RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/M/40 
26 January 2007 
 (07-0361) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 9 NOVEMBER 2006  
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Margers Krams (Latvia)
 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
 
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA............................................................................................2  
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRA TION OF THE AGREEMENT ...................2  
A. STATEMENTS  FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 .................................................2 
B. SPECIFIC  TRADE  CONCERNS ..............................................................................................2 
1. New Concerns ................................................................................................................... .........2  
2. Previously rai sed concerns..................................................................................................... ...8 
3. Follow-up on TBT Specific Trade Concerns............................................................................20  
C. O THER MATTERS .....................................................................................................................20 
1. Attachments to TBT Notifications ............................................................................................20  
III. FIFTH ANNUAL TRANSITIONAL REVIEW MANDATED IN PARAGRAPH 18 OF 
THE PROTOCOL OF ACCE SSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.................20  
IV. TECHNICAL COOPERATION ..........................................................................................27  
V. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS ............................................................................................28  
VI. FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW .......................................................................................28  
VII. REPORT (2006) OF THE COMMITTEE ON  TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE29  
VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS...............................................................................................................29  
1. Counterfeiting of Certification Marks .....................................................................................29  
2. Dates of next meetings ......................................................................................................... ....29  
 
                                                      
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/40 
Page 2  
 
   
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/2909.   
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
A. STATEMENTS
 FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 
2. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to a list  of Statements made under Article 15.2 
of the TBT Agreement (G/TBT/GEN/1/Rev.4).  He  noted that since the last meeting of the 
Committee, Fiji (G/TBT/2/Add.90) and Paraguay (G/TBT/2/Add.91) had submitted Statements;  
Moldova had issued a Supplement to its original  statement (G/TBT/2/Add.68/Suppl.1); and Papua 
New Guinea had submitted a Revision (G/TBT/2/Add.77/Rev.1).   This meant that, since 1995, a total 
of 108 Members had submitted at least one Statement unde r Article 15.2.   He noted that latest list of 
Members' Enquiry Points was contained in docume nt G/TBT/ENQ/28.  The Chairman also drew the 
Committee's attention to document G/TBT/GEN/39 wh ich contained a list of Members' publications 
in relation to technical regulations, conform ity assessment procedures and standards.    
3. The representative of Paraguay  informed the Committee that it had recently established a 
National Information and Notification System (S NIN).  He noted that responsibility for the 
organization of the system was with the Ministry of Industry and Trade, and that the focal point for notifications and information would be housed in th e Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  The system had 
been set up with the support of the cooperation of the European Union and was currently being 
implemented.  This meant that the process of notifi cations to WTO ha d begun.   It was stressed that 
system, through the exchange of the relevant inform ation, promoted trade and helped fulfil Paraguay's 
multilateral obligations in terms of transparency .  He thanked those countries who had helped 
Paraguay establish this system and that continued to do so through various technical assistance 
activities.
2 
B. SPECIFIC  TRADE  CONCERNS 
1. New Concerns 
(i) Switzerland – Draft Ordinance on measures to reduc e particle emissions from diesel engines 
(G/TBT/N/CHE/67) 
4. The representative of the European Communities  was concerned about the above-mentioned 
draft measure notified by Switzerland in August  2006 to which the European Communities had 
directed comments in October 2006.  It was the EC understanding that the measure aimed at setting 
stricter limits for particle emissions from diesel engines which would apply to cars, mini buses and 
commercial vehicles already from 1 March 2007, and fo r certain other vehicles, from 1 January 2009.  
While the European Communities sh ared the general objective pursued by the Swiss proposal – which 
was to protect human health and the environment – th is needed to be done in a way which was in line 
with Switzerland's international obligations.  There were, first of all, the obligations under the 1958 
UNECE Agreement concerning the adoption of uniform  technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles 
to which Switzerland was a contracting party.  Mo reover, the proposed regulation, according to the 
assessment of the European Communities, did not see m to be in line with the obligations under the 
TBT Agreement, in particular with Article 2.2 becau se it appeared to be more trade restrictive than 
necessary.  Nor was the proposed me asure in line with Article 2.4 since it was not based on existing 
and relevant international standard s.  Finally it also appeared not to be in line with Article 2.12 
                                                      
2  More details about SNIN are contained in G/TBT/2/Add.91.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 3 
 
 
  because the date of entry into force (March 2007) di d not leave a reasonable interval before entry into 
force:  manufacturers would not be able to adapt to  the proposed restrictions and limits within a 
couple of months.  In addition, the measure appe ared to run counter to the Mutual Recognition 
Agreement which Switzerland and the European Communities had signed in 1990.   
5. The representative of Switzerland  took note of the concerns raised and assured Members that 
comments received were being examined by the respons ible Swiss authorities.  As several Ministries 
were involved this procedure was not yet comple te.  Written replies would be provided as soon as 
possible.   
(ii) European Communities - Proposal for a Regulatio n of the European Parliament and of the 
Council establishing a common authorisation pro cedure for food additives, food enzymes and 
food flavourings (G/TBT/N/EEC/123) 
6. The representative of China  referred to the above-mentione d EC notification regarding a 
proposed regulation affecting food additives, food en zymes and food flavourings.   China appreciated 
the EC practice of providing 90 days for comments from Members and flagged that it was in the process of drafting comments;  these would be provi ded to the European Communities in due time.  A 
major concern to China was that  the European Communities had drafted the regulation without 
making reference to relevant standards from the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC).  There 
were several differences between the two.  Fi rst, the classification of food additives differed 
significantly from that of Codex.  For instance, th e CAC used means of propellant while the European 
Communities had adopted propellant gas and packag ing gas.  Second, the scope of application 
differed from the that of the Codex: some food a dditives were allowed by the Codex standard while 
the European Communities prohibited their use.  Moreover, for the same food additives, Codex had 
different requirements compared to those of the Eu ropean Communities both with respect to scope of 
application and conditions.  The representative of  China recalled that the TBT Agreement required 
Members to base their technical regulations on intern ational standards where such standards existed.  
However, in this case, the European Communities ha d failed to do so.  China requested the European 
Communities to follow the relevant Codex standard. 
7. The representative of the European Communities
 noted that China's comments would be 
taken into account in the drafting process and that a response would be prepared upon receipt of these. 
(iii) Japan - Revision to Enforcement Regulation fo r the Law Concerning the Rational Use of 
Energy and Ministerial Notification of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry 
(G/TBT/N/JPN/176). 
8. The representative of China  recalled that his delegation ha d provided Japan with comments 
on the above-mentioned measure.  Although a reply ha d been provided, it had not been satisfactory.  
First, Japan had adopted a Top Runner Standard that  certain products needed to comply with.  In 
theory, the more stringent the standard was, th e less energy was consumed.  However, both the 
current level of technology and the capacity of ma nufacturers needed to be taken into account.  If 
these elements were neglected, production and trad e would be negatively affected and the measure 
would be more trade restrictive than necessary.  Henc e, China considered that Japan's current standard 
lacked scientific evidence and was more trade restrictive than neces sary.  Japan was requested to 
revise its new standard to accommodate the current available technology as well as the capacity of the 
manufacturers – especially manufacturers in developi ng country Members – to comply, while meeting 
the objective of saving energy.    
9. Second, the representative of China noted that Jap an had also mentioned that their new testing 
methods needed revision.  However, a notifi cation had not been made to the WTO.  The 
representative of China stressed that these testing me thods were very important to the manufacturers;  G/TBT/M/40 
Page 4  
 
  without them manufacturers had no way of determini ng whether their products met the standard set by 
Japan.  China urged Japan to notify the new tes ting methods to the WTO as soon as possible.    
10. Third, Japan had offered no adaptation period for the new standard.  This standard had been 
notified in September 2006 and had entered into for ce in the same month.  This was not in compliance 
with Japan's obligation to leave a reasonable interval of not less than 6 months, taking into account the 
technical nature of the new standards.  China re quested Japan to offer a twelve month adaptation 
period for manufacturers from developing country Member s so that they had sufficient time to adjust 
their production to meet the new requirement.   
11. Finally, due to the complexity of the t echnical requirements for energy saving, the 
manufacturers encountered significant difficulties in  adjusting their production to meet the over-
stringent energy saving criteria of Japan.  China requested Japan to provide the manufacturers with 
the relevant new technologies so that they could adjust their production to maintain market share in Japan.   
12. The representative of Japan
 noted that his country was party to the Kyoto Protocol which 
obliged Japan to reduce emissions of Green House Gases by 6 per cent of the amount in 1990 within 
the period from 2008 to 2012.  The measure at issue was one of the most effective ones aimed at 
meeting the obligations under the Kyoto Protocol.  He pointed out that, in recent years, air 
conditioners tended to be  operated in mid-range power for a long time;  that was why Japan had 
adopted the measurement method based on the Annual Performance Factor.  Regarding the measuring method, the measuring method was written in two JI S standards:  C 9612:2005 for air conditioners 
and C 9801:2006 for refrigerators and freezers.
3  The Top Runner Programme required the 
achievement of target standards in terms of weighted  average within a target fiscal year, specified for 
each designated product.  In other words, products whic h failed to meet relevant target standards were 
also allowed to be shipped and imported into Japan if the manufacturers shipped more of these 
products which met the standard.  Therefore, Japan did not consider that the measure was more trade 
restrictive than necessary.  China had also requested  Japan to provide a one-year period to prepare to 
comply with the programme.  It was stressed that 2010 was the target year by which air conditioners 
and other equipment had to meet the Top Runner St andards with their weighted average values.  
Finally, it was noted that there was a one-year grace period allowed for this requirement.   
(iv) United States - Energy Conservation Program fo r Consumer Products: Test Procedure for 
Residential Central Air Conditioners and Heat  Pumps; Proposed Rule (G/TBT/N/USA/202 
and Corr.1) 
13. The representative of China  informed the Committee that his authorities had studied the 
above-mentioned Rule and provide d the United States with detailed comments in October 2006.  
However, no reply had been received.  While Chin a appreciated that the measure's objective was to 
save energy, there were technical issues which require d further clarifications.  First, in respect of 
testing methods on default equations, while it was understandable that the United States had adopted 
the method of default equations instead of the meth od of forced accumulation with a view to reducing 
the manufacturers' burden, necessary technical data had not been provided.  It was difficult for manufacturers to implement a rule without this in formation.  Hence, Ch ina requested the United 
States to publish the relevant data.  Regarding the b asis for testing for repeatable targets, the proposed 
rule gave a definition which helped with the repeatability and uniformity in tests and favoured 
reducing test costs.  However, the repeatable targ et level was determined based on data from only two 
enterprises which, in China's view, casted doubt on how representative the data was.  China requested 
the United States to address this issue by using data  from more enterprises.  Also, the definition of a 
pre-production unit, which was of crucial importance to the manufacturers th at produced and exported 
                                                     
 
3  Available on the JISC's website:  http://www.jisc.go.jp/eng/.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 5 
 
 
  products to the United States, was not clear in th e proposed rule.  This could lead to unnecessary 
misunderstandings;  the United States was requested  to provide a clear definition on pre-production 
units.  Finally, regarding the issue of the adopti on of international harmonized calculating units, the 
United States had adopted new systems which diffe red from international ones.  The United States 
was requested to adopt the international system  of units to fulfil its obligation under the 
TBT Agreement. 
14. The representative of the United States  was not in a position to provide a detailed response on 
the technical issues raised at the current meeting.  Relevant authorities were most likely still in the 
process of reviewing the comments received.  She a ssured the representative of China that a response 
would be provided.  The comment period ha d been prolonged to 9 November 2006.   
(v) India – Pneumatic Tyres and Tubes for Automo tive Vehicles (Quality Control) Order, 2006 
(G/TBT/N/IND/20) 
15. The representative of the European Communities  noted that his delegation had submitted 
comments to the above-mentioned measure in October 2006 (a reply had not yet been received).  This 
issue was related to another specific trade concern that the European Communities had raised at an 
earlier meeting of the Committee.4  The European Communities was concerned about the burdensome 
requirements which the measure implied on tyre manu facturers:  it involved high costs and technical 
series production adjustments and modifications, compared to tyre production line used in other markets.  The European Communities considered th at the proposed measure appeared to be more 
trade restrictive than necessary, in violation of Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.  Moreover, the 
conformity assessment procedures provided by the Indi an legislation also seemed to be more trade 
restrictive than necessary.  For instance, it was reported that the tests on which national homologation 
in India were granted could only be carried out by a single laboratory (the Central Institute for Road 
Transport).  In addition, specific marking was required and audits could not be delegated to 
independent third parties, etc..  This had led the European delegation to consider that the Indian 
legislation concerning certification of tyres was not in  line with Article 5.1.2 of the TBT Agreement.  
In addition, there also seemed to be a discriminat ory element infringing on Article 5.1.1 of the TBT 
Agreement in that license fees could result to be lower for domestic products compared to imported 
products.  The European Communities encouraged Indi a to participate actively in the international 
forum for the elaboration of globally harmonized specif ications applicable to tyres as well as to other 
parts of wheeled vehicles.   
16. The representative of United States
 expressed her delegation's interest in learning more about 
India's safety objectives, in particular with respect to the extent to which there were existing problems 
and how the proposed regulation would help meet I ndia's objectives.  She also asked whether India 
had done a cost benefit analysis and whether the an alysis included looking at effects on foreign versus 
domestic producers.  It was noted that the US Rubber Manufacturers A ssociation had provided 
comments in response to the Indian notification.  Am ong other things, they were interested in finding 
a way for India to recognize tyres that were alread y certified, e.g. to the US Federal Motor Vehicle 
Safety Standards. There was some concern that limite d test capacity in India could lead to backlogs 
and even prevent India from meeting its own safety objectives.  It was stressed that if there was anything that the United States could do to facilitate  India's understanding of the US regulations, the 
United States' authorities would be happy to be of assistance.  She noted that it was the US 
understanding that India was participating in the UNECE WP29 discussions of Global Technical 
Regulation for Tyres and welcomed that particip ation as well as encouraged continued dialogue in 
that forum.   
                                                     
 
4 March 2006, regarding different legislation referring  to a new certification system for tyres notified in 
G/TBT/N/IND/11 (G/TBT/M/38, paras. 42-44). G/TBT/M/40 
Page 6  
 
  17. The representative of Korea
 shared the concerns with resp ect to the measure at issue and 
noted that his delegation had already sent comments to the relevant Indian authorities.  In particular, Korea asked what requirements were needed for appr oval for samples that had to be tested in the 
laboratory approved by the Bureau of Indian Standa rds (BIS).  Also, could a laboratory outside the 
territory of India be eligible for approval?  Kor ea also asked whether imported "finished" cars would 
also be covered by the legislation at issue?  It was Korea's understanding that in the case of finished 
cars, no further testing or certification activities were needed. 
18. The representative of India
 noted that his authorities were engaged in a process of internal 
coordination and that comment s would soon be provided. 
(vi) Philippines - Ceramic wall and floor tiles (G/TBT/N/PHL/60 and 63)  
19. The representative of the European Communities  raised a concern regarding a national 
standard for ceramic wall and floor tiles.  The first notification (PHL/60) had informed WTO 
Members about the national standard;  the sub sequent notification (PHL/63) concerned an 
administrative order which rendered the specifications  in the standard mandatory.  All manufacturers 
and importers of ceramic floor and wall tiles were required to secure a Philippine Standard (PS) 
License and/or an Import Commodity Clearance (ICC)  prior to distribution and sale.  The first 
notification referred to the year 2005 and the ad ministrative order, which rendered the standard 
specification mandatory, was signed on 6 June 2006.  However, in the notification the year 2007 was 
indicated as the proposed date of adoption as well as entry into force.   Th e European Communities 
sought clarification regarding the st atus of both notified texts.    
20. The European Communities also had serious s ubstantive concerns regarding the mandatory 
specifications which, inter alia , related to the dimensions and tolerances of tiles, their physical and 
chemical characteristics, sampling, testing and the marking requirements.  All manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers were obliged to  comply with these requirements of the Standard.  
The European Communities was of the view that at  least certain requirements would have a negative 
impact on trade and would be more restrictive than necessary, thus not in line with Article 2.2 and 
Article 5.1.2 of the TBT Agreement.  It was also  not clear what the legitimate objective was, for 
example, with respect to the nominal dimensions of ceramic tiles specified in the Standard.   
21. The European Communities also asked the Philippines to explain why an existing 
international standard, contained in ISO13006, whic h included specifications for ceramic tiles, as well 
as ISO standard ISO10545, which described the t est procedures required to determine the product 
characteristics of the former ISO standard, had not been used as a basis for the Philippine national 
standard.  This appeared to be contrary to Article  2.4 of the TBT Agreement.  Furthermore, according 
to the information at the disposal of the European  Communities, many specifications of the Philippine 
national standard significantly deviated from interna tional standards.  This was surprising because the 
Philippine Bureau of Correct Standards BPS was a Member of the ISO and had accepted the Code of 
Good Practice for the preparation, adoption and appli cation of standards laid down in Annex 3 of the 
TBT Agreement.   
22. Finally, the European Communities was concer ned with regard to the actual impact on 
imports which the mandatory specifications in th e standard would have in conjunction with the 
requirements of import commodity clearance procedure applicable in the Philippines.  The European 
Communities had been informed that imported tiles required a third party certificate for import commodity clearance certifying compliance with both the requirements of the standard as well as 
other rules and laws.  The European Communities be lieved that this procedure would be costly and 
burdensome and could create a technical barrier to trade that was not justified by the legitimate objectives recognized in the TBT Agreement.    G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 7 
 
 
  23. The representative of the Philippines  informed the Committee that his delegation was not in a 
position to respond at the current meeting.  However,  note had been taken and a detailed clarification 
would be provided to the European Communities, as well as to the Members of the Committee, at a 
future meeting. 
(vii) Uruguay – Decree on the enrichment of wheat flour and foods prepared with wheat flour      
(G/TBT/N/URY/2) 
24. The representative of the  European Communities  referred to the above-mentioned measure  
regarding a ministerial decree adopted in May 2006 requiring wheat flour and its derived products to 
be enriched with iron and folic acid.  In its no tification, Uruguay had indicated that the adopted 
measure sought to ensure the protection of human hea lth, in particular the health of infants between 
six months and two years of age.  While the European Communities agr eed with the efforts 
undertaken by Uruguayan authorities to protect ch ild health, it was concerned about the negative 
impact on trade that the measure was having.  Since its entry into force in May 2006, exports of several European products had been blocked at custom s.  For example, while pasta was not one of the 
most consumed products amongst children of the above-mentioned age group, it was still subject to 
the provisions of the decree.  Th e decree referred to a study carried out by the National Nutritional 
Committee of Paediatricians, which indicated that  the product which was consumed the most by 2-
year old children was milk;  hence, it was this produc t in particular which needed to be enriched to 
address the deficiency of iron among this popul ation age group.  The European Communities 
welcomed the decision of the Uruguayan authorities to  suspend the application of this decree during 
the Christmas period in order to allow the importa tion of traditional European pastry products.   
Nevertheless, the European Communities considered that this measure was insufficient to address its 
concerns, in particular those of the European e xporters.  Uruguay was requested to take into account 
the comments made and to ensure, according to Arti cle 2.2 of the TBT Agreement, that the measure 
was not more trade restrictive than necessary.   
25. The representative of Uruguay
 took note of the statement.   
(viii) Mexico –  Draft regulation establishing maximum emission levels for new diesel engines 
(G/TBT/N/MEX/115) 
26. The representative of the European Communities  noted that, in respect of the above-notified 
measure, that his delegation had provided co mments during the drafting process and had been 
involved in numerous discussions over the last two years.  The European Communities was pleased to 
note that its comments had been taken into account a nd wished to convey its satisfaction with the text 
of the standard which had been recently adopted in  October.  The European Communities wished to 
put on record its appreciation for Mexico’s openness in discussing this issue and its efforts to address 
the concerns expressed by the European Communities. 
(ix) China - Measures on the Environmental M anagement of New Chemical Substances 
(G/TBT/N/CHN/210) 
27. The representative of the European Communities  was concerned with the above-notified 
measure regarding measures on the Environmental Management of New Chemical Substances.  She informed China that comments had been sent in October 2006 to the Chinese enquiry point and the 
European Communities looked forward to receiving a response. 
28. The representative of China
 said that his delegation took note of the statement by the 
European Communities.  G/TBT/M/40 
Page 8  
 
  2. Previously raised concerns 
(i) Sweden – Restrictions on the use of  Deca-bromo diphenylether (deca-BDE) 
(G/TBT/N/SWE/59) 
29. The representative of Israel
 was concerned about the adoption, in August 2007, in Sweden of 
a measure concerning a ban on the use of Deca-bromo diphyenylether  (deca-BDE).  It was his 
understanding that the measure was due to enter into  force on 1 January 2007.  Israel considered the 
prohibition an unnecessary obstacle to international trade which infringed on Article 2.2 of the TBT 
Agreement.  While Sweden invoked human health  and the protection of the environment as 
justifications for the proposed technical regulation,  and these were in fact legitimate objectives under 
Article 2.2, in the case of deca-BDA, Sweden had not demonstrated that a risk existed.  As under the 
TBT Agreement there could be no recourse to the precautionary principle, Sweden could not claim 
that deca-BDA posed a potential risk to the envi ronment and human health.  Sweden was required 
under Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement to consider , among other things, the available scientific and 
technical information in order to take account of th e risk that would be created if the prohibition of 
deca-BDA was not enacted and implemented.  Th e comprehensive European Union risk assessment 
of deca-BDA revealed that no risks had been identif ied.  In addition, Swed en had not generated new 
information or risk assessments that could justify th e adoption of the technical regulation.  Therefore, 
there was no scientific basis for imposing a ban on deca-BDA.   
30. The representative of Israel stressed that, in accordance with the principles of the 
TBT Agreement, when examining the necessity of th e ban a Member had to consider whether there 
was an alternative measure that would achieve the same purpose while being less trade restrictive than 
a prohibition.  Notwithstanding that deca-BDA posed  no risk to the environment or human health, 
alternative measures were available to Sweden.  In  this regard it was noteworthy that following its 
comprehensive risk assessment, the European Commi ssion had concluded that there was no need for 
risk reduction measures to be imposed on deca-B DA or products containing the substance beyond 
those which were already in place.  The measure s taken by the European authorities included an 
emissions reduction program as well as bio- and e nvironmental monitoring.  Thus, Sweden could 
consider the adoption of less trade restrictive me asures concerning the use of deca-BDA similar to 
those adopted in the EC.   
31. In addition, the representative of Israel dr ew the Committee's attention to Sweden's 
notification based on Article 2.10 of the TBT Agreemen t concerning "the nature of urgent problems".  
Israel objected to the claim of urgency;  the nature of the proposed technical regulation did not 
concern any urgent safety, health or environmen tal protection issue.  In fact, Sweden had not 
demonstrated that any risk existed, and certainly none of an urgent nature.  Sweden's decision to 
implement measures differing from those establishe d in the European Union derogated from the 
principle of harmonization of technical regulations  referred to in Articles 2.6 and 2.7 of the 
TBT Agreement.  As a member State of the EU Sweden participated in risk assessments in 
accordance with European Union rules and had to afford mutual recognition to the conclusions 
reached by those assessments.    Hence, Isr ael objected to the introduction of a ban.  
32. The representative of the United States  associated herself with the comments made by Israel 
and other Members at previous meetings.  It w as noted that the European Commission had conducted 
a risk assessment on deca-BDE which had not identifie d any risk posed by the substance.  On the 
basis of this result the European  Communities had decided to exempt deca-BDE from the scope of the 
RoHS Directive (regarding the restriction of the u se of certain hazardous substances in electrical and 
electronic equipment).  Sweden was urged to cons ider reviewing the proposed technical regulation 
taking into account the concerns raised by Memb ers;  the United States was among those who had 
submitted written comments in response to the notif ication.  Hence, the United States was also 
concerned that Sweden had decided to go ahead and r estrict the use of deca-BDE in textiles, furniture  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 9 
 
 
  and cables in January 2007.  The US Environmenta l Protection Agency remained prepared to discuss 
its findings and studies with the appropriate officials of the Government of Sweden.   
33. The representative of Japan  supported the comments made by Israel and the United States.  
She recalled that at the last meeting, Japan had asked the European Communities, based on 
Article 2.5, to explain the justification for Sweden 's proposed prohibition of deca-BDE.  At that point, 
the European Communities had stated that the is sue was in the internal consultation process.  
However, Japan remained interested in a more detailed explanation from the European Communities 
regarding the measure. 
34. The representative of Jordan  associated himself with the vi ews of previous speakers and 
recalled that Jordan had expressed its concern abou t Sweden's restriction on deca-BDE at previous 
meetings of the Committee.  Jordan was now very  concerned that Sweden was proceeding to impose 
the prohibition.  Jordan looked forward to an update  on the results of the EC internal consultations 
and hoped that Sweden would take into c onsideration the concerns of Members.  
35. The representative of the European Communities  was unable to provide a substantive 
response at the current meeting.  She noted that  the measure had been the subject of bilateral 
discussions with Swedish authorities and was bein g examined by the European Commission with a 
view to ensuring that the measure was compatible  with both EC and WTO law.  A more detailed 
response would be provided at the next meeting of the Committee.  
(ii) Korea - Proposed Act for R esource Recycling of Electrical/Electronic Products and 
Automobiles (G/TBT/N/KOR/105) 
36. The representative of Japan  noted that her delegation had not received an answer to the 
second comment that it had submitted through the na tional enquiry point in May 2006 on the above-
mentioned proposed regulation.  Japan requested Korea to provide detailed information in this regard.   
37. The representative of th e European Communities  informed the Committee that it had received 
replies to its comments on this matter.  Korea had confirmed that the list of hazardous substances in 
future implementing measures would be the same as that of the European End of Life Vehicles 
Directive and also the EC RoHS Directive.  It was also the EC understanding that Korea would be 
notifying the TBT Committee of future implementi ng measures and Korea was encouraged to take 
possible future comments on these into account. 
38. The representative of Korea  informed the Committee that it had received 19 comments and 
questions on the notification and Korea had responded to all of these; he would check the status of 
Korea's answer to the Jap anese second comment and follow-up bila terally.  It was stressed that the 
proposed regulation was based on the current EC legi slation and the Japanese Auto Recycling Law, as 
well as on existing international standards.  Inte rnal consultation were still underway and Korea 
would make efforts to incorporate other Members' concerns to the extent possible. 
(iii) China – Administration on the Control of Po llution Caused by Electronic Information 
Products (G/TBT/N/CHN/140 and Add.1) 
39. The representative of Japan  noted that while his delegation appreciated China's efforts to 
remove unclear points by posting FAQs on the webpa ge of the Ministry of Information Industry 
(MII), Japan nevertheless had outstanding concerns about the enforcement of the legislation at issue.   
With less than a month left to enforcement, Japan wished to kn ow when the sectoral and national 
standards would be notified to WTO Members.  In addition, Japan requested China to provide 
sufficient time for industries to be able to fully comply with the la w.  Although Japan recognized that 
China had posted a document entitled "Note on Electr onic Information Products Classification" on the G/TBT/M/40 
Page 10  
 
  MII's home page (in March 2006), in the classificati on the terms "others" or "other devices" were 
used;  Japan requested China to explai n what products these terms referred to. 
40. The representative of China
 noted, with respect to sectoral and national standards, that these 
were still being enacted and were only sectoral in na ture.  The notification was under consideration.  
Regarding the note referred to by Japan, it was st ressed that this was only reference material.  
(iv) European Communities - Draft Commission Deci sion regarding the Classification of the  
Reaction to Fire Performance of Construc tion Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/92 and Add.1) 
41. The representative of Japan , supported by Korea,  recalled that at the last meeting of the TBT 
Committee5, his delegation had asked the EC delegati on to explain how WTO Members' comments 
and discussions in the TBT Committee had been ta ken into account.  While Japan appreciated the 
comprehensive reply to comments raised, Japan cons idered that there was insufficient information 
regarding the use of acidity as a standard for safety.  In addition, and regardless of intention, the EC 
decision would discriminate against PVC coated cables in trade.  Therefore, Japan requested further 
explanations from the European Communities. 
42. The representative of the European Communities  noted, with respect to the decision at issue 
that this was about an optional  classification; it was a complex and exceedingly technical issue and 
more detailed information releva nt to Japan's query was include d in the European Communities 
comprehensive written reply to several Members’ comme nts.  It was noted that comments, replies and 
the adopted decision were publicly available on the EC TBT webpage.6  The common classification 
proposed in the European Commission decision incl uded acidity as an optional performance oriented 
indicator of hazardous properties of gases developed in the event of fire which compromised the 
ability of persons exposed.  Essentially, the purpo se was to prevent the incapacitation of persons 
exposed to fire.  European member States which would make use of this optional classification would 
probably use it only for certain very dangerous co nstructions such as tunnels, where a number of 
serious accidents had occurred in the recent past.  Regarding the alleged discrimination of PVC coated 
cables, if the classification used had the effect that  PVC coated cables could not be used any more for 
certain constructions, this could not be seen as discr imination but was rather a reflection of the risk 
involved – justified on health grounds, and recognized by the TBT Agreement.    
(v) 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) 
43. The representative of Singapore, speaking on behalf of ASEAN members  raised a concern 
relating to the EC REACH Regulation.  He re called that ASEAN memb ers, both as a group and 
individually had expressed concer ns on various aspects of the REACH Regulation at previous 
meetings of this Committee.  He reiterated that th ey supported the right of Members to take measures 
to protect health, safety and the environment.  Howe ver, in keeping with the spirit and letter of the 
TBT and other WTO Agreements it was also incu mbent upon Members not to adopt measures that 
created unnecessary barriers to trade.  In this conne ction the industry in ASEAN countries remained 
concerned about the adverse impact that the REACH regulation's complex and broad regulatory 
structure could have on international chemical and downstream trade.  While ASEAN appreciated the 
consultations that the European Communities had undertaken with industry and other interested 
parties, there continued to be many outstanding  questions and concerns about the REACH.  In 
addition, apart from the ASEAN context, the RE ACH proposal had been discussed in the broader 
APEC setting, to which ASEAN me mbers belonged.  At its meeting in Da Nang, Viet Nam, in 
September 2006, the APEC Chemical Steering Group consisting of industry experts and government 
                                                      
5 G/TBT/M/38, paras. 14-21. 
6 www.ec.europa.eu/enterprise/tbt.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 11 
 
 
  officials from the Asia-Pacific region discussed the la test developments of the REACH regulation.  
That meeting had identified a number of concerns th at ASEAN's industry continued to have, primarily 
with respect to: the mandatory substitution of subs tances;  requirements for monomers in imported 
polymers; compliance determinations; and the development of REACH guidelines and procedures 
(G/TBT/GEN/46).  ASEAN requested the European  Communities to provide clarification to its 
industries' concerns and questions. 
44. The representative of Japan  supported the statement by Singapore and drew the Committee's 
attention to the fact that REACH Regulation w as undergoing the European Union Parliament's 
Second Reading, and was on the verge of adoption.  Ye t, Japan had remaining concerns.  In particular, 
Article 6.3 of REACH required registration of monomers in polymers which did not harm the 
environment.  The reacted monomers were not ad verse to the environment and the monomers in 
polymers hardly existed.  Therefore, the obligation to register the reacted monomers in polymers was 
not appropriate and might, according to Japan, not be in line with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.  
A simple notification should be required if the agen cy needed to understand the material composition 
of polymers for reference.  Industries in APEC had the same concern.  It was also pointed out that at 
the previous Committee meeting, the European  Communities had noted that once the common 
position was adopted, an amendment to the original  notification would be submitted to the Committee 
explaining some provisions, for instance Article 6. 3 of REACH.  Japan requested answers to the 
specific questions contained in document referre d to by the previous speaker (G/TBT/GEN/46). 
45. The representative of Costa Rica  supported the previous speakers and asked for more detail 
about the new agency that would be established under the REACH regulation.  For instance, how 
would this agency operate as a depository for inform ation regarding dangerous substances?  Would it 
have representatives in the various entry points into  the European territory or would there just be one 
agency with centralized information? 
46. The representative of China  supported the previous speakers and noted that, taking into 
account the complexity and wide scope of REACH,  the Chinese industry was concerned that the new 
registration system would have a significant impa ct on the production and trade of the products 
concerned.  It was recalled that China had expr essed its concerns at different occasions to the 
European Communities; hence, China wished to know whethe r the European Communities was 
considering any plan or arrangements to accommodate the concerns of industry from developing country Members, for instance in terms of technical  assistance or special and differential treatment.  
Since REACH was in the process of  adoption, these concerns were becoming increasingly urgent.   
47. The representative of Korea
 supported the comments made by previous speakers and asked 
for clarification on the meaning and scope of Ar ticle 7 of REACH regarding "substances intended to 
be released under normal and reasonabl y foreseeable conditions of use".   
48. The representative of Canada  supported the health and environmental objectives of REACH 
and expressed appreciation for the opportunities fo r consultation provided by the European 
Communities during the development of REACH.  Moreover, Canada supported several of the 
recently proposed amendments.  One of these am endments provided an exemption for ores and 
concentrates from authorization.  This would compliment previous exemptions for ores and 
concentrates as well as those for cellulose pulp from registration.  Canada believed that these exemptions would significantly reduce the administ rative burden without jeopardizing environmental 
or human health in any way.  Nevertheless, ba sed on Canada's analysis of the proposed REACH 
regulation, Canada remained concerned that ther e were several provisions which would hamper the 
effective operation of REACH if not addressed.  These included issues such as monomers and 
polymers, authorization and substit ution, and substances in articles.   Canada also had additional 
concerns regarding the proposed regulation of inte rmediates and the proposed approach to the listing 
of substances of very high concern.   G/TBT/M/40 
Page 12  
 
  49. The representative of the United States
 joined previous delegations in expressing concern 
about REACH. Like others delegations, the Unite d States shared the objectives of protecting human 
health and the environment, but remained concer ned that the revised proposal was overly expansive 
and could be made more effective.  The United St ates was concerned that the economic implications 
of the proposed approach to industry, government s and consumers would not be adequately assessed.  
There continued to be a number of outstanding questions and the United States had identified a 
number of priority areas for attention:  the RE ACH Implementation Projects (RIPs), harmonization, 
coverage of articles, registration of monomers and polymers in the authorization process.  It was noted 
that the paper circulated by Singapore on behalf of  the ASEAN (G/TBT/GEN/46) raised a number of 
questions that also the United States was raising in the TBT Committee.  Among other things it was 
noted that REACH guidelines and procedures were being developed through a process which was not 
fully open to direct participation by non-EU firm s;  questions were also raised about how non-EU 
firms would be assured that their unique viewpoints would be taken into account in the development 
of this guidance.   
50. The representative of Chile  supported previous speakers and noted that her delegation had 
closely followed the development of the REACH re gulation and had used all opportunities to provide 
comments; she expressed appreciation for the transpar ency of the process.  Now that the regulation 
was about to be adopted in the European Parlia ment, it was of importance to Chile that certain 
exclusions from the scope of the regulation were a pproved regarding ores and me tals.  Other concerns 
related to the fact that the regulation extended its  requirements beyond the borders of the European 
Communities through the wide concept of "duty of care" and the establishment of a quality mark for 
articles.  Chile was also concerned that the oblig atory substitut ion system could, in certain cases, 
entail that certain substances were substituted with less dangerous s ubstances although the substances 
being substituted had actually been rigorously cont rolled.  Chile emphasized the need for European 
authorities to make available technical assistance to facilitate the understanding of this regulation for 
partners in developing countries. 
51. The representative of Cuba  and Chinese Taipei  associated themselves with the concerns 
expressed by previous speakers.   
52. The representative of th e European Communities  noted that he was not in a position at the 
current meeting to reply to the specific questions ra ised.  Nevertheless, he would take note and report 
back to experts.  In respect of the current st ate of play, the Council's Common Position had been 
adopted in late June 2006 and th is had been communicated to WT O Members by means of a second 
addendum to the original notification;  the main changes compared to the original proposal were 
outlined in an appendix to this addendum (G/TBT /N/EEC/52/Add.2).  The second reading had taken 
place on the basis of the Council's Common Position and since these proposals had not yet been adopted it was difficult to go into detail in respect of  some of the questions raised as the issues were 
still under discussion.  Moreover, the final text w as needed before guidance material could be 
finalized.  Members were assured that the text would be made available to all stakeholders, interested 
parties, domestic or foreign in the same way.  Guidance, capacity building and technical assistance 
would be provided, in particular to manufacturers in developing countries.  It was noted that REACH 
could still be adopted in 2006 (subsequently, RE ACH was adopted in December 2006 and will enter 
into force on 1 June 2007).  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 13 
 
 
  (vi) 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 
53. The representative of Japan
 recalled that his delegation ha d previously addressed the above-
mentioned Chinese measure regarding toxic chemicals.7  His delegation considered that the measure 
could be inconsistent with the TBT Agreement and requested a rati onal explanation for it.  It was 
pointed out that the system was restrictive in na ture because foreign exporters to China would be 
required to obtain a Registration Certificate from SEPA (costing USD$10,000) and a Clearance 
Notification for import.  This coul d be inconsistent with the TBT Ag reement, especially Articles 2.1. 
and 2.2.  Moreover, the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) had announced the 
revised list on 28 December 2005 and enforced it only f our days later.  This could also be inconsistent 
with Article 2.9.   Japan asked China to clar ify the schedule for the implementation of the new 
regulation:  although SEPA had released, in 2002, a draft of "Import and Export Registration 
Regulation of Dangerous Chemicals"  this regulation had not been im plemented.  According to the 
draft, the current regulation for environmental management on initial impor ts would be abolished 
once the draft was adopted.  Japan strongly welcomed  the immediate implementation of this new draft 
and asked the Chinese delegate to clarify the schedul e for this process.  In addition, Japan was aware 
that SEPA had added 158 chemicals selected from the chemicals listed on the "Regulation of 
Dangerous Chemicals" to the "Highly Restricted Imported and Exported Toxic Chemicals" list.  Japan 
asked China whether it had a plan to add an y other chemicals to this latter list.   
54. The representative of the European Communities   shared the concerns expressed by Japan and 
informed the Committee that it had recentl y sent comments to China on this issue.8  It was pointed out 
that while China had notified the list of several EU restrictive toxic chemicals (SEPA Announcement 
65/2005) it had not notified the list of toxic chem icals which were banned in China (announcement 
116/2005).  The European Communities asked for more  information concerning the rationale behind 
the list of chemicals covered and further clarifica tion regarding the way the relevant risks had been 
assessed.  Finally, the European Communities sought clarification regarding the legislative and 
operational requirements, especially with r espect to the rules on mixtures and articles. 
55. The representative of the United States  recalled that at both previous meetings in the year 
(March and June 2006) her dele gation had expressed concern about the new requirements that China 
had imposed as of 1 January 2006, five days after the measure had been announced.   China had been 
asked to notify the regulations to the TBT Comm ittee and provide an opportunity for comment, as 
well as a reasonable period of time to comply.  Howe ver, despite the repeated requests both bilaterally 
and in the Committee, China had notified the measure on 12 June 2006, with no opportunity for comment and no transition period.  The United States  referred to the detailed questions posed in the 
context of China’s Fifth Annual Transitional Review.
9  
56.  The representative of China  stressed that the objective of the regulation at issue was to  
protect the environment and human health from pollution, or poisoning by toxic chemicals.  Moreover, it was stressed that the measure was not import-restrictive in nature and both domestic and foreign exporters were required to follow the rules.
10  
                                                      
7 See also G/TBT/W/270, paras. 15-24. 
8 See also G/TBT/W/272, paras. 23-25. 
9 G/TBT/W/271, para. 13. 
10 See also G/TBT/W/274, para. 16. G/TBT/M/40 
Page 14  
 
  (vii) India  – Regulation on Medical Devices (in part relevant to G/TBT/N/IND/19) 
57. The representative of the European Communities
 asked India to explain the rationale for 
classifying certain medical devices as drugs;  why was it necessary to submit these types of medical devices to the rules applicable to drugs instead of submitting them to a regulatory regime for medical 
devices?  This appeared to run contrary to globa l practice.  Furthermore, the European Communities 
regretted that despite her delegation's request at the last two TBT Committee meetings – which other 
delegations had joined in on – India had still not  notified the so called guidelines for import and 
manufacture of medical devices which had been issued in October 2005 by India's Ministry of Health 
and Family Welfare.  These guidelines  appeared to set mandatory requi rements and were thus to be 
considered as technical regulations as well as conformity assessment procedures under the 
TBT Agreement.  Moreover, a number of concerns  had been raised at the last meeting of the 
TBT Committee regarding the implementation of the guidelines.
11  Hence, the European Communities 
asked India to update the Committee in respect of the current regulatory situation applicable to 
medical devices and also to give its commitment that  the rules applied would be in conformity with 
the TBT Agreement, notably Articles 2.1, 2.2, 5.1 and 5.2.   In addition, wher e relevant international 
standards or guides existed, India was invited to u se these as a basis, in line with Articles 2.4 and 5.6 
of the TBT Agreement. 
58. The representative of the United States  welcomed the above-mentioned notification 
(G/TBT/N/IND/19) and noted that, in March 2006, In dia had stated that it would take into account the 
work of the Global Harmonization Task Force in regul ating medical devices.  Moreover, she informed 
the Committee that, at India’s request, the United St ates had provided information on the work of the 
Task Force as well as information on US regula tions, and relevant inte rnational standards. 
59. The representative of India  noted that it was his understanding that the only pending issue was 
the non-notification of the medical devices by the Drug Control General of India.  He took note of the statements made and confirmed that replies would be provided to the concerned Members before the 
next meeting.  
(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 (“EuP”) and amending Counc il Directive 92/42/EEC and Directives 
96/57/EC and 2000/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 
60. The representative of Japan
 noted that because the above-notified measure was called a 
"framework directive", product categories and the de tailed regulations were to be described in the 
implementing measures  based on EuP Directive Article 15.  The implementing measures stipulated 
concrete numerical criteria which could be more trad e restrictive than necessary.   Japan requested that 
the European Communities provide updated information regarding the present status of the implementing measures.   
61. The representative of the United States
 supported Japan’s request for more information.  It 
was noted that the United States had been provi ded with information to the effect that the 
implementing measures were under development but th at these were not likely to be notified until 
2007.  Hence, the United States asked if there wa s a way to provide input into the development 
process at the current stage and to have some consider ation give to other standa rds and criteria.  Also, 
the United States asked whether at some point there would be published criteria for evaluating the equivalence of other standards especially where th e other standards could achieve or improve the 
level of performance. 
                                                     
 
11 G/TBT/M/39, paras. 39-40.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 15 
 
 
  62. The representative of th e European Communities  reaffirmed that the framework directive did 
not set any product requirements;  these were usua lly included in the implementing measures to be 
adopted under Article 15 as well as Article 16 of the Directive.  Currently fourteen studies were being carried out regarding the eco-design requirements fo r specific products and product groups.  Hence, 
the European Communities was not in a position to notify the Committee of any implementing 
measures as no draft for an implementing measure exis ted.  Nevertheless, interested stakeholders – 
including from outside Europe – would be able to  provide input to the contractors which were 
carrying out the studies.  In this regard, the atte ntion of the Committee was drawn to two websites 
where update information on the ongoing studies was available.
12 
63. The representative of Malaysia  noted that his delegation shared the concerns raised by the 
United States and Japan on this issue.  He stress ed that the issue of how non-EU Members could 
provide input into the ongoing processes was important.   
(ix) Belgium and The Netherlands – Seal products (G/TBT/N/BEL/39 and G/TBT/N/NLD/68) 
64. The representative of Canada  recalled that at the last meeting of the TBT Committee his 
delegation had emphasized the view that the pr oposed Belgian and Dutch measures to ban the 
importation of seal products were inconsistent with the Belgian, Dutch and EC  obligations under the 
WTO Agreements.13  The seal hunt was of significant economic importance to remote coastal 
communities and aboriginal peoples in Eastern and No rthern Canada;  it was part of their traditional 
way of life.  Canada had gone to great efforts to provide factual information on the seal issue 
including information on the fact that the Cana dian seal population was neither endangered nor was 
the trade in those seal products regulated under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species (CITES).  Canada had also explained that  the harvesting methods used in the seal hunt 
compared favourably to those employed to hunt othe r wild animals as well as those used to slaughter 
domestic livestock.    
65. Canada had hoped that by providing the above-m entioned factual information the concerned 
countries, as well as other members of the European Union, would realize that their efforts, while 
perhaps well intentioned, were bot h unnecessary and inconsistent with  the trade obligations under the 
WTO agreements.  However, the German Bundestag had recently adopted a declaration that called for 
a domestic ban on the import and use of seal products  until such time as a new EU-wide ban was in 
place.  Canada was also concerned with the declar ation by the European Parliament calling on the 
European Commission to legislate a ban on the trade in seal products throughout the European Union.  
As Canada had done with the proposed ban by Be lgium and the Netherlands, Canadian authorities 
would review any similar legislation tabled by other EU member States for WTO consistency.  
Canada appreciated that the Eur opean Commission had publicly stated in May and June 2006 that 
there was no need for further EU level con servation measures on seal products beyond Council 
Directive 83/129/EEC.  Canada hoped that the Eu ropean Communities would restate this position 
when it responded to the European Parliament a nd member States and enc ouraged the European 
Commission to take stronger steps to discourage member States from proceeding with bans on seal 
products.   
66. The representative of Norway  shared the view expressed by Canada that the notified measures 
by Belgium and the Netherlands to ban the impor tation of seal products were inconsistent with 
obligations under the WTO TBT Agreement.  Norway was also concerned with declarations in other 
European countries and the European Parliament calli ng on legislation to ban trade in seal products.  
Norway intended to review the possible actions and plans for trade remedies in light of WTO 
                                                      
12http:/ec.europa.eu/energy/demand/legislation/eco_design_en.htm.and 
http:/ec.europa.eu/enterprise/eco_design/index_en.htm. 
13 G/TBT/M/39, para. 6. G/TBT/M/40 
Page 16  
 
  consistency.  Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement ma de specific reference to available scientific and 
technical basis for the risk assessment performed by  a Member.  However, from the notifications at 
issue, it was not possible to tell how the Belgian a nd Dutch proposals had ensured that the barrier to 
trade was no more trade restrictive than necessary as required under Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.  Furthermore, Norway noted th at invoking the protection of public morality and 
reasons of public opinion and animal suffering as arguments for prohibiting imports of Hooded Seal 
and Harp Seals was difficult to reconcile with the requirements of the TBT Agreement.  Also Norway 
had provided factual information re garding this issue to Belgian and Dutch authorities, as well as to 
the European Communities.  It ha s been pointed out that the No rwegian seal hunt was strictly 
controlled and had proven to be sustainable and human e;  it had been demonstrated that the harvesting 
methods used compared to those used on domestic livestock.  Seal quotas were set on the basis of 
scientific advice and the state of the seal stocks were well within the boundaries of sustainable 
management.  
67. The representative of Norway was of the opinion that GATT Article XX could not be applied 
to justify trade restrictions on seal.  The fact that seals were not listed under the CITES, which 
regulated trade in endangered species, was highly re levant.  To ban imports of seal products would set 
a dangerous precedent for trade in animal products that were harvested in a sustainable and humane 
manner.  Hence, Norway was concerned by the decl aration of the European Parliament which called 
on the European Commission to implement a ban on  trade in seal products throughout the European 
Union as well as the European Parliament's move to put in place similar legislation in a number of member States individually.  Also the representativ e of Norway drew the Committee’s attention to the 
fact that the European Communities had publicly stat ed that there was no need  for further measures 
on seal products than those included in Council Directive 83/129/EEC. 
68. The representative of the European Communities
 informed the Committee that several 
meetings with the countries concerned (Belgium, th e Netherlands, Canada and Norway) over the past 
months had enabled the parties to reach a be tter understanding of each ot her's concerns.  The 
European Communities was  still di scussing the matter internally, in cluding with Belgium and the 
Netherlands.   Hence, it was not possible to provide more detail at the current juncture.  Both Canada 
and Norway had referred to the recent European Parliament Declaration of September 2006 which 
requested the Commission to take measures to ba n the import of seal products into the European 
Union.   The Committee was informed that the European Commission was currently finalizing its 
response and it would be made public with a fe w weeks time.  The European Commission assured 
both Canada and Norway that it was giving careful consideration to the c oncerns voiced and would 
ensure that the Belgian and Dutch draft measur es were compatible both with Community and WTO 
law. 
(x) Israel – Connection Boxes for Electrical Installations 
69. The representative of Israel  recalled that at the last meeting of the TBT Committee the 
European Communities had expressed concerns regard ing certain requirements in Israel's Standard 
SI 145 with respect to connection boxes for electrical installations.14  It was noted that the relevant 
IEC international standard covering boxes for electri cal installations did not set out requirements on 
the box shape or dimensions.  In fact, he note d that each country could treat these parameters 
according to its own specific circumstances.  More over, within the European Union various box 
shapes and dimensions were accepted among member States.   The issue of Israel Standard SI 145 
was brought before Israel's High Court of Justice by an importer of connection boxes manufactured in 
an EC member State.  After having studied expe rts’ opinions and the decisions of the Technical 
Committee responsible for the SI 145, the Tribunal ru led, two years ago, that the requirement of a 
mechanical partition contributed to safety.  In li ght of the views expressed by the importer of the 
                                                      
14 G/TBT/M/39, paras. 17-18.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 17 
 
 
  European connection boxes, the matter was again subject to discussion in the relevant Standards 
Committee responsible for SI 145.  In its deliber ations of 21 June 2006 , the Public Standards 
Committee decided to revise the standa rd, with respect to the partitions. 
70. As discussed with the European  Communities in a bilateral meeting which had recently taken 
place, Israel would provide a copy of the second dr aft of the revised 145 Standard on socket boxes 
once the Technical Committee had given its approval and shortly before a public review.  Israel 
confirmed to the European Communities that the second draft of SI 145 would allow one-circuit 
boxes to be marketed without partitions.  Public revi ew of the revised standards was expected to be 
completed by March 2007;  it would then be published in the official journal and notified to the WTO 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade.   
71. With respect to the glow wire test value, whic h had also been a point of concern, relevant 
authorities in Israel had examined the standard and we re of the opinion that it was for the most part 
identical to the international IEC standard.  No twithstanding this, the authorities had expressed their 
willingness to re-examine the EC interpretation of th e standard requirements, and, if necessary, would 
call the attention of the Technical Committee to eventu al discrepancies to be resolved in the revision 
of the standard in question.  In any event the re presentative of Israel stressed that there was no 
justification to refer to any discrimination with resp ect to this issue, since the conformity requirements 
for this standard were identical for imports and local manufacturers.   
72. The representative of the European Communities  noted that bilateral meetings had been very 
productive and that the outcome, as laid out by the Is raeli delegation, looked positive.   The European 
Communities was looking forward to receiving the second draft.   
(xi) Saudi Arabia – International Conformity Certification Programme (ICCP) 
73. The representative of Japan  noted that as of 28 August 2004, Saudi Arabia had cancelled the 
monopoly of its International Conformity Certificat e Program (ICCP), in order to comply with WTO 
rules.  This cancellation was in line with the Mi nster's Decision No. 213 of 3/8/1424H.  It was Japan’s 
understanding of Ministerial Resolution No. 6386 that  an entity authorized by  a competent official 
agency in the country of origin could issue the conformity certificate until such time that a new 
conformity certificate program will be established in  the near future.  Japan asked the representative 
of Saudi Arabia about the content of the new program (as opposed to the current transitional one), and 
when it would be enforced.   Would it, for inst ance, include the definition of accreditation body for 
conformity assessment bodies in the country of or igin, as well as requirements for the conformity 
assessment bodies under the new program?  
74. The representative of the United States  recalled that it had made a statement on this point at 
the March 2006 TBT Committee meeting.15  Her delegation was frustrate d by Saudi Arabia's failure 
to abide by its accession commitments.  As had been  previously noted, Saudi Arabia had agreed to 
publish detailed guidance on how to comply with th e new certificate of conformity requirements in 
English on the Ministry of Commerce website.  The Mi nistry had oversight authority for this program.  
When the United States had met with Saudi Arabia  in March 2007, and as had been reported to the 
TBT Committee, it had been the US understanding that  the information on the website was imminent;  
however that had not been the case.  In early N ovember, the Ministry of Commerce had made its 
website available in English and it had recently put on an official announcement concerning the ICCP.  
However, the information contained in that announcement was insuffici ent for companies to 
understand how to comply with the requirements a nd was not as detailed as the information that Saudi 
Arabia had agreed to in its accession process.  More specifically, paragraph 197 of its accession 
document (WT/ACC/SAU/61), noted that new mech anism allowed entity submitting the Conformity 
                                                      
15 G/TBT/M/38, para. 58. G/TBT/M/40 
Page 18  
 
  Certificate (i.e., a conformity assessment body, an accredited body, an independent third party or a 
manufacturer) to declare compliance with the appropriate technical regulation or standard.  Such and entity was responsible for the information contained in the Certificate and, moreover, the mechanism 
recognized technical regulations or standards that  were in conformity with an approved SASO 
technical regulation.  In addition, the document st ated that in the absence of a relevant, approved 
SASO technical regulation, information should be  provided to identify whether the product met a 
technical regulation of another government author ity, SASO standard or relevant international 
standard, or other standard.  The representative of th e United States believed that Saudi Arabia needed 
to make the information on its website clearer so  that suppliers and its own authorities could 
understand the new system.  There no longer appeared  to be a link to the document which showed 
what the conformity certificate looked like and the United States recommended that Saudi Arabia link 
its announcement with this information as well.   
75. The representative of Mexico
 endorsed the concerns expressed by Japan and the United 
States.  While his authorities had obtained information from the Saudi Arabia government on this particular issue, they still had doubts about how to  comply with the conformity assessment program.  
One particular point that Mexico was considering was that it appeared that Saudi Arabia recognized 
those certificates that were issued by authorities in the country of origin.  In the case of Mexico, these 
were usually issued by accredited certification bodies, which could be non-governmental bodies.  
Mexico was concerned that this particular set of circumstances represented a barrier for its companies, 
hindering their exports to Saudi Arabia.   
(xii) Korea – Import of Fish Heads 
76. The representative of New Zealand
 recalled that the essence of her delegation’s concern was 
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, at the same time, those same hake 
heads also caught in New Zealand waters but processed  by Korean boats were allowed entry into the 
Korean market.  The issue had been raised in the TBT Committee over a period of five years.  Hence, 
New Zealand was pleased to info rm the Committee that Korea had recently indicated willingness to 
establish workable import conditions for New Zeala nd hake heads.  New Zealand welcomed this 
initiative and looked forward to cooperating with Kor ea with a view to solving the issue as soon as 
possible.  Nevertheless, as New Zealand remained of the view that it should be possible to allow 
imports to commence immediately, the issue was on ce again drawn to the attention of the Committee. 
77. The representative of Norway  shared the concerns expressed by New Zealand;  his authorities 
had also raised the issue at previous meetings, as well as bilaterally.   While Norway would continue 
to pursue discussion on a bilateral basis, it also hoped that Korea and concerned Members could come together to discuss all aspects of the issue in orde r to find a mutually satisfactory solution as soon as 
possible for all involved.  
78. The representative of the European Communities
 informed the Committee that, with regard to 
trade in edible cod heads, good progress had been  made under the ongoing b ilateral discussions, and, 
as a result, a Memorandum of Understanding was almost finalized.  The European Communities 
hoped that both parties would be able to sign the agreement in the coming weeks.   
79. The representative of Korea  thanked Members for their un derstanding of the difficulties 
Korea was facing in terms of na tional sensitivities and the protection of human health.  Relevant 
authorities had made great efforts to address this issu e in  manner consistent with the TBT Agreement. 
As both the European Communities and New Zealand had mentioned, the parties were now engaged 
in the final stages of reaching a satisfactory agreement.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 19 
 
 
  (xiii) China - Wireless Local Area Network Products  with WAPI functions (G/TBT/N/CHN/189) 
80. The representative of Japan  noted that her delegation remain ed concerned with the technical 
regulation for wireless LAN (WAPI) in terms of c onsistency with the TBT Agreement.  This was 
because WAPI was not currently recognized as an inte rnational standard.  Therefore, Japan was of the 
view that China's WAPI might be inconsistent with  Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement.  Moreover it 
had been reported that China's relevant author ity would disclose to domestic manufacturers the 
technical content of WAPI six months before  foreign manufacturers could obtain the same 
information.  If this information was accurate, Japan  believed this was inconsistent with the principle 
of national treatment.  Japan asked China to explai n its view on these points.  Japan also asked China 
to provide information on the technical cont ent of WAPI and the relevant website.   
81. The representative of China  pointed out that it was the ISO/IEC Standard 8802.11 that had 
marked security concerns.  Since WAPI addressed al l the security problems – a fact that was deemed 
important by the Chinese government, particularly  in respect of China’s own national security – 
WAPI could not be seen as inconsistent with Artic le 2.4 of the TBT Agreement.  Moreover, China 
was not aware that information would be disclosed  to the domestic manufacturers six months before 
foreigners.   
(xiv) Norway - Restrictions on the Use of  Deca-bromo diphenylether (deca-BDE) 
(G/TBT/N/NOR/6) 
82. The representative of Japan  recalled that the issue of Norway's deca-BDE.  At the last 
meeting of the TBT Committee, Japan had request ed Norway, based on Article 2.5 of the TBT 
Agreement, to explain the justification for its  proposed prohibition of deca-BDE.  Norway's 
explanation had been that this draft regulation w as based on scientific evidence and public hearings.  
Norway was requested to show the risks based on scientific data.  Japan also asked about the nature 
and content of the discussion that had been held during the public hearings. 
83. The representative of Norway  noted that the Norwegian Ministry of Environment was still 
assessing the proposal and had not yet finalized the decision regarding the regulation of deca-BDE.  
The ban had not yet entered into force. 
(xv) China – Domestic Gas Cooking Appliances 
84. The representative of the European Communities  raised a concern regarding a Chinese 
standard applicable to domestic gas cooking appliances.  He recalle d that at the March 2006 meeting 
of the TBT Committee the Chinese delegation had c onfirmed that once the drafting phase would be 
accomplished the final draft would be made availa ble to the Members.  The Chinese delegation was 
requested to respond to the concerns raised at th e March meeting and update  the Committee in respect 
of the measure at issue.16  He stressed the usefulness of tec hnical bilateral contacts at the drafting 
stage, even before notification – by inviting interested parties to express their views.   
85. The representative of China  reported that the standard at issue was still in the drafting process 
and that the final draft would be notified.  Regardi ng the technical issue, Chin a noted that the Chinese 
way of cooking was different:  for example, qui ck-heat requirements were quite different from 
western style cooking.   
                                                      
16 G/TBT/M/38, para. 38 - 40. G/TBT/M/40 
Page 20  
 
  3. Follow-up on TBT Specific Trade Concerns 
86. The representative of Mexico
 noted that his country had made several interventions in the 
TBT Committee in respect of STCs and although these were not reverted to at each meeting of the TBT Committee, interest and concerns remained – an example of this was the case of the EC 
regulation on wine labelling whic h had been raised in the Committee on several occasions.  The 
representative of Mexico referred to G/SPS/GEN/ 204/Rev.6 which contained a document that had 
been produced by the SPS Secretariat (and that was regularly revised) on specific trade concerns and requested the Secretariat to prepare a similar background note for the TBT Committee.  This document was a useful track record of all speci fic trade concerns raised in the Committee. 
87. The representative of the United States
 supported Mexico's request and noted that the 
document could be particularly useful for Member s that were new to the Committee as it provided 
and easy reference to information on issues previous ly discussed;  gave an indication of how long 
these had been discussed and what the nature of the discussions were.   
88. The representative of the European Union  referred to the table on pages 19-22 of document 
G/TBT/18 (Annual Review of 2005) wh ich was updated on an annual basis and pointed out that if this 
information was regularly updated ahead of each Co mmittee meeting this could be a way of meeting 
the suggestion made by Mexico. 
89. The Chairman  said that the Committee would revert to this matter. 
C. OTHER MATTERS  
1. Attachments to TBT Notifications 
90. The Chairman  recalled that during the preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review and in the 
context of the Committee's discussions on Transpar ency, Members had sought information regarding 
the technical feasibility of attaching the text of notified measures to notifications submitted to the 
WTO.  In this regard, he drew the Committee's atte ntion to the fact that information of a technical 
nature had been provided by the Secretariat at  both the Committee's June and October informal 
meetings in 2006.  This information had b een circulated in document G/TBT/GEN/40. 
III. FIFTH ANNUAL TRANSITIONAL REVIEW MANDATED IN PARAGRAPH 18 OF 
THE PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
91. The Chairman  recalled that, in accordance with Paragra ph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of 
the People's Republic of China (WT/L/432), the TBT Committee would undertake an annual review 
for eight years of the implementation by China of the TBT Agreement.   
92. The representative of Japan  introduced her delegation's su bmission contained in document 
G/TBT/W/270.  She drew the Committee's attention to the China Compulsory Certification system 
(the "CCC System");  under this system, no foreign conformity assessment bodies ("CABs") had been accredited by China according to Article 13 of the Regulations of the People's Republic of China on 
Certification and Accreditation, which permitted onl y Chinese CABs to engage in CCC certification 
activities.  Japan considered this provision inconsis tent with the objective of Article 6.4 of the TBT 
Agreement and with China's commitment in Paragr aph 195 of the Report of the Working Party.  
Japan requested China to permit foreign CABs to  participate in CCC certification activities under 
conditions no less favourable than those accorded to Chinese CABs in light of the TBT Agreement.   
93. It was noted that spare parts and components to which the CCC system was applied were not 
subject to the CCC certification when incorporated  in final exported products.  However, the CCC  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 21 
 
 
  certification was required when th ese products were exported as a single  unit for repair, even if they 
were finally incorporated in CCC certified final pr oducts.  Japan requested China to exempt single 
parts and components which would ultimately be incorporated in CCC certified final products from 
CCC certification. 
94. The representative of Japan pointed out that problems remained with respect to the  
conformity assessment procedures of the CCC system.  At the previous TRM, China had stated that if 
factories decided to stop manufacturing products wh ich were subject to the CCC certification and 
notified the CABs of this, periodical factory inspec tions would be automatica lly halted.  However, 
Japan was of the view that this procedure was not working properly.   
95. The representative addressed China's Administra tion on the Control of Pollution Caused by 
Electronic Information Products, which Japan unders tood would be enforced from March 2007.  The 
representative asked whether and when China inte nded to make a WTO TBT notification.   
96. With respect to the issue of China's Registra tion of Initial Imports of Chemical Products and 
System for Environmental Management on the Import and Export of Toxic Chemicals, while Japan appreciated China's efforts regarding enforcement of provisions on the environmental administration 
of new chemical substances, Japan had some concer ns.  First, Japan understood that the simplified 
notification was approved only in the case of the importation of chemical substances for the purposes of research and technological development.  Howe ver, requiring the same range of data from all 
importers regardless of import volume would impose an excessive economic burden on importers of small amounts.  Japan wished to see the prompt introduction of the simplified notification for the 
importation of small amounts of new chemical s ubstances.  Second, the new regulation had a 
provision to the effect that eco-toxicological data of new chemical substances had to include those 
obtained through biological tests performed in Chin a using China's testing facilities.  However, 
OECD Member countries mutually accepted testing results based on the GLP (Good Laboratory Practice) system.  Japan enquired on the progress achi eved so far for China to  join the GLP system.  
Third, certain chemicals were exempt from the notif ication.  However, the procedure for exemption of 
notification was too burdensome and Japan re quested China to simplify its procedure. 
97. With respect to the technical regulation of wireless LAN (WAPI), Japan noted that it had 
been reported that China's relevant authority w ould disclose to domestic manufactures the technical 
content of WAPI six months before  foreign manufacturers receive this information.  In addition, 
WAPI was not presently accepted as an international standard because Japan was concerned that such 
a measure could be inconsistent with the TBT Ag reement.  Japan requested China's views on this 
point.  
98. The representative of the United States
 introduced her delegation's submission 
(G/TBT/W/271) and noted that the Fifth Transitiona l Review showed there were areas of progress and 
areas where questions remained.  In recent review s, the United States had raised questions about 
China's ability to ensure all notifications from all their agencies which developed technical regulations 
were made pursuant to the TBT Agreement.  Th e US submission included a chart showing the range 
of agencies involved;  most of the notifications were made by the Standardization Administration 
Commission of the People’s Republic of China (S AC) and the General Administration of Quality 
Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of th e People’s Republic of China (AQSIQ).   
99. The United States had previously brought to the attention of the Committee its concerns with 
respect to China's toxic chemicals regulation.  The United States appreciated efforts China was 
making to notify the range of relevant regulati ons.  Regarding international standards, the 
United States had ongoing discussions in the TBT Committee as well as bilaterally.  The 
United States encouraged China to continue consid ering the list of standards from a broad range of 
bodies and not only those which it had classified in its law on standards.  The United States also noted G/TBT/M/40 
Page 22  
 
  the cooperative activities that China had engaged in  with standards bodies fro m the United States.  
Like Japan, the United States also had concerns and qu estions in the area of conformity assessment.  It 
was recalled that during the 2005 transitional review, China had indicated it was exploring the possibility of adopting different conformity assessm ent procedures including supplier's declaration of 
conformity (SDoC);  the United States asked China to update the Committee on any steps taken in this 
regard.   
100. The representative of the United States noted th at information had been provided to the 
Committee on some 20 mutual recognition agreements  China had signed;  many of these appeared not 
to have been notified pursuant to Article 10.7 of th e TBT Agreement.  China was asked to clarify.  
China was also asked whether it considered providing alternativ e approaches to facilitate the 
acceptance of conformity assessment results from b odies located in countries other than those with 
which it had concluded MRAs.   
101. In respect of medical devices, the representa tive of the United States noted her understanding 
that China would remove duplicative testing a nd certification requirements.  However, the 
United States remained concerned that a number of duplicative requirements remained.  China was 
asked to provide an update on its plans to elimin ate remaining testing and certification redundancies 
for medical devices. 
102. The representative of the United States noted that, like Japan, she still had a number of 
outstanding questions related to China's administration on the control of pollution caused by electronic information products.  While the genera l framework had been notified to the WTO, with 
less than five months before the implementation date, a number of the details on processes that the 
United States would need to comply with remained  outstanding.  In particular, the United States was 
concerned that suppliers would be unable to me et the labelling requirements as well as testing and 
certification requirements.  China was asked to respond to the questions contained in the US 
submission in this respect. 
103. The representative of the United States recalled that  in past transitional reviews, questions has 
been raised in respect of China's regulation on dis tilled spirits.  The United States was pleased that on 
28 August 2006 China had notified, pursuant to th e SPS Agreement, a draft revision on its hygienic 
standard for distilled spirits and swizzle for public comments;  the United Stat es was also encouraged 
by the proposed revision, which, if adopted, w ould satisfy the concerns that the United States had 
expressed previously in the TBT Committee.  Other issues were also raised in the US submission. 
104. The representative of the European Communities
 introduced his delegation's submission 
(G/TBT/W/272).  He was pleased to note an increase  in cooperation between China and the European 
Communities on TBT issues;  formal cooperation m echanisms had been estab lished which worked 
well.   Nevertheless, a number of concerns remained – some of which were highlighted in his statement (G/TBT/W/272 contained more detail on these concerns and addressed also other issues). 
105. Like the two previous speakers, the Europ ean Communities had a general concern with 
respect to China's Compulsory Certification system (CCC).  Despite several ch anges over the years, it 
remained a burdensome, expensive and time consum ing conformity assessment procedure.  Moreover, 
it was not transparent and left room for interp retation.  The European Communities was also 
concerned that China appeared to be enlarging the list of products which fell under this scheme – 
rather than reducing this list.  Similar to Japan , the representative of the European Communities was 
concerned as well about spare parts certifica tion and believed the CCC requirements could be 
simplified.  On confidentiality, the European Comm unities was of the view that the scheme required 
too much documentation to be supplied and could also be simplified.  The European Communities 
had listed a number of other concerns in G/TB T/W/272 but, in summary, the technical requirements  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 23 
 
 
  of the CCC system were not always relevant to th e level of risk the product posed – which implied 
that the CCC system was more trad e restrictive than necessary.   
106. A second main area of concern to the Europ ean Communities was horizontal in nature and 
related to standardization – in pa rticular with respect to the development of domestic standards, 
especially in areas where internationally recognised st andards already existed and in particular in the 
ICT field.  The European Communities preferred to  see China's standardization efforts integrated 
more into the established international standardiza tion organizations and consortia.  For instance, the 
European Communities was concerned with the so- called compulsory standards used in China's 
system which mainly focused on fields of specifi c public interest covering health and safety and 
environmental protection.  However, these standa rds often include issues such as performance and 
interoperability requirements which the European Co mmunities considered went too far.  China was 
urged to consider restricting compulsory standards to a few well defined areas where there was a clear public interest to have such standards.  The European Communities was also concerned about the 
ability of European companies to participate in Chin a's standardization work.  There was also a need 
for greater transparency with respect to de viations of Chinese standards from corresponding 
international standards.   
107. With respect to ICT products, the European Co mmunities' main concerns related to the fact 
that there existed multiple procedures for approval which were managed by different authorities.  
China was urged to consider simplifying the current system, if possible by merging existing separate procedures into a single approval procedure overseen by one authority.   
108. On automobiles, the European  Communities fully supported the objective of regulating for 
safety, health and environmental protection.  Ne vertheless, the European Communities was of the 
view that these goals could best be achieved by harmonization under the UN-ECE 1958 Agreement 
on Motor Vehicles and China was therefore urged to b ecome a contracting party to this Agreement.  
In fact, the EC's own assessment was that many of Chin a's regulations in this sector were very similar 
to the UN regulations under the 1958 Agreement. 
109. The issue of active pharmaceutical ingredients (A PIs) remained of concern to the European 
Communities and specifically the fact that each impo rted API batch into China remained subject to 
routine multi-sampling and testing practise carried out by ports and drug authorities.  In other words, 
batches were sometimes sampled and tested six or  seven times which was both very expensive and 
overly complex.  Regarding cosmetics, the Euro pean Communities' concern was that there was a 
difference between the approval procedures in place for domestic products and for imported products.   
On medical devices, the European Communiti es was concerned about double certification 
requirements.  Moreover, the European Communities was of the view that new or fully refurbished 
medical devices needed to be treat ed in the same way;  the ban on refurbished products was not 
justified.  
110. On textiles, the representative of  the European Communities noted with respect to exports of 
raw silk that there was a requirement to provide compulsory certification of silk quality which was 
needed before the silk could actually be exported.  However, this requirement did not appear to apply 
in the same way to domestic buyers of raw silk .  On conformity assessment procedures for textiles 
and footwear, the compliance of products with Chin ese standards was verified at the borders and the 
European Communities urged China to progressively  replace customs control at the border as this 
represented duplicative checking of  imported goods.  The European Communities was also of the 
view that the labelling requirements for clot hing were excessive and could be simplified. 
111. The representative of China
 introduced his delegation's submission (G/TBT/W/274).  In 
respect of transparency, it was stressed that China had always paid great attention to the 
implementation of the transparency obligations of  the TBT Agreement and had been consistently G/TBT/M/40 
Page 24  
 
  improving its domestic mechanisms in this respect since accession.  Immediately after its accession, 
implementation by all related government agencies of the WTO transparency obligations, including 
notifications, had been required.  Moreover, au thorities responsible for WTO notifications and 
enquires had been designated.  Notification gui delines on TBT measures had been provided and 
training courses and seminars had been held to in troduce the TBT Agreement.  It was pointed out, 
however, that there were always possible differe nces in understanding and interpretation when the 
notification obligations were applie d in specific cases.   It was noted that compulsory standards in 
China constituted the majority of the technical regulations which were required to be notified 
according to the TBT Agreement and since all th ese standards had to be registered with the 
Standardization Administration Commission of the People’s Republic of China (SAC), which was 
within the General Administration of Quality Supe rvision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People’s 
Republic of China (AQSIQ), it was normal that notif ications from AQSIQ accounted for most of the 
TBT notifications from China.   
112. Regarding the CCC system, the representative of Ch ina was of the view that the principle of 
unification was applied in CCC certification and that  national treatment was guaranteed.  Moreover, 
the list of products covered by the CCC scheme w as developed in a manner that was based on 
sufficient analysis, as well as risk assessment.  SDoC could only be applie d together with crucial 
elements such as efficient market surveillance, pr oduct liability law and administrative involvement in 
control to ensure quality and safety of products.  Ch ina agreed that the application of SDoC would 
facilitate trade and served the interests of manufacture rs;  in fact, China had been studying this issue 
and intended to further improve its facilities so as to be prepared to apply SDoC in the future.  
Regarding confidentiality, the representative of Ch ina confirmed that conf identiality requirements 
were in place in both legal documents and c onformity assessment procedures in the current 
certification system.   
113. On the issue of complexity and the high costs of CCC procedures,  China was of the view that 
the procedures were prepared and published in a transp arent way, in line with the TBT Agreement.  In 
the course of implementation of the CCC system, Ch ina had already taken measures to simplify the 
procedures and improve efficiency, such as recogniti on of test results, reclassification of products 
module, online certification application and the commit ment to complete certification within 90 days.  
However, as the factory inspection in the CCC sy stem contained not only requirements related to 
general quality management systems, as specified  in IS09001, but also process control and product 
conformity assessment, China was of the view th at IS09001 could not replace the factory inspection 
requirement in the CCC system.  Moreover, factor y inspection was common practice worldwide.   
114. The representative of China reaffirmed that st andards and procedures for fees charged in the 
certification process were transparent; he noted al so that the fee charged for CCC certification was 
significantly lower than the average world level.  As for recognition of foreign certification bodies 
and their testing results, pursuant to the Regulation on Certification of the PRC, certification bodies 
established in China could be qualified as CCC certifi cation bodies by way of official authorization by 
Certification and Accreditation Administration (CNCA).  For foreign certification bodies, 
qualification could only be acquire d through inter-government agreements, agreements recognized by 
the Chinese government or agreements with comp etent authorities of the Chinese government.   
115. On recognition of test results, pursuant to th e TBT Agreement, Chin a recognized, to the 
extent China was a participant, the test results  of the IECEE/CB Scheme.  Moreover, China had 
signed agreements with agencies or certification bodies from more than 20 countries or regions on 
recognition of factory inspection and test results.   With respect to the initial factory inspection and 
certification time limit, the whole process included: the submission of a formal application with relevant documents; the factory revi ew after sample testing; and the issuance of certification.  China 
had undertaken substantial efforts to  shorten the period of time for the certification process, and, since  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 25 
 
 
  coordination and cooperati on from relevant parties had to be achieved, China had committed to 
complete this process within 90 days, which app lied both to domestic and foreign manufacturers. 
116. Regarding the requirement for both type test and initial factory inspection, the representative 
of China observed that these two tests could be con ducted simultaneously;  however, failure to pass 
the type test could invalidate the test result of in itial factory inspection, which could lead to another 
time-consuming testing process.   Regarding the fre quency of periodic factory inspection, since the 
CCC system was carried out on the basis of interna tional guides and practice, annual inspection was a 
basic requirement for factories holding their ow n CCC certificate;  for high-risk products more 
inspections were required.  Since toys related to children's health and safety, they were considered 
high-risk products subject to mandatory certification. 
117. Regarding the definition of international standa rds, the representative stressed that China had 
no restriction on the adoption of standards set by international standard-setting bodies including ISO, 
IEC or ITU.  To the contrary, China had always encouraged the adoption of standards which were 
deemed appropriate and applicable for China.   
118. With respect to the amendment to Decree No. 5, since China wa s still at a stage of public 
opinion solicitation and collection, and since the cha nges were rather more of a procedural nature 
rather substantial, China was deliberating on whet her it was necessary to notify the amendment to the 
WTO.  If substantial changes were made to Decree No. 5, China would fulfill its obligation to notify 
to the WTO. 
119. Regarding WAPI, the representative of Chin a stressed that the current Chinese WAPI 
standards addressed the safety concer ns of China which the relevant international standards failed to 
do.   It was recalled that the TBT Agreement allo wed Members to adopt measures in compliance with 
legitimate objectives under the Agreement.   China w as of the view that the Chinese WAPI standard 
fulfilled the objectives specified in the TBT Agreem ent.  Moreover, China had already published the 
calculating methods used in WAPI and if Members were interested they could visit the relevant 
website: www.oscca.gov.cn . 
120. Regarding the issue of duplicative certificati on, the representative of China drew the 
Committee's attention to the fact that the Chinese g overnment had made enormous efforts to uniform 
the certification system.  Announcement No. 70, issued on 30 April 2006, by SFDA and AQSIQ 
eliminated duplication in certification of eight categories of medical devices.  It was noted, however, that the compulsory certification  of products and the registration  of products were two systems that 
focused on different sides of the same coin:  CCC certification mainly focused on safety while 
registration was about its clinical performance.  This was common practice in many other Members, 
such as the EMC certification and UL certifica tion for electric devices in the United States. 
121. On Measures for Controlling Pollution Caused by  Electronic Information Products, which, in 
China's view should not be called "Chinese RoHS", China had fully abided by the TBT Agreement in 
respect of notification requirements.  Currently, there was no new information available regarding 
certification bodies, products catalogue or timeframe.  China would respond to comments received.  
In fact, some comments had been accepted and integr ated in the measure. Regarding requirements for 
Concentration Limits for Certain Hazardous Subs tances in Electronic Information Products and the 
Marking for Control of Pollution Caused by Electronic Information Products, it was pointed out that these two requirements, which would enter into force, were only recommending sectoral standards.  The notification of these two standards was under c onsideration by the relevant authority of the 
Chinese government.  In addition, information regard ing the latest progress of the Measure could be 
found on the website of the Ministry of Information Industry ( www.mii.gov.cn
).  Regarding the 
implementation of the Measure, since China ha d provided a one year adaptation period for G/TBT/M/40 
Page 26  
 
  manufacturers, China did not intend to postpone the implementation of the Measures for Controlling 
Pollution Caused by Electronic Information Products. 
122. On the issue of the mandatory labelling, this requirement aimed at informing consumers and 
those who recycled products about possible pois onous content of such products (used electronic 
information products).  China was of the view that the requirement was reasonable, necessary, 
appropriate and in compliance with the WTO TBT Agreement.   
123. Regarding the subject of standardization,  China had established both compulsory and 
voluntary standards.  When drafting compulsory sta ndards, legitimate objectives specified in the TBT 
Agreement were taken into account.   
124. Regarding the participation of foreign enterp rises in the domestic standards development 
process, the Standardization Administration of Ch ina (SAC) had promulgated Document No. 40 of 
2005, namely:  Opinions on Par ticipation of Foreign Enterprises in China in Domestic 
Standardization.  This document sp ecified conditions for foreign enterp rises in China to participate in 
the standards development process;  hence, comment s could be taken into account and interested 
Members could visit the website of the Standard ization Administration of China to download the 
document.  Regarding the refusal of applications fo r participation in domestic standardization process 
by European Union companies, the representative of  China pointed out that foreign enterprises could 
submit applications to the competent authorities fo r participation, and make complaints to the 
Standardization Administration of China with sufficient reasons and justification in case an 
application was turned down.  At present, the SAC had not yet received any complaints or such 
appeals from any foreign enterprises. 
125. Regarding the adoption of international standa rds, China had made efforts to increase the 
percentage of adopted international standards in  Chinese standards.  Regarding ICT products, all 
technical tests requirements under the CCC system could be completed within one test laboratory.  It 
was true that for a few products, such as teleco mmunication terminal products, in addition to the CCC 
requirement, these products also needed to meet th e network entry requirement of the Ministry of 
Information Industry.  Nevertheless, with the joint efforts of the relevant authorities in China, an 
understanding for coordination between the two requi rements had already been reached:  the CCC 
focused on the safety and EMC test while the ne twork entry requirement focused on network 
performance;  this guaranteed two requirements without duplication. 
126. On issues regarding imported cosmetics, the re presentative of China confirmed that in the 
past there had been an approval requirement for im ported cosmetics not used for special purposes.  
However, it was pointed out that after 1 August 2004, the Ministry of Health had promulgated 
announcement No. 217 of 2004, which stipulated that imported cosmetics not used for special 
purposes only had to go through a registration pro cess which would take 20 days.  Therefore, China 
was of the view that both domestic and imported co smetics not used for special purposes enjoyed the 
same treatment. 
127. Regarding automobiles, the CCC certifi cation served the same purpose as the ECE 
certification, which was to guarantee consumers' safety.  However, compared to ECE certification, the Chinese CCC system was more simple and cost effec tive.  Chinese auto makers at present could not 
adapt themselves well to the ECE system mainly due to  the fact that the cost of application was too 
high and far beyond the capacity of those auto manufacturers.  Moreover, different member States within the European Communities had different st andards of implementation of the ECE system.  
China understood the positive effect of the 19 58 Agreement and was considering joining as a 
contracting party to the Agreement at an appropriate time in the future.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 27 
 
 
  128. Regarding labelling, there were cases where lo cal inspection and quarantine administrations 
had different understandings on implementing the same standard.   The Commi ttee was informed that 
the Chinese government took note of this situati on and was currently establishing a nation-wide 
registration system to ensure uniform application of food labelling standards. 
129. On issues of medicines, China currently app lied double examination in the registration of 
imported active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) to  ensure that the quality of imported products met 
the domestic standard.  However, it was pointed out that the double examination requirement was relevant not only for imported API but also for dom estic medicines.  This requirement was conducted 
before the medicines were distributed in the market .  For clinical trial requirements, China confirmed 
that the requirement applied equally to domestic and imported medicines. 
130. The Committee adopted
 its Fifth Annual Transitional Revi ew Report mandated in Paragraph 
18 of the Protocol of Accession of the People's Re public of China to the Council for Trade in Goods 
(G/TBT/20). 
IV. TECHNICAL COOPERATION 
131. The representative of Norway  updated the Committee on Norwegian technical assistance 
projects in the TBT area (G/TBT/GEN/42).  It was stressed that emphasis was put on standards, 
metrology, testing and quality.  In particular, the Committee was informed  about work aimed at 
establishing the Southern African Development Co mmunity Accreditation Service (SADCAS);  this 
was essential as many countries in the region did not have internationally recognized accreditation 
services.  This, in turn, entailed significant mark et access barriers to goods from the region.   The 
establishment of SADCAS was a regional response to  this challenge.  She also drew the Committee's 
attention to a joint NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation) and SIDA (Swedish 
International Development Authority) publicatio n entitled "Development of Trade in Africa – 
Promoting exports through quality and product safety."17 
132. The representative of the European Communities  introduced his delegation's submission on 
technical assistance (G/TBT/W/273) which provided a list of technical assistance activities in the TBT 
area either funded directly by the European Commission or by European member States.  
133. The Chairman  recalled that in November 2005 the Committee had adopted a format for the 
voluntary notification of technical assistance need s and a response (G/TBT/16).  To date, three 
notifications had been made: from Jamaica, Armenia and Costa Rica.18  The Committee would review 
the functioning of this mechanism in 2007.   
134. The Secretariat  reported on technical assistance activiti es undertaken in 2006 and planned for 
2007 (G/TBT/GEN/44).  It was stressed that the ai m of these activities was to facilitate an effective 
and informed implementation of the TBT Agreement at  the national level.  To this end, the activities 
conducted in 2006 had give n particular emphasis to current issues before the TBT Committee, in 
particular with respect to the preparation of the F ourth Triennial Review of the TBT Agreement.   For 
2007, the Secretariat aimed at conducting three regi onal workshops in the TBT area:  for English 
speaking Africa, Asia and for the Arab and Middle East countries.   
135. The representatives of the Codex  and the ITC  provided the Committee with updates on their 
technical assistance activities (G/TBT/GEN/41 and G/TBT/GEN/43, respectively). 
                                                      
17 http://www.norad.no/items/3059/38/9951288863/Development%20of%20trade%20in%20Africa.pdf. 
18 G/TBT/TA-1/JAM, G/TBT/TA-2 /ARM and G/TBT/TA-3/CRI. G/TBT/M/40 
Page 28  
 
  V. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS 
136. The representative of the IEC
 updated the Committee on relevant work in the IEC (a separate 
publication was made available as a Room Docu ment).  With respect to developing country 
participation, it was noted that the IEC Affiliate Programme had grown to 71  affiliates.  Moreover, 
two new countries had become members of the IEC: Nigeria and Sri Lanka (bringing the total IEC 
membership to 67).  Recognizing the importance of  conformity assessment in developing countries, 
the IEC had developed a guide for affiliates which ha d been distributed in 2005 in English (a French 
version was being prepared).  It was also noted that the IEC had opened a new regional centre for Latin America on 1 September, in Sao Paolo (two others already exist for North America and Asia 
Pacific).  The IEC was also considering opening a regional centre in Africa.   
137. The representative of the Codex
 noted that the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery 
Products (Beijing, China, 18 - 22 September 2006), ha d agreed on the amendment to the standard for 
canned sardines.  She recalled that this had been a controversial trade issue discussed for 10 years.  
Similarly, the Codex Committee on Nutrition and F oods for Special Dietary Uses (held outside of 
Europe for the first time, in Chiang Mai, Thaila nd, 30 October-3 November 2006), had finalized the 
revision of the standards for infant formula and formula for special medical purposes – also after a 
decade of discussions.  In addition, the representa tive of Codex drew the Committee's attention to 
Codex work in the context of the Internationa l Task Force on Harmonization and Equivalence in 
Organic Agriculture (ITF), convened jointly by F AO, IFOAM and UNCTAD.  This Task Force had, 
since 2003, provided a forum for exchange of view s on issues related to organic agriculture and 
especially those dealing with certification and devel oping countries.  Members of the task force had 
focused on market access difficulties faced by de veloping countries due to differences in organic 
regulations and, perhaps more significantly, certific ation and inspection procedures.  The last session 
of this Task Force had been held in Sweden in October 2006.19  
138. The representative of the OIML  updated the Committee on relevant ongoing work 
(G/TBT/GEN/45).  In particular, delegates' attention was drawn to a recently held seminar on "Legal 
metrology aspects of pre-packaging for international trade"  (16 October 2006, Cape Town, South 
Africa).   This seminar had shown that current in ternational trade in pre- packaged goods was limited 
because of technical barriers to trade which exis ted due to differing labe lling requirements between 
countries.  In light of this, the OIML would be  undertaking a review of its recommendation on the 
labelling of pre-packaged products in cooperation with other interna tional organizations, including the 
CODEX and the OIV (International Organisation of Vi ne and Wine).  The OIML was also intending 
to look into setting up an interna tional "Quantity Mark" for pre-pack aged goods, also in cooperation 
with other relevant organizations as we ll as industry and consumer groups.   
VI. FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW 
139. The delegation of Colombia  presented her delegation's contri bution to the Fourth Triennial 
Review on Good Regulatory Practice, Conformity Assessment and Transparency (G/TBT/W/269).  
140. The Committee adopted  its Report of the Fourth Trienni al Review of the Operation and 
Implementation of the Agreemen t under Article 15.4 (G/TBT/19). 
141. The representative of Costa Rica  recalled that his delegation's submission on the Fourth 
Triennial Review (G/TBT/W/266) contained, inter alia , a proposal regarding ad hoc  consultations by 
the Chairman of the TBT Committee aimed at seeking a settlement to specific trade concerns raised 
by Members in the Committee.  Co sta Rica was of the view that the Committee needed to follow-up 
on this proposal.  
                                                      
19 For more information, see http://www.uncta d.org/trade_env/ITF-organic/welcome1.asp.  G/TBT/M/40 
 Page 29 
 
 
  VII. REPORT (2006) OF THE COMMITTEE ON  TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE 
142. The Committee adopted  its 2006 Report to the Council for Trade in Goods (G/L/803). 
VIII.  OTHER BUSINESS 
1. Counterfeiting of Certification Marks 
143. The representative of Canada  recalled that at the last meeting of the Committee, Canada had 
presented a document on Counterfeiting of Certificati on Marks Affixed to Goods Where There Exists 
a Health and/or Safety Concern (G/TBT/W/265/Re v.1).  At that point, some Members had asked 
specific questions.20  Answers to these questions, together with some specific examples of products 
affected, was provided in Room Document at the current meeting. 
2. Dates of next meetings  
144. The Chairman  announced that the next regular meeting of the Committee would take place on 
21-22 March 2007.  The following two meetings we re tentatively scheduled for 6-7 June and 
7-9 November 2007. 
__________ 
 
                                                      
20 G/TBT/M/39, paras. 84-91.