. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/MA/W/121 
23 November 2009 
 (09-5841) 
Negotiating Group on Market Access Original:   English 
  
 
MARKET ACCESS FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS 
 
Answer to Questions from Singapore on Agreement on Non-Tariff Barriers Pertaining to Standards, 
Technical Regulations, and Conformity Assessment Procedures  
for Automotive Products  
 
Communication from the United States 
  
 The following communication, dated 20 November 2009, is being circulated at the request of 
the delegation of the United States. 
 
_______________ 
 
Question 1: 
 
H.1.  Paragraph III (B) (2) – Will the United States please elaborate on how this paragraph 
would operate, and explain in detail what “market incentives or other voluntary mechanisms” 
are, and how they would feature in this particular context?  
 Answer:  In many instances it is preferable to pr ovide incentives to manufacturers to act 
voluntarily rather than mandate specific actions  through regulation.  For example, the main 
automotive regulator in the United States, th e National Highway and Transportation Safety 
Administration (NHTSA), not only maintains crash st andards (front impact, side impact, etc.), but it 
also issues “stars” to auto compan ies for crash test performance of their vehicles.  Market forces will 
push consumers who seek safer vehicles towards th ese models without actually mandating a level of 
performance that some other manufacturers might find uneconomical to meet.   The second part of the paragraph asks that a Member consider available regulatory or non-
regulatory alternatives that may fulfill a Member’s legitimate objective.  This could take several 
forms.  Some countries allow compliance with more  than one standard to demonstrate conformity 
with the relevant requirements.  In the United Stat es, our regulators consider existing regulations in 
other WTO Members when developing new regula tions and, if they are found acceptable, those 
regulations may be incorporated into the U.S. requ irements.  An obligation to consider what other 
regulators are doing before regulating would be a useful tool for minimizing unnecessarily regulatory 
divergences worldwide, steering regulators toward s regulatory approaches that have been proven 
effective, cutting costs for regulators (who may not  have to develop new requirements from scratch), 
and cutting costs for manufacturers who, with fewer regulatory approaches to comply with 
worldwide, will be able to recognize greater economies of scale.  TN/MA/W/121 
Page 2  
 
  Question 2:  
 
H.2.  Paragraph III (H) – How frequently does th e United States expect the “single official 
journal of national circulation” to be publishe d? Does the United States currently have such a 
practice and what are the estimated production and distribution costs incurred for each single 
official journal? Would the objective behind su ch a provision be achieved through electronic 
publication? 
 
 Answer : The United States accomplishes this through daily publication of the Federal 
Register, which is available in both hard copy a nd electronically.  The objective of this section could 
easily be met with electronic publication – the more  frequent the better.  The idea is to increase 
transparency, which increases th e potential for harmonization towards well-crafted regulatory 
approaches, and inform interested parties of new in formation at the same time .  All parties must know 
where to look and have easy access to the informa tion.  In some ways, electronic publication is 
preferable to printed text as it can be made availa ble instantly to all partie s globally, and can generally 
be more readily searched and examined. 
 
Question 3:  
 
H.3.  Paragraph K – Which testing facilities outside of the US have been “deemed competent 
or otherwise approved” by the US? 
 
 Answer:  The United States operates under a self-cer tification system with respect to 
automotive safety standards, so that auto manufact urers conduct their own tests in their own labs or 
other labs of their choosing all over the world.  Therefore, our regulators do not need to deem 
competent any foreign or domestic testing facilities.  Our intent in this section was to lay out the 
obligations of Members with regard to testing of automotive products where testing is required.  For 
example some Members use a type-approval system in which all testing is performed in government 
or government accredited laboratories.  These Members should allow or accredit labs outside their own borders to conduct tests, if they are deemed competent.    
Question 4:  
 
H.4.  Footnote 47 – Will the US please clar ify the reference to “subparagraphs 3(i)-(iii)” 
referred to in the footnote? Are the subparagr aphs referring to those under paragraph E? 
 
 Answer:  Yes, this footnote is referring to subpa ragraphs 3(i)-(iii) of paragraph E.  
 
__________