G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
28 June 2019  
(19-4376) Page: 1/16 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade    
 
THEMATIC SESSION ON TRANSPARENCY1 
18 JUNE 2019 (P.M.) - 19 JUNE 2019  
Moderator 's Report2  
The Moderator of the Thematic Session on Transparency delivered this Report at the WTO TBT 
Committee 's meeting of 20-21 June 2019.  
 
_______________  
 
 
At the conclusion of the Eighth Triennial Review, Members agreed to continue to hold thematic 
sessions in conjunction with regular meetings of the Committee  with a view to further deepening 
the Co mmittee 's exchange of experiences on specific topics and to hold a session on transparency,  
including the Ninth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange , in June 2019 .3 At its 
meeting of 6 -7 March 2019, the Committee agreed to hold the thematic session on transparency 
over one and a half days, starting in the afternoon of Tuesday 18 June 2019 and to webcast the 
session.4 The pr ogramme for the thematic session  is contained in the Annex  of this report. 
In addition, a Secretariat background  note was circulated to assist the Committee's deliberations on 
the topic of transparency.5 The p resentations  summarized below  are available through  the WTO 
website.6  
1  GENERAL FUNCTIONING OF ENQUIR Y POINTS  
1.1.  The Secretariat  recalled that one of the recommendations adopted during the Eighth Triennial 
Review is to encourage Members to validate enquiry point contact information as contained in the 
TBT IMS.7 The Secretariat has undertaken  this validation exercise by sending an e mail to the TBT 
IMS list of all enquiry points on 21 January 2019, followed by  a reminder on 10 May. To date , 
102 Members  have validated their contact details in response to that email, either by confirm ing 
that their contact details are correct  or by providing updated information . Members that ha ve not 
yet responded to the validation request are encouraged to do so by email to tbt@wto.org . 
1.2.  Mr. Yang Song  (China ) described the working mechanism for implementing the transparency 
provisions in the TBT area. Subsequent to a recent government restructuring, Mr. Yang noted that 
several government authorities are involved in TBT work, including: the Ministry of Commerce (the 
Notification Authority), the General Administration of Customs (the National Enquiry Point), the State 
Administration for Market Regulation, the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, and the Ministry of 
Industry and Information Technology. Mr. Yang exp lained what is notified in China (e.g., laws and 
regulations, decrees and rules as well as compulsory standards), how this is done and the TBT 
enquiry point's responsibilities. He said that by end 2018, China had notified 1,375 notifications. The 
process o f handling other Members ' notifications was also described, including, for example, 
encouraging stakeholders to use ePing , and the consideration of whether to raise a Specific Trade 
                                                
1 The final programme  was circulated  as G/TBT/ GEN/264/Rev.1 . It is also in Annex I of this document.  
2 Mr. Sung-Hwa Jang  (Republic of Korea ). This Report is provided on the Moderator's ow n responsibility.  
3 G/TBT/41 , para. 8.2.a.iv , footnotes 296 and 297; JOB/TBT/273/Rev.2 , para. 1.7.  
4 http://webcast.wto.org   
5 JOB/TBT/320  
6 https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/tbt_e.htm  
7 G/TBT/41 , para. 6.19.a.i . G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Concern (STC) in the Committee.  Mr. Yang described how comments are collec ted from stakeholders 
in China,  includ ing not only government authorities, but also academia and industry associations. 
He said that sector -specific research and comment centres  have been established to assist in this 
work (e.g. on household appliances, au tomobiles, toys, textiles and fireworks). Since accession, 
China had received more than 10,000 enquiries from both domestic and foreign stakeholders. There 
are several challenges for the Chinese enquiry point, includ ing translation of texts (costs, volume of 
full texts); too short comment periods; the need to raise awareness – particularly for SMEs – about 
the importance of commenting; and assessing which notifications to comment  on, and evaluating 
their impact on trade . 
1.3.  Ms Ester Williams  (Jamaica ) said tha t the Bureau of Standards Jamaica (BSJ) is the 
designated WTO/TBT National Enquiry Point. It is mandated to respond to enquiries on technical 
regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures from Jamaica, as well as  to inform 
local stakeholders about export requirements in international markets. She noted that the Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs and Trade is the Notification Authority. The work of the enquiry point involve s a 
number of duties, including responding to requests from trading partners on  measures affecting 
trade (including, for example, in the agricultural and cosmetic sectors), assisting the national 
standards development process for key productive sectors, and assisting Jamaican manufacturers 
and exporters – in particular SMES – to prep are customs documentation. Jamaica use s online tools 
to help raise awareness among SMEs for requirements in foreign markets, including ePing and the 
European Commission Market Access Database, as well as the links shared by the US and Canadian 
enquiry poin ts for packaging and labelling requirements. Jamaica ha s received several enquiries 
from SMEs about a wide variety of products including on cosmetics, toys, processed fruits and water 
pipes. Ms Williams noted that Jamaica has made several notifications, provided texts on demand, 
and answered several requests about how to access more information about market access in export 
markets.  
1.4.  Mr. Li -Yu Wei (Chinese Taipei ) provided some insights on how Chinese Taipei responds to 
enquiri es on TBT. He noted, to begin with, that the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection 
is the enquiry point for Chinese Taipei. Mr. Wei said that there is an increasing use of the enquiry 
point, evidenced by a rising trend of enquiries from various sta keholders (both domestic and 
foreign). The procedure for handling enquiries from international stakeholders (acknowledgment of 
receipt, consultat ion and response) normally takes  less than five days and in practice average s 
1.5 days. He stressed the importa nce of re -sending  an enquiry if there is no acknowledgement (from 
Chinese Taipei) within one to two days, in case of a transmission problem. Responses from Chinese 
Taipei normally include supporting documents and relevant references. Mr. Wei said that dome stic 
enquiries take somewhat longer, depending on  whether Members respond  and how long it takes. 
Frequently, these are about whether products are regulated, w hat the applicable standards are, and 
who can perform relevant conformity assessment procedures. D ifficulties that Chinese Taipei face  in 
sending enquir ies to other Members are, for example: lack of acknowledgement; over-lengthy 
response time ; responses being sometimes incomplete , and even of questionable accuracy or 
correctness. It was suggested – in follow -up to the Decisions and Recommendations Adopted by the 
WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade since 1 January 19958 - that Members acknowledge 
receipt and process requests for information within five working days. Mr. Wei further suggested 
that supporting documentation and official references (links) be provided to increase credibility of 
responses. Another possible suggestion was to share approaches used by Members to access other 
Members' TBT -related information . 
1.5.  Ms MaryAnn Hogan (United States) referred to  the rising number of STCs discussed dur ing 
the TBT Committee meetings and pointed out that increased communication between enquiry points 
could help to avoid, address and resolve STCs by exchanging information and questions on n otified 
measures in between meetings. Enhancing communication could facilitate staying abreast of 
developments and create awareness on possible issues related to notified TBT measures i n advance 
of the TBT Committee m eetings. According to Ms Hogan, bilater al engagement will also increase if 
enquiry points follow up and communicate on notified measures between meetings, working together 
before a measure becomes an STC and seeking clarifications on the scope and intent of a propo sed 
regulation. A possibility is to look into ePing, the SPS/TBT notification alert system, to facilitate such 
commu nications as it already include s a discussion forum for enquiry points. This enhanced 
communication will by no means replace STCs, but  will provide a less formal opportun ity to address 
                                                
8 G/TBT/1/Rev.13 , para 5.7.2.1.1.  G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 3 - 
 
  possible trade concerns. Ms Hogan also referred to the challenge related to getting help from trade 
stakeholders to formulate questions on notified measures and to reply to incoming ones.  
1.6.  Ms Lucy Ikonya  (Kenya) presented Kenya' s experience i n managing notifications and 
comments, explaining the institutional framework and processes of the country to deal with TBT 
transparency obligations and rights. The presentation touched upon the TBT National Committee, 
drafting and submitting domestic noti fications, handling of comments on notified measures and STCs 
and related challenges. She explained that the TBT National Consultative Committee is a key 
institution in TBT transparency matters and consists of government officials and private sector 
stakeh olders. The TBT National Enquiry Point sends regular reports to the TBT National Committee. 
The National Enquiry Point covers a broad set of functions such as the drafting of TBT notifications, 
uploading approved notifications to the WTO NSS and responding  to incoming comments on 
notifications in consultation with the regulatory bodies and technical officers. This is in addition to 
the main role of responding to enquiries related to Standards, Technical Regulations and Conformity 
Assessment Procedures. STCs  are handled by the TBT National Committee. If technical in nature, 
the STC is forwarded to the relevant Technical Committee. Main challenges pointed out by Ms Lucy 
Ikonya are the limited feedback from the business community on foreign notifications, delay ed 
communication from regulatory authorities concerning proposed or revised technical regulations, 
problems related to delays in getting full texts, lack of response from some NEPS, problems with 
obtaining translation of notified regulations , and inadequat e resources. She also mentioned the 
necessity for an enquiry point to have a strong network with regulatory bodies to effectively carry 
out assigned tasks, and the need to fully utilize technology in their daily work . 
2  TRACKING AND REACTING TO MEMBERS' MEASURES AND NOTIFICATIONS  
2.1.  The Secretariat  provided an update on the ePing SPS /TBT notification alert system. The 
pertinence of an SPS /TBT notification alert mechanism was highlighted, referring to the rising 
number of SPS and TBT notifications submitted to the WTO each year. ePing facilitates navigating 
through and responding to notifications in a timely manner. An email alert mechanism,  it was  
explained, helps tracking relevant notifications while a communication platform facilitates national 
and international discussion and coordination on distributed notifications. Engagement of the enquiry 
points to implement ePing at national level i s however key, especially for what concerns effectively 
using the communication and discussion functions . ePing is a tripartite partnership between the 
WTO, UN DESA and the ITC. As of 15 June, around  6800 persons/institutions have registered on 
ePing. 47% o f ePing users are government officials  and 44% are private sector stakeholders. 
95 enquiry points have received admin right s to administer ePing at the national level. The number 
of users per country shows that capacity building and training are key to suc cessfully disseminate 
the ePing system: many of the countries with a relatively high number of ePing users are countries 
in which traini ng sessions have been organized . To deliver on the increasing number of capacity 
building requests, the WTO has worked t ogether with partners such as US AID and ISO and has 
developed training and promotion materials such as an ePing manual and flyer. The ePing system is 
also being updated regularly, based on feedback received from enquiry points and regular users. 
Complemen tary f actors that could help draw maximum benefits from the system include the level 
of compliance w ith notification obligations,  engaged public and private sector stakeholders , effective 
coordination mechanisms and awareness of rights and obligations unde r the SPS/TBT Agreements .  
2.2.  Mr. Christian Knebel (UNCTAD) presented the UNTCAD Non -tariff Measures (NTM) 
programme. The programme covers a broad spectrum of measures including but not limited to TBT 
and SPS measures. Data collection is at the heart of this project which applies the following "value 
chain ": definition and classification of NTMs, data collection, data dissemination, research and 
analysis, and support to policy making. Providing some insights into the analysis, the presenter 
pointed out that TB T measures are the most common and costly NTMs, with lack of transparency 
being a major cost factor. Analysis show s that almost 70% of international trade is affected by TBT 
measures. Compliance with TBT measures invokes a price increase of on average 7% o f the product 
price, which is more than all other NTMs combined. Some price increases are inevitable due to, for 
example, intrinsic costs of product safety. However, other costs are avoidable, such as information 
costs due to a lack of regulatory transpare ncy. The global NTM transparency initiative aims to 
address these transparency challenges. The data collection, Mr Knebel mentioned, is not based on 
notifications but on careful reading of regulations in a country and the classification of products 
affecte d and measures contained in the regulation. Data collection is comprehensive, but it is a 
stocktaking exercise at a certain point in time. Updating could happen via the SPS and TBT 
notification procedures, bringing both efforts together.  G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.3.  Mr. Mathieu Lorid an (ITC) introduced the Global Trade Helpdesk9, a single -entry point for 
trade -related information that aims to integrate dispersed and complex information on trade. 
Mr. Loridan  explained that many international organizations undertake endeavours to improve the 
trade -related information flow to help SMEs  and other trade stakeholders  benefit from an open 
international trade system. These efforts resonate closely with one of ITC's main goals: empowering 
SMEs to grow. He also pointed out that TBT -related issues are one of the key challenges when 
addressing obstacles to trade, for example the lack of information on certification processes. 
ITC helps SMEs to address these challenges by  providing detailed and comprehensive information 
through a suite of market analysis tools, yet this information does not always meet their needs. As 
many other international organizations have developed databases to enhance information 
dissemination, the Global Trade Helpdesk aims to bring together all this information in one online 
platform and trans late it into business language. Mr. Loridan further elaborated on the Global Trade 
Helpdesk, explaining that it is based on four pillars: (i) building a netwo rk of partners working on 
collection of trade information and sustainability; (ii) developing a one -stop-shop integrating 
dispersed trade information; (iii)  increasing capacity by training national stakeholders on the u se of 
the Global Trade Helpdesk ; and (iv) strengthening data collection efforts. Currently , a beta version 
is available online which is updated regularly. The Helpdesk consists of four parts: (i) explore 
markets; (ii) access requirements; (iii) navigate procedures; and (iv) identify partners.  It combines 
information on applied technical requirements from UNCTAD and ITC databases with potential 
regulatory changes contained in  SPS/TBT notifications . 
2.4.  Ms Lara Adams  (Australia ) shared experiences on how Australia addresses Non -Tariff Barriers 
(NTBs ). She explained that addressing NTBs is a priority for Australia. While some measures are 
justified , some rules and requirements go beyond what is justified under international trade rules. 
Australian exporters have called on the government to apply a who le-of-government approach to 
address international NTBs as the y can imply a high cost, hampering potential growth. Responding 
to the Australian businesses, the government developed a Non -tariff Barriers Action Plan; a whole -
of-government strategy to increa se efforts to improve market access through enhancing 
understanding of barriers that are legitimate and addressing barriers that are inconsistent with 
international trade rules. To develop the action plan, the government consulted with industry and 
busines ses. In light of this, a gateway website was created to facilitate raising concerns for all 
businesses, and particularly small and medium -sized businesses. Ms Adams also pointed out that 
the consultation process revealed the importance of setting clear exp ectation s on what governments 
can and cannot do when advocating for industry on international trade issues. Ms Adams discussed 
the action plan and its goals of: access, collaboration and transparency. In terms of access, the plan 
commits to improve access for exporters to report trade barriers and develop capability to identify 
NTBs and take necessary action. Under the collaboration goal, standard operation procedures have 
been developed to address the commitment to respond to queries raised in a timely fashion. The 
transparency goal focusses on increasing transparency on the status of non -tariff issues being faced 
by industry and business. The government aims to ensure that there is transparency on the advocacy 
that is being done by the government and to close the feedback loop with industry on particular 
trade issues. Ms Adams point ed out that this work has helped Australia to get a more comprehensive 
view on the issues being faced by exporters in moving towards more liberalized trade.  
2.5.  Ms Celine Zaimo ğlu (European Union ) described the procedure for TBT notifications in the 
EU. She cl arified that EU draft measures are notified by the EU TBT Notification and Enquiry Point 
but that EU member States also have individual TBT Notification and Enquiry Points, responsible for 
notifying national draft measures.  She explained that the EU TBT No tification and Enquiry Point is 
situated in the Directorate -General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs (DG 
GROW) of the EU Commission and described its composition, clarifying her role as one of the two 
TBT managers of the unit. Ms Za imoğlu explained that the EU TBT Notification and Enquiry Point 
notifies draft EU measures such as Commission proposals for regulations , directives , decisions of the 
European Parliament and of the Council, as well as draft acts of the Commission (such as d elegated 
acts and implementing acts) and explained the notification process. She said that between 2008 and 
2018, the EU TBT Notification and Enquiry Point notified 875 notifications and that in this time, 
received over 400 reactions from third countries t o these notifications. She noted that since there 
will be a new Commission in 2019, the EU TBT Notification and Enquiry Point expect s to submit less 
notifications than in 2018. Ms Zaimoğlu also described the process of EU member States ' 
                                                
9 www.globaltradehelpdesk.org  G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 5 - 
 
  notifications and s tated that the EU TBT Notification and Enquiry Point play s a limited role and 
coordinate s only the response to comments from third countries . 
2.6.  Ms Phuong Nguyen Thi Mai (Viet Nam ) described Viet Nam's experience in handling the 
notifications of WTO Members. She explained that the TBT National Enquiry Point (i.e. TBT Viet Nam 
Office) is situated in the Directorate for Standards, Quality and Metrology (STAMEQ) in the Ministry 
of Science and Technology and is responsible for notifying and responding to all enquiries related to 
TBT issues; managing and operating the TBT Viet Nam portal; and providing and disseminating TBT 
information to stakeholders. Ms Nguyen Thi Mai said that a Prime Minister decision of 2017  regulat es 
the organization and operation of TBT Viet Nam Network , made up of TBT Points in different 
government ministries, including: the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Ministry of Health, the 
Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Agriculture and R ural Development, the Ministry of Culture, 
Sport and Tourism, the Ministry of Environment and Resources, the Ministry of Labour – Invalid and 
Social Affairs as well as the Ministry of Construction, all working together  to support the work of the 
TBT Viet N am Office. Ms Nguyen Thi Mai explained how notifications of WTO Members are delivered 
to the TBT Network and interested stakeholders. The TBT Viet Nam Office also provide s training on 
ePing, which has increased the number of user registrations from governm ent agencies (53%), 
private sector (24%) and academic institutions (23%). She said that a lack of awareness and 
engagement with the private sector meant that many SMEs (who represent 96% of Viet namese 
enterprises , contribute 40% to Viet Nam's GDP and contr ibute 50% towards employment in Viet 
Nam)  are not registered on ePing, possibly due  to language barriers and a lack of knowledge of 
NTMs (TBT). To address some of these challenges, the TBT Viet Nam Office is targeting workshop 
and training seminars for the  private sector (SMEs) and collaborating with ITC on a project that 
would  translate the ePing platform to  Vietnamese to facilitate an improved public -private sector 
dialogue.  
2.7.  Ms MaryAnn Hogan (United States) described the role of the USA TBT Enquiry Point and how 
it facilitates stakeholder awareness of and comments on TBT notifications. Ms Hogan explained that 
the USA TBT Enquiry Point is the notification authority of the US. The role of the USA TBT Enquiry 
Point is to make notifications available through N otifyUS; to distribute comments to agencies of the 
US government and to the appropriate Enquiry Points of WTO Members; to respond to 
correspondence from WTO Members; to provide information and guidance to US industries; and to 
monitor US Federal and State regulations to notify the WTO of potential TBTs. Ms Hogan indicated 
that NotifyUS is a free, web -based service offered by the USA TBT Enquiry Point and has over 3,000 
active users from both the US Government and private sector. Ms Hogan said that NotifyUS 
distributes key information on notifications and provides full texts not made available at the time of 
notification. She also said that there are many benefits of using the USA TBT Enquiry Point, including 
the guidance provided on how to make comments on n otifications of draft measures. Ms Hogan 
explained that the US had already provided about 768 comments on WTO Members' notifications 
and had made over 180 requests for information to WTO Members between 2015 and 2019 alone. 
She said that these numbers indi cate a strong engagement of the US stakeholders in TBT matters. 
Finally, Ms Hogan urged Members to think about some of the challenges they face in monitoring 
notifications or engaging stakeholders and to consider using ePing as a tool that could facilitate  
stakeholders' comments on notifications.  
2.8.  Ms Jamie Ferman  (United States), u sing the toy industry as an example for successful 
stakeholder engagement, described how the US engaged stakeholders to reduce STCs. Ms Ferman 
indicated that the US exports toys to  at least 168 countries and that since 96% of children between 
the ages of 0 to 14 live outside the US, it is important for the US to help its domestic industry be 
successful exporters. Ms Ferman explained that stakeholder engagement does not always start with 
notifications submitted to the WTO but could start with a country report ing a problem for the toy 
industry. In that case, the US Department of Commerce would engage stakeholders, evaluate the 
measure, submit comments through the US enquiry point, engage the foreign government and try 
to solve the problem identified before raising it as an STC in the TBT  Committee . Ms Ferman used a 
case study on toys with Nepal to show how well the process of engaging stakeholders work s. 
Specifically , she said  that her Department had received a request in June 2017 to engage Nepal on 
a proposed toy restriction that was to be adopted to law. After consultations with Nepal, it became 
clear that Nepal needed technical assistance to comply with international standa rds. After 
engagement with various stakeholders on technical issues, Nepal notified in May 2018 a re-drafted 
version of the measure to the WTO that was in line with international standards. Ms Ferman pointed 
out that this issue had not been raised at the T BT Committee but resolved through the TBT process. 
Finally , although some enquiry points perform similar tasks to her role as an International Trade G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Specialist, she urged Members to have specific people dedicated to understanding the needs of 
various indus tries to facilitate the speedy resolution of potential problems.  
2.9.  Ms Francine Lamoriello (United States) emphasised the highly regulated nature of the global 
cosmetic and personal care products industry and the importance of retaining customer loyalty and 
faith in the safety and efficacy of products. Supply chains are highly complex and dependent on open 
markets, as well as transparent  and consistent regulatory environments. The industry shares the 
goal of regulators in assuring that only safe products are p laced on the market. The WTO process, 
and in particular the TBT Agreement , is critical to industry's ability to be informed about proposed 
regulations in a wide range of countries. This is done by using Notify US and could apply equally to 
the ePing system . These critical tools enhance the role of Personal Care Products Council ( PCPC) in 
advocating international best practices in cosmetics regulation, promoting alignment of global 
regulatory approaches and, ultimately, educating member companies about new r egulations. The 
TBT notification process allows the sharing of perspective and experiences as a global industry that 
is used to taking account of differing regulatory regimes for cosmetics and that has come to have 
an understanding of international best pr actices. By providing comments, the regulation can be 
improved to avoid it becoming a trade barrier. Global coordination exists so that cosmetic industry 
associations around the world speak with one voice. Another important dialogue is with US 
Government o fficials in USTR, Department  of Commerce and the FDA to see if there is government 
support for industry concerns. PCPC has dialogue with the US government about notifications that 
will have a significant impact on industry and consults with the US governme nt prior to each TBT 
meeting to discuss outstanding trade concerns. All of this takes time and she emphasised the 
importance of allowing a 60 -day comment period. The speaker concluded with the following: 
(i) Notify early in the drafting process so that reg ulators have time to listen to opinions from 
stakeholders; (ii) The notification process should not be a one -way street and should ideally create 
a dialogue between stakeholders and regulators that will benefit both , and enquiry points should 
share the com ments throughout their respective governments so relevant agencies are aware of 
stakeholders' points of view. PCPC believes it is important  that enquiry points forward stakeholder 
comments to the notifier so that stakeholder perspectives are given due cons ideration ; (iii) Notifiers 
should provide feedback to stakeholders about whether and how their suggestions will be taken into 
account, and should  notify the final regulation ; (iv) Finally, enquiry points should continue to share 
best practices and experiences with each other.  
2.10.   Mr. George Opiyo (Uganda) shared Uganda's experience in its extensive use of the ePing 
platform. Uganda adopt s a sector approach for promotion, training & registration of users, reaching 
out to the manufacturing, organic, fishe ries, and flowers, fruits and vegetables sectors. Central and 
local government officials have also been trained in using the system. Thanks to ePing email alerts, 
users can download notifications and draft measures using links provided in the notifications . If no 
link/website is provided, the National Enquiry Point  contacts the notifying Member to request this 
information. This information is then shared with users using the ePing File Sharing function. Uganda 
also uses the National Discussion Forum functio n to facilitate discussion of notifications and has 
created sector groups for discussion of notifications that may affect a particular sector. The 
discussion forum feature is moderated by the National Enquiry Point who provide s clarifications and 
guidance as necessary. This has led to more discussion at the bilateral level and assisted in compiling 
comments to the notifying Member. Further discussions are also conducted in the National TBT/SPS 
Committee.  Mr. Opiyo concluded by emphasising the usefulness of ePing in coordinating 
consultations on notifications and draft measures at the national, regional and international levels. 
He recommended that ePing allow for regional groups and discussion and emphasised the 
importance of promoting ePing in all SPS/TBT a nd trade related events . 
2.11.   Ms Janelle Teemal (Trinidad and Tobago) laid out the challenges faced by the Trinidad and 
Tobago Bureau of Standards in its role as focal point for implementation of the Agreement. With no 
identified mechanism to address TBT -relate d issues, she said it can be difficult for the enquiry point 
to identify who might be affected by a notification leading to a lack of a coordinated national position 
or comments in response to TBT -related trade concerns. The officer with the responsibility  for 
handling TBT matters has submitted a proposal to the executive director of the Trinidad and Tobago 
Bureau of Standards to establish a national coordinating committee to mitigate these challenges. 
ePing will play an important role in improving efficien cy as the committee would use the discussion 
forum feature so no time is lost in reacting to issues. At the regional level, CARICOM has established 
a regional committee, currently chaired by Trinidad and Tobago, to handle matters on Technical 
Barriers to T rade, Information Management and Enquiry Points (TIE). The objective of the TIE 
committee includes supporting the work of National TBT Committees, acting as the regional G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 7 - 
 
  committee for the dissemination of pertinent information on new concepts, best practic es, 
recommendations and guidelines for the effective implementation of the WTO -TBT Agreement and 
disseminating countries' experiences on TBT matters in the WTO Committees on TBT, TF and SPS. 
A questionnaire requesting enquiry point information and to ident ify assistance needed with 
implementation statements has been sent to CARICOM member states. The results of this will lead 
to ePing being used as a forum for regional discussions amongst enquiry point officers and to 
effectively address time constraints of  national/regional committees, facilitate sectorial discussions 
on proposed notifications, assist with national enquiry point discussions for harmonization regionally 
and disseminate specific sectoral information . 
2.12.   Ms Aya Abdelmonem Moussa (Egypt) explained  the work undertaken by Egypt in fulfilling 
its TBT Agreement's transparency obligations. In 2018, 80 draft regulations were notified and 
already 43 had been notified this year. Egypt established a TBT national sub -committee in 2003 
under the auspices of t he Supreme national committee headed by the Minister of Trade and Industry, 
chaired by the head of the Egyptian organization of Standardization and Quality. The subcommittee 
comprised all relevant governmental and non -governmental stakeholders.10 Recognizin g the 
importance of transparency and predictability, a National Coordination Mechanism was established 
by the Prime Minister decree No. 2489/2007, the aim of which is to efficiently share TBT -related 
information. Mechanisms are in place for both outgoing a nd incoming notifications, with public and 
private sector involvement throughout. The benefit of using ePing is that stakeholders registered to 
receive email alerts of notifications of interest to them. It also helped to facilitate provision of 
comments wi thin the time -frame. To enhance awareness of ePing, the Egyptian Ministry of Trade 
and Industry Trade Agreement Sector organize s regular workshops on ePing with representatives 
from all TBT stakeholders.  
2.13.   Ms Roswitha Franz  (ISO) provided information  on ISO's MENA STAR project11, the objective 
of which is to strengthen the institutional infrastructure on standards and regulations to support 
business and industry in the Middle East and North Africa. In the context of this project, n ational 
workshops were conducted on the benefits and obligations under  the TBT Agreement, including 
awareness on ePing. These workshops were complemented by hands -on training on ePing for the 
staff of the TBT Enquiry Point.  As a result, the number of regis tered ePing  users in the participating  
countries increased from 95 (prior to the workshops ) to 429 in May 2019.  
3  HANDLING OF COMMENTS , DISSEMINATION OF C OMMENTS AND REPLIES ON A 
VOLUNTARY BASIS  
3.1.  Ms Celine Zaimoglu (European Union) noting the steady increase in the number of TBT 
notifications since 2003, described the EU -TBT public website ( www.ec.europa.eu/growth/tools -
databases/tbt/en ) as the IT tool used to manage this large volume of not ifications and related 
documents. Initially targeted at EU economic operators, in particular SMEs, the system allows users 
to subscribe to a mailing list to receive notifications based on sectors and countries of interest. She 
said that there are currently  2,300 or so industry stakeholders subscribed to the mailing list. The EU 
TBT notification and enquiry point also has direct contact with the enquiry points of other member 
States, or with Commission departments in charge of trade or specific sectors. In t erms of the 
1,655  third-country notifications received in 2018, Ms Zaimoglu reported that the EU had sent 
comments on 73 of these. She described the comment procedure, from the enquiry point distributing 
notifications received from the WTO database to Comm ission departments and to stakeholders, to 
those departments providing technical input and assessing stakeholder comments, and finally to the 
enquiry point preparing comments on behalf of the EU in cooperation with the Commission 
departments. Ms Zaimoglu e xplained that whilst comments on notifications, answers and reactions 
thereto from the EU to WTO Members and vice versa are published on the EU -TBT public website, 
comments received from industry are not. In an attempt to balance transparency and data 
protection, she said that documents sent by Members to the EU -TBT enquiry point should not contain 
any personal data in order to allow them to be published. Members were also urged to ensure that 
comments from industry be clearly endorsed by the Member concern ed in order for them to be 
published . 
                                                
10 The lis t of stakeholders is contained in the presentation on the WTO website: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/thematicsession1819_06_29_e.htm  
11 https://www.iso.o rg/sites/menastar/  G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.2.  Mr. Ravi Bharwani  (United States) described FDA's resource - and time -intensive process for 
developing and implementing new regulations which meet US public health objectives, whilst 
respecting established laws, policie s, and trade obligations. He noted that regulatory prioritization 
can arise from multiple sources: mandated by an Act of Congress; reflecting public health priorities; 
or from a public health emergency following an outbreak. The FDA's goal in the rulemakin g process 
is to engage all stakeholders (e.g. consumers/patients, domestic or foreign industry, foreign or US 
state governments, academics/researchers) to maximize substantive comments that may improve 
the proposed rule. The process of developing a propose d regulation, once regulatory priorities have 
been identified, involves holding public meetings, opening a docket to receive comments on specific 
scientific topics, issuing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, notifying a draft rule for 
comment, and issuing a final rule in which the comments received from stakeholders are addressed.  
Following clearance as per Office of Management and Budget procedures, a draft regulation will be 
published in the Federal Register, notified to the WTO, and set up for pu blic comments by means of 
a docket on the www.regulations.gov  website. FDA reviews comments received through the enquiry 
point with USTR and works to address trading partners' concerns.  FDA organizes the feedback by 
topic, which helps when large volumes of comments from stakeholders are received. For example, 
following FDA's updates to the Nutrition Facts Label on packaged food products approximately 
280,000 interested parties submitted comments. In this case, FDA included in the docket the actual 
scientific evidence , which had informed the draft rules, a practice which helps educate stakeholders, 
and in turn would raise the quality of the feedback received. Substantive comments are frequently 
taken into considerati on and can lead to FDA making changes to a draft rule when issuing the final 
rule. One such instance was the development of the FDA final rule on Unique Device Identifiers, a 
process that took seven years from the initial request for comments to the issuan ce of a final rule, 
and where comments on the draft rule informed a better final rule. The last stage in the rulemaking 
process, once the comment period is closed, involves FDA reviewing and considering the comments 
received, responses to which appear by t opic in the preamble to the final rule . 
4  ESTABLISHING WHETHER  A MEASURE SHOULD BE  NOTIFIED UNDER THE SPS 
AGREEMENT AND/OR TBT  AGREEMENT  
4.1.  The Secretariat  highlighted key elements from the Secretariat Background Note 
(JOB/TBT/320 , Section 3.2 and Annex II) relevant to the session's theme: (i) the TBT and SPS 
Agreements contain provi sions disciplining their relationship and scope (Articles 1.5 and 1.4, 
respectively); (ii) this issue is not new as already back in 1995 -1996 the TBT and SPS Committees, 
jointly as well as separately, discussed how to identify and notify measures that may contain TBT 
and SPS elements; (iii) as background for these early discussions, the SPS Committee asked the 
Secretariat to prepare two notes on th e issue ( G/SPS/W/17  and G/SPS/W/32 ), both perhaps still 
relevant for the current discussions under both TBT and SPS Committees; and (iv) following those 
early discussions, the SPS Committee – but not the TBT Committee – adopted a recommendation 
that when a regul ation contains both TBT and SPS measures, it should be notified under both 
agreements, " preferably with an indication of which parts of the regulation fall under the SPS 
Agreement […] and which parts fall under the TBT Agreement […]" (G/SPS/7/Rev.4 , para. 2.39).  
4.2.  Ms Lea Contier de Freitas (Brazil) highlighted various aspect of Brazil's regulatory framework 
which, combined, foster constant dialogue among Brazil's main regulators, international trade 
authorities and the TBT National Notification Authority. This dialogue, she said, helps with the task 
of clarifying which agreement to notify. Another positive element she mentioned was Brazil's 
enhanced transparency policy of going beyond the Agreements' minimum obligations and notifying 
all regulations that have impact on trade, irrespective of their deg ree of trade restrictiveness or if 
they are based or not on international standards. Additionally, consistently with this enhanced 
transparency approach, over the years Brazil has been increasing the number of "double" TBT -SPS 
notifications (mostly for Bra zilian measures on food marking, labelling and packaging, and 
pesticides). She encouraged Members to continue discussing experiences with "double notifications" . 
4.3.  Mr. Luís Henrique Barbosa da Silva (Brazil) first gave a brief overview of the key TBT and 
SPS respective provisions disciplining the coverage of these Agreements. He stressed that knowing 
precisely how to notify measures under the two Agreements is particularly important because 
transparency is one of the cornerstones not only for TBT and SPS but in fact to all WTO agreements. 
He stressed that uncertainties on how, to whom, and under which agreement one should notify can 
have important negative consequence to Members: time to communicate drafts to interested 
stakeholders could be lost; given that d isciplines governing regulation are different, resources could 
be wasted when STCs are raised in the wrong Committee. He said that delineating the boundaries G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 9 - 
 
  between TBT and SPS may at first seem a simple task, when in fact  it can  sometimes be daunting 
and difficult.  After referring to some examples, including under a WTO dispute, he concluded with a 
proposal for the TBT  Committee to " encourage [] Members to reflect on the benefits of notifying 
simultaneously to both  [TBT and SPS] Committees ". 
4.4.  Ms Emma Pagott o (Canada) described Canada's experience with both submitting to, and 
receiving from, Members' notifications of regulations containing SPS and TBT elements. She said 
that in Canada a single body performs the tasks of Notification Authority and the Enquiry Point for 
both TBT and SPS measures. This creates a "single window" for the delivery of transparency 
requirements, not only under the TBT and SPS Agreements, but also under Canada's preferential 
free trade agreements. Canada's Notification Authority and En quiry Point and Canadian regulators 
work together to identify issues requiring notification and to prepare such notifications. Concerning 
the preparation and submission of notifications, she said that Canada's regulations are 
comprehensive in nature, with those by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) falling mainly 
into three categories: food (food safety and consumer protection); plant (plant health, protection, 
and technical requirements); and animal (animal health, protection and technical requirem ents). 
When determining whether to notify a proposed regulation, CFIA assesses whether elements in the 
regulation fall under the SPS or TBT Agreement. She then provided an example of a regulation that 
was notified to both the SPS and TBT Committees. Concer ning the handling of TBT and SPS 
notifications from other Members, she said that Canada regularly monitors these notifications and 
noted that other Members also have regulations on food, plants, and animal commodities that 
contain both TBT and SPS elements . She concluded by making a "best practice" suggestion for 
Members to indicate in their notification if the regulation has been notified to another Committee; 
for example, in the Description of Content Section Members could include a sentence to the effect  
of 'This regulation has been notified under the TBT Agreement ( G/TBT/N/ ) and SPS Agreement 
(G/SPS/N/ )'. 
5  TECHNICAL CO -OPERATI ON 
5.1.  Ms Sigrid Simpson (United States) described the TBT transparency -related aspects of US -
Brazil and US -Argentina Commercial Dialog ues, which promote industry -specific cooperation to 
address issues in each partner country. With respect to the US -Brazil dialogue, she highlighted the 
"Memorandum of Intent on Joint Cooperation on Regulatory Coherence and Meaningful Engagement 
with the Pr ivate Sector" which promotes and institutionalizes good regulatory practices (GRP). Under 
the US -Argentina dialogue, the "MOU on Joint Cooperation on Regulatory Coherence and Meaningful 
Engagement with the Private Sector" led to technical exchanges on issu es such as public 
consultation, e -rulemaking, and taking comments into account. She described positive developments 
in the use of GRP by Brazil and Argentina stemming from the dialogues, for instance, the "Regulatory 
Impact Analysis (RIA) guidelines" issue d by Casa Civil in Brazil, and the creation of the "Technical 
Regulations Unit" in Argentina. Lessons learned include the importance of top -level leadership and 
political will to drive regulatory reform, relationship and network building for GRP leadership , and 
involving regulators in the discussion . 
5.2.  Ms Leslie McDermott (United States)  highlighted technical assistance provided by the 
Standards Alliance for TBT Enquiry Points of African Members. Under the programme, technical 
assistance was provided to twelv e Members during 2013 -2018. The focus was capacity building and 
the development of action plans to improve the effectiveness of the Enquiry Points and Notification 
Authorities in line with the needs of each Member assisted. This involved steps such as addr essing 
staffing gaps and development of standard operating procedures for Enquiry Points and Notification 
Authorities, stakeholder communication such as through coordination mechanisms, and promotion 
and awareness raising. Activities included in -country tr aining, visits to the US Enquiry Point, 
establishing TBT/SPS national committees, and developing Enquiry Point and Notification Authority 
procedures, while building on the development of ePing. The average number of notifications 
submitted by the 12 partne r Members increased from 13.3 per year in 2013, to 54.6 in 2018; the 
assistance provided by Standards Alliance, and other donors and organizations, contributed to this 
increased transparency.   G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 10 - 
 
  6  NOTIFICATION AND AVA ILABILITY OF ADOPTED  FINAL TEXTS  
6.1.  The Secret ariat drew delegations ' attention to the recommendations dealing with Final Texts 
as described in the background document ( JOB/TBT/320 , paras 2.34 – 2.38). Members were invited 
to consider the revised  formats ( JOB/TBT/320 , Annexes III and IV) and provide any comments in 
writing. Delegations were also invited to provide infor mation  to the Secretariat, about where (e.g., 
website addresses) Members maintain up -to-date information regarding adopted final texts of 
technical regulations as well as applicable conformity assessment p rocedures.  
7  FACILITATED DISCUSSI ONS IN BREAK -OUT GRO UPS 
7.1  Group 1: Notifications : How to improve the quality and completeness of notifications  
7.1.  Ms Uma Muniandy  (Facilitator, Singapore) noted th at the group 's discussions focused on a 
range of issues, including challenges and possible solutions on notifying regulations and measures 
with both SPS and TBT elements, identification of HS/ICS codes, access to draft and final texts and 
inter-agency coordination. She highlighted three take -aways from the session. Firstl y, it was clear 
that closer coordination between  the TBT and SPS enquiry points  would be useful. This could help 
to address some specific issues, such as wh en different comment periods are provided in SPS and 
TBT notifications for the same measure , as the notifications have been submitted on different days.  
In this regard, it was also pointed out that having one enquiry point for SPS and TBT issues could 
be beneficial. Second ly, it was important for notifications to contain clear and comprehensive 
descriptions of regulations, as this will help enquiry points to decide which regulators and 
stakeholders need to be alerted when a new notification comes  in. This will also help traders  comply 
with the regulations.  Finally, delegations had noted difficulties in complying with  transparency 
procedures when notified measures contained proprietary information owned by others: for instance, 
notifying, and providing free access to the full tex t of regulations can sometimes be problematic 
when a (voluntary) national standard  – based on text protected by copyright owned by an 
international standardizing body  – is turned into a "mandatory" standard (i.e. a TBT technical 
regulation).  
7.2  Group 2: Stake holders : How to engage stakeholders in assessing and responding to 
incoming notifications  
7.2.  Mr. Laurence Sandral (Facilitator, Australia) noted that the group 's discussion brought out 
five key themes. Fir stly, it was noted that there was  no magic solution fo r identifying and connecting 
with stakeholders and that Members use different methods to create a culture around engagement, 
including booths at trade shows, online portals, trade officers being assigned to specific sectors, 
meetings of national coordinati on committees, meetings with industry  before and after TBT meetings 
and face -to-face dialogues. Secondly, even when stakeholders d o receive notifications, they are not 
always providing feedback . It was unclear why this is the case and could  possibly be due to the 
technical nat ure of the notifications or  language barriers. To overcome these problems, suggestions 
were made to involve sectoral associations, technical committees developing standards, government 
agencies with expertise, multinationals operating in the country or even local partners in third -
countries and also provide translations of draft texts when feasible . Thirdly, it was noted that 
businesses might not always see the benefits of providing comments and rather focus on complying 
with new regula tions. Fourthly, the importance of providing at least a 60 -day comment period, if not 
longer, was underlined. Some delegations indicated their flexibility to extend the comment period if 
the request is communicated in good time. Finally, the group reflecte d on how to demonstrate to 
stakeholders that it is in their interest to engage and respond to notifications. One idea, which could 
be worth exploring further  by the Committee , was to compile successful examples and data on 
instances where comments by stake holders had resulted in changes to proposed regulation s and 
ultimately benefitted businesses and other stakeholders . Highlighting the cost of having a product 
blocked or rejected at the border could also be useful. At the same time, it was pointed out that  
greater engagement in the notification process and increased communication is in itself of benefit.   G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 11 - 
 
  7.3  Group 3: Communication : How to enhance communication between Enquiry Points 
across Members to reduce trade tensions  
7.3.  Ms Renee Hancher (Facilitator, United States) noted that communication starts with having 
up to date contact information  from enquiry points. Enquiry Points were therefore encouraged to 
respond to the Secretariat 's request to confirm or update their contact information (there were still 
62 enq uiry points that had not done so to date). The Group considered the use of ePing for outreach 
purposes , and the use of the "National Discussion Forum feature " as a potentially useful tool for 
sharing information with stakeholders – subgroups could also be set up for major export sectors for 
each economy. It was noted that conducting stakeholder outreach would be a particularly useful 
activity for enquiry points to learn how to better use the ePing system while also increasing their 
understanding of stakehol der concerns.  It was suggested that greater use of social media  to 
generate interest in ePing and TBT issues might also be explored. Among the challenges  discussed 
were that: (i) domestic procedures could sometimes hamper efforts by enquiry points to 
commu nicate with other Members ' enquiry points; (ii) the lack of response from regulators to 
request s from enquiry points; (iii) the need to build relationships with regulatory authorities through 
regular meetings and encouraging trade officials to bring enquir y point representatives to TBT 
Committee meetings.  Participants also shared ideas about new approaches . Using templates for 
requesting information from regulators could help them to understand why requests support 
compliance with WTO obligations, and assis t stakeholders to submit comments. The group also 
agreed that it could be useful for Members to consult and exchange experiences on emerging 
regulatory issues as a way to avoid STCs, share practices and align regulatory app roaches, although 
this had not been previously been done in the Committee . 
8  COMMENT BY MODERATOR  
8.1.  On a personal note, the Moderator  made the following remarks.   
8.2.  I believe we had a very fruitful thematic session on transparency, enriched by a large number 
of presentations as well as ensuing discussions. The active involvement of so many delegations as 
presenters/participants in the session pointed to the importance that Members attach to the TBT 
transparency mechanism. The rich and extensive information shared  illustrated the enormous 
amount of work and activity already taking place both domestically and internationally on 
transparency. Still, we also heard many good suggestions to further enhance the functioning and 
value of our transparency mechanism. It is i mpossible to distil the wealth of information we heard 
into a few bullet points. I would just like to highlight a few of the issues which could merit further 
consideration and invite you all to read the full summary of presentations to get further inspirat ion. 
a. First, a few points regarding the quality and completeness of notifications : 
• We heard some practical suggestions on how draft measures which may contain both 
SPS and TBT elements could systematically be notified to both SPS and TBT 
Committees, ideally  at the same time and with a cross -reference, for easier tracking . 
• We also heard about difficulties of accessing final texts  of regulations and knowing 
when they actually enter  into force. In this regard, following on from the Triennial 
Review recommendations, I believe it would be useful for the Committee to proceed 
with its planned work on developing a revised Addendum format.  
b. Second, a few observations on stakeholder engagem ent: 
• We heard that ePing's alert and discussion forum functions could serve as useful tools 
in tracking and responding to incoming notifications from trading partners. In this 
regard, I believe it would be useful to continue to exchange experiences in the use of 
ePing and to also provide regular feedback to the Secretariat so that the system 
continues to respond to our evolving needs.  
• We also heard that it would be very useful to be able to demonstrate to stakeholders 
that it is in their interest to engage  and respond to notifications. During the 
presentations, we did hear about some specific instances where comments had led to 
changes in notified draft measures. But could we explore further the possibility of G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 12 - 
 
  compiling examples on how tracking and commenti ng on notifications has led to 
concrete benefits for businesses and how ignoring them has at times led to commercial 
losses.  
c. Third, with respect to communication between Enquiry Points ,  
• We heard that there is a strong linkage between notifications and spe cific trade 
concerns as many STCs are about seeking further information and clari ty on notified 
measures. It was pointed out that enhancing the information flow among Enquiry 
Points could help reduce the number of trade concerns raised in the TBT Committee .  
• The starting point for this is of course to keep the contact information up to date  and 
respond promptly and clearly to incoming requests, accompanied by supporting 
documentation . In addition, Enquiry Points could consider relying on ePing's Enquiry 
Point discussion forum and file sharing options to have an ongoing dialogue with each 
other. Still, I  believe it is also important to come together physically once in a while, 
as we did this week, to exchange experiences personally, come up with new ideas and  
further strengthen our sense of community.  
 
_______________  
 
  
 
 G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 13 - 
 
  ANNEX  
 
THEMATIC SESSION ON TRANSPARENCY  
18 JUNE 2019 (P.M.) – 19 JUNE 20 19 
Final Programme  
At the conclusion of  the Eighth Triennial Review, Members agreed to continue to hold thematic 
sessions in conjunction with the Committee's regular meetings, with a view to further deepening the 
Committee's exchange of experiences on specific topics, and to hold a session on t ransparency, 
including the Ninth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange,1 in June 2019.2  
At its meeting of 6 -7 March 2019, the TBT Committee agreed to hold the thematic session on 
transparency over one and a half days, starting in the afte rnoon of Tuesday 18 June 2019, and to 
webcast the session.3 The programme below is a compilation of proposals for topics and speakers 
put forth by Members, structured around some of the transparency -related recommendations of the 
Eighth Triennial Review.4 
_______________  
 
 
The thematic session will be moderated by:  Mr. Sung -Hwa JANG, Chair of the TBT Committee  
1  GENERAL FUNCTIONING OF ENQUIRY POINTS  
a. Update from the Secretariat on the validation of Enquiry Point contact information .5 
b. China : The working mechanisms of China on TBT transparency , Mr. Yang Song, 
Director, National TBT/SPS Notification and Enquiry Center of the People's Republic 
of China.6 
c. Jamaica : Practical use of Enquiry Points and online tools to address SMEs enquiries for 
market access inf ormation, Ms Ester Williams, Team Leader, Regional & International 
Trade Branch, Bureau of Standards Jamaica.7 
d. Chinese Taipei : Practical experience of processing requests , Mr. Li -Yu Wei, Associate 
Technical Specialist, Bureau of Standards, Metrology and In spection.8  
e. United States : How communication between Enquiry Points can be used to reduce, 
clarify and resolve specific trade concerns , Ms MaryAnn Hogan, United States Enquiry 
Point, National Institute of Standards and Technology.9 
f. Kenya : Kenya's experienc e in managing notifications and comments , Ms Lucy Ikonya, 
National TBT Enquiry Point, Kenya Bureau of Standards.10  
                                                
1 G/TBT/1/Rev.13 , para. 5.8.1.  
2 G/TBT/41 , para. 8.2.a.iv, footnote 296.  
3 http://webcast.wto.org/  
4 Earlier versions of the programme were circulated in JOB/TBT/303 , JOB/TBT/303/Rev.1  and 
G/TBT/GEN/264 .  
5 G/TBT/41 , para. 6.19.a.i.  
6 JOB/TBT/307 . 
7 JOB/TBT/311 . 
8 JOB/TBT/308 . 
9 JOB/TBT/305 . 
10 JOB/TBT/315 . G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 14 - 
 
  2  TRACKING AND REACTIN G TO MEMBERS' MEASUR ES AND NOTIFICATIONS  
a. Accessing information on TBT measures and notifications  
i. Update from the WTO Secr etariat on the SPS/TBT notification alert system ePing.11 
ii. The Non -Tariff Measures Initiative: Enhancing transparency in SPS and TBT , 
Christian  Knebel, UNCTAD. 12 
iii. Global Trade Helpdesk: Single entry point for trade -related information , 
Mathieu  Loridan, ITC.12 
b. Australia:  Increasing transparency and addressing non -tariff barriers (NTBs): 
Australia's  experience , Lara Adams, Assistant Director, Non -Tariff Barriers Section, 
Office of Trade Negotiations, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.13 
c. European Union:  The involvement of stakeholders in TBT notifications: the EU 
experience , Celine Zaimoglu, EU TBT enquiry point coordinator.14 
d. Viet Nam:  Viet Nam's experience in handling Members' notifications , Ms Phuong 
Nguyen Thi Mai, Head in charge of Notification & Enquiry Division, TBT Viet Nam Office.15 
e. United States:  Using a TBT Notification Alert System to engage the private sector in 
commenting on WTO Notifications: US experiences and practices , Ms MaryAnn Hogan, 
United States Enquiry Point, National Institute of Standar ds and Technology .16 
f. United States:  Engaging industry in the TBT notification process to reduce trade 
concerns , Ms Jamie Ferman, Senior International Trade Specialist, US Department of 
Commerce.17 
g. United States:  Benefit of industry using tools like Notify U.S. and ePing , Ms Francine 
Lamoriello, Executive Vice President Global Strategies, Personal Care Products Council 
(PCPC).17 
h. Uganda:  Use of ePing by the Enquiry point to disseminate and coordinate review of 
draft SPS and TBT measures in Uganda , George Opiy o, Uganda National Bureau of 
Standards.18 
i. Trinidad and Tobago:  Facilitating compliance with the TBT Agreement through the 
use of ePing , Ms Janelle Teemal, Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards.19 
j. Egypt:  TBT Transparency mechanism and dissemination of TBT -related information 
among stakeholders in Egypt , Ms Aya Abdelmonem Moussa, International Trade Policies 
Researcher, Central Department of World Trade Organization, Trade Agreement Sector, 
Ministry of Trade and Industry.20 
                                                
11 G/TBT/41 , para. 6.19.a.ii.  
12 JOB/TBT/313 . 
13 JOB/TBT/306 . 
14 JOB/TBT/314 . 
15 JOB/TBT/312 . 
16 JOB/TBT/305 . 
17 JOB/TBT/316 . 
18 JOB/TBT/309 . 
19 JOB/TBT/317 . 
20 JOB/TBT/321 . G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 15 - 
 
  3  HANDLING OF COMMENTS , DISSEMINATION OF COMMENTS AND REPL IES ON A 
VOLUNTARY BASIS  
a. European Union : EU practice on the dissemination of comments and substantive 
replies on notified measures via online tools , Ms Celine Zaimoglu, EU TBT enquiry point 
coordinator.21 
b. United States : How the United St ates evaluates and incorporates comments received 
in the rulemaking process , Mr. Ravi Bharwani, U.S. Food and Drug Administration.22 
4  ESTABLISHING WHETHER  A MEASURE SHOULD BE  NOTIFIED UNDER THE SPS 
AGREEMENT AND/OR TBT  AGREEMENT23 
a. Introduction by the Secretariat on scope of SPS and TBT Agreements and on procedural 
aspects regarding notification of measures that might contain relevant elements under 
both Agreements  
b. Brazil : Brazil's experience with notifying measures that contain ele ments covered under 
both the SPS and TBT Agreements , Ms Lea Contier de Freitas, Acting Deputy Head, 
Office of International Affairs of the Brazilian Notification Authority and Enquiry Point to 
the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade.24 
c. Brazil : Brazil's experience with incoming notifications of measures that contain 
elements covered under both the SPS and TBT Agreements,  Mr. Luís Henrique Barbosa 
da Silva, Agricultural Attaché, Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply, 
Permanent Mission of Brazil to the WTO.24 
d. Canada : Canada's experiences with regulations containing elements under both the 
WTO SPS and TBT Agreements , Ms Emma Pagotto, Analyst, Canadian Food Inspection 
Agency.25 
5  TECHNICAL COOPERATIO N 
a. United States : Notice & Comment and cooperation on other transparency best 
practices: US experience on cooperation in commercial dialogues and other 
initiatives,  Ms Sigrid Simpson, Senior International Trade Specialist, Good Regulatory 
Practices, US Department of Commerce.26 
b. United States : Experience assisting with the functioning of Enquiry Points in Africa via 
the Standards Alliance , Ms Leslie McDermott, Director, International Development, 
American National Standards Institute.26  
6  NOTIFICATION AND AVA ILABILITY OF ADOPTED  FINAL TEXTS  
a. Discuss ion of new addendum format based on WTO Secretariat draft.27 
b. Update from the Secretariat regarding compilation of Members' websites containing final 
texts of technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures.28 
                                                
21 JOB/TBT/280 ; JOB/TBT/273/Rev .3, para. 3.1.a.;  JOB/TBT/314 . 
22 JOB/TBT/305 . 
23 JOB/TBT/283 ; JOB/TBT/273/Rev.3 , para. 3.1.b.   
24 JOB/TBT/283 . 
25 JOB/TBT/318 . 
26 JOB/TBT/305 . 
27 JOB/TBT/304 ; JOB/TBT/320 , para. 2.34 -38, Annex III and IV.  
28 JOB/TBT/41 , 6.19.e.iii -iv. G/TBT/GEN/265  
 
- 16 - 
 
  7  FACILITATED DISCUSSI ONS IN BREAK -OUT G ROUPS29  
7.1.  The objective of the break out session is to facilitate a more interactive setting for delegations 
to exchange experiences regarding implementation of the transparency elements of the TBT 
Agreement and to draw on the experiences of the large number  of Enquiry Points and notification 
authorities who will be in attendance, including from developing countries and LDCs.30 Delegates will 
be invited to join one of three discussion groups. Each group will discuss a topic for about one hour, 
with assistance from a facilitator. The groups will then reconvene in the plenary, where the 
facilitators will provide a brief oral summary (5 minutes) of their groups' discussions. The 
Chairperson will open the floor for follow up questions and comments.  
7.2.  Topics for disc ussion:  
• Group 1: Notifications (Room CR1 - with interpretation)  
Facilitator: Ms Uma Muniandy (Singapore)  
How to improve the quality and completeness of notifications.  
• Group 2: Stakeholders (Room D – no interpretation)  
Facilitator: Mr. Laurence Sandral  (Australia)  
How to engage stakeholders in assessing and responding to incoming notifications  
• Group 3: Communication (Room E – no interpretation)  
Facilitator: Ms Renee Hancher (United States)  
How to enhance communication between Enquiry Points across Memb ers to reduce 
trade tensions.  
8  CLOSING (IN PLENARY)  
8.1.  The moderator will provide an oral summary of the thematic session.  
__________  
 
                                                
29 The break -out session will not be webcast.  
30 The WTO Sec retariat is organizing a week -long TBT transparency workshop for Enquiry Points and  
notification authorities from developing countries and LDCs, which will run in parallel to the June TBT 
Committee meetings. Workshop participants will attend parts of the C ommittee meetings, including the 
transparency thematic session.