G/TBT/W/468  
 
27 March 2018  
(18-1905) Page: 1/2 
 Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
 
CHINA - CHINESE ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTION CONTROL  STANDARDS  
FOR IMPORTED SOLID W ASTE AS RAW MATERIAL S 
STATEMENT BY THE UNI TED STATES TO THE CO MMITTEE ON TECHNICAL  BARRIERS TO TRADE  
21 AND 22 MARCH 2018  
The following communication, dated 21 March 2018, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of the United States . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.  The United States would like to reiterate its concerns, as first expressed during our last 
meeting on November 2 017, regarding the negative trade and environmental impacts resulting 
from China 's import ban and accompanying measures further restricting imports of recovered 
materials, such as plastics.   
2.  Despite these concerns and our repeated attempts to request meeti ngs with experts from 
China 's Ministry of the Environment (MEP) to discuss these concerns, China appears to be moving 
forward with the implementation of these trade -restrictive measures.  
3.  The United States requests that China immediately halt implementation  of its ban on the 
import of recovered materials as well as its import control standards for recovered materials that 
in many cases result in a de facto ban due to the technical infeasibility of those measures.  
4.  We request that China revise these measures i n a manner consistent with existing international 
standards for trade in recycled commodities, which provide a global framework for transparent and 
environmentally sound trade in such? Non -virgin materials.  
5.  Thereafter, we request that China observe the nor mal 60 -day timeframe for comment 
consistent with the Committee Recommendation in G/TBT/9 Annex 3 and afford reasonable 
implementation timeframes subsequently.  The United States has observed that notifications 1211, 
1212, and 1224 through 1234 have all ente red into force well before the customary 6 -month 
minimum timeframe for technical measures and beyond any reasonable interval for industry to 
make necessary adjustments to their supply chains.  
6.  While the United States recognizes and appreciates China 's inte rest in addressing 
environmental concerns, including potentially by pursuing measures to improve its management of 
recovered materials, the approach that China is taking appears to be having the opposite effect by 
exacerbating both global and local environ mental challenges.  
7.  For example, the most likely outcome of China 's ban on post -consumer plastics and restriction 
of trade in post -industrial plastics is that reusable plastics will be - and in many cases already are 
being - redirected from productive purpo ses, such as recycling, to the waste stream. In addition to 
unnecessarily adding to landfill waste, once plastics enter the waste stream they risk polluting 
waterways and oceans, causing deleterious harm to fish and protected marine life.  
8.  Globally, 275 mil lion metric tons of plastic waste is produced on an annual basis, an estimated 
8 million metric tons of which end up in the ocean where it poses serious harm to fish, birds, and 
marine mammals. When marine life become entangled -in or ingest plastic debris the animal risks 
injury, illness, suffocation, starvation and death.  G/TBT/W/468  
 
- 2 - 
 
  9.  We also are interested in how China views these measures in the context of national treatment 
requirements. In many cases, no commensurate domestic materials management regime appears 
to exist. In the case of recovered paper and paperboard, import measures appear to vary 
fundamentally from local requirements in a manner that renders them technically impossible to 
meet.   
10.  For instance, China 's domestic standard for recovered paper and paper board outlines carried 
waste thresholds between 2.5% and 4.0% for various classes of paper and paperboard where the 
import standard notified through CHN/1225 imposes a 0.5% carried waste threshold for all classes 
of paper and paperboard in addition to the outright ban on mixed paper notified in CHN/1211.  
11.  China 's 0.5% threshold for imported papers appears to serve as a de facto ban on these 
materials. For the highest grades of post -industrial recovered papers, modern mechanical, 
magnetic, and optical sorting  technologies are unable to exceed a 1% threshold for carried wastes. 
Furthermore, according to our research, achievable thresholds for most grades of sorted post -
consumer papers are closer to 5%.  
12.  However, for a vast number of materials outlined in both t he ban and import control 
standards, we have observed that China has no mandatory commensurate domestic standard in 
place.  
13.  For example, for the 21 categories of non -ferrous metal commodities subject to China 's 
import control standard notified in CHN/1228,  China appears to have only voluntary standards in 
place for just three categories of non -ferrous metal: copper, aluminum, and zinc, and no domestic 
standards, voluntary or otherwise, for the remaining non -ferrous materials specified in the 
measure.  
14.  We re main concerned that a ban and related import control standards with such a broad 
scope are more trade restrictive than necessary to fulfil the stated objectives, and that there are 
fundamental differences between requirements for foreign and domestic commo dities.  
15.  Has China considered less trade restrictive alternatives instead of a total import ban coupled 
with highly restrictive import standards to fulfil its objectives?  If not, the United States would be 
pleased to work with China on such less trade rest rictive alternatives.  
16.  Can China clarify what measures it is applying to the use or sale of domestically sourced 
recovered materials and why those measures would not be sufficient to fulfil the objectives if 
applied to imported materials as well?   
17.  Pursuant to 1211 and 1212, we observe that China has also issued a number of relevant 
measures, such as the revised "Standards on Imported Solid Waste that Can be Used as Original 
Material 's Environmental Protection Control (Draft for Comment). " These standards hav e not been 
notified to the WTO TBT Committee and only provided a 15 day public comment period. We 
request that China notify these new standards in a timely manner and provide 60 -90 day comment 
period.  
18.  Other relevant measures published by MEP that have not been notified to the TBT Committee 
and that lacked the required 30 day comment period include the revised "Regulations on Imported 
Waste Paper Environment Protection Management (Draft for Comment) " (No. 1607) and the 
"Regulations on Restricting Imported Solid Waste that Can be Used as Original Materials 
Environment Protection Management (2017 Draft for Comment). " 
19.  In summary, we request that China immediately halt implementation of these measures with 
a view towards developing alternative measures that are less trade restrictive.  
 
__________