G/TBT/W/533  
 
5 June 2018  
(18-3439) Page: 1/3 
 Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
CONFORMITY ASSESSMEN T PROCEDURES - OPERATION OF THE COM MITTEE  
EIGHTH TRIENNIAL REV IEW 
Submission from Brazil  
The following communication, dated  5 June 2018 , is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Brazil.  
 
_______________  
 
 
On the occasion of the Eighth Triennial Review of the operation and implementation of the 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) , under its Article 15.41, Brazil presents to the 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade the following matter for its consideration, 
recommendation and possible adoption.  
 
 
1  CONFORMITY ASSESSMEN T PROCEDURES  
1.1.  The TBT Agreement recognizes the importance of the acceptance of results of conformity 
assessment procedures in its article 6.1, which provides that Members "shall ensu re, whenever 
possible, that results of conformity assessment procedures in other Members are accepted, even 
when those procedures differ from their own, provided they are satisfied that those procedures 
offer an assurance of conformity with applicable tech nical regulations or standards equivalent to 
their own procedures".  
1.2.  With a view to enhancing the implementation of this provision, during the Second Triennial 
Review, Members have agreed on an indicative list of approaches2 to facilitate the acceptance of  
results of conformity assessment procedures, which encompasses: (1)  mutual recognition 
agreements (MRA s) for conformity assessment to specific regulations ; (2) cooperative (voluntary) 
arrangements between domestic and foreign conformity assessment bodies ; (3) the use of 
accreditation to qualify conformity assessment bodies ; (4) government designation ; (5) unilateral 
recognition of results of foreign conformity assessment ; and (6) manufacturer's/supplier's 
declarations (SDoC) .  
1.3.  However even if one Member u ses one or more of the approaches suggested, other Members 
may not accept  CA results, especially when third party CA is concerned. To address this challenge, 
bilateral and regional agreements with TBT chapters have increasingly included provisions to 
facilitate the recognition of conformity assessment results. Enhancing transparency, with 
provisions such as explaining the reasons why one of the Parties have not accepted the other 
                                                
1 Article 15.4 - Not later than the end of the  third year from the date of entry into force of the WTO 
Agreement and at the end of each three -year period thereafter, the Committee shall review the operation and 
implementation of this Agreement, including the provisions relating to transparency, with a  view to 
recommending an adjustment of the rights and obligations of this Agreement where necessary to ensure 
mutual economic advantage and balance of rights and obligations, without prejudi ce to the provisions of 
Article  12. Having regard, inter alia,  to the experience gained in the implementation of the Agreement, the 
Committee shall, where appropriate, submit proposals for amendments to the text of this Agreement to the 
Council for Trade in Goods.  
2 G/TBT/9, Annex 5  G/TBT/W/533  
 
- 2 - 
 
  party' s results, or building trust and confidence among accreditation bodies, through the 
adherence to multilateral recognition agreements to qualify conformity assessment bodies such as 
ILAC (International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation) and IAF (International Accreditation 
Forum), are among the provisions that can be found i n those chapters.  
1.4.  In this context, Brazil believes  that further discussion at the multilateral level on the practical 
implementation of the approaches  to facilitate the recognition of CA results and certificates  is 
highly desirable and would be of great va lue to developing and less developed countries. A new 
exchange of ideas would allow an updated overview of the practices and successful initiatives in 
this field.  
1.1  Proposal  
1.5.  In light of the above, Brazil encourages Members to resume debate on the Indicative List of 
Approaches G/TBT/9, Annex 5, with a view to update the state of affairs and actual use of the 
quoted instruments, either bilaterally or in regional trade agreements.  
1.6.  Brazil proposes that thematic sessions should be held with a view to discussing pr actical 
examples of how acceptance of conformity assessment results and certificates has been 
accomplished among Members, especially in cases of third party CA . 
2  OPERATION OF THE COM MITTEE  
2.1.  The 22nd Annual Review of the Implementation and Operation of the TB T Agreement3 
indicated a steady growth in the number of STCs raise in the TBT Committee over the years. The 
Review also showed, however, that such increase is mostly due to previously raised STCs, as 
opposed to newly raised ones. In 2016, for example, out of a total of 173 STCs raised, 142 (or 
82%) were previously raised STCs, and 31 (18%) were newly raised STCs.  
2.2.  By contrast, among SPS measures4, in 2016, out of a total of 37 STCs, 24 (or 65%) were 
previously raised STCs, and 13 (or 35%) were newly raised S TCs. Article 12.2 of the SPS 
Agreement specifically mandates the SPS Committee to "encourage and facilitate ad hoc 
consultations and negotiation on specific sanitary and phytosanitary issues". On the basis of that 
provision, in 2014, the SPS Committee deci ded to create a detailed procedure that provides for 
predictability with respect to the functioning of such consultations.5 
2.3.  The participation of Members in that procedure is voluntary (art.1.1). It provides that any 
Member may at any time request consultat ions with another Member regarding any SPS measures 
(art.1.3). It also provides for specific rules on the request for consultations and on responses to 
such requests, including the applicable timelines (arts. 2.1 to 2.7). Also importantly, according to 
the agreed procedure, a Facilitator – who will most of the times be the Chairperson of the 
Committee, but may be anyone else as agreed by the Members – will help the involved Members 
to reach a mutually satisfactory solution (arts 2.8 to 2.15).  
2.4.  While the TBT Agreement does not specifically refer to ad hoc consultations, its Article 13.1 
refers to the "purpose of affording Members the opportunity of consulting on any matters" and 
Article 13.2 allows the Committee to "establish working parties or other bodies as  may be 
appropriate". Therefore, it appears the TBT Committee can create a procedure equivalent to the 
one existent in the SPS Committee.  
2.5.  During the 4th Triennial Review of the TBT Committee, Costa Rica submitted a similar 
proposal relating to ad hoc consultations6. As Costa Rica then explained, that would be an 
"expeditious procedure able to secure more of a response from countries that have established 
regulations that affect trade". Comments in response from other Members were generally in favor 
of the proposal, but pointed out the need to define more precisely how the proposed mechanism 
would function.  
                                                
3 Document G/TBT/39/Rev.1  
4 See Docume nt G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev .17 
5 See Document G/SPS/61  
6 Document G/TBT/W/266  G/TBT/W/533  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.6.  In Brazil 's view, the detailed procedure establis hed by the SPS Committee, as summarized 
above, is a good example of a mechanism that would be helpful to resolve STCs relating to TBT 
measures. While the detailed procedure itself appears not to have been used since its creation in 
2014, on several occasio ns, Members have referred to the possibility of initiating consultations 
within the ad hoc procedure if the regular forum within the Committee meetings proved 
insufficient.  
2.7.  Given that the number of STCs relating to TBT measures has been much higher than th ose 
relating to SPS measures in the past years, an additional mechanism to encourage satisfactory and 
effectively resolution of trade concerns could prove to be important at this stage.  
2.1  Proposal  
2.8.  Brazil would like to encourage Members to consider creating a detailed voluntary procedure 
for ad hoc consultation, which could be mirror or adapted from the procedure that has been 
adopted for consultations in the SPS Committee (document G/SPS/61).  
2.9.  Brazil suggests that the new voluntary procedure should include, a mong others: the 
possibility of requesting ad hoc  consultations at any time; the role of the Facilitator, who could be 
the Chairman of the Committee or another person as agreed by the Members involved; rules on 
whether, and when, the content of consultatio n requests and responses, as well as Facilitator 
reports, should be shared with the Committee; and r ules to ensure that, where the content of 
consultations is not disclosed, the Committee and other Members will at least be informed of the 
fact that ad hoc  consultations have been requested, accepted or justifiably not accepted, answered 
and/or completed as per the procedure . 
 
 
__________