WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/W/262 
10 March 2006 
 
 (06-1066) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:   English 
 
 
 
REPORT ON THE  RESULT OF STANDARDS ALIGNMENT WORK IN APEC 
 
 
Submission by Japan   
 
 
 The following communication, dated 8 March 2006, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of Japan . 
 
_______________ 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. This paper is submitted by Japan, as a lead memb er for this area in APEC, to report on the 
result of a comprehensive review of the voluntary alignment work in the APEC Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance (hereafter APEC/SCSC).  
2. The APEC/SCSC was formed in November 1994 to promote cooperation among member 
economies on standards and conformance to facilitate tr ade in the region.  One of the objectives of the 
APEC/SCSC is to achieve alignment of member econom ies’ standards with international standards.  
This would lead to the convergence of standards among member economies to facilitate trade flows.  
3. Each APEC member has made an effort for alignment through one of the Voluntary Action 
Plans (hereafter VAP) and the APEC/SCSC conducted a comprehensive review of its alignment work 
from 2001 to 2005;  in 2005 this work was led by Japan.  
4. The agreed priority areas and targeted years of  the alignment work are shown in Table 1. 
Table 1: The priority areas and targeted years of the alignment work 
 
Priority areas Developed economies 
(Year) Developing economies 
(Year) 
Electrical and Electronic Appliances, Food Labelling, Rubber 
Products, Machinery  2000 2005 
Standards and guides on 
conformity assessment 
and management systems 2002 2005 
E/E equipment 
(IEC60335s and CISPR) IT equipment 
(IEC60950s) 2004 2008 
 G/TBT/W/262 
Page 2 
 
 
  II. ALIGNMENT RESULTS 
A. 2005  VAP  ALIGNMENT RESULTS   
5. Among the 21 APEC member economies, 16 ec onomies have updated and submitted their 
alignment reports of 2005.  Table 2 shows the num ber of those economies that have achieved 100 per 
cent alignment for each priority area, among tho se economies which have submitted their alignment 
reports.  
Table 2: Number of Economies that achieved 100 per cent alignment 
 
Area Number of economies  
with 100% alignment 
Electrical and Electronic Appliances 15 economies 
Food Labelling All 16 economies 
Rubber Products 14 economies 
Machinery 15 economies 
IEC 60335s All 16 economies 
CISPRs All 16 economies 
Standards and guides on conformity assessment and management systems All 16 economies 
Safety of information technology 
equipment All 16 economies 
 
6. Detailed results including reasons for not equiva lent (hereafter NEQ) are shown as Table 3.  
As shown in the reasons for NEQ at the bottom of Table 3, most of the remaining standards have already taken the necessary measures for the alignment. 
7. Since the major reasons for NEQ are either: (i ) because the process of review is ongoing and 
the targeted year for completion is coming soon, or (ii), because the member economy is in the 
process of withdrawing standards, it would seem that no economy has been facing major difficulties 
in the alignment work. 
B. 2001
 TO 2005  VAP  ALIGNMENT RESULTS  
8. 2001 to 2005 VAP results are shown in the figu res contained in the Annex.  As shown in 
these figures, many economies gradually increased their degree of achievement of alignment from 2001.  We can see from the results that the APEC/SCSC’s VAP alignm ent work successfully 
promoted alignment with international standards.   Furthermore, we had an outstanding successful 
result.  Although the targeted year of E/E e quipment (IEC60335s and CISPR) and IT equipment for 
developing economies is 2008, all economies, incl uding developing economies, achieved 100 per cent 
alignment in 2005, three years before the target.  
C. N
EXT STEP  
9. As for the next step, APEC/SCSC agreed to en courage members’ continuous efforts for the 
alignment work, including alignment with the lat est international standards and APEC/SCSC agreed 
to launch new voluntary alignment works on the IEC standards to be completed by 2010.   
   G/TBT/W/262
 Page 3 
Table3: The achievement of alignment (2005)             
Priority areas Additional priority areas 
    Electrical and 
Electronic 
Appliance Food Labeling Rubber 
Products Machinery IEC 60335s CISPRs Standards and 
guides on 
conformity assessment and 
management 
systems Safety of 
information 
technology equipment 
1 Australia 100% 13/13 100% 3/3 100% 2/2 66% 2/3(*1) 100% 60/60 100% 7/7 100% 15/15 100% 1/1 
2 Brunei 100%No 
standard 100% No 
standard100%No 
standard100%No 
standard100% No 
standard 100%No 
standard100% 3/3 100%No 
standard 
3 Canada 100% 9/(12-3) 100% No 
standard100%No 
standard100% 0/(1-1) 100% 58/58 100% 2/2 100%14/ 
(15-1) 100% 1/1 
4 Chile 100% 4/4 100% 3/3 60% 6/10(*2) 100%No 
standard100% 16/16 100%No 
standard100% 13/13 100%No 
standard 
5 China 100% 9/(15-6) 100% 0/(1-1) 100% 8/(10-2) 100% 6/6 100% 58/(59-1) 100% 7/(8-1) 100% 11/11 100% 1/1 
6 Hong 
Kong, China 100% 3/3 100% 2/2 100%No 
standard100%No 
standard100% No 
standard 100% 3/3 100% 2/2 100% 1/1 
7 Indonesia 100% 10/10 100% No 
standard100% 10/10 100%No 
standard100% 38/38 100% 6/6 100% 14/14 100%No 
standard 
8 Japan 100% 18/18 100% 4/4 100% 10/10 100% 6/6 100% 66/66 100% 1/1 100% 16/16 100% 1/1 
9 Korea 100% 20/20 100% 4/4 100% 10/10 100% 6/6 100% 73/73 100% 10/10 100% 17/17 100% 1/1 
10 Malaysia 100% 14/14 100% No 
standard100% 10/10 100%No 
standard100% 49/49 100% 10/10 100% 16/16 100% 1/1 
 
 
  
  G/TBT/W/262 
Page 4 Priority areas Additional priority areas 
    Electrical and 
Electronic 
Appliance Food 
Labeling Rubber 
Products Machinery IEC 60335s CISPRs Standards and 
guides on 
conformity assessment and 
management 
systems Safety of 
information 
technology equipment 
11 New 
Zealand 100% 13/13 100% 3/3 100%2/(10-
8) 100%No 
standard100% 60/60 100% 7/7 100% 10/10 100% 1/1 
12 Philippines 100% 18/18 100% 3/3 100% 10/10 100% 6/6 100% 30/30 100% 1/1 100% 15/15 100%No 
standard 
(*5) 
13 Singapore 100% 4/4 100% 3/3 100% 2/2 100% 1/1 100% 13/13 100% 2/2 100% 8/8 100% 1/1 
14 Chinese 
Taipei 100% 20/20 100% 4/4 100% 9/9 100% 6/6 100% 37/37 100% 10/10 100% 17/17 100% 1/1 
15 Thailand 93% 14/15(*3) 100% 2/2 0% 0/3(*4) 100%No 
standard100% 44/44 100% 8/8 100% 17/17 100% 1/1 
16 Vietnam 100% 12/12 100% 3/3 100% 10/10 100%No 
standard100% 32/32 100% 6/6 100% 22/22 100%No 
standard 
*1 Remaining one standard is under the revi ew process. Targeted time-frame for completion of the review is the year 2006.   
*2 Out of the remaining four standards, three standards are based on ASTM.         
*3 One remaining standard is under the review process. Targeted time-frame for completion of the review is the year 2006.  
1 of 14 aligned standard is under re view and targeted time-frame for th e completion of the review is 2007. 
One draft standard is under preparation and target ed time-frame for completion of the review is 2006. 
*4 As of June 2005, the remaining three standards have comple ted their review and achieved 100% (3/3) alignment for this area.   
*5 One draft standard is under circulation and targeted time -frame for completion of the review is end of 2005.     
   G/TBT/W/262 
 Page 5 
 
 
   
 
Or iginal Four P rioriy A reas (1)
2005, 95%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 76%2005, 100%2005, 100%
2004, 95%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 76%2004, 75%2004, 100%
2003, 88%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 74%2003, 100%
2002, 79%2002, 100%2002, 82%2002, 100%
2001, 68%2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 80%2001, 65%2001, 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Aust r aliaBrunei D arussal amCanadaChileChinaHong Kong Chi naEconomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
 G/TBT/W/262 
Page 6 
 
 
   
Or iginal Four P rioriy A reas (2)
2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%
2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%
2003, 86%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 95%
2002, 90%2002, 100%2002, 100%2002, 63%2002, 36%
2001, 79%2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 58%2001, 36%2001, 53%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%IndonesiaJapanKor eaMa laysiaMex icoNew Zeal andEcnomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
  G/TBT/W/262 
 Page 7 
 
 
  Or iginal Four P rioriy A reas (3)
2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 80%2005, 100%
2004, 100%2004, 88%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 84%
2003, 88%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 88%
2002, 86%2002, 100%2002, 100%
2001, 86%2001, 100%2001, 97%2001, 95%2001, 83%2001, 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Per uPhilippinesSingaporeChinese TaipeiThailandU.S.AViet NamEcnomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001G/TBT/W/262 
Page 8 
 
 
  Additional P rioriy Areas (1)
2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%
2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%
2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 99%2003, 100%
2002, 100%2002, 100%2002, 97%2002, 100%
2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 97%2001, 89%2001, 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Aust r aliaBrunei D arussal amCanadaChileChinaHong Kong Chi naEcnomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
  G/TBT/W/262 
 Page 9 
 
 
   
Additional P rioriy Areas (2)
2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%
2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%
2003, 100%2003, 99%2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 100%
2002, 100%2002, 100%2002, 100%2002, 96%2002, 69%
2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 96%2001, 70%2001, 99%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%IndonesiaJapanKor eaMa laysiaMex icoNew Zeal andEcnomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
 G/TBT/W/262 
Page 10 
 
 
  Additional P rioriy Areas (3)
2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%2005, 100%
2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 100%2004, 71%2004, 100%
2003, 100%2003, 100%2003, 56%2003, 99%
2002, 100%2002, 100%2002, 89%
2001, 97%2001, 100%2001, 100%2001, 95%2001, 13%2001, 89%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Per uPhilippinesSingaporeChinese TaipeiThailandU.S.AViet NamEcnomoy (' 01-'05)
Achivem ent (%)2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
 
__________