RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/RO/M/34
31 January 2001
(01-0505)
Committee on Rules of Origin
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 1 DECEMBER 2000
Chairman:  Mr. S. Simon
The agenda proposed for the meeting, contained in WTO/AIR/1440, was adopted by the
Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO) as follows:
I. OVERALL ARCHITECTURE OF THE HARMONIZED RULES OF ORIGIN
(G/RO/41) ...................................................................................................................... ............1
II. PRODUCT-SPECIFIC RULES OF  ORIGIN (G/RO/41).....................................................4
A. C HAPTERS 25-27 ( MINERAL PRODUCTS );  41-43 ( LEATHER );  44-49 ( WOOD AND
PAPER );  AND  92-97 ( MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS AND OTHER ARTICLES )......................................4
B. C ROSS -SECTORAL ISSUES ..........................................................................................................10
III. STOCKTAKING OF PROGRESS MADE IN THE HARMONIZATION
WORK PROGRAMME.........................................................................................................11
IV. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF
THE AGREEMENT ON RULES OF  ORIGIN (G/RO/W/61)...........................................12
V. IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HARMONIZED
RULES OF ORIGIN  ON OTHER WTO AGREEMENTS ................................................12
VI. DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK PROGRAMME ON
HARMONIZING RULES OF ORIGIN ...............................................................................12
VII. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON RULES OF
ORIGIN (G /RO/ 44) ............................................................................................................... .12
VIII. NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE  5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II
OF THE AGREEMENT ON RULES OF  ORIGIN (G/RO/ N/29/REV.1).........................13
IX. OTHER BUSINESS.............................................................................................................. ..13
I. OVERALL ARCHITECTURE OF THE HARMONIZED RULES OF ORIGIN
(G/RO/41)
1.1 The representative of the European Communitie s, facilitator for the informal plurilateral
discussions on the overall architecture, stated as follows:
(1) INTRODUCTION
Between 27 and 30 November 2000 plurilateral meetings on overall architecture were devoted to:
Definitions;  General Rules;  Appendix 1;  Appendix 2.
(2) RESULTS OF DISCUSSIONS
(2.1) DEFINITIONSG/RO/M/34
Page 2
Agreement on the definitions as contained in G/RO/41(AS)6 was confirmed.  Members of the
plurilateral agreed to delete all observations contained in the box.  However, as regards letter (e)
(definitions of primary and residual rules) the deletion was subjected to the appropriate relabelling of
all rules contained in the Annex, i.e. both in the general introductory part (architecture) and in the
matrix.
(2.2) GENERAL RULES
General Rule 1: Scope of Application
Consensus on this rule was reiterated.General Rule 2: HS
Consensus on paragraph 1 had already been reached at a previous meeting.  As regards paragraph 2
(possible amendments to the rules resulting from am endments to the HS), the majority of the group
was in favour of its deletion as it was a rule of procedure falling under the scope of amendments to
results of the Harmonization Work Programme (HWP) referred to in Article 6 para 3 of the
Agreement on Rules of Origin (Agreement).  The group accepted the suggestion that it would,
nevertheless, be useful to preserve in a facilitator's box the (revised) text (see document G/RO/45,
page 3) in order to draw the attention of the CRO to  the need for a study on the effect of such changes
on the rules of origin as well as on the issue of the date of implementation.
General Rule 3: Determination of Origin
Consensus on this rule had already been reached at the previous meeting.General Rule 4: Minimal Operations and Process
Except for the delegations that expressed a scrutiny reservation, consensus was reached on the
application of this rule only to Appendix 1.  Consequently the provision is moved to its appropriate
place under Appendix 1 (Rule 2) and its text shall be revised accordingly (see document G/RO/45,
page 7).
The group agreed to delete the list of examples, even though one delegation pointed out that an
indicative list might be useful.
General Rule 5: Neutral Elements
Situation unchanged.General Rule 6: Packing and Packaging
Consensus had already been reached at the previous session.General Rule 7: Accessories and Spare Parts and Tools
Consensus had already been reached at a previous session.(2.3) APPENDIX 1
(a) Scope of ApplicationG/RO/M/34
Page 3
Consensus had been reached at a previous session.
(b) Minimal Operations and Processes
(v. supra  General Rule 4)
Definition: 1 letter (a) through (i)
The group confirmed consensus on these definitions and agreed to delete the note concerning
definition (i).
Definition 2: Products of sea fishing and other products taken from the sea
The group had an exchange of views on the five options currently on the table.  One delegation
submitted a new alternative text.
The Chairman invited delegations to carefully study all options abiding by the mandate given to the
CRO.(2.4) APPENDIX 2: PRODUCT SPECIFIC RULES OF ORIGIN
Rule 1: Scope of Application
Consensus had already been reached at a previous session.Rule 2: Application of Rules
The group agreed to revise the text contained in G/RO/41(AS)6.  The outcome of the discussions is
contained in document G/RO/45 (page 13).  Consen sus was achieved on Rule 2(a).  As regards
Rule 2(b) one delegation requested that the second sentence be in square brackets.  As regards Rule
2(c), two delegations requested that the phrase "or a specific manufacturing or processing operation"
be in brackets; one delegation expressed reservation on the whole rule.  As regards Rule 2(d) one
delegation opined that this was an origin rule rather than a rule of application and expressed also some
reservations on its contents.  Rule 2(e) appeared acceptable.
Rule 3: Determination of Origin
Delegations were interested in the new proposal for Rule 3(a) offered by the facilitator and supported
by one delegation – (see document G/RO/45, page 14).  Given the new text, two delegations withdrewtheir request for a footnote to Rule 3(b).  The remaining proponent of the footnote maintained his
support although deleting the text in fine .
As regards Rule 3(c) (origin retention rule), Members of the plurilateral had a useful exchange of
views.  The proponent of the second alternative m odified the text so as to ensure the additional
proviso only applied to change of tariff classification rules, and announced that he would examine
whether a similar change was needed for his proposals under (f) and (g).  In a spirit of compromise,
the proponent of the first alternative of Rule 3(c) offered to drop its proposed text on condition that
this resulted in consensus on the first alternative of Rule 3(f), and with the clear understanding that
Rule 3(c) applied to goods that were almost finished, i.e. maintaining the same Harmonized Systemdescription as the processed good.  One delegation pointed out that it was still in favour of the first
alternative.
Rules 3(d) and (e) appeared to be acceptable.  As regards Rule 3(f) the situation is unchanged.G/RO/M/34
Page 4
Rule 4: Intermediate Materials
Further to the discussion of the group the provision was redrafted (see document G/RO/45, page 17).
One delegation confirmed its request for the initial  bracketed text to be included in the provision.
Another delegation requested that the  facilitato r's box should contain an indication whereby the
originating status was acquired by fulfilling a primary rule or chapter residual rule.  The principle of
this provision appeared acceptable to the whole of the group.
Rule 5: Special provisions
The group agreed to delete this heading for editorial reasons.
(a) Fungible goods and materials
Given that the delegations confirmed to be in favour of such provision, the facilitator offered a new
text taking into account the concerns expressed by some delegations during the previous meeting.
The proponents of the text contained in G/RO/41(AS )6 offered to study the possibility of merging
their text with the facilitator's proposal.  A new text shall therefore be drafted and circulated during
the intersessional period.
(b)  Putting up in sets or kits
There is growing consensus that putting up in sets is not origin conferring, and that there is no need
for a specific rule.  Three delegations, on the othe r hand, maintained their request for a specific sets
and kits rule.
(c)  Collection of parts
With the exception of the proponent, all delegations present were against the provision.Rule 6:  De Minimis
There was growing consensus on the mandatory character of this provision.  During the discussion it
appeared that some delegations would prefer to define the criteria for such a rule on a chapter levelbasis.  The group agreed to conduct further discussions on the basis of alternative 1 of the facilitator's
proposal as amended during the discussion (see document G/RO/45, page 19).  Consequently the
proponents of alternative texts dropped their proposals.
II. PRODUCT-SPECIFIC RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/41)
A. CHAPTERS 25-27 ( MINERAL PRODUCTS );  41-43 ( LEATHER );  44-49 ( WOOD AND PAPER );  AND
92-97 ( MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS AND OTHER ARTICLES )
2.1 The Vice-Chairman stated as follows:
(1) INTRODUCTION
- At the outset, the Vice-Chairman emphasized that  the current session of the informal meeting
should be an opportunity for serious negotiations aimed at achieving tangible progress.  As a
context for the current session, the Vice-Chairman reminded Members of  (i) the deadline on the
HWP soon to be agreed at the General Council and (ii) the shift of CRO discussions from thethree-tier to the two tier system of informal and formal.
- During the meeting, several delegations echoed such an assessment of the Vice-Chairman and
made concessional proposals in the spirit of reaching consensus.G/RO/M/34
Page 5
- The Vice-Chairman requested the Members to express their position on the pending issues1 by the
notional deadlines of (I) 22 November, (ii) 1 December and , if necessary, (iii) by the next
informal meeting of the CRO.
(2) Chapters 25-27 (Mineral Products)No.1
-     Japan and Canada confirmed their support for option B.
- However, they expressed willingness to join the co nsensus, if it is reached.  Such flexibility was
appreciated, and is to be reflected in the negotiating documents.
No. 7
- The U.S. submitted a new non- paper.
- Many Members were of the view that Basket I agreement has already been made on chemical
reactions and that further discussion on chapter note 2 should be limited to what constitutes
physical separation.
No. 8
- Three more Members expressed their support for option A, and growing consensus for option A
was confirmed once again.
- However, one Member holding to option B stated that the proposed 70% rule can address many
mixture issues.
No. 9
- - Two more Members expressed their support for option A, and growing consensus for option A
was confirmed once again.
- One Member holding to option C suggested that it might be easier for the Member to join option
A, if ‘obtaining sulphur content’ is removed from the negative list.
- (*) The two Members holding to option C were requested to submit a technical information to
support their proposal to delete ‘obtaining sulphur content’ from the negative list.
No. 10
- (*) One Member supporting chapter note 5 was urged to reconsider its position in the interest of
reaching a consensus.
(3) Chapters 41-43 (Leather)No.1
-   One more Member joined option B.
No.5
- Two more Members joined option A and a growing consensus was confirmed on option A.
- (*) One Member holding to option B was urged to reconsider its position in the interest of
reaching a consensus.  In view of the definition (Basket 1) of tanned leather which includes "wet-
blues", and the fact that tanning of wet-blue s would, according to the Basket 1 definition, be
classified as re-tanned leather (which is to be addressed under Issue no.6), the Member agreed to
reconsider its position.
No. 6
-  Three more Members expressed their support for option A.
                                                     
1 Especially, on the issues marked with an asterisk (*) in this Report.G/RO/M/34
Page 6
No.7
- Three more Members expressed their support for option B.
No. 8
- It was agreed that parchment dressing is not a process additional to tanning, but an alternative to
it.
- In view of the above, it was agreed that there was no major difference between options A and C.
- There was a growing consensus towards option C.
- The Vice-Chairman urged three Members holding to option A to reconsider their positions.
(4) Chapters 44-49 ( Wood and Paper)No.1
- At a previous meeting consensus on finger-jointin g as origin-conferring was reached, whilst there
was growing consensus on end-jointing.  As the consensus on finger-jointing was not confirmed,
in an attempt to achieve compromise, the EC prop osed to split issue No.1 into issue 1, finger- or
end-jointing and issue 1- bis, planing and sanding.  Given the problems faced by some delegations,
the EC further proposed to add to the deal a package linking issues 1- bis, planing and sanding, to
issue 2, beading and moulding, which should not be regarded as origin-conferring operations.
- (*) The Vice-Chairman welcomed the spirit of compromise and urged all Members to seriously
consider the package proposed by the EC.
- Some Members expressed their willingness to join such a package of compromise.
No. 2
-     See No.1 above.
No.3
- Three more Members joined option A, while two more Members joined option B.
No. 4
- One more Member joined option A, while four more Members joined option B.
No. 5
- A consensus has been reached on option A.
No. 6
- Three more members joined option A.
- Australia , already supporting option B, modified its position within option B to join EC and the
Philippines.
No. 7
-    Three more Members joined option A, while one more Member joined option B.
- (*) The Vice-Chairman opined that cooper’s job was substantially different from simple
assembly, and urged Members supporting option B to seriously reconsider their position.
No. 8
- One more Member joined option A, while three more Members joined option B.
No. 10
- Two more Members joined option A, while one more Member joined option B.G/RO/M/34
Page 7
No. 11
-     A consensus has been reached on option B.
(5) Chapter 92 (Musical instruments)
No.1
- Four more Members joined option A.
No.2
- Four more Members joined option A.
(6) Chapters 93-97 (Other articles)No.1
- Four more Members joined option A.
No.3
- Option A was removed.
- Three more Members joined option C.
No.4
- In a spirit of compromise the EC dropped its option and consensus has been reached on option A.
No.5
- Two more Members joined option A, while one more Member joined option B.
No.6
-    Three more Members joined option A.
No.7
- Two more Members joined option A.
No.8
- A consensus has been reached on option B.
No.9
- A consensus has been reached on option B.
No.10
- Three more Members joined option A.
- Argentina, Australia, Brazil and Japan expressed willingness to reconsider this issue in the
interest of forming consensus.
- (*) Five Members holding to option B were urged by the Vice-Chairman to reconsider their
positions.
- The EC indicated that this was a non-issue as parts from 94.01 and 94.03 were not
interchangeable.
No. 11
- Four more Members joined option A.
No. 12
-    Two more Members joined option A.G/RO/M/34
Page 8
No. 13
-    Three more Members joined option A, while one more Member joined option B.
No. 14
-    Three more Members joined option A.-    Four more Members joined option B.
No. 15
- Six more Members joined option A.
- option B was deleted.
- One more Member joined a simple CTH.
No.16
- A consensus was confirmed that change of use should not be origin –conferring.
- It was also agreed that such a consensus should be reflected in the chapter note for chapter 85 on
the basis of the present para 1(d).
No. 18
- Six more Members joined option A.
- Option B was deleted.
- CTSH proposal was deleted.
No. 19
- Three more Members joined option A.
- Two different versions of option B were merged, and the two members supporting the option
were requested to provide a language for the merged option.
- One less Member supported option C.
No. 20
-    Six more Members joined option A.
-    Option B was deleted.
-    Two less Members supported option C.
- CTSH proposal was deleted.
No. 21
- A consensus has been reached on option A.
No. 23
-    Four more Members joined option A.
- Option B was deleted.
- One more member joined option C.
No. 24
- It was a widely held view that the issue was not ripe for discussion at the informal.
- The facilitator was requested to conduct further preliminary discussions on the issue.
No. 26
-Two more members joined option A.
No. 27
- Four more Members joined option A.
- Option B was deleted.G/RO/M/34
Page 9
No. 28
- One Member left CTSH with conditions for a simple CTSH.  One more Member joined CTSH
rule.
- (*) One Member holding to CTSH with condition was urged to reconsider its position.
No. 29
- A consensus has been reached on option A.
No. 31
-    Three more members joined option B.
- (*) Two Members supporting option A was urged to reconsider its position in the interest of
consensus.
No. 32
- Three more Members joined option A.
No. 33
-    One less Member supported option B.
(7) Conclusion
(a) An awareness of the need to expedite the remaining work on harmonizing rules of origin was
reflected in the unprecedented flexibility shown by many delegations during discussions on theseproduct-specific issues as well as at the informal meeting of the CRO on 1 December 2000, and it was
hoped that a similar flexibility would prevail regardin g resolutions with regard to the many remaining
issues.
(b) The importance of making progress on horiz ontal rules was reconfirmed by Members.
The development of a horizontal assembly rule , for example, would lead to resolution of
many product-specific issues.
(c) While Members felt it useful to have informal meetings chaired by a Chairman or Vice-
Chairman, to discuss sectoral issues, it was stressed that the role of the facilitators was crucial to a
successful outcome of the negotiations.  Their knowledge and experience of the nuances and different
positions taken by delegations made their contributions invaluable to making progress.
(d) The Secretariat's "non-paper" was acknowledged as being very useful.
2.2 The representative of Venezuela stated that ch apter 27 was of particular interest to Venezuela,
which was one of the main oil refining countries in the world.  In principle, Venezuela did not take
issue with the content of the draft notes regarding chapter 27.  There were, however, business
practices commonly used in the international petroleum industry which had not been duly addressed
in the draft discussed during this working session.  Venezuela was accordingly working on a proposal,in line with the basic content of draft note no. 2, that dealt with situations in which refining facilities
were used.  It was common commercial practice for oil firms seeking to make optimal use of refining
facilities available on the market to send crude oil stocks to different refineries and to market the final
product as their own.  Venezuela intended to submit a proposal that addressed the aforementioned
issues as soon as possible.G/RO/M/34
Page 10
B. CROSS -SECTORAL ISSUES
2.3 The representative of the United States stated as follows:
(1) Introduction
The CRO, at its meeting on 18 July 2000, recognized that addressing cross-sectoral issues offered
possibilities to streamline the various proposals and expedite the HWP.  At its meeting on 3
November 2000, the CRO agreed to take up some of the cross-sectoral issues in the meeting of the
CRO scheduled for 23-24 November 2000.
(2) Mixtures/Blending
− The Committee decided to limit its observations and discussions on this agenda item to the
products classified in chapters 1-24.  The Committee concluded that the proposals and principles
proposed for goods of these chapters did not have cross-cutting impacts for goods outside of this
sector.
− The view emerged from the discussions that there is no clear or useful distinction between the
term mixture and the term blending;  it could be assumed for the purposes of further considerationthat they mean more or less the same thing.
− Proposals that production of mixtures result in substantial transformation refer to situations in
which origin is to be conferred in the country where the mixture takes place without reference to
the particular materials that go into it.  If in fact a mixture is agreed to be origin conferring, thisshould be expressed at the primary rule level.
− The residual rules would always provide origin determinations for mixtures.  However,
determining the origin of mixtures under residual rules may not always give the intended originoutcome, because origin is determined under residual rules by reference to the origin of the
materials, and not necessarily by reference to the last country of production.
− As a general observation, Members consider that production of mixtures is not origin conferring,
subject to exceptions which might be agreed upon and articulated in primary rules.
(3) Assembly
− Assembly issues were discussed in connection with chapters 61, 62 and 91.  There was a
recognition that the cross-sectoral approach was inappropriate for these chapters.
− After the informal meeting, discussion on this issue was continued in a plurilateral mode.
Discussion took place in connection with chapters 84 and 87,  and there was a useful exchange ofviews among Members.
(4) Value-Added Rules
− It was recognised that in accordance with Article 9.2 (c) (iii) value-added rules could be used only
after the exclusive use of the HS nomenclature was exhausted.
− Proponents stated that value-added rules were simple and trade facilitative, and widely used in the
preferential trade regime.  These proponents considered that alternative "process" rules would be
complicated and subject to technological changes.G/RO/M/34
Page 11
− Proponents of  process rules stated that value-added rules would be complicated, non-transparent
and burdensome to administer.  It would entail substantial cost of administration as well as
compliance.  Fluctuation of currency values would result in different origin outcomes for the
same good produced by the same producer.  Differences in costs of production likewise would
lead to inconsistent origin outcomes even applying the same rules to the same processes.
− The Chairman noted that some Members had made clear their continued opposition to the use of
value-added rules.  Other Members saw merit in examining their application in more depth.
− It was concluded, in view of the many questions directed to the proponents of value-added rules,
that they should be offered the opportunity to present a comprehensive paper addressing the
concerns identified in the discussion.
(5) Residual rulesIt was noted that the residual environment of chapter 1 was quite different from the residual
environment of other chapters.  Cross-sectoral discussion in this chapter was inappropriate.
(6) Sets and KitsIt was agreed to discuss this issue in the overall architecture discussion.(7) Conclusion
The Committee agreed that in its efforts to streamline the harmonization work it had been important
to conduct cross-sectoral discussions.  It was acknowledged, however, that this approach had not
produced the hoped-for results.  It appeared in the final analysis that cross-sectoral discussions might
be productive only when the products were closely related, such as in the machinery sector (chapters
84-90).
2.4 The representative of the European Communities stated that the cross-sectoral discussions had
been fruitful as they helped overcome the fragment ed nature of negotiations on product-specific rules.
Cross-sectoral issues should, with adequate preparation, be included in the agendas of forthcoming
meetings.
2.5 The representative of the Philippines supported the statement made by the EC.
2.6 The CRO took note of the statements made.
III. STOCKTAKING OF PROGRESS MADE IN THE HARMONIZATION WORK
PROGRAMME
3.1 The Chairman stated that the CRO was now entering the final phase of its harmonization
work programme.  Only about one year was granted to the CRO to complete the remaining work.  He
urged Members to mobilize all resources available and to exercise the political will and flexibility
necessary to expedite the remaining work.  Members needed to prioritize their trade interests in the
various product-specific rules in order to conduct a real political trade-off among Members.  He alsourged Members to hold bilateral meetings between scheduled meetings.  Real political negotiations
were more likely in bilateral mode than in a multilateral one.
3.2 The representative of Chile stated that some progress had been made over the last two weeks
due, in part, to the change in working methods whereby the Vice-Chairman, with the assistance ofG/RO/M/34
Page 12
facilitators, presided over the informal meetings  of the CRO discussing product-specific rules.  It
seemed more effective using one person, instead of a number of facilitators, to head the discussions of
product-specific rules at the informal meetings of the CRO.  The chairperson would then be able to
assess more consistently the outcome of discussions on different product groups.
3.3 The representative of New Zealand expressed concern about the general direction in which
the HWP was heading.  A stumbling-block of a political nature remained on certain issues, whilst a
stalemate had been reached on many other issues despite wide-ranging discussions over the last two
years.  The draft text of the General Council Special Session Decision on Implementation set, as the
deadline for completion of the remaining work on ha rmonizing rules of origin, the date of the fourth
Ministerial Conference, or at the latest the end of 2001.  In order to meet the new deadline, the CRO
needed to change its working methods and evaluate the situation at the end of each meeting in afocused, transparent and frank manner.
3.4 The representative of the European Communities stated that at the latest session of
negotiations there had been a lack of flexibility on the part of delegations to seize deals and offers
made on longstanding issues.  Although there had been some progress in some areas, there shouldcertainly be an intensification of efforts by all delegations if the HWP was to be completed within the
new deadline.  She also shared the concerns expressed by New Zealand about the direction taken by
the HWP, and requested the Chairman to continue his formal and informal consultations on ways of
expediting the HWP and ensuring completion by the Fourth Ministerial Conference.
3.5 The Chairman stated that he would undertake informal consultations with Members to
establish the notional work programme for 2001.
3.6 The CRO took note of the statements made.
IV. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE
AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/W/61)
4.1 The CRO conducted its annual review of the implementation and operation of the Agreement
on the basis of the note prepared by the Secretariat (G/RO/W/61).  It was agreed that the Secretariat
issue a revised document in the G/RO/-series, taking into account the work of the CRO during this
session.
V. IMPLICATIONS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HARMONIZED RULES
OF ORIGIN ON OTHER WTO AGREEMENTS
5.1 The CRO agreed to revert to this issue at its next meeting.
VI. DEADLINE FOR COMPLETION OF THE WORK PROGRAMME ON
HARMONIZING RULES OF ORIGIN
6.1 The CRO agreed to revert to this issue at its next meeting.
VII. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE ON RULES OF ORIGIN
(G/RO/44)
7.1 The Chairman recalled that the Chairman of the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin
(TCRO) had forwarded to the CRO  a request for th e CRO's advice on matters relating to the ongoing
responsibilities of the TCRO (G/RO/44).  The CRO had discussed this issue at the meetings in Apriland November 2000.  There were differing views amongst Members.  The Chairman, in light of theG/RO/M/34
Page 13
fact that at this stage the CRO was not in a positio n to have a common view on a response to be given
to the questions raised, proposed sending an interim response stating this factual situation to the
Chairman of the TCRO.
7.2 The CRO agreed to mandate the Chairman to transmit such a letter1 to the Chairman of the
TCRO.
VIII.  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 5 AND PARAGRAPH 4 OF ANNEX II OF THE
AGREEMENT ON RULES OF ORIGIN (G/RO/N/29/REV.1)
8.1 The Chairman recalled that since the last meeting the Secretariat had circulated a document
informing delegations of modifications to Slovenia's submission of the English version of Annexes 3
and 7 to the Decree of the Implementation of the Customs Act.  To date, 72 Members had madenotifications of non-preferential rules of origin and 75 Members had made notifications of preferential
rules of origin.
8.2 The Chairman expressed concern that a number of Members had not yet complied with the
notification requirements.  He urged Members who ha d not yet notified to do so as early as possible.
8.3 The Committee took note of the statement.
IX. OTHER BUSINESS
Date of the next meeting
9.1 The CRO agreed to hold its next meeting on 16 March 2001, preceded by
informal/plurilateral meetings from 5-15 March 2001.
__________
                                                     
1 Contained in document G/RO/46.