 andother information withrespect toquotas. Hedrew attention inthisregard to
paragraph 28oftheReport oftheWorking Group onNotification Obligations andProcedures.3The
Working Group hadconcluded thatefforts toremove thepossible duplication were notwarranted.
Inhisview, withtheinformation presented totheCommittee onAgriculture itwould notbepossible
toverify whether ornotMembers fulfilled theirobligations under theLicensing Agreement. The
information submitted totheCommittee onAgriculture wasforthepurpose ofchecking thatthe
mechanisms inplacefortheadministration oftariffquotas didnotaffect themarket access commitments
undertaken intheUruguay Round. Forthese reasons, hestressed thatitwasunacceptable thatcertain
Members stillwished toexclude certain import licensing mechanisms fromtheobligations under the
Import Licensing Agreement.
41. Therepresentative ofAustralia supported thecurrent draftofparagraph 13andnoted thatas
hadbeenmentioned byother delegations, thiswasnotanattempt toreopen what wasanextensive
debate ininformal consultations. Paragraph 13fullyreflected herunderstanding thatallimport licensing
procedures thatfellwithin thescope ofthisAgreement mustbenotified. There wasindeed agreement
reached onthispoint. Australia maintained itsposition thatimport licensing procedures usedunder
agricultural tariff ratequotas fellwithin thescope ofthisAgreement andfullysupported theposition
outlined byArgentina. Shenoted particularly inthisregard thatnotifications provided totheCommittee
onAgriculture didnotmake judgements about theconformity withtheImport Licensing Agreement
ofimport licensing procedures used.
42. TherepresentativeofCanadasaidthatthelanguageinparagraph13,asmentionedbythedelegate
ofAustralia, recognized thatallimport licensing procedures thatfellunder thisAgreement should be
notified andthatthere wasbroad agreement onthatfactintheCommittee. There wasdisagreement
withrespect totheimplications ofthatforagricultural tariffratequotas. These views hadbeenrecorded
intheMinutes ofprevious meetings oftheCommittee.
43. Therepresentative ofNewZealand saidthathisdelegation tooaccepted paragraph 13asit
stood. NewZealand maintained itsposition aswasstated intheMinutes ofthesecond meeting, and
supported theviews expressed byArgentina, Australia, Canada andtheUnited States thatthere was
agreement thatimport licensing procedures, including those dealing withagricultural tariff quotas,
should benotified tothisCommittee.
44. Inresponse toseveral delegations, theChairman saidthattheinformation contained inthe
documentwouldbeupdatedtotakeintoaccountnotificationsreceivedbytheSecretariatupto28October
1996.
3G/L/112.G/LIC/M/4
Page8
45. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made. Itagreed toadopt itsReport totheSingapore
Ministerial Conference andtosubmit ittotheCouncil forTrade inGoods atitsmeeting on1November
1996.4
F. First Biennial Review oftheImplementation andOperation oftheAgreement under
Article 7.1
46. TheChairman recalled thatunder Article 7.1oftheAgreement theCommittee hadagreed
tobiennially review theimplementation andoperation oftheAgreement, taking intoaccount the
objectives oftheAgreement andtherights andobligations contained therein, andtoconduct thefirst
suchreviewatthepresentmeeting.Adraftbackgroundworkingdocumentcontainingfactualinformation
hadbeenprepared bytheSecretariat andcirculated asG/LIC/W/5. Arevised version ofthedocument
hadbeensubsequently issued inG/LIC/W/5/Rev.1 based onthecomments made during aninformal
consultation heldon1October. Hesaidthatthedocument would beupdated inlightofthediscussion
atthepresent meeting.
47. Therepresentative oftheUnited States suggested thatanewparagraph beinserted inSection B,
after paragraph 5,tostatethattheoverall compliance withnotification procedures hadnotbeen
satisfactory andthattheCommittee recognized theimportance ofnotifications fortheeffective
implementation andfunctioning oftheAgreement. Theabsence ofnotifications frommany Members
affected thework thatwasactually donebytheCommittee during theperiod covered bythereview.
Henoted inthisrespect thatoutofthe24developing country Members thathadtaken advantage of
thedelayed application provisions oftheAgreement, onlyfourhadmade anymandatory notifications
sofar.Hepointed outthattheinvocation onlypermitted these countries todelay theapplication of
some requirements forautomatic import licensing procedures foracertain period andthatitdidnot
exempt them from thenotification obligations.
48. TheCommittee tooknoteofthecomments made. Itagreed toaddanewparagraph aswas
proposed bytheUnited States.
49. TheCommittee concluded thefirstbiennial review under Article 7.1oftheAgreement based
onG/LIC/W/5/Rev.1, thebackground working document prepared bytheSecretariat.5
G. Tentative Dates forMeetings in1997
50. TheChairman informed theCommittee thatinthecontext ofacalendar ofmeetings for1997,
theSecretariat hadproposed 22April 1997(10a.m.) and15October 1997(10a.m.) astentative dates
forthenexttwomeetings oftheCommittee onImport Licensing. Thiswasontheunderstanding that
additional meetings would beconvened ifnecessary.
51. TheCommittee agreed tothetwodates proposed.
4TheReport asupdated wascirculated indocument G/L/127.
5Thedocument wasupdated inlightofthediscussion atthepresent meeting andwascirculated inG/LIC/5 andCorr.1.