RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/M/38 
23 May 2006 
 (06-2502) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 15 AND 17 MARCH 2006 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Margers Krams (Latvia)
 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA......................................................................................................... .......2  
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT ...................................2  
A. STATEMENTS  FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 .................................................................2  
B. SPECIFIC  TRADE  CONCERNS..............................................................................................................2  
1. New Concerns ................................................................................................................... ....................2  
2. Concerns Previ ously Raised..................................................................................................... ...........14  
C. OTHER  MATTERS ........................................................................................................................ ........20  
1. Scheduling of the Fifth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange ...........................20  
2. Other .......................................................................................................................... .........................20  
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW............................................................................................................... ..........21  
A. PREPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW .................................................................................21  
1. Stocktaking.................................................................................................................... ......................22  
2. Previously raised or new topics ................................................................................................ ..........28  
3. Next steps ..................................................................................................................... .......................32  
IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION......................................................................................................... 32 
V. ELEVENTH ANN UAL REVIEW......................................................................................................... ...33 
A. THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE TBT  AGREEMENT (ARTICLE 15.3)................................33  
B. THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE (ANNEX 3 OF THE TBT  AGREEMENT ) .....................................................33  
VI. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS .......................................................................................................... ..33 
VII. ELECTION OF CH AIRPERSO N .......................................................................................................3 4 
VIII. DATE OF NEXT  MEETI NG........................................................................................................... 34 
ANNEX 1:  THE TBT WORKSHOP ON THE DI FFERENT APPROACHES  TO CONFORMITY 
ASSESSMENT..................................................................................................................... ...............................35  
 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 2  
 
   
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/2761.   
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
A. STATEMENTS
 FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 
2. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to the list of Statements on Implementation and 
Administration of the Agreement, contained in document G/TBT/GEN/1/Rev.3, issued on 16 February 2006.  He recalled th at in 2005 the Former Yugos lav Republic of Macedonia, the 
Republic of Rwanda and Kenya ha d submitted their 15.2 Statements and that Colombia and the 
European Communities had submitted revisions to their Statements.  He also noted that on 
27 February 2006, Qatar had submitte d its Statement (G/TBT/2/Add.87) and that, since 1995, a total 
of 104  Members had submitted at least one such statemen t.  The Chairman also drew the Committee's 
attention to the latest list of TBT Enquiry Points  (G/TBT/ENQ/27) and recalled that this information 
was also available (and updated regularly) on the WTO website.
2   
3. The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to a document on publications prepared by the 
Secretariat which contained a list of publications related to technical regulations, standards and 
conformity assessment procedures (JOB(06)/50).  Where available, on-line sources of information had also been included in this document.  He noted  that the information had been extracted from 
Members' statements under Article 15.2 of the Ag reement and he invited Members to submit any 
other information that could usefully be incl uded in a further revision of this document. 
4. The representative of Chile
 introduced a revision to her country's Article 15.2 Statement 
(G/TBT/2/Add.16/Rev.1).  She highlighted that, in  2003, a Law had been enacted in Chile that 
established a mechanism to implement notification pr ocedures, providing a 60 day period to formulate 
comments on draft technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures.  The Law was enacted by the Decree n°77 of 14 June 2004, which established certain basic principles to follow in 
the elaboration of technical regulations a nd conformity assessment procedures, including, inter alia , 
the use of international standards as a basis for the measures and the avoidance of unnecessary 
obstacles to trade.  It was noted that a national commission on TBT matters, bringing together all the relevant institutions, had been created in Chile.  This commission was presided over by the Ministry 
of Economy, which was responsible for th e implementation of the TBT obligations. 
B. SPECIFIC
 TRADE  CONCERNS 
1. New Concerns 
(i) Norway - Restrictions on the Use of deca-BDE (G/TBT/N/NOR/6) 
5. The representative of Japan  raised concerns regarding a measure notified by Norway 
(G/TBT/N/NOR/6) which prohibited the content of 0.1 per cent or more of deca-BDE by weight in all 
products.  While Japan understood the need to protect human heath and the environment, his delegation was concerned about the impact of the pr oposal on trade and investment.  He recalled that 
the European Communities had decided that deca-BD E be excluded from the RoHS Directive, and 
was of the view that Norway needed to align its measure with this decision.  He asked Norway to 
explain the justification of this measure, in accordance with Article 2.2 and 2.5 of the TBT Agreement. 
                                                     
 
2 http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e /tbt_e/tbt_enquiry_points_e.htm.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 3 
 
 
  6. The representative of Israel  shared the concerns in respect of the Norwegian proposal, and 
recalled that comments had been transmitted to the Enquiry Point of Norway in September 2005.  His 
delegation was of the view that the proposed impor t prohibition was not based on available scientific 
and technical information, and that its applica tion would constitute an unnecessary obstacle to trade 
within the meaning of Article 2.2 of  the Agreement.  He recalled that, in its notification, Norway had 
invoked the protection of human health and the envi ronment as the rationale for the measure.  While 
the representative of Israel recognized that these were legitimate objectives under the TBT 
Agreement, he was of the view that Norway had not demonstrated the existence of a risk and stressed 
that, in any case, there was no legal basis for a "p recautionary principle" in the TBT Agreement. 
7. The representative of Israel noted, further, th at Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement provided 
that in assessing risks the elements to be consid ered included available scientific and technical 
information.  He recalled that the European Communities had conducted a risk assessment of deca-
BDE which had not identified any risk posed by the substance.  On the basis of this result, the 
European Communities had decided to exempt deca-BD E from the scope of the RoHS Directive.  Yet 
Norway, instead of relying on the overwhelming scien tific evidence showing the absence of any risk 
for human health of the environment, had chosen to base its decision on a single document, therefore 
not complying with Article 2.2 of the Agreement.   Moreover, when examining the need for a new 
technical regulation, Members had, in line with th e TBT Agreement, to consider whether there were 
alternative, less trade restrictive measures that woul d achieve the same objective.  Israel was of the 
view that Norway had not considered alternative measures to fulfil its goals.  As an example of 
alternative measure, the representative of Israel mentioned the European Union control measures, 
including an emission reduction programme and envi ronmental monitoring.  Norway was invited to 
review its proposed measure so as not to impose a ban on deca-BDE in a way that was contrary to 
Article 2.2. 
8. The representative of Jordan  shared the concerns expressed and noted that his country was a 
major producer of the bromine element used in th e production of deca-BDE.  He recalled the decision 
taken by the European Communities to exempt deca -BDE from the RoHS Directive;  a decision that 
had been taken as a result of a 10 year risk assessment, which had concluded that the use of deca-BDE did not pose health or environmental risks.  He poi nted out that Norway had not made available the 
scientific or technical information that the proposed  ban was based on, nor was it possible for Norway 
to show that a risk existed.  Norway was thus urged to consider reviewing the proposed technical 
regulation taking into account the concerns raised by Members. 
9. The representative of the United States
 noted that her delegation too had provided comments 
on the notified proposal.  It was pointed out that deca-BDE was a flame retardant – manufactured in the United States as well as elsewhere – that was ma inly used in electronics and textiles to increase 
their resistance to fire.  Flame re tardants such as deca-BDE were cred ited with the US Fire Marshals 
for saving lives and properties.  She shared the c oncerns that the Norwegian proposal had failed to 
take into account the available scientific evidence and noted that voluntary programmes to control and 
reduce emissions offered Norway an  alternative to product bans.  Sh e noted that detailed information 
on studies undertaken by the US Environmental Pr otection Agency had been provided to Norway. 
10. The representative of Norway
 highlighted that her country had set a target to substantially 
reduce emissions on a number of environmentally hazardous chemicals;  bromine flame retardants 
being among them.  She explained that Norway had restrictions on the flame retardants penta-BDE 
and octa-BDE, corresponding to restri ctions in the relevant EC Directives.  She pointed out that recent 
data showed that the presence of deca-BDE in Ar ctic areas was of significant concern, and it was 
against this background that Norw ay had proposed to ban the use of deca-BDE with a few, limited, 
exceptions.  She assured the Committee that Norwegia n technical regulations, including those related 
to restrictions on environmentally hazardous chemic als were in compliance with the TBT Agreement, 
and that these restrictions were based on scientific evidence, respecting Article 2.2 and 2.4 of the G/TBT/M/38 
Page 4  
 
  Agreement.  It was further stressed that co mments received from WTO Members, as well as 
comments received from other different actors in the hearing process, would be taken into account  along with the developments in the European Unio n, before finalizing the regulation on deca-BDE. 
Moreover, the date of entry into force of the regul ation had been postponed from the original date of 
the 1 July 2006 (indicated in the notification) to a date yet to be decided.   
(ii) Sweden – Restrictions on the use of deca-BDE (G/TBT/N/SWE/59) 
11. The representative of Japan
 raised concerns on the Swedish proposal to prohibit the use of 
deca-BDE in all products except automobiles and el ectrical appliances, in concentrations exceeding 
0,1 percent by weight (notified on 23 November 2005).  While he understood the need to protect 
human health and the environment, he was concer ned about the impact of the proposal on trade and 
investment.  He recalled the study conducted at European level which had concluded that deca-BDE 
did not pose a risk to human health and the enviro nment and believed that Sweden needed to align 
with this scientific and technical evidence.  He noted that his delegation had submitted comments on 
this proposal and hoped that Sweden would explain the validity of this proposed technical regulation 
in accordance with Article 2.2 and 2.5 of the Agreement. 
12. The representative of Israel,  Jordan  and the United States  associated themselves with the 
concerns raised and recalled that their delegations  too had sent comments to the Swedish authorities.  
13. The representative of the European Communities  informed the Committee that the proposed 
Swedish regulation was being analyzed to verify its  compatibility with internal market rules within 
the European Communities.  The obj ective was to arrive to at a solution that would both respect 
internal Community legislation as well as take into a ccount the concerns raised by third countries.  An 
update would be provided once the procedur e at Community level was concluded. 
(iii) European Communities - Draft Commission Deci sion regarding the Classification of the  
Reaction to Fire Performance of Cons truction Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/92) 
14. The representative of Japan  pointed out that his delegation had submitted comments on the 
draft Decision notified by the European Commission on 13 October 2005, amending the Decision 
2000/147/EC on the classification of the reaction to fi re performance of constr uction products.  This 
draft Decision was intended to secure safety in the ev ent of fire, and stipulated that an acidity test 
should be conducted for assessing fire performance of cables in the construction sector.  The 
representative of Japan noted that the draft decision did not include any restriction on the amount of monoxide emissions, which, in his view, needed to be  given top priority in order to reduce mortality 
in fire incidents.  Instead, the restrictions applie d only to the acidity of the emission gases in the case 
of fire, which was not an aspect of primary importan ce in international fire safety standards.  It was 
stressed that, under proposed restrictions, the use of  PVC coated cables, which had an excellent fire 
resistance, would become difficult.  Japan was con cerned that this restriction would lead to an 
unnecessary obstacle to trade, and requested the Eu ropean Communities, in accordance with Article 
2.5 of the Agreement, to explain the justification of  its draft Decision in terms of Article 2.2 and to 
consider excluding the acidity test  from the proposed restriction. 
15. The representative of the United States
, while supporting the objective of ensuring high 
standards for fire safety of construction products, was concerned about the justification of certain 
elements of the proposal relating to electric cables, and on their possible adverse impact on international trade.  She questioned the scientific ba sis for the use of acidity as a proxy for toxicity, 
and pointed out that neither the ISO nor the IEC had validated acidity as a measure of toxicity for fire 
safety purposes.  The representative of the United States requested the European Communities to 
explain the basis for using this criteria and believe d that the Decision's focus on acid gas ignored the 
toxicity and potential effects of other gases such as carbon monoxide, the leading cause of human  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 5 
 
 
  fatalities in fires;  in fact, she wondered how the Commission proposal addressed the threat of 
fatalities from carbon monoxide and other gases.  It w as also noted that electric cables were singled 
out for the acidity test, and the representative of  the United States asked how the Commission had 
chosen these cables in particular.  She believed that  the proposed Decision could have the effect of 
banning wiring cables products, that would otherwise receive the highest fire safety ratings, and could 
result in the use of less fire safe products.  The Commission was urged to revise its proposal in light of 
the concerns raised, and to consider removing the acidity criterion as a classification standard for wire 
and cable products from its proposal. 
16. The representative of the Philippines  was of the view that the proposed Decision had the 
effect of creating unnecessary obstacles to interna tional trade, as it was more trade restrictive than 
necessary to achieve the European Communities' legitimate objective of fire safety.  While he agreed 
that fire safety for construction products was a leg itimate concern of high priority, it was stressed that 
it should not be used as a means to take trade-rest rictive measures th at were not required for safety, 
such as, in the case of electric cabl es, the use of the acidity criterion.  He believed that such a measure 
would allow the European Communities to exclude pol yvinyl chloride (PVC) from cable sheathing, or 
to effectively ban the use of PVC-coated cables in the EU market because, while PVC met safety 
requirements in all areas, it did not meet the acidity  test. Yet, according the scientific evidence, the 
failure to meet the acidity test did not mean that  PVC cables were less safe than other cables.  He 
stressed that PVC material was known to have ex cellent flame-retardant properties, and that the 
alternatives to PVC-coated cables were significantly more expensive. 
17. The representative of the Philippines also poi nted out that the Decision was not based on 
international standards, and recalled that the IEC had adopted standards on toxicity testing, which 
were valid for electric cables.  He stressed that Article 2.4 and 5.4 of the TBT Agreement required the European Communities to use these standards if toxicity had to be addressed, and wondered why the 
European Communities had failed to do so.  He further recalled that Article 2.4 provided for an exception where the relevant international standards would be ineffective or inappropriate, and noted 
that the European Communities had not provided any reason or cited any problems that would prevent 
the European Communities from basing its technical regul ation on the relevant IEC standards.  It was 
also pointed out that the regulation was not performance based.  His understanding was that the regulation was designed for material declaration and not for the performance testing of plastic 
materials' potential reaction to fire.  The represen tative of the Philippines was concerned that the 
regulation could adversely affect Philippine industries, and reiterate d that PVC was safe, affordable 
and a leading material of choice for many constructi on materials and other indoor  applications.  In his 
view, the proposed Commission Decision did not meet  the obligations under the TBT Agreement, in 
particular those contained in Articles 2, 5 and 12.   
18. The representatives of Colombia
, Brazil , Korea  and Mexico  associated themselves with the 
concerns raised.  The representatives of Colombia and Brazil also noted that that written questions 
and comments on the proposal had been presented to the European Communities, but that no response 
had been provided to date.  
19. The representative of the European Communities  highlighted that the comments submitted 
had been taken into consideration in the decisi on-making process, which was still pending.  This was 
the reason why written replies had not yet been provi ded.  He explained that the Construction Product 
Directive's essential requirements provided that c onstruction works had to be designed and built in 
such a way that, in the event of an outbreak of fire:  (i) the generation and spread of smoke was 
limited;  (ii) the occupants could leave the works or be rescued by other means;  and (iii) the safety of 
rescue teams was also taken into consideration.  Each of these essential requirements might give rise 
to the establishment of classes corresponding to di fferent performance leve ls of the relevant 
construction products.  It was pointed out that such classification would be established at the 
Community level, and that member States might then determine the performance levels to be G/TBT/M/38 
Page 6  
 
  observed in their territory, in parts of their territo ry or for certain works, within the classification 
adopted at Community level.  The European Co mmission had developed a classification of the 
reaction-to-fire performance of electric cables on th e basis of several years of examination and 
discussion among experts.  For each class, one or several test methods were defined, as well as classification criteria and parameters of "additional cl assification".  With regard to the latter, member 
States would be entitled to regulate according to th eir needs, but were not obliged to do so. 
20. The representative of the European Commun ities stressed that electric cables were 
construction products with particular risks in the case  of fire and that in certain hazardous places, for 
instance in tunnels for passenger transport by rail,  potentially high quantities of electric cables were 
placed.  Therefore, it had been considered that th e release of so-called hydrogen halides, generally 
referred to as "acidity" in a case of fire posed a specifi c risk for the safety of people.  The parameter of 
acidity could be found in some national and interna tional standards on the reaction to fire performance 
of electric cables, fire propagation and gas emission,  and was used in technical regulations of some 
EU member States and other WTO Members, such as Japan.  The parameter was also included in the 
technical specifications of bodies responsible for undergrounds, airports and railways.   
21. In the comments received on the TBT notificati on, and in the concerns raised, EC trading 
partners appeared to assume that the possibility of classifying according to acidity should be used as a 
method to detect toxicity.  He stressed that this was not correct, and that "acidity" as a parameter could be used as an indicator of the concentration of  irritants generated in the case of fire, which were 
expected to produce the effect of incapacitation or lethality of human beings  exposed to smoke.  By 
referring to the proposed additi onal classification which would in clude the "acidity" parameter, 
member States would be allowed to require for certa in works the use of elect ric cables belonging to 
a so called "low smoke/low/zero halogen" family which would prevent incapacitating effects to occupants allowing them therefore enough time to escape in case of fire and the spread of toxic 
gases.  It was stressed that the purpose of the pr oposed Decision was not to ban PVC cables, and 
that it was not going to establish any obligation on EC member States to regulate.  Instead, by 
means of the proposed Decision, those member States wishing to maintain or adopt national 
regulations could do so without conflicting with European law, and in a common, harmonized way.   
(iv) Korea – Recycling of Electrical and Electronic Products and Automobiles 
22. The representative of Japan
 raised concerns about a new Korean draft regulation, relating to 
recycling of electrical and electronic products, announced in the Korean Official Journal N° 16160 on 30 December 2005.  His delegation was concerned that the implementation and operation of this 
regulation could constitute a technical barrier to trad e.   Considering that the regulation was expected 
to enter into force on 1 July 2007, Korea was requested  to notify it at an early and appropriate stage, 
in accordance with the TBT Agreem ent.  Moreover, the representativ e of Japan asked whether the 
Executive Order issued by the President and which was cited in the Law would be notified to WTO 
Members. 
23. The representative of the United States
 supported the comments made by Japan and sought 
clarification from Korea regarding whether a notification would be made. 
24. The representative of Korea  informed the Committee that a public hearing had been held 
recently on the proposal and that, as a result, amendmen ts to the original text were being made.  He 
noted that the proposal had similarities with the EC RoHS and WEEE Directives.  He assured the 
Committee that a notification would be made and that a 60 day comment period would be provided.3 
                                                      
3 Notification G/TBT/N/KOR/105 of 30 March 2006.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 7 
 
 
  (v) China - Revision of list of toxic chemicals se verely restricted in the People's Republic of 
China in the regulation for environmental management on the first import of chemicals and the import and export of toxic chemicals 
25. The representative of the European Communities
 referred to the above-mentioned Chinese 
regulation, dated 1 March 1994.  She pointed ou t that an amendment to the Annex which listed 
several severely restrictive toxic chemicals had been introduced on 27 December 2005 and that, on 
31 December 2005, the Chinese authorities had submitte d a list of toxic chemicals banned in China.  
Both lists had entered into force on 1 January 2006.  He noted that the two lists had not been notified 
to the TBT Committee and had entered into force a few days after the publication in the Chinese 
Official Guide, leaving trade partners without the possibility of submitting comments or adapting to 
the new situation.  This had resulted in several  shipments from the European Communities to China 
being blocked at the Chinese border for not complying with the new requirements.   
26. The representative of the European Commun ities stressed that Article 2.12 of the 
TBT Agreement stated that, except for urgent r easons, Members should allow a reasonable interval 
between the publication of a technical regulation a nd its entry into force in order to allow trade 
partners to adapt to the new requirements.  She sought clarification about how China had assessed the 
relevant risk and asked for copies of the techni cal and scientific information that supported the 
measure.  She also sought information as to wh ether the provisions applied equally to domestic 
products. 
27. The representative of Japan  also expressed his country's concerns about the Chinese measure.  
He noted that the Chinese State Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) had announced through a 
circular4 that it had revised the "Highly Restricted Imported and Exported Toxic Chemicals" list and 
that, from 1 January 2006, it would be necessary to comp ly with the regulation at issue, and to obtain 
both a registration certificate and clearance notification in order to import toxic chemicals contained 
on the list.  He noted that several chemicals su ch as dichloromethane and chloroform, which were 
widely used in industry, had been added to the revised list of toxic chemicals.   The representative of 
Japan further noted that reports had been receive d from several Japanese exporters that the duration 
between announcement and enforcement had been t oo short, and that chemicals which had been 
contracted for before the announcement had also b een stopped at customs in Shanghai and other ports 
as of 1 January 2006.  This had generated confusion among the exporte rs, as they were unexpectedly 
told that they needed to obtain a registration certificate from SEPA which would cost USD 10,000 per 
contract, as well as a clearance notification for import,  which would cost 2,000 Yuan, per shipment.   
28. His delegation was concerned that the registration system at issue was an import restriction, 
and could damage the ope ration of Japanese manufacturing sites in China by blocking their supply-
chains, and also interfere with Japan's chemical exports to China, depending on how the registration 
system would be implemented in the future.  He re quest China to reviews the system and its methods 
of enforcement, in order to maintain consistency with WTO rules.  In particular, with regard to 
industrial-used chemicals and agrichemicals, the re gistration system regulated the characteristics of 
products that did not contain chemical substances sp ecified as toxic chemicals in the list, and imposed 
registration and/or other obligati ons on exporters when importing ch emical products that contained 
listed toxic chemicals.  This registration system c ould therefore be regarded as a technical regulation 
under the TBT Agreement.  He noted that the re gistration system imposed requirements for the 
acquisition of registration certificate and clearance notification only for imported chemicals, and was concerned that this might be incons istent with Article 2.1 of the TB T Agreement, which stipulated no 
less favourable treatment between imported products a nd products of national origin.  The registration 
system levied fees on imports in excess of those necessary for registration certificates and clearance 
                                                     
 
4 Circular 65 of 2005. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 8  
 
  notifications and Japan was concerned that this might be inconsistent w ith Article 2.2 of the 
Agreement, which stipulated the prohi bition of unnecessary import restrictions. 
29. Furthermore, the representative of Japan stress ed that China had not provided a reasonable 
interval between the publication of a measure and its en try into force, and this was not consistent with 
Article 2.12 of the Agreement.  Moreover, China had not provided Members with the possibility to 
submit comments, thereby not acting in conformity w ith Article 2.9.  His country was of the opinion 
that the reason why this problem occurred was th at although SEPA had released a draft of "Import 
and Export Registration Regulation of Dangerous Chemicals" for pub lic comment in September 2002, 
this directive had not yet been implemented due to delayed coordination among government agencies.  
The directive clearly stipulated the abolition of the present "Regulation for Environmental 
Management on the First Import of Chemicals a nd the Import and Export of Toxic Chemicals" 
simultaneously with the date of enforcement of the new regulation.  His delegation requested China to 
immediately implement this new regulation, which w as considered to be more consistent with WTO 
rules.  Japan also requested Chin a to provide an adequate interval for Members to review the new 
regulation and submit comments on it af ter receiving the TBT notification. 
30. The representative of the United States
 associated her delegation with the comments and 
concerns expressed by the previous speakers;  she supported the request made for China to notify the 
measure so as to allow WTO Members an opport unity to provide comments, and to allow a 
reasonable period of time to comply.  She appreciated the efforts that SEPA had made to delay the entry into force until the end of March 2006, but still found it not in line with WTO rules and, like Japan, had substantive concerns about the fees whic h had been imposed.  The representative of the 
United Stats also sought clarification about the effo rts under way in some Chinese Ministries to revise  
the regulations at issue. 
31. The representative of China
 recalled that in February 2006, a meeting had been held between 
officials of the Japanese Embassy in Beijing and re presentatives of the Ministry of Commerce and the 
State Environment Protection Agency.  At this  meeting, the Japanese delegation expressed its 
concerns, and replies had been provided.  First, on the newly added list of dangerous articles, the 
representative of China recalled that in 2002 the State Council had issued a new regulation on the 
control and safety of dangerous chemicals with an annex that listed more than 4,200 types of 
dangerous chemical products and explained that most  products on the list caused severe harm to the 
environment.  Second, on the transition period, he  highlighted that a transition period was provided 
from 1 January to 31 March 2006, and explained th at if a contract had been signed before 
1 January 2006, the companies could first apply for th e release declaration and then for the certificates 
for the importation of toxic chemicals.  In this case, there was no registration fee.  It was further noted 
that if a contract had been signed after 1 January , then the companies should apply for the release 
declaration and the import certificates jointly.  Third, it was pointed out that the registration fee arose from the implementation of the Regulations for En vironmental Management on the First Import of 
Chemicals and the Import and Export of Toxic Chemicals issued in 1994.  The regulations were being 
amended by the Chinese authorities and the issue of  the registration costs was being taken into 
consideration.  The concerns raised would be transmitted to the competent authorities and further 
information would be provided at a later stage. 
(vi) China – Import and Export Inspections  (G/TBT/N/CHN/182);  Paper articles 
(G/TBT/N/CHN/183);  Wireless Local Area Network Products with WAPI functions 
(G/TBT/N/CHN/187, 188 and 189) 
32. The representative of the European Communities
 noted that at the beginning of 2006, China 
had made the above-menti oned TBT notifications after  the adoption of the corresponding technical 
regulations.  He stressed that the transparency pr ovisions laid down in Articles 2.9.2 and 5.6.2 of the 
TBT Agreement provided that a notification of a proposed technical regulation or conformity  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 9 
 
 
  assessment procedure should be made at an early appropriate stage, when amendments could still be 
introduced and comments taken into account.  In par ticular, the notifications related to the Wireless 
Local Area Network (WLAN) products (G/TBT/N/C HN/187 to 189) were dated 31 January 2006 and 
the corresponding measures' date of entry into fo rce was 1 February 2006,  thereby preventing WTO 
Members from the possibility to assess the relevant  documents and provide comments.  It was 
recalled that the European Communities had con tinuously expressed its concerns regarding WLAN 
products with WAPI functions in numerous bilateral meetings with Chinese authorities.  Finally, the 
representative of the European Communities thanke d China for having provided a summary of the 
draft regulations in English, which had been fo rwarded to the experts who would be assessing it and 
would provide comments, if necessary. 
33. The representative of the United States  asked why the notifications related to the WLAN 
products had been made one month after the co rresponding measures had been adopted.  She also 
sought clarification from China whether these were  mandatory measures applicable to all WLAN 
products manufactured, used and sold in Chin a and whether an opportunity for comments was 
provided. 
34. The representative of Japan  shared the concerns expressed by the previous speakers.  His 
delegation understood that the Chinese authorities w ould disclose the content of WAPI six months 
before to domestic manufacturers only.  He was con cerned that this might be inconsistent with the 
obligations under Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreemen t, as China seemed to thereby to be giving 
preferential treatment to products of national origin.  He was also concerned that WAPI seemed to be 
incompatible with relevant inte rnational standards such as WPA WIFI protected access, developed by 
IEEE and WIFI alliance.  He stressed that the Chine se regulation could therefore be inconsistent also 
with Article 2.2 and 2.4 of the Agreement.  Clarification was sought form China on these points. 
35. The representative of Mexico  recalled that his delegation had,  on various occasions, raised the 
issue that many notifications failed to give a d eadline for comments and point ed out that the Chinese 
case was not the only one.  He believed that the deba te needed to be considered in a horizontal 
manner in the context of the Fourth Triennial Re view of the TBT Agreement (see paragraph 120). 
36. The representative of Canada  associated her delegation with the comments made on the 
notifications on WLAN products and asked for a summary of the measures in English.  She was particularly concerned about the need for providi ng a period for Members to formulate comments on 
the measures. 
37. The representative of China
 fully understood the concerns ra ised, which would be transmitted 
to the competent authorities in capital;  answers to the specific questions would be provided. 
(vii) China – Domestic Gas Cooking Appliances 
38. The representative of the European Communities  raised an issue concerning a mandatory 
Chinese standard on domestic gas cooking appliances, in particular gas cookers, gas roasters and gas 
and electric double function cookers.  The issue had al ready been raised at the bilateral level.  EU 
manufacturers had informed the Commission that a revision of the mandatory standard regarding 
these appliances was underway, and that the new me asure would replace the standard GB 16400.10 of 
1996.  Some EU manufacturers whose products did no t fully comply with the proposed new standards 
were experiencing a significant reduction in their orders coming from China.  His understanding was 
that a relevant international standard fo r the products concerned did not exist.   
39. The European Communities requested China to  notify the proposed amendment to the 
mandatory standard in accordance with Article 2. 9.2 of the TBT Agreement, and reiterated the 
importance of fully complying with the transparency  provisions.  Information was also sought on the G/TBT/M/38 
Page 10  
 
  current state of play of the adoption procedure of the standard and the objectives pursed by the 
amendment.  His delegation understood that th e proposed amendment was aimed at improving the 
safety level for Chinese consumers, but was concerne d that some proposed technical requirements of 
the amended standard would constitute an unnecessary obs tacle to trade.  In particular, he noted that 
the amended standard imposed a requirements th at a burner should have a 3.5 Kilowatt minimum 
output on each cooking appliance, and was concerne d that the European experts could not see any 
justification for such requirement, which would le ad to higher energy consumption and higher 
pollution in terms of CO
2 and nitrogen oxide.  Instead, this re quirement would effectively ban the 
European burners from the Chinese market.   
40. The representative of the European Communities was also concerned about the requirement 
of a minimum temperature resistance of the burner  material, which he believed to be set at 700 
degrees Celsius.  It was stressed that none of th e existing standards in Japan, the Unite States, 
Australia and the European Communities had such a minimum temperature resistance requirement, as this was not necessary for safety r easons.  Instead of setting an abstract resistance capacity of the 
material, the temperature resistance  of the material of the burner should be related to the working 
temperature of the burner.  He also highlighted that it seemed technically unreasonable to fix a 
minimum temperature resistance for the material of the burner, as this parameter varied greatly with the burners’ design and the material used.  As an example, he pointed out that cookers made of 
aluminium and with an air intake from above were  suitable to pass all relevant safety standards, 
however, they would not be able to comply with the minimum resistance temperature of 700 degrees Celsius as laid down in the draft Chinese standard.  In technical terms, only cookers made of  cast iron 
or brass would be able to respect such minimum temperature requirement.  He noted that the gas 
cooking appliances produced in China mostly used such cast iron or brass, while in Europe the 
production of such cookers had been  substantially abandoned due to environmental concerns, as they 
contained a high concentration of lead.  He inv ited Chinese authorities not to ban advance technology 
cookers from the market which ensured high safety standards and energy efficiency.  The proposed 
amendment should not be more trade restrictive th an necessary to fulfil th e legitimate objectives 
pursued, in accordance with Ar ticle 2.2 of the Agreement. 
41. The representative of China
 stated that the comments received from the European 
Communities by the Chinese Enquiry Point would be an alyzed.  He stressed that the standard on gas 
appliances was still in the drafting phase, and that wh en a final draft would be available, it would be 
notified to WTO Members.  He welcomed any fu rther information exchange in this regard. 
(viii) India – Fifth Amendment to the Central Motor Vehicles Rules (G/TBT/N/IND/11) 
42. The representative of the European Communities  raised concerns in respect of the above-
mentioned measure, adopted on 16 September 2005, that established rules on, among other things, a 
new certification system for tyres.  On procedure, it was pointed out that the notification had been made six weeks after  the adoption of the measure, and that India had also failed to provide, upon 
request, a copy of the technical regulation in order to allow Members to assess the text and to make 
comments.  On substance, the European Commun ities was concerned that the new certification 
scheme, which he understood would become be applicable as of 1 July 2006, established that tyre manufacturers would have to emboss the logo of th e Bureau of Indian Standards on the tyres (BIS 
logo), along with an approval number, in order to have access to the Indian market.   
43. The representative of the European Communities stressed that adding this marking would 
have a significant financial impact on tyre manufactur ers, because the moulds for all tyres would have 
to be adapted.  Moreover, additional costs would be generated by factory inspections of Indian 
officials and testing procedures.   Although enhancing road safety and protecting the life of passengers were legitimate objectives, the requirement s as they stood were more trade restrictive than 
necessary to fulfil these objectives.  In particular, it was stressed that tyres which were in conformity  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 11 
 
 
  with the relevant UNECE tyre approval procedure and marked accordingly, ensured a high level of 
quality and security.  The European Communities requested the Indian au thorities to admit such tyres 
as equivalent to tyres which were BIS marked pursu ing to the new Central Motor Vehicles rules.  It 
was pointed out that many problems related to the import and export of motor vehicles and parts 
thereof could be avoided if India and other Me mbers would adhere to the 1958 UNECE Agreement 
on International Technical Harmonization in the motor vehicle sector. 
44. The representative of India  explained that the mandatory certification was applicable to 
internal as well as outside manufacturers, and that the main criteria for establishing these rules was 
related to meeting the environmental and road condit ions of his country.  He stressed that the system 
would ultimately benefit consumers, and that there would not be any issue of discrimination.  It was 
recognized that some minimal costs would be associat ed with the system, but stressed that there were 
higher considerations of human safety to be ta ken into account.  Discussions were being held 
domestically on the possibility for India to sign on to the 1958 UNECE Agreement WP 29.  Until 
such time, his country would not be in a position to accept test approvals issued by authorities of other countries.  However, it was noted that the I ndian national standards were aligned with the 
corresponding EC regulations and that tyres which met the EC requirements were expected to be 
approved when tested in India.   
(ix) India – Regulation on Medical Devices 
45. The representative of the European Communities
 drew the Committee's attention to a 
proposed Indian regulation on medical devices, which would treat certain medical devices in the same way as drugs.  This would imply that medical devices  would have to be subject to licences by the 
central government in order to be manufactured, sold or  distributed in India.  He stressed that such a 
system was not in conformity with global practi ce and encouraged India to harmonize its medical 
devices regulations with the rest of the world, in particular with a system developed by the global 
harmonization task force for medical devices, w hose funding members were Australia, Canada, the 
European Union, Japan and the Unite d States.  This would facilitate trade with emerging markets.  He 
also noted that the proposed regulation should be notified to the TBT Committee. 
46. The representative of the United States
 noted that, in the autumn of 2005, the Bombay High 
Court had ordered the drug Controlle r General of India to begin re gulating medical devices and to 
post a notification of its regulatory plans.  In March 2006, guidelines for the registration of medical 
devices had been issued.  It was recalled that several enquiries about the regulations and the 
opportunity to provide comments on them had been forwarded to the Indian authorities through the 
US Enquiry Point, but that no reply had been r eceived.  The representative of the United States 
pointed out that the regulations at issue raised several questions for the US industry, and that they could have a direct impact on trade.  India w as requested to notify the regulations and allow a 
reasonable transition period for supp liers to comply be provided. 
47. The representative of India
 agreed that every country need ed to move towards harmonization 
in this area, and pointed out that his country was moving in that direction.  He took note of the 
concerns raised, in particular those about the notification of the measure. 
(x) Japan – Amendment to the Enforcement Order of  the Law for the Promotion of Effective 
Utilization of Resources (G/TBT/N/JPN/156, Add.1 and Corr.1) 
48. The representative of China  raised concerns about the a bove-mentioned measure, which had 
been notified on 28 November 2005 and was due to enter into force on 4 July 2006.  It was recalled 
that the Chinese delegation had sent comments to Japan.  China was concerned with the fact that one 
of the mentioned objectives of the measure was to address the increase of imported products;  this was not in accordance with the TBT Agreement, and Japan was requested to provide scientific justification G/TBT/M/38 
Page 12  
 
  in this regard.  He noted that the measure also  requested that manufacturers or importers provide 
information on six specific chemical substances (mercury, cadmium, light, chromium, PPB and PPD) for seven types of electrical and electronic equipmen t.  However, no standards or other requirements 
for these substances had been specified.  In the view of the representative from China, the measure 
created an unnecessary obstacle to trade and did not comply with the principle of the least trade 
restrictive option under the TBT Agreement.  Jap an was requested to provide information on the 
notified regulation and the relevant standards;  to reconsider the date of its enforcement, and to 
consider providing technical assistance to developing Members. 
49. The representative of the European Communities
 recalled that comments had been sent to 
Japan and that a written reply had been received .  He hoped to continue the dialogue with the 
Japanese authorities on this matter. 
50. The representative of Japan  explained that, in recent years, the imports of products such as 
personal computers had increased.  However, the eco-design measures of the Law for the Promotion 
of Effective Utilization of Resources only applie d to domestic manufacturers.  Therefore, the 
amendment of the Enforcement Order of the Law ha d proposed to require the same measures for both 
domestic and imported produc ts so as to ensure equal treatment for both manufacturers  and importers.  
He noted that Japan had allowed an adequate peri od of time for comments and that replies had been 
provided to comments received.  Japan also highlighted that his authorities had provided relevant information on the provisions of the Order.  In resp ect of the transitional period, it was stressed that 
the regulation of the matter was of an urgent nature  to Japan, and that an adequate period for business 
entities to take the necess ary steps to adapt had been provided.  Therefore, Japan was not going to 
postpone the date of enforcement of the measure.  Fi nally, it was clarified that the measure at issue 
did not restrict the use of certain hazardous subs tances, but stipulated the provision of information 
regarding their presence.  Moreover, when products complied with the EC Directives, they were not 
required to be labelled.  
(xi) Brazil - Gas fueled lighters, disposable or refillable (G/TBT/N/BRA/193) 
51. The representative of Brazil
 informed the Committee that comments had been received by 
China on the measure at issue and that an answer would be provided in due time. 
(xii) Slovakia – Textiles Products and Fibers (G/TBT/N/SQV/7) 
52. The representative of Brazil  noted that his delegation had provided comments on the above-
mentioned measure, and thanked the European Comm unities for providing an answer and for taking 
the comments into account in terms of a possible amendment of the measure. 
(xiii) Costa Rica – Fruit Juices (G/TBT/N/CRI/14 and Add.1) 
53. The representative of Brazil  noted that his delegation was examining the answer provided to 
comments they had made on the Cost a Rican notification on fruit juices. 
(xiv) European Communities - Fireworks and other Pyrotechnic Articles (G/TBT/N/EEC/97 and 
Add.1) 
54. The representative of China  appreciated the fact that the European Communities had extended 
the period to provide comments on the above notified dr aft directive.  His delegation agreed with the 
objectives to ensure safety in the transportation, st orage and use of pyrotechnical articles so as to 
improve consumers' protection.  Ho wever, it was pointed out that some of the technical requirements 
were of a too general nature, for instance the requirement of low water and high temperature 
resistance, and asked the European Communities to provide specific requirements and standards.  The  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 13 
 
 
  representative of China also sough clarification about the certification procedure, and whether 
certificates issued in EC member States would still be  accepted.  It was also noted that the proposed 
directive required that pyrotechnical articles be subj ect to a type approval testing;  China considered 
this to be too burdensome for the manufacturers.   China requested that the European Communities 
established a reasonable classification of pyrotechnic articles on a scientific basis.  It was also of 
concern that the directive did not provide sufficien t protection of intellectual property rights for the 
manufacturers and was of the view that the directiv e could prejudice the interests of the pyrotechnic 
industry of China, which was well known and established. 
55. The representative of the European Communities  explained that the proposed directive aimed 
at replacing the 25 different national legislations w ith one single European system for the approval of 
pyrotechnical articles, including fireworks.  This would make it easier for exporters to place products 
in the European market, sin ce they only had to meet one set of standards for all the EC member 
States.  On the concerns raised about the water and temperature resistance, these would be discussed 
in the Council working group during  the legislative process.  Regarding certification, it was clarified 
that pyrotechnic articles of a similar nature were being grouped together, and that minor changes in 
the chemical composition would not result in each  subtype being tested separately.  Existing 
approvals would still be valid for a maximum of 12 years from the entry into force of the directive.  Finally, he assured China that the European Communities took all necessary measures to protect 
intellectual property rights, which were an important field in European law.  He explained that the 
European conformity assessment bodies had to be independent of the manufacturers of pyrotechnic 
articles, and that there was no need to introduce sp ecific provisions on intellectual property rights in 
the proposed directive. 
(xv) United States - Energy Conservation Stan dards for Certain Consumer Products and 
Commercial and Industrial Equipment (G/TBT/N/USA/154) 
56. The representative of China
 raised a concern about the amendments to the energy 
conservation standards for 15 types of consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment, 
to be placed in the Code of Federal Regulati ons, and recalled that detailed comments had been 
submitted by his delegation.  While he appreciated th e efforts made by the Unit ed States in the energy 
saving and environmental protection, he was c oncerned about the certification and enforcement 
programmes.  In particular, the notified standards specified that manufacturers were subject to DOE 
certification, and that their products needed to me et energy conservation or energy design standards 
set by EPACT 2005.  He sought clarification from the United States on the type of conformity 
assessment procedure that would be adopted.  It was also pointed out that the notified standards 
specified that all eliminated exit signs should meet the Energy Star programme;  and the United States 
was requested to provide detailed information about this programme.  In addition, the representative 
of China pointed out that the energy efficiency ratio for small and large air conditioning equipment was higher than the present internal level in the Un ited States.  This woul d increase the costs for the 
design, manufacturing and consumption of raw mate rials, which would negatively affect energy 
conservation.  Therefore, he requested the United States to modify the energy efficiency ration to 
bring it into line with the internal level. 
57. The representative of the United States
 noted that she would follow-up on the issue with the 
Chinese authorities.   
(xvi) Saudi Arabia – International Conformity Certification Programme (ICCP) 
58. The representative of the United States  welcomed the delegation of Saudi Arabia to its first 
meeting as a Member of the TBT Committee.  She noted that several enquiries had been received 
from US companies that were confused about the requirement s of Saudi Arabia's International 
Conformity Certification Programme (ICCP).  It  was the US understanding that the previously G/TBT/M/38 
Page 14  
 
  requested pre-market approval had been withdrawn and replaced by a conformity certificate 
statement.  However, the United States was con cerned about the lack of publicly available 
information on the new requirements.  Moreover, th e company which had been contracted to provide 
services to support the ICCP was falsely advertising through the Internet and claiming that its services 
were a mandatory requirement for access to the Saudi  market.  Saudi Arabia had clarified that the 
required statement had to be printe d on the letterhead of the manufacturer or third party conformity 
assessment body established in the co untry exporting to Saudi Arabia.  It was the US representative's 
understanding that there were still some technical difficulties associated with the publication of the 
relevant information in English on the Internet, but  that Saudi Arabia was taking steps to address 
these.  The United States welcomed any additional effo rt that Saudi Arabia might undertake to ensure 
transparency in its new requirements. 
59. The representative of Saudi Arabia
 stressed that his country w as abiding to the commitments 
in the Working Party Report.  He noted that the information about the ICCP on the Internet, which 
was a commitment made in the Working Party, woul d be clarified for the benefit of all Members. 
2. Concerns Previously Raised 
(i) Korea – Import of Fish Heads 
60. The representative of New Zealand  recalled that edible hake heads which were caught in New 
Zealand waters and processed by New Zealand boats  were prohibited from entering the Republic of 
Korea, while hake heads caught in New Zealand wa ters but processed by Korean boats were allowed 
entry into the Korean market.  She noted that, in August 2005, Korea had proposed new requirements 
that would continue to prevent the import of all hake heads from New Zealand and stressed that New 
Zealand had demonstrated, through correspondence w ith Korea, how the proposed new requirements 
would continue to prevent trade.  The representa tive of New Zealand urged Korea to accord hake 
heads caught in New Zealand waters and processed  by New Zealand boats a treatment no less 
favourable than that accorded to t hose hake heads processed by Korean boats.  It was stressed that her 
delegation had raised the issue repeatedly, both bila terally and in the Committee;  yet Korea had not 
been able to provide a WTO-consistent justifica tion for its discrimination against the product caught 
by New Zealand boats.  The representative of New Zealand expected rapid progress towards the resolution of the issue and was willing to engage in further discussion with Korea. 
61. The representative of the European Communities
 informed the Committee that, with regard to 
trade in edible cod heads, good progress had been  achieved in the on-going bilateral discussion with 
Korea.  It was hoped that the two parties would be able to finalize an agreement in the near future. 
62. The representative of Norway  shared the concerns expressed by New Zealand and recalled 
that his delegation had raised the issue at previous  meetings.  He hoped that Korea and all concerned 
Members could come together to discuss all the re levant aspects of the issue in order to find a 
mutually satisfactory solution. 
63. The representative of Korea  noted that bilateral negotiations  were going on and expected that 
the issue would be resolved in the near future.   
(ii) European Communities – Regulation on Certai n Wine Sector Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/15, 
Corr.1-2 and G/TBT/N/EEC/57) 
64. The representative of New Zealand  remained concerned that the EC Regulations 753/2002 
and 316/2004, relating to wine labelling, contai ned provisions that were unnecessary obstacles to 
international trade.  She recalled that her delega tion had raised the issue at every meeting of the 
Committee since June 2002 and continued to seek  written responses to the concerns raised.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 15 
 
 
  65. The representative of the European Communities  took note of the concerns expressed and 
recalled that extensive discussion had taken place on this  issue.  She referred to the responses that the 
European Communities had provided at the Comm ittee meetings of Marc h 2004 and November 2004. 
(iii) European Communities – Regulation on the Regi stration, Evaluation and Authorisation of 
Chemicals (REACH) (G/TBT/W/208 and G/TBT/N/EEC/52 and Add.1) 
66. The representative of Japan  noted that his delegation ha d submitted a Room Document 
summarizing the concerns on the REACH proposal.  He pointed out that some of the concerns 
previously expressed had been addressed, namely the "one substance, one registration" issue and the 
qualification of substances to be notified and inco rporated in the text.  However, other concerns 
remained.  With regard to the manufacturing of polym ers mentioned in Article 5.3 of the proposal, he 
noted that the exclusion from the registration of monomers in polymers was limited only to the 
registration by the upper monomer manufacturers in th e supply chain.  In practice, the manufacturers 
in the European Communities did not need to regist er monomers.  On the other hand, even if the 
polymer had been produced in the European Communities, the importer of the polymer from non-EU countries had to register all composed monomers of  the same polymer separately.  The representative 
of Japan considered that this di fferent treatment was not consiste nt with the WTO non-discrimination 
principle.  He stressed that the provision in th e REACH text should be improved, and that if the 
composed monomers in polymer had already been regi stered, then the exclusion of the registration on 
the monomers should be allowed both in the case of the polymer manufacturer and the polymer importer.  He hoped that the European Communiti es would continue the dialogue with its trading 
partners and that the REACH proposal coul d be made consistent with WTO rules. 
67. The representative of Australia
 was also of the view that REACH needed to be brought in 
fuller consistency with the TBT principles and that  it was more trade restrictive than necessary to 
achieve the objectives enshrined in Article 2.2 of th e Agreement.  He was of the view that subjecting 
such a broad range of materials containing substa nces to authorization obligations captured also 
minerals or metals, that presented little danger of risk.   
68. The representative of the United States  associated herself with the comments made.  She 
noted that a result from the intern al processes in the European Co mmunities that would show that 
Members' concerns had been take n into account had yet to be seen. 
69. The representative of Chile  shared the concerns expressed.  In  particular, she stressed that the 
final text needed to be:  simpler;  reduce the cost s for the application of the system;  contain a better 
approach to risk based on science;  and, avoid any duplication of information.  The representative of 
Chile was of the view that REACH should not b ecome an unnecessary obstacle to trade by being 
more trade restrictive than necessar y.  She also recalled the concern of developing countries in terms 
of technical assistance that could be provide d by the European Commu nities for the correct 
application of the regulation. 
70. The representative of the China  associated his delegation with the comments made by the 
previous speakers.  He was of the view that REAC H was trade restrictive and not in compliance with 
the principles of the TBT Agreement.  He was also  concerned about the broa d scope of REACH on its 
impact on trade.  He encouraged the European  Communities to continue sharing information on 
REACH and to provide updates on its development.  He reiterated his delega tion's request that the 
European Communities provide technical assistance to  developing country Members, as well as take 
special and differential treatment into consideration. 
71. The representative of Cuba  agreed with Chile and China that  technical assistance and special 
and differential treatment to developing countri es needed to be taken into consideration. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 16  
 
  72. The representative of Mexico
 thanked the European Communities for their efforts in terms of 
transparency, but highlighted the importance of  taking into account the comments made and to 
consider technical assistance at the appropriate time, as well as special and differential treatment to developing countries. 
73. The representative of the European Communities
 informed the Committee that, in mid-
November 2005, the European Parliament had given its first reading opinion on the text presented by 
the European Commission in 2003 and had proposed numerous amendments regarding, inter alia , the 
scope of the future regulation, the registration and authorization requirements and the future 
responsibilities of the Agency which REACH would est ablish.  Following that, the European Council 
had come to a unanimous political agreement on the REACH proposal on 13 December 2005, which 
had taken into account many of the key amendmen ts made by the European Parliament.  On 
8 March 2006, the Committee of Permanent Represe ntatives had agreed on the recitals for REACH. 
74. It was stressed that the Eu ropean Commission had expressed its full support for the Council's 
political agreement, which was consistent with  the EC objectives on competitiveness and innovation, 
while achieving an improvement in the protection of health and environment.  The political agreement 
had to be cast into a Common Position.  He explained that the drafting was expected to be finished by 
May 2006, and that a Common Position, which was expected to be endorsed by the Commission, 
could be formally adopted by 30 May 2006.  Subs equently, in the summer or autumn of 2006 – and 
on the basis of the Common Position – the Parliament would hold its second reading.  At this point the Parliament could either reject or agree to the Common Position or, more likely, propose further 
amendments.  The further amendments would have to  be agreed by the Council:  if it did not agree, 
then a conciliation procedure between the European  Parliament and the Council would have to be 
established.  This meant that the formal adoption of REACH would ideally take place by the end of 
2006, and its entry into force was planned for 1 April 2007. 
75. The main changes adopted by the Council in its  political agreement related to a number of 
issues.  The first amendment, on exemptions, related to (i) the clarification that waste was exempt;  
(ii) exemption of certain substances from registra tion, in particular noble gases and cellulose pulp;  
(iii) exemption of minerals and or es from registration if they had not been chemically modified.  The 
second amendment related to substances in articles, and provided that all substances intended to be 
released from articles had to be registered, accordi ng to the same timetable as for substances not in 
articles.  Substances subject to authorization but not intended to be released had to be notified to the 
Agency.  The third amendment related to reduced requ irements for the registration of non-priority low 
volume substances and to increased requirements fo r prioritised low volume substances.  A fourth 
amendment gave the Agency greater powers, partic ularly in evaluation procedure.  Finally, all 
requests for authorisation had to be accompanied by an  analysis of alternativ es and all authorisations 
had to be subject to tim e-limited review periods. 
76. The representative of the European Communities pointed out that, after the adoption of the 
Common Position by the Council, an Addendum to the original notification would be submitted, 
which would also explain how REACH would opera te, while focussing on the major changes of the 
Common Position compared with the original proposal .  He stressed that the revised REACH proposal 
was fully compatible with WTO rules, in particular with Article 2.1 and 2.2 of the TBT Agreement, as 
products were treated the same way and possible obst acles to trade were justified by the objectives to 
protect health and the environment.  He would conve y specific questions raised in the current meeting 
to the experts.  The European Communities also recognized the EC obligations under Article 11.3 of 
the TBT Agreement and highlighted that extensive guidance material would be prepared and that 
appropriate technical assistance, and, on the Co mmission's request, capacity building activities to 
industry and authorities in devel oping countries were planned.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 17 
 
 
  (iv) European Communities – Restrictions on the Use of Certain Phthalates in Toys 
(G/TBT/N/EEC/82) 
77. The representative of China  reiterated the concerns on the above-mentioned measure, raised 
both in previous TBT Committee meetings and bila terally with the European Communities.  His 
delegation considered that China's comments had not been taken into account, and further comments 
had been submitted in January 2 006, which remained unanswered.  The European Parliament had 
approved the proposed amendments to the directiv e 76/769/EEC on 6 October 2005.  Therefore, his 
delegation believed that the European Communities ha d not acted in compliance with Article 2.5 of 
the TBT Agreement, which requested Members prepar ing, adopting or applying a technical regulation 
to explain its justification upon request.  The represen tative of China was of the view that the notified 
measures lacked scientific evidence.   For instance, the three phthalates DIMP, DIDP and DNOP had 
not yet been proved to be harmful to children's' health, and there was no scientific evidence that 
supported the limits of 0.1 per cent of phthalates se t by the EC measure.  He  requested the European 
Communities to provide scientific basis for this rest riction, and to bring the measure into conformity 
with the TBT Agreement by adopting the ISO Sta ndard 8124, which set the testing methods for 
harmful substances in toys. 
78. The representative of the European Communities  recalled that the directive concerned six 
phthalates:  three of them had been identified as toxic in the risk assessment undertaken, and therefore 
had to be banned in toys and childcare articles.  For a second group, including the DIMP, DIDP and DNOP mentioned by China, scientific information was either lacking or conflicting and, on the basis of precautionary considerations, restrictions on thei r use in toys and childcare articles had also been 
introduced.  However, following the principle of proportionality, these restrictions would be less 
severe.  He informed the Committee that a guidance paper, which woul d be publicly available on-line, 
was being prepared by the experts.  A written re ply to China's comments would be provided and 
European experts remained willing to further expl ain the measures, including the possible alternative 
substances that could be used by manufacturers. 
79. The representative of the United States
 referred to the guidance paper that the European 
Communities was preparing and recalled that her de legation had asked the European Communities to 
prepare legally binding guidelines in the context of the RoHS Directive in order to give companies 
seeking to comply with this directive commercia l certainty.  She noted that on the Commission 
website there was a section on Frequently Aske d Questions which also included the respective 
answers, but that it was not legally binding.  She sought clarification on the status of the guidance 
paper which would be prepared on phthalates. 
80. The representative of th e European Communities  clarified that the guidance document on the 
phthalates in toys would not be  legally binding, because the Commission could not give legally 
binding guidance on a directive which had been adopted  by the European Parliament and the Council.  
Ultimately, only the European Court of Justice coul d interpret and instruct specific provisions of a 
legal act adopted under Community rules.  The gui dance was instead  aimed at helping manufacturers 
and industry to comply with the oblig ations contained in the directive. 
(v) China – Administration on the Control of Po llution Caused by Electronic Information 
Products (G/TBT/N/CHN/140 
81. The representative of Japan  reiterated his delegation's concerns about the Chinese measure on 
the control of pollution caused by electronic info rmation products.  His de legation appreciated the 
answers from China that WTO rules were being follow ed, but requested China to  reply to the specific 
comments and questions posed.  First, with regard  to the electronic units and components and to 
electronic materials, he requested China to reconsid er excluding them or changing their names, in line 
with the international practice.  Second, clar ification was sought on the names of electronic G/TBT/M/38 
Page 18  
 
  information products and on the kind of products defined as household electronic products.  The 
representative of Japan also asked whether spare pa rts of the products sold before the date of 
implementation of the law, as well as re-used products  would be out of the scope of the law.  Third, 
Japan sought clarification on compulsory product certification and imported product inspection.  His 
delegation had received the answer that electroni c information products received in the catalogue 
should pass the compulsory certification.  The representative of Japan asked whether supplier's 
declaration of conformity (SDoC) would be allo wed, so as to reduce unnecessary technical obstacles 
to trade.  Finally, with regard to the sectoral st andards, he wondered whether these would be notified 
to WTO Members. 
82. The representative of the United States
 thanked China for the response provided to the 
comments made, but had similar concerns to t hose expressed by Japan.  For instance, it was her 
delegation's understanding that the catalogue would provide important information on the type of 
assurance of conformity, and whether this could be the CCC mark or supplier's declaration of 
conformity (SDoC).  However, she noted that this in formation was not yet available, and that also the 
related technical standards and testing methodol ogies were still under development.  The United 
States asked whether China would notify Members, for instance by means of an addendum to the 
original notification, when these additional documen ts became available and whether there would be 
an opportunity for comments.  She also sought ad ditional information on th e scope of the products 
covered and on the criteria, timeline and definition of the new "environmentally friendly use period" 
of electronic information products labelling requirements.   
83. The representative of the European Communities  associated herself with the comments made 
by the United States.   
84. The representative of China  recalled that, at the request of  the European Communities, an 
extension of the comment period of one week had been provided.  Comments had been received by 
eleven governments or enterprises from the Unite d States, Japan, the European Communities and 
Singapore.  The comments were being analyzed and responses to specific questions such as the ones 
on conformity assessment or SDoC would be provided through the Enquiry Point.  He pointed out that 
the regulation was of a framework nature and that  specific catalogues of products subject to this 
regulation would be develope d in the future.  It was stressed that  China would continue to fulfil its 
obligations on transparency and that it was willing to continue the dialogue w ith its trading partners. 
(vi) United States - DTV Tuner Requirements (G/TBT/N/USA/128) 
85. The representative of the United States  wished to follow up on a concern raised by China at 
the last meeting of the TBT Committee.5  She informed the Committee that, on 3 November 2005, the 
Federal Communication Commission had taken the d ecision to amend the rules taking into account 
the comments made by China and that this informati on, along with the text of the measure, had been 
provided to China.  Information was also available for other Members on the FCC website.6 
(vii) European Communities - Disposable lighters (G/TBT/N/EEC/89) 
86. The representative of China  noted that the above measure on child resistant lighters notified 
to the TBT Committee had taken into account some of the concerns raised by his delegation in 
previous TBT meetings.7  While his delegation understood the efforts to improve children's 
protection, concerns remained about a number of i ssues.  First, his delegation believed that there was 
                                                      
5 G/TBT/M/37, paras. 5-10. 
6 www.fcc.gov 
7 G/TBT/M/36, paras.4-6.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 19 
 
 
  no factual support for the exemption of child resistan t requirements on certain refillable lighters.  This 
would result in a different treatment granted to diffe rent groups of products that ha the same function 
in an arbitrary fashion which was not consistent with the TBT Agreement. 
87. Second, the representative of China was also concerned about the prohibition of placing on 
the market of novelty lighters.  He noted that a US study on the effectiveness of child resistant 
requirements, which had been cited in the draf t EC measure, reported a 60 per cent reduction in 
accidents;  this proved that child-resistant devices on lighters could effectively prevent children from operating lighters.  His delegation believed that th e EC draft measure failed to justify why novelty 
lighters complying with child-resistance requirement s should be prohibited from being sold in the 
European Communities.  He further stressed that mo st of the novelty lighters on the European market 
came from China and that the prohibition would constitute a de facto  discrimination against China.  
He requested the European Communities to lift th is prohibition and to conduct a risk assessment of 
child resistant novelty lighters after one year of the enforcement of the measure. 
88. Third, China was doubtful that the European  Communities recognized testing bodies could 
conduct all the child-resistance tests within ten months as stipulated and requested that the transition 
period be extended to at least 20 months.  He also  recommended that the draft should presume that the 
force that needed to operate the lighter should ex ceed 8.5 pounds and that relevant testing centres and 
procedures be developed in order to avoid using several children as testing tools.   Finally, the 
representative of China also sought clarification on the mutual recognition of test results and on the 
list of EC recognized testing bodies, in particular those in China.  Clarification was also sought on certain definitions such as luxury and semi-luxury lighters, repairable ignition mechanism and about 
the requirements and procedures of the specia lized service centre b ased in the European 
Communities.   
89. The representative of th e European Communities
 appreciated the recognition by China of the 
importance of ensuring a high level of protection fo r children from the risks caused by lighters and 
explained that the draft text, which had been notif ied to the TBT Committee on 5 July 2005, had been 
reviewed to take into account the comments recei ved from several WTO Members, including China – 
both in the Committee and at a bilateral level.  It was pointed out that the scope of the decision had 
been modified and that it was no longer based on a monetary value of 2 Euros which had been 
criticized by China, but on a technical definition of luxury and semi-luxury lighters.  These were defined as lighters which were designed, manufactured and placed on the market so as to ensure a continued safe use over a long peri od of time and which were cove red by a written guarantee and the 
benefit of after-sale replacement or repair. 
90. The representative of the European  Communities stressed that st udies showed that the misuse 
of luxury and semi-luxury lighters had caused less acci dents, and, given that the risk they posed when 
used by children was lower, th ey did not require child resistan t mechanism.  In this sense the 
European Communities had limited the scope of th e measure to what was necessary to protect 
children;  it was the least trade-restrictive optio n.  The draft decision also included a provision 
regarding the placement on the market lighters that resembled toys or other objects which were commonly recognised as appealing or intended for use by children younger than 51 months, the so-called novelty lighters.  She explained that this pr ovision was based on the consideration that child 
resistant mechanisms only guaranteed an 85 per cent level of resistance which was considered sufficient for normal lighters but not for novelty li ghters.  Finally, it was stressed that the draft 
measures would apply equally to domestic producer s and to those from third countries and that the 
ban was temporary.  The European Communiti es acknowledged receipt of further comments from 
China on the amended measure, and noted that a reply would be provided.   G/TBT/M/38 
Page 20  
 
  (viii) European Communities – Directive 2005/32 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-
using products and amending Council Dire ctive 92/42/EEC and Directives 96/57/EC and 
2000/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 
91. The representative of the United States
 referred to the concerns raised by China about the 
above-mentioned measure at the previous meeting of the Committee8 and appreciated the information 
provided by the European Commission that the impl ementing measures associated with the directive 
would be notified.  She sought information about the status of development of the directive, which she 
understood to be a "New Approach" directive with so me unique characteristics associated with it such 
as the subsequent implementing measures which were not  going to be standards.  She asked about the 
products to be covered by these measures and the ti me frame for its development.  The representative 
of the United States also sought information a bout the conformity assessment requirements and 
whether there would be criteria for evaluating the equi valence with other standards.  It was noted that 
equivalence was an approach cho sen by the European Communities fo r some of its directives, and 
recalled that her delegation had raised concerns in the past about the lack of transparency on its 
implementation.  It was her delegation's understa nding that there would be a consultation with 
stakeholders and that the European Commission was establishing a eco-design consultation forum.  
The United States was interested in knowing how interested parties from non-European countries 
could provide an input to this process at a suffi ciently early stage so as to have meaningful 
consideration in the implementation process of the directive. 
92. The representative of the European Communities  confirmed that the implementing measures 
would be notified and pointed out that the ques tions posed by the United States would transmitted 
experts.  He further suggested that so me issues could be clarified bilaterally. 
C. OTHER  MATTERS 
1. Scheduling of the Fifth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange 
93. The Chairman  recalled that the Committee's last Special Meeting on Procedures for 
Information Exchange had been held on 2-3 November 2004.9  He reminded Members that the 
purpose of these meetings – held on a biennial basis – was to give Members an opportunity to exchange experiences and discuss the functioning of  notification procedures and enquiry points and 
stressed that these meetings dealt only with tec hnical issues.  The Chairman proposed that the 
Committee scheduled the Fifth Special Meeting on  Procedures for Information Exchange back-to-
back with its first meeting in 2007.  This would al so enable the Secretariat to request funding for the 
participation of developing country Members in the context of the 2007 Technical Assistance and 
Training Plan.  He invited Members of the TBT Co mmittee to discuss this issue with the colleagues 
dealing with the Committee on Trade and Developmen t so as to ensure its inclusion in the 2007 
Technical Assistance and Training Plan. 
94. It was so agreed
. 
2. Other 
95. The representative of Canada  drew the Committee's attenti on to a recent notification under 
Article 10.7 of the TBT Agreement, contained in  G/TBT/N/10.7/48 (10 January 2006).  This was a 
notification of a mutual recognition agreement on conformity assessment between her country and 
Australia, on medicines, good manufacturing practice and certification between the two governments.  
                                                      
8 G/TBT/M/37, paras. 11-13. 
9 The report of the meeting is contained in G/TBT/M/34, Annex I.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 21 
 
 
  She highlighted that this MRA would provide fo r mutual recognition of certification and acceptance 
of certificates of good manufacturing practice of medici nes, issued by both Australia's department of 
Health and the Health Products Food Branch of Canada.  The Agreement would allow each of the 
parties to recognize and accept each others' tec hnical competence to certify these products for 
compliance with their domestic standards and regulatory requirements;  it would also allow mutual 
recognition of certification of each batch of medicinal products. 
96. The representative of Japan  updated the Committee on the result of standards alignment work 
in APEC (G/TBT/W/262). 
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW 
A. PREPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW  
97. The Chairman  recalled that, based on its Work Programme for the Preparation of the Fourth 
Triennial Review10, the Committee had initiated its review wo rk in March 2005 with the preliminary 
identification of possible topics for review by de legations.  In June 2005, the Committee continued 
this exploration of topics and discussed several of them.  At the Committee's preceding meeting 
(2 November 2005), further topics were explored  and there had been general agreement in the 
Committee to consider the following five topics as el ements of the Fourth Triennial Review: (i) Good 
Regulatory Practice; (ii) Conformity Assessment;  (iii) Transparency;  (iv) Technical Assistance; and, (v) Special and Differential Treatment.  The Ch airman drew the Committee's attention to a 
background note from the Secretariat (JOB(06)/ 24) summarizing the discussion held so far on each 
topic and aimed at assisting the Committee with its deliberations at the current meeting.   
98. The representative of the United States
 noted the usefulness of receiving the Secretariat 
background note early in the triennial review pro cess.  On substance, the United States was of the 
view that while the first three Reviews of th e TBT Committee needed to inform the Committee's 
discussion and Members' positions for the Fourth Re view, there was a need to focus on the discussion 
pertaining to the Fourth Review.  The distinction between the discussions and the follow-up to the 
Third Triennial Review and the Preparation of the Fo urth Triennial Review was somewhat artificial in 
JOB(06)/24.  The structure of the Committee's Age nda made it somewhat unclear where one Review 
ended and the other started.  Some of the recomme ndations from past Reviews had not been acted on 
and the Committee might need to consider why no ac tion was taken, or, whether they continued to be 
valid.  If so, such recommendations could be noted in  the context of the Fourth Triennial Review.   
She stressed that the review needed to be Member driven and based on consensus.   
99. The representative of Mexico  considered that the factual refe rences to previous Reviews were 
useful as they gave perspective on past work.  Moreover, the background was important when 
considering that many current delegations had not been involved in previous reviews.   
100. The representative of Canada  was of the view that the Secretariat's background document 
provided a useful basis and context for all Members to proceed in the Fourth Triennial Review with some understanding of what had gone on in the past.  Nevertheless the content needed to reflect what 
was necessary to develop a common understanding which could guide the Committee forwards;  it 
was not necessary to include all information from prev ious reviews.   Canada also wished to have 
some discussion on how to address aspects of past Triennial Reviews which had not been completed by the Committee.  The Committee could decide on the continued relevance (or non-relevance) of 
these issues. 
                                                     
 
10 G/TBT/M/37, Annex 1. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 22  
 
  101. The representative of the European Communities,
 Brazil  and Chile  considered that the 
Secretariat note had successfully brought out – and given perspective to – the elements for discussion 
in the Fourth Triennial Review.   
1. Stocktaking 
(i) Good Regulatory Practice 
102. The Chairman  noted that during the preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review, Members 
had expressed a continued interest in an exch ange of information on various aspects of good 
regulatory practice.  For instance, it had been s uggested that the Committee could further explore 
what "more trade restrictive than necessary" imp lied in practice in order to limit the scope for 
interpretation of these statements.  Moreover, discu ssions had taken place on issues related to (i) the 
choice of policy instruments; (ii) efficient and e ffective regulation; and, (iii) regulatory cooperation 
between different countries.   
103. The representative of Chinese Taipei  introduced her delegation's submission (Part III of 
G/TBT/W/261) and proposed that Members conti nue to exchange experiences related to the 
implementation of good regulatory practice.  In pa rticular, it was necessary to examine how such 
practices could be integrated into regulatory struct ures, for instance in respect of specific sectors. 
104. The representative of Canada  introduced her delegation' s submission contained in 
G/TBT/W/264.  She proposed that the Committee advanced the discussion of Good Regulatory Practices by agreeing, in the Fourth Triennial Review, to hold at least one workshop which would 
include, inter alia , an examination of the issue of "instrumen t choice".  It was further suggested that 
the year 2007 be used to continue an exchange of information, as proposed by Chinese Taipei, and 
that the workshop take place in the year 2008. 
105. The representative of Mexico
 supported Canada's proposal on the workshop and noted that 
input from several international organizati ons would be useful in this respect.   
106. The representative of Malaysia  supported, in respect of the choice of policy instruments, the 
recommendation that the Committee explore how th e use of performance based regulations, where 
appropriate, could contribute to ensuring that unne cessary obstacles to trade were avoided.  It was 
stressed, in this regard, that th e Committee needed to take into c onsideration the added complexities 
of adopting and enforcing such regulations:  a hi gh level expertise and skills was required in the 
assessment of compliance with performance based re gulations.  Hence, determination of compliance 
could become more demanding, especially for de veloping country Members where expertise and 
skills were in short supply.   
107. In terms of the effectiveness and efficiency of regulations, the representative of Malaysia 
noted that several management tools were availabl e for Members to use to improve the effectiveness 
and efficiency of regulations.  Malaysia supported the work of the Committee to enhance the 
understanding and implementation of these tools.  It  was stressed that capacity considerations needed 
to be addressed:  in particular, Malaysia urged Memb ers with experience in th e use of tools such as 
RIAs, cost/benefit analysis, to give priority in providing technical assistance to other Members who 
request such assistance in line with the provisions of Article 11.1 and 11.2 of the TBT Agreement. 
108. In respect of equivalence, Malaysia welcom ed further sharing of experiences on establishing 
equivalence of technical regulations as this was an area that had not had much success.  The TBT Agreement, in Article 2.7, suggested that equi valency should be determined on the basis of 
equivalency of outcomes.  This was often not easi ly achievable when regulations did not contain 
explicit statements of the desired outcomes.  In other cases there could also be differences of opinion  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 23 
 
 
  on the actual outcomes that were being achieved.  A further understanding of the issues through an 
exchange of experiences needed to be undertak en before the Committee considered designing a 
procedure to facilitate the development of equiva lency.  Malaysia supported the contention that 
regulatory cooperation could be viewed as an essential element of Good Regulatory Practice. 
109. The representative of th e European Communities  agreed with Chinese Taipei on the need to 
continue an exchange of experiences in the area of Good Regulatory Practice and supported Canada's 
views on the importance of focussing on desired outco mes of a measure;  the European Communities 
had positive experiences in the performance-based re gulations (G/TBT/W/254).  In terms of "better 
regulation", the European Communities wished to emphasize the need for th e Committee to exchange 
information in the area of RIAs.  It could be useful for the Committee to consider what common 
elements could be gleaned from different appro aches to RIAs.   The European Communities also 
wished to emphasize the need to ex amine the existing stock of regulations and take steps to simplify 
it.  For instance, it was noted that the European Communities was considering steps to repeal, modify 
or simplify over 200 basic pieces of legislation over  the next three years, starting with the most 
heavily regulated sectors (such as automobiles, wast e and construction).  In this same vein, it was 
important to revisit existing legislation in light of progress made in international standardization, and, 
wherever possible, take into account eventual cha nges.  Last, the European  Communities wished to 
stress the need for the Committee to consider diffe rent approaches to transparency procedures.  
110. The representative of the Unites States  shared the comments made – in particular by Malaysia 
– on the need for more information on equivalence,  particularly as this had proved to be difficult to 
achieve.  For some time the United States had welcomed the presentation by other Members of 
successful examples of the operation of equivalence.  Of particular interest were the steps undertaken 
to arrive at a determination of equivalency in a particular case.  For instance, had the decision been 
taken on the basis of published criteria?  What ot her aspects of the process had facilitated the arrival 
at a determination?  In the view of the United States, it was not always a matter of specifying regulations in terms of performance requirements be cause even in c ases where this had been done and 
there existed an expressed policy of equivalence it w as not always transparent;  i.e. it was not always 
easy to determine why certain regulations had b een recognised as equivalent and others not.  
Although equivalence had been on the agenda of the Committee from a very early stage, very little information had been provided to date on  good practice regarding this concept. 
111. The representative of Brazil
 was of the view that a more in-d epth debate in this area could 
encourage counties to adopt simpler and more rati onal regulatory processes and thereby diminish the 
number of trade barriers imposed unnecessarily.  In Brazil,  the identification of difficulties in this area 
had entailed the creation, in 2005, of a National C ouncil of Metrology, Normalization and Industrial 
Quality (CONMETRO) which, among its main tasks, set criteria and the processes of national regulation.   
112. The representative of Chile
 supported proposals made by Chinese Taipei, Canada and the 
European Communities.  Irrespective of the cont ext – whether made during an exchange of 
information in the Committee or in presentations in the proposed workshop – elements of good 
regulatory practice had been raised (and would in th e future) in the Committee .  These needed to be 
taken onboard by Members.  In particular, the Committee needed to continue its exchange of 
experiences, including on:  voluntary approach versus mandatory;  the evaluation of RIAs, the 
experiences on the use of equivalency;  experien ces from the use of performance-based regulations;  
regulatory cooperation between different countries;  and,  regulatory coordination at the national level.   G/TBT/M/38 
Page 24  
 
  (ii) Conformity Assessment Procedures 
113. The Chairman
 presented a brief factual statement on the 16-17 March 2006 TBT Workshop 
on Different Approaches to Conformity  Assessment (Annex 1 on page 35)11 and recalled that the 
Committee had discussed a number of issues in resp ect of conformity assessment, including on the 
avoidance of unnecessary obstacles to trade and diff erent approaches to facilitate the acceptance of 
conformity assessment results.  In particular, he hoped that the Committee's work in the on-going 
Review would achieve greater focu s and understanding than had been achieved at previous triennial 
reviews in respect of conformity assessment.  He drew the Committee's attention to two new submissions, one from Chinese Taipei (G/TBT/W/261) and the other from Japan (G/TBT/W/263).   
114. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 introduced Section I of G/TBT/W/261.  In particular, it 
was proposed that the Committee's discussions fo cus on specific ISO/IEC Guides for third-party 
product certification, because third-party certificati on was a conformity assessment procedure widely 
used by Members to demonstrate compliance of a product with the relevant technical regulations.  Reference was also made to ISO/IEC Guides 28, 53  and 67, which had all either been adopted or 
revised in the last two years.  The representative of Chinese Taipei was of the view that a focused 
discussion on Members' experience in using these Gu ides would help regulators to better understand 
how they could be applied and, in particul ar, how Article 5.4 of the TBT Agreement was 
implemented.  Moreover, as a follow-up to the di scussions on SDoC, Chinese Taipei was also of the 
view that Members should notify when SDoC was used as a conformity assessment procedure.   
115. The representative of Japan
 introduced his delegation's proposal (G/TBT/W/263) on 
conformity assessment.  Regarding the section on cross-border designation, reference was made to 
Japan's presentation at the Workshop.  On the issu e of mutual recognition agreements (MRAs), some 
clarification on terminology was provided:  in th e Japanese submission the term "MRA" referred to a 
bilateral mutual recognition mechanism between gove rnments for regulatory authorities to accept the 
result of conformity assessment issued by conformity  assessment bodies in trading partners.  It did not 
refer to the multilateral recognition mechanisms  among accreditation bodies to accept the result of 
accreditation for conformity assessment bodies or tes ting laboratories and other mechanisms.  The 
Japanese submission was proposing the possibility of  cross-border designation as a trade facilitation 
tool.  Japan was of the view that in some case s and for some specific products such cross-border 
designation mechanisms could be useful and more  cost-effective compared to traditional MRAs.  
Japan's proposal also put forward some ideas on  how to improve – or make more useful – 
international multilateral mutual recognition arra ngements among accreditation bodies.  Currently, 
such arrangements were, in Japan's view, not utili zed enough by Japanese stakeholders, in particular 
regulatory authorities.  Japan concluded from the workshop and the discussion held so far that it would be useful not only for developed country  Members to provide knowledge and experiences to 
developing country Members, but also for devel oping country Members to share their knowledge and 
experiences among themselves. 
116. The representative of the European Communities
 noted that the contribution from Chinese 
Taipei suggested that Members should notify when SDoC was used as a procedure.  The European 
Communities was of the view that this was a good idea and suggested that the Committee could go 
even further:  Members could be asked to provide information on the use of other types of conformity assessment procedures as well.  With  enough information the Committee might be able to gain some 
insight into how different procedures were applied in  different sectors by different Members.  If this 
was too much, the proposal suggested by Chinese Taip ei could be seen as a first step.  The European 
Communities was also positive to the proposal to sh are information and experiences on the use of the 
                                                     
 
11 The programme (G/TBT/GEN/31) as well as pr esentations are available on the TBT webpage: 
http://www.wto.org/english/ tr atop_e/tbt_e/tbt_e.htm#events .    A summary report of the Workshop will be 
issued separately.   G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 25 
 
 
  ISO/IEC Guides;  in fact, the European Communiti es was of the view that some factual reference 
would need to be made in the Fourth Triennial Review report with respect to development of ISO 
standards in the conformity assessment area since th e Third Triennial Review.  Referring to the paper 
by Japan, the European Communities welcomed an explanation on the use of accreditation leading to 
the possibility of cross-boarder designation by Japan. 
117. The representative of Mexico  noted, with respect to Japan's document, that many of the 
elements were linked to accreditation;  this was an activity done in Mexi co in the private sector. 
Mexico needed to consider the proposal more care fully and reserved the right to react to all other 
proposals made on this topic.  
118. The representative of the United States  stated, in respect of the proposal by Chinese Taipei to 
notify the use of SDoC, it needed to be considered  to what extent this would overlap with existing 
obligations in the TBT Agreement.  While the United States welcomed more transparency and 
information on the use of SDoC or other approaches to conformity assurance, at the same time there 
was a need to avoid detracting from the existi ng obligation to notify the proposed conformity 
assessment procedures for comment.   
119. The representative of Malaysia  noted that the implementation of unnecessarily burdensome 
conformity assessment procedures created unnecessary barri ers to trade and that this was a point that 
had been made during the course of the Workshop .  Hence, it would be useful for Members to 
exchange views on the identification of appropria te conformity assessment procedures to use in 
different situations.  This would assist Memb ers in getting a better understanding on what the 
appropriate procedure could be in a given situa tion.  The representative of Malaysia noted that 
although there were several international standa rds and guides defining and describing the various 
types of conformity assessment procedures, he was not  aware of any internatio nal standard or guide 
that dealt with the selection of an appropriat e procedures for use in specific situations.   
(iii) Transparency 
120. The Chairman  noted that in discussions on transparen cy so far, the following issues had 
arisen:   (i) publication of a notice of proposed technical regulations;  (ii)  notifications of proposed 
technical regulations and conformity assessment pro cedures of local governments at the level directly 
below that of the central government;  (iii) no tification of revised technical regulations and 
conformity assessment procedures following a recommendation of the DSB;  (iv) comments on proposed technical regulations and conformity assessme nt procedures;  (v) access to texts of notified 
measures;  (vi) sharing of translations;  and (vii)  timing of the entry into force of measures.   
121. The representative of Chinese Taipei
 introduced Section II of G/TBT/W/261.  It was noted 
that Paragraph J of Annex 3 of the TBT Agreement allowed a standardizing body either to notify the 
existence of its work programme directly to the ISO/IEC Information Centre or to communicate it via 
the Internet.  As the information made available to Members did not seem to be very clear on the specifics of how a standardizing body chose to fu lfill this obligation, Chinese Taipei had proposed 
certain action to ensure that implementation of this obligation was as transparent as the other 
notification obligations in the TBT Agreement.
12  Moreover, Chinese Taipei also reiterated the 
importance of the notification obligation contained in Article 10.7.  It was noted that in the year 2005, 
no notifications had been made under this Article despite recent activity in this area, both bilaterally 
and regionally.13 
                                                      
12 G/TBT/W/261, para. 8. 
13 G/TBT/W/261, para. 9. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 26  
 
  122. The representative of Malaysia
 supported the initiative regarding the development of a 
voluntary system of sharing translations and was of the view that it would be preferable for this to be 
facilitated through the WTO Website rather than many  Member websites.  On the issue of access to 
final texts of notified measures, wh ile Malaysia supported the requireme nt that the full text of notified 
measures be made easily available to other Memb ers.  It seemed burdensome, duplicative and also 
unnecessary that the Enquiry Point itself be required to have such texts always available;  the 
requirement was that the Enquiry Point provide qui ck and easy access to the text was sufficient to 
fulfill the established objectives.   
123. The representative of Chile  stressed the importance, when submitting a notification, to 
include whenever possible a reference to where th e full information on the technical regulation or 
conformity assessment procedure could be found.  Ther e was a need to include, at the very least, the 
Internet address where it could be obtained.  
124. The representative of the European Communities  supported the statement made by Chile and 
noted the usefulness of having the relevant draft technical regulation directly included in the notification, perhaps as an attached electronic file , or at least including a reference to a functioning 
Internet website where it could be downloaded.  The representative of the European Communities also 
recalled their suggestion that Members give more pr ecise and detailed information in the notification 
format under Section 6 which was entitled "Description of the content".
14   
125. The representative of China  noted that the Secretariat's new TBT Handbook (paragraph 163) 
showed that progress had been made in terms of the comment period which last year had reached an average of 60.5 days.  This was particularly helpfu l for developing country Members.  In addition, the 
sharing of translations was important;  the TBT Committee could learn from the SPS Committee’s 
experience in this regard.  The representative of Ch ina also considered that the TBT Committee could 
explore whether draft texts of notified measures co uld be provided together with the notification 
format so as to save time for the translation as well as time for comment. 
126. The representative of Mexico
 stated that in respect of notifications there was sometimes no  
consistency between Members with respect to  what was notified and under what provisions 
notifications were made.  There was also a need to consider in more depth the time periods for public 
consultation.  Moreover, Members appeared to have different periods of time for the receipt of 
notifications and Mexico considered it preferable to have one standard period of time for all.  Mexico 
supported the suggestions made by Chinese Taipei with respect to transparency and the notification of  
the existence of a work programme for national standards bodies. 
127. The representative of Canada  considered the proposal that Members, on a voluntary basis, 
make available full texts of the draft regulation att ached to a notification, a positive step forward.  
This not only reduced the time needed for receipt of  the full text notification, it also improved the total 
period of time in which a Member could make comme nts and entailed, therefore, an improvement in 
efficiency and effectiveness.  Canada also supporte d the comments made in respect of the sharing of 
translations.  Regarding the time for comments,  while the average time for comments had now 
surpassed 60 days15, the 11th Annual Review of the TB T Agreement (G/TBT/18) showed that 
approximately 10 per cent of the 2005 notifications  had been made with a comment period of less 
than 45 days, and, there were also about 8 per cen t of the 2005 notifications for which the time period 
for comments had not been specified, had la psed or was stated as non-applicable.16  Hence, there was 
still room for progress.  Canada c ontinued to support its previous proposal regarding the enhancement 
                                                      
14 G/TBT/W/253, para. 6. 
15 G/TBT/18, Figure 4. 
16 G/TBT/18, Annex F.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 27 
 
 
  of transparency for new or changed regulations or  conformity assessment procedures which arose as a 
result of implementation of a recommendation of the DSB.17 
128. The representative of Chile  referred to a previous proposals made by other Members 
regarding the possibility that once a regulation was p ublished, information coul d be made available on 
observations received on, and responses made to, th ose observations.  There was a need to find a 
practical approach that would close the process of notifications, for instance, through the use of an 
Internet address that would archive comments made and the responses given.  This would enable each 
Member to check how its comments had been taken into account. 
129. The representative of India  considered that the 60 day period for comments was short, given 
the need to obtain full texts, translations etc.  I ndia proposed that this time limit be extended to 90 
days;  this would make it easier for most countries to communicate comments on notified texts.  India 
also proposed that there be a minimum 15 days inte rval after the expiry of  the deadline for comments 
and the adoption of the notified text.  Moreover, Indi a was of the view that the date of notification 
needed to be unified with the date of circulati on of the notification by the WTO.  Regarding the 
description of the content (Section 6 of the notifica tion format) the varying nature of the information 
given made it difficult to make a preliminary assessment of the impact of the notified measure.  India 
therefore recommended that Members give a more elaborate explanation and description of content.  India also observed that certain WTO Members made notifications of measures that were voluntary in 
nature. This created unnecessary work in terms of distinguishing between notifications that could 
entail a barrier for the trade and others which did not.  Member needed, in compliance with the TBT 
Agreement's Code of Good Practice, to make the relevant notifications to the ISO/IEC Information 
Centre. 
130. The representative of Japan
 noted, with respect to suggestion to secure 15 days or more 
between the lapse of the comment period and adopti on, that there needed to be some exceptions 
allowed to this rule based on the legitimate objec tive of the measure and according to the Ministerial 
Decision regarding Article 2.12 of the TBT Agreement.18  On the proposal to host comments for 
notifications and their responses on the WTO TBT website, although useful, Japan reiterated that 
some bilateral communications between Memb ers could be of a confidential nature.  
131. The representative of Canada  noted in respect of the proposals made by Chinese Taipei on 
standardizing bodies that, provided that these proposals be considered as an encouragement, or of a voluntary nature, the provision of more informa tion about their work programme would certainly 
assist all Members of the TBT Committee.   In resp ect to the proposal that  the ISO/IEC Information 
Centre provide the Committee with a summary stat ement on the status of notifications made under 
paragraph J of the Code of Good Prac tice, Canada was of the view that this would be a helpful step in 
providing increased level of transparency on a more timely basis to the Committee. 
132. The representative of Mexico
 stressed the need fo r the Committee to be careful about creating 
new obligations for Members in the context of th e Review work.  The Comm ittee needed to focus on 
how to better comply with and implement th e existing provisions of the Agreement. 
133. The representative of Brazil , like Mexico, was of the view that the Committee needed to 
concentrate on the implementation of the current obligations in the TBT Agreement and not on the 
creation of new obligations for Members.  Brazil expressed concern about the Canadian proposal on 
transparency (G/TBT/W/234) which, in its vi ew, introduced new obligations concerning the 
implementation of the recommendations of the DSU by subjecting members to demands which were 
neither set out in the TBT Agreement nor in the provisions of DSU. 
                                                      
17 G/TBT/W/234. 
18 WT/MIN(01)/17, 20 November 2001, paragraph 5.2. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 28  
 
  (iv) Technical Assistance 
134. The Chairman
 noted that during preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review, Members had 
discussed issues relating to (i) tran sparency in demand and supply and (ii) the effective provision of 
technical assistance;  and (iii) participation in international standard-setting bodies.   
135. The representative of Egypt  stressed the need to consider practical forms of technical 
assistance.  While Egypt supported Canada's earlier proposal for a workshop on good regulatory 
practice, it was felt that more work shops and seminars needed to take  place in developing countries;  
these needed to aim at achieving a more practical im plementation of the Agreement.   In particular, 
conformity assessment was a difficult issue for many developing countries, especially in terms of the acceptance of conformity results (mutual recognition agreements, accreditation, certification).  Hence, 
there was a need for hands-on assistance in this area in particular. 
136. The representative of China
 agreed with the need to furthe r enhance the different aspects of 
technical assistance and noted that the Committ ee had recently adopted a voluntary notification 
format specifically on technical assistance ne eds (G/TBT/16).  The representative of China 
encouraged all Members to make full use of this format as it could give important signals to donors on 
the different types of technical assistance needs.  China reiterated that there was much scope for 
improving technical assistance, for instance through the provision of technical assistance in urgent 
cases.19 
137. The representative of the UNIDO , referring to the statement by the representative of Egypt, 
noted that UNIDO did provide technical assistance in  the area of conformity assessment infrastructure 
aimed at overcoming barriers to trade.  The UNIDO was, hence, involved in building the actual 
capacity in the area of conformity assessment.  The UNIDO would provide more detailed information 
on its area of expertise at the next meeting of the TBT Committee. 
(v) Special and Differential Treatment 
138. The Chairman  noted that Article 12 had been a topic of consideration in the TBT Committee 
since 1995 and that, on various occasions, Members had exchanged information and views on the 
operation and implementation of this Article as well as relevant provisions of other Articles.  In 
particular, during the preparation of the Fourth Tr iennial Review, China had tabled a proposal and the 
Committee had held some discussion on this topic (G/TBT/W/252, Section IV).   
139. The representative of Mexico  considered that the issue of special and differential treatment 
was very important and that when a country recei ved a request for such treatment the Agreement 
needed to be effective.  The Co mmittee needed to have clear criteri a, for instance with respect to 
when a country had the obligation to provide special and differential treatment.   
2. Previously raised or new topics 
(i) Intellectual Property Right (IPR) Issues in Standardization 
140. The representative of China  wished to give some further b ackground to a previous submission 
on this subject (G/TBT/W/251).   It was stressed th at the incorporation of intellectual property rights 
into technical standards was an inevitable outcome of the development of science, technology and the 
economy.  He recalled that the WTO's World Trad e Report 2005 had explored the links between IPRs 
and technical standards and had cited research wh ich had found a positive co rrelation between patent 
applications and new technical regulations, especially  in innovative fields.  Based on cross country 
                                                      
19 G/TBT/W/252, paras. 14-15 and 19.  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 29 
 
 
  analysis, this research had also found that sectors with a higher propensity for standardization tended 
to be more patent and export intensive.  In the view of the Chinese delegation, there was a clear trend 
whereby proprietary technology entere d into the standard-setting process. 
141. It was noted that standards-setting organizations at international, regional and national levels, 
including ISO, IEC, ITU, ETSI, ANSI, etc, had neith er avoided – nor could they avoid – the inclusion 
of patented technologies.  Therefore, on the issu e of incorporation of patented technologies into 
standards, these organizations did not object in princi ple to patented items.   In the view of China, the 
combination of IPRs with standards could bri ng about negative impacts on standardization and 
international trade.  With regard to the IPR de clarations, patent holders  could hold back patent 
information in the process of standard setting (a case involving Dell was used to illustrate this point).   
In accordance with the prevailing patent policies of standards developmen t organizations, if the 
identified patent holders refused to license on Reasonable and Non Discriminatory Licensing (RAND) terms and conditions, the standard s development organizations coul d alter the standard around the 
proprietary technology.  However, some essential te chnologies were hard to avoid and, in such cases, 
the standard at issue might have to be withdraw n.  In China's view, standard-setting work had 
suffered, and would continue to suffe r inefficiencies due to this situ ation.  Hence, China was of the 
view that inclusion of IPRs into standards coul d have a serious impact on international standard-
setting efforts and implementation.  As the TBT Agreement aimed at boosting production efficiency 
and facilitating international trade by encouraging the adoption of international standards, such 
objectives could be frustrated and, therefore, international trade held back.
20   
142. The representative of China stressed that th e international community was increasingly 
paying attention to IPR issues in standardization.   International standards-setting bodies such as the 
ISO, IEC and ITU-T had recognized the impact of the above-mentioned IPR issues and had 
endeavoured to solve the problems.   They had fo rmulated basic principles for patent disclosure and 
licensing arrangements which were widely cited by other standards development organizations.  In 
China's view, these principles also constituted a sound technical base and a roadmap for the 
discussion in WTO.  It was noted that the ISO, IEC and ITU-T had taken into consideration the 
development needs in their policies and activities.  
143. The representative of China noted that aside from the patent policies of international standard 
development organizations, the Un ited Nations Centre for Trade Facilitation and Electronic Business 
(UNCEFACT) was also well aware of this issue in its standardization work and had begun to 
formulate its patent policy for standards on electroni c commerce.  In some developed countries, these 
issues had captured regulators' atten tion.  For instance, in Japan, the Guidelines for Patent and Know-
how Licensing Agreements under the Antimonopoly Act  which had been implemented by the Japan 
Fair Trade Commission, stipulated that the patent hol ders whose patents were implicated by standards 
adopted by government agencies shall not use their patents to exclude or control other companies, 
including with respect to exclusion and/or control of  commercial activities of the patent users.  In the 
United States, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ) had been 
conducting intense discussions on these issues, including the 2002 FTC/DOJ joint Hearings on 
Competition and Intellectual Property Law and Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy.  In 
European Union, the  EC Communication on IPRs and Standardization  recognized that IPR holders 
should "make best efforts to identify any IPR wh ich they hold relevant to a standard under 
development and to confirm or refu se permission for its incorporati on in the standard"; "Offer fair, 
reasonable and non-discriminatory monetary or non-monetary terms for the license to use IPR" ; and 
"Treat their eventual agreement for incorpora ting an IPR in a standard as irrevocable."  
                                                      
20 The Representative of China made reference to the Box on page 39 of the WTO World Trade Report 
2005. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 30  
 
  144. In China's view it was important to strike a balance between IPR holders and standard 
implementers so as to create a win-win situation.  IPR issues in standardizati on did not mean that IPR 
holders would lose and the IPR users would gain:  th e real problem, currently, was that there were not 
adequate rules to respond to IPR issues in standard ization in the international community, including in 
the WTO framework.  Without well-defined rules to follow, inefficiency aro se in that the resulting 
disputes were to the detriment of both IPR holders  and IPR users of both developing and developed 
country Members of the WTO. While it was important to protect the rights and interests of IPR holders, it was equally significant that new intern ational standards and advanced IPR technologies 
were applied as widely as possible in order to enhance efficient, high quality production and to 
facilitate world trade to the inte rests of consumers worldwide.  
145. Regarding the relevance of the above-menti oned issues to the WTO TBT Committee's work, 
it was recalled that Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreem ent encouraged WTO Members to use international 
standards as a basis for technical regulations.  Howe ver, in situations where Members were not clear 
about:  IPRs in the relevant international standards;   whether all the IPRs had been disclosed;  under 
what terms the IPRs were to be licensed by the IPR holders – all WTO Members would face 
difficulties when adopting international standards.  This could mean that enterprises who were subject 
to the implementation of the technical regulations would encounter great difficulties with relation to 
disclosure of IPRs in standards, as well as difficu lt and time-consuming negotia tions with IPR holders 
on the terms of licensing.  At both the governme nt and company level, there existed a certain 
unwillingness to adopt international standards as the basis of national standards and technical 
regulations if there was no common rule to regulate IPRs in standardization.  This situation would 
bring a negative impact on the implementation of  TBT Agreement with relation to adoption of 
international standards.  With a view to facilita ting the setting and implemen tation of international 
standards, and therefore the smooth implementation of the TBT Agreement, IPR issues in standardization had to be addressed properly. 
146. Considering the above, China proposed that the international standard setting bodies, as well 
as WTO Members, provide the Committee with re levant information regarding practices and 
experience on their IPR policies in standardization to further Members' understanding of the subject.  
Such an information exchange w ould be necessary to facilitate meaningful discussions.  The subject 
was of great significance to the integrity of inte rnational standardization community and multilateral 
trade system and China was therefore of the belief that  this issue needed to be carried forward within 
WTO.  
147. The representative of Brazil
 noted that the Chinese proposal was under consideration by his 
national authorities. 
148. The representative of Mexico  noted that although his delegation understood the nature and 
importance of the problem, he still remained to be  convinced that the TB T Committee was the right 
forum to deal with it.  Mexico asked China to expl ain exactly what the result was that China wished to 
obtain by discussing this proposal in the TBT Co mmittee.  Was China looking for guidelines, or 
simply an exchange of information, i.e., an educational discussion on the subject.  Mexico was 
somewhat concerned that time be spent on this in the context of the Triennial Review without being 
clear on the outcome that the proponent was seeking.  Like Brazil, Mexican authorities on intellectual property issues were considering the proposal presented by China. 
149. The representative of the United States
 reiterated her delegation's comments from the last 
meeting.  In particular, it was noted that the paper made an interesting statement that there were no 
WTO rules to address this issue; one question the United States had posed to China in bilateral 
meetings was that whether China foresaw the estab lishment of new rules under the TBT Agreement.  
In such a case, the discussion would become of a diff erent nature.   Therefore, it would be helpful if 
China could make its intentions clear in this regard.    G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 31 
 
 
  150. The representative of China  stressed that the objective of raising the issue under the Triennial 
Review process was to have an information exch ange so as to familiarize WTO Members with the 
issue. 
151. The representative of the International Telecommunication Union  (ITU)21 noted that one of 
the important products of his organization was standards, referred to in ITU language as 
"recommendations".  For instance, the use of broa dband or ADSL access to the Internet was based on 
an ITU standard.   It was noted that since the liber alization of the telecoms market and the Internet, 
standardization had become a mark et in itself and that there were currently about 500 fora and 
consortia active in the standardization of teleco ms and the Internet.  The ITU was one of these, 
together with the ISO and the IEC.  What charact erized the ITU was that it had both government and 
private membership.  Hence, IPRs in the ITU syst em comprised three parts:  patents, software 
copyright and marks.   
152. Regarding patents, the patent policy of the ITU was very similar to the patent policy of ISO 
and IEC.  The three organization were currently in  the process of drafting a common patent policy so 
that it would be the same for all three organizations .  The ITU encouraged early disclosure of patent 
information by the holder.  Such information could be disclosed by ITU members as well as non-
members.  Moreover, all detailed commercial licen sing arrangements were left to the parties 
concerned.  The ITU patent policy comprised three situations:  (i) the company gave a free licence to 
everybody;  (ii) payment for licence was granted on RAND terms, i.e., reasonable terms and conditions on a word-wide non discriminatory basis; and, (iii) the party was unwilling to grant the 
licence.   
153. In addition to the patent policy, the ITU also had Patent Guidelines and a Patent Statements 
Database where it was possible to look up the patents or patent information that has been submitted to 
ITU.
22  There were also Software Copyright Guid elines and Marks Guidelines.  The Committee was 
further informed about an Ad hoc Group on IPRs23 which consisted of both engineers and lawyers. 
The group met every nine months and dealt with a number of complex IPR issues.  
(ii) Terms and Definitions 
154. The representative of the European Communities  wished to draw the Committee's attention to 
a previously raised topic regarding terms and de finitions.  In the Third Triennial Review Report 
Members had made reference to the fact that  the ISO/IEC Guide 2: 1991 had been revised.24  Since 
then, the ISO had provided information on these revisions.  In light of this, the European 
Communities proposed that the Fourth Triennial Re view Report, in a factual statement, make 
reference to these changes and state whic h standards were currently relevant. 
155. The representative of the United States  was of the view that while some information had been 
provided on the updating of definitions, the ISO had not fully addressed the question:  the Committee 
needed to get a better understanding of how the re visions made related to the document currently 
referenced in the TBT Agreement  (t he 1991 version of the Guide 2).   
                                                      
21 At the outset of the meeting and on China's reques t, it was agreed that a representative of the ITU 
would make a presentation on the subject of IPRs and standards under this Agenda Item.  The full presentation 
was distributed as a Room Document and is available from the WTO Secretariat on request. 
22 http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/patent/index.html . 
23 http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/other groups/ipr-adhoc/index.html  
24 G/TBT/13, para. 61 states:  "On the issue of te rms and definitions, the Committee agrees that the 
ISO/IEC could be invited to provide information to the Committee on the revised ISO/IEC Guide 2: 1991, with 
a view to examining whether and how far this revised document departs from ISO/IEC Guide 2: 1991." G/TBT/M/38 
Page 32  
 
  156. The Chairman
 invited the ISO to provide this information in writing in advance of the next 
meeting of the Committee.   
3. Next steps 
157. The Chairman  noted that according to Work Progra mme for the Fourth Triennial Review25, 
the Committee would begin the drafting phase at its next  meeting.  In order to initiate this work, the 
Chairman proposed to prepare a first draft of the report of the Fourth Triennial Review.  Under each 
element of this draft, there would be a factual su mmary of the issues raised by delegations, including 
brief information of the development of each elemen t under previous reviews.  The draft would also 
set out suggestions for possible recommendations dr awn from these inputs.  The Chairman stressed 
that the Triennial Review was a Committee endeavour  and that the process had to be consensus-based 
and Member driven. 
158. To allow sufficient time for discussion of th e Fourth Triennial Review, the Chairman 
proposed an additional day for the June meetings:  the dates would hence be 7-9 June.  Consistent 
with the agreed Work Programme and past practise in the Committee, the Chai rman anticipated that 
the drafting work would be conducted in informal mode.  
IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION 
159. The Chairman  welcomed the first two notifications from Jamaica (G/TBT/TA-1/JAM) and 
Armenia (G/TBT/TA-2/ARM) under the mechanism for the voluntary notification of specific technical assistance needs and responses, which the Committee had adopted at its last meeting 
(G/TBT/16). 
160. The representative of Brazil
 informed the Committee that the Brazilian TBT Enquiry Point 
(INMETRO) had received official visits from the Enquiry Points of India, China and the United 
States.  This mutual exchange of experiences ha d helped identify possibilities areas of further 
collaboration.  In particularly, INMETRO had ha d the opportunity to provide information on the 
operation of its early warning system that functio ned so as to alert Brazilian exporters about the 
issuing by WTO Members of notifications on t echnical regulations or conformity assessment 
procedures that might have possible commercial imp lications for them.  For the purposes of technical 
cooperation, INMETRO had also initiated contacts with  the Enquiry Points of Venezuela, Bolivia and 
Paraguay. 
161. The representative of Mexico  noted that his government had sent experts to Jamaica and to 
Nicaragua for technical assistance purposes.  This assistance was aimed at providing some courses on conformity assessment procedures.  Moreover, Mexi co had also received a visit from the Egyptian 
delegation for the same purposes.   
162. Considering the intervention from Brazil and Mexico, the Chairman
 noted the importance of 
technical assistance being provided by developing  countries themselves, who were now engaging on 
the donor side of technical assistance activities. 
163. The representative of the Secretariat  introduced a "Handbook on the TBT Agreement" which 
had been produced in response to a ma ndate from the Third Triennial Review.26  It was stressed that 
the Handbook was a practical guide to the TBT Agre ement and had been prepared to increase public 
understanding of the Agreement.  It was not inte nded to provide a legal interpretation of the TBT 
Agreement. 
                                                      
25 G/TBT/M/37, Annex 1,  p. 25. 
26 G/TBT/13, para. 56 and footnote 20 .  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 33 
 
 
  164. The representative of the European Communities  noted that at the June 2006 meeting the 
EC delegation intended to make a presentation on what was referred to as the "Exporters' Help Desk" 
which was a facility to assist developing countr ies to understand ways in which to access the 
European market. 
165. The Chairman  noted that the a Room Document had been provided listing the Secretariat's 
technical assistance activities in 2006.27 
V. ELEVENTH ANNUAL REVIEW 
A. THE IMPLEMENTATION AND OPERATION OF THE TBT  AGREEMENT (ARTICLE 15.3) 
166. The representative of the United States  recalled that one of th e recommendations from the 
Third Triennial Review was to provide informa tion on technical assistance in the annual reviews.28 
She asked the Secretariat to include information on content, participation and feedback from recipient 
members in the annual reviews.   
167. The Committee adopted  the Eleventh Annual Review of th e Implementation and Operation of 
the TBT Agreement contained in document G/TBT/18. 
B. THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE (ANNEX 3 OF THE TBT  AGREEMENT ) 
168. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to the Eleventh Edition of the WTO TBT 
Standards Code Directory prepared by the ISO/IE C Information Centre whic h contained information 
received according to paragraphs C and J of the C ode of Good Practice for the Preparation, Adoption 
and Application of Standards in Annex 3 of the Ag reement.  He also drew the Committee's attention 
to two lists prepared by the Secretariat.  The first list, contained in document G/TBT/CS/1/Add.10, 
compiled the standardizing bodies that had accepted th e Code in the period under review.  He noted 
that during the period under review, three standa rdizing bodies from three Members had accepted the 
Code of Good Practice and no standardizing body  had withdrawn from the Code.  The second list, 
contained in document G/TBT/CS/2/Rev.12, compile d all the standardizing bodies that had accepted 
the Code since 1 January 1995.  Since 1 January  1995 – and including a recent notification of 
acceptance from Qatar (G/TBT/CS/N/163) – 15 2 standardizing bodies from 111 Members had 
accepted the Code of Good Practice. 
169. The Committee took note  of the above-mentioned documents. 
170. The representative of India  drew the Committee's attention to the fact that although there were 
more than 159 member bodies of ISO, the number of such bodies that had accepted the Code of Good Practice was inferior.  In fact, there were standa rds bodies who claimed to follow the WTO principles 
of transparency in writing standards yet they had not registered themselves under the Code of Good 
Practice.  The representative of India urged all ISO member bodies to enrol themselves under the 
Code of Code Practice so that all followed a uniform practice. 
VI. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS 
171. The Chairman
 drew the Committee's attention to information provided by the Codex 
(G/TBT/GEN/32) and the OIML (G/TBT/GEN/33). 
                                                      
27 Updated and subsequently circulated as G/TBT/GEN/34. 
28 G/TBT/13, para. 55, second tiret. G/TBT/M/38 
Page 34  
 
  172. The representative of the ITC
 informed the Committee that th e ITC had recently prepared an 
information training pack on the WTO TBT Agreem ent from a Business perspective (available from 
the ITC).  It was also noted that in October 2005, the ITC had held a workshop based on this training 
pack in Kazakhstan, and, in November, a similar workshop had been held in Uzbekistan.  Moreover, 
in June 2005, together with the Standards and Industrial Research In stitute of Malaysia, the ITC had 
organized a consultation to discuss with developi ng countries and transition economies how they 
tackled problems related to establishing a quality infr astructure with limited resources.  The ITC had 
also issued a publication on this subject  which was available on the ITC website.29 
VII. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
173. Pursuant to Article 13.1 of the TBT Agreement, the Committee re-elected  Mr. Margers 
Krams (Latvia) as the Chairpers on of the TBT Committee for 2006. 
VIII.  DATE OF NEXT MEETING 
174. The Chairman  announced that the next regular meeting of the Committee would take place on 
7-9 June 2006. 
                                                      
29 http://www.intracen.org/eqm/ .  G/TBT/M/38 
 Page 35 
 
 
  ANNEX 1:  THE TBT WORKSHOP ON THE DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO 
CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
Statement made by the Chairman30 
 1. We held, yesterday and this morning, a works hop on the different approaches to conformity 
assessment, including on the acceptance of conformity assessment results.  To recall, the organization 
of the workshop was mandated in the Third Trienn ial Review as part of a Work Programme on 
conformity assessment.  We heard extremely interesting presentations by 27 speakers representing a broad range of conformity assessment institutions in all parts of the world. We had identified three 
main focus areas for this workshop.  
2. Following a presentation by the WTO Secretariat on the TBT Committee's work on 
conformity assessment procedures and the relevant provisions of the TBT Agreement, the first session focussed on conformity assessment procedures at the nati onal level.  In the first part of the session, 
speakers provided concrete examples of existing a pproaches at the national level and explained the 
mechanisms in place to make the conformity assess ment procedures both effective and well-suited to 
the regulatory purpose at hand.  ISO made a presentation on their standards on conformity assessment 
and their relevance to regulatory requirements; the speaker from Colombia presented the regulatory 
framework created to facilitate the use of th e appropriate conformity assessment scheme;  a 
representative of the US private sector provided a co ncrete perspective and stressed the importance of 
consumer confidence and brand recognition.  We  also heard presentations on the experience of 
Mexico and Brazil in working towards a more efficient and market-relevant conformity assessment 
system.  The second part of the first session pres ented sector-specific approaches to conformity 
assessment.  Speakers identified the benefits and possible problems of the different conformity 
assessment approaches in relation to the followi ng sectors: Vehicle emission and noise in Chinese 
Taipei; electricity in Argentina; and forest cer tification in Canada.  In addition, we heard a 
presentation from the US private sector on the implementation of voluntary conformity assessment 
market programs.  
3. Session II focussed on mechanisms to facilitate  the acceptance of conformity assessment 
results (pursuant to Article 6 of the TBT Agreem ent).   In the first part, speakers addressed the 
advantages of, and possible difficulties with, various  approaches in this respect.  Following a report 
by the OECD on the results of a survey of conformity assessment bodies (CABs), two presentations were made on the work of accreditation bodies, one  in New Zealand and Australia (JAS-ANZ) and 
the other in Mauritius (MAURITAS).  The Eur opean experience of cooperation among accreditation 
bodies at a regional level was also discussed.  The second part of Session II dealt with the negotiating 
of mutual recognition agreements (between governments) and the acceptance, by regulatory 
authorities, of results of conformity assessment bodies participating in voluntary arrangements.  With respect to the former, presentations were made on experiences in Japan and Europe.   On voluntary 
arrangements, participants heard a presentation from the electronic & IT industry's perspective and the 
IEC IECEE and IECEx schemes were discussed as examples in this respect. 
4. Finally, this morning, the programme focused on developing countries.  There were 
presentations on the experiences of a number of devel oping countries in either administering existing 
conformity assessment systems (e.g. India, Brazil) or working to build such infrastructure (e.g. 
Nigeria).  We learnt of the operations of these systems and key challenges and problems faced 
(resource constraints, technical and infrastructural need s, etc).  We were also informed of the views of 
some developing countries on the utility of conf ormity assessment systems (facilitating trade, 
                                                     
 
30 The programme (G/TBT/GEN/31) as well as pr esentations are available on the TBT webpage: 
http://www.wto.org/english/ tr atop_e/tbt_e/tbt_e.htm#events .    A summary report of the Workshop will be 
issued separately.  G/TBT/M/38 
Page 36  
 
  disseminating information, protecting consumers)  and on the developmental potential of such 
infrastructure.  Fundamentally, significant support to  developing countries is needed to support their 
objectives in the area of conformity assessment.  A number of international agencies (UNIDO, ILAC) informed the Workshop of their role and work to assist developing countries in the identification of 
conformity assessment-related needs and in the provi sion of technical assistance.  The importance of 
regional coordination was also well reflected duri ng this session.  The Economic Community of West 
African States presented its experience in build ing a quality system at the regional level and a 
representative from Trinidad and Tobago highlighted th e efforts made in the Caribbean to establish a 
regional conformity assessment infrastructure. 
__________