RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/M/34 
5 January 2005 
 (05-0024) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  
  
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 4 NOVEMBER 2004 
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Sudhakar Dalela (India)
 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ......................................................................................................... .3 
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT ..................................3  
A. STATEMENT FROM MEMBERS UNDER ARTICLE 15.2...................................................................................3  
B. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS .......................................................................................................................3  
1. New Concerns ................................................................................................................... ....................3  
2. Concerns Previ ously Raised..................................................................................................... .............5  
C. OTHER MATTERS ............................................................................................................................... ......23  
1. Special Meeting on Procedures for Informati on Exchange (held on 2-3 November 2004) ................23  
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW............................................................................................................... .........24  
A. ISSUES ARISING FROM THE THIRD TRIENNIAL REVIEW ............................................................................24  
1. Good Regulato ry Prac tice....................................................................................................... ............24  
2. Transparency Procedures ........................................................................................................ ...........26  
3. Conformity Assessment .......................................................................................................... .............27  
4. Technical a ssistance........................................................................................................... .................28  
5. Other Elements................................................................................................................. ...................29  
B. PREPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW .................................................................................29  
IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION........................................................................................................2 9 
V. OBSERVERS...................................................................................................................... ..................32  
A. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS ..........................................................................................................32  
B. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS .......................................................................................................................32  
VI. ANNUAL TRANSITIONAL REVIEW (TRM) MANDATED IN PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE 
PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ..........................................33  
VII. REPORT (2004) OF THE COMMITTEE ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE ..............35  
VIII. DATE OF NEXT  MEETI NG ........................................................................................................... ...35 
ANNEX 1: WORK PROGRAMME FOR THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW....................................36  
ANNEX 2: SUMMARY REPORT OF THE FOURTH SPECIAL MEETING ON PROCEDURES FOR 
INFORMATION EXCHANGE ........................................................................................................... .............38  
A. PRIOR TO NOTIFICATIONS .........................................................................................................................38  
1. The Chilean National Co mmission on TBT......................................................................................... 38 
2. The "Notice and Comment" Procedure in the United States...............................................................39  
B. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF NOTIFICATIONS ................................................................................39  
1. The Experience of Canada: the Stan dards Council and Export Alert! ...............................................39  
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's ow n responsibility and is without prejudice to the positions of 
Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 2  
 
2. The Notification Procedure of the Trini dad and Tobago Bureau  of Standards ..................................40  
3. The Notification Procedure of the Thai  Industrial Standar ds Institute ..............................................41  
C. PROCESSING AND CIRCULATION OF NOTIFICATIONS ................................................................................41  
1. The Processing of Notifications  by the WTO S ecretariat....................................................................41  
2. How to Use the WTO Website and the CRN Da tabase? .....................................................................42  
D. HANDLING OF COMMENTS .......................................................................................................................42  
1. The Experience of the TBT Enquiry Point of the European Communities and its TBT Website .........42  
E. TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE ....................................................43  
1. The Malaysian Standar ds Infrastructure ......................................................................................... ...43 
2. The Activities of the ISO/IE C Informatio n Centre ..............................................................................4 4 
F. THE FUNCTIONING OF ENQUIRY POINTS .................................................................................................445  
1. The Functioning of the Brazilian En quiry Point and the Services Developed to Assist Exporters .....45  
2. The Chinese Experience in Enhancing the Role of the Enquiry Point ................................................45  
3. The Kenyan Experience in Establishing and Running a National Enquiry Point ...............................45  
G. BENEFITING FROM TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS : DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION ..............................47  
1. The Experience of the Mexica n TBT/SPS Enquiry Point ...................................................................47  
2. The Experience of Chinese Taipei and the Product-Classified Notification Dissemination System ..48  
3. The Uganda TBT/SPS Coordination Committee ................................................................................48  
  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 3 
 
 
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/2396, dated 1 October 2004.   
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
A. STATEMENT FROM MEMBERS UNDER ARTICLE 15.2 
2. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to four  new statements on Implementation and 
Administration of the Agreement, submitted by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Madagascar, 
Georgia and Nicaragua, contained in documents  G/TBT/2/Add.79, Add.80, Add.81 and Add.82, 
respectively.  He also noted that Armenia and Ma laysia had submitted revisions to their previous 
statements, contained in documents G/TBT/2/Add.75 /Rev.1 and G/TBT/2/Add.9/Rev.1.  A full list of 
statements made under Article 15.2 was containe d in document G/TBT/GEN/1/Rev.1 and Corr.1.  
The latest list of enquiry points was containe d in document G/TBT/ENQ/25, dated 13 October 2004. 
B. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
3. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to the recommendation of the Third Triennial 
Review, that encouraged Members to share with the Committee, on a voluntary basis, any follow-up 
information on issues that had previously been rai sed in regard to their technical regulations and 
conformity assessment procedures.2 
1. New Concerns 
(i) Mexico: Pre-packaged pr oducts(G/TBT/N/MEX/95) 
4. The representative of th e European Communities  reminded Mexico that, on 14 September 
2004, it had submitted comments concerning G/TBT/N/ MEX/95 on pre-packaged products.  Concerns 
had been expressed on the fact that the Mexican  law differed from the revised version of the 
international standard OIML R 87, which had been  approved in November 2003.  She stressed that 
according to Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement, when international standards existed, Members 
should use them, or the relevant parts of them, as a basis for their technical regulations.   
5. The representative of Mexico  pointed out that the comments received from the 
European Communities were being considered and that a written reply would be provided.  He 
stressed that the technical regulation was at a draft stage and that all the comments, not only those of 
the European Communities, were being discussed in a working party;  the results would be made 
public on completion of work. 
(ii) European Communities: Hip, knee and shoulder joint replacements(G/TBT/N/EEC/70) 
6. The representative of the United States  raised concerns on G/TBT/N/EEC/70, in which the 
European Communities had announced its intention to  reclassify or up-classify hip, knee and shoulder 
joint replacements from Class II b to Class III, under Directive 93/42/EEC on Medical Devices.  The 
US and European medical device industry had expressed strong concerns about the lack of a 
comprehensive scientific review of total joint replacements to substant iate the EC's planned 
up-classification.  She also noted that the EC's pr oposed action diverged from regulatory treatment of 
these medical devices in the United States, where th e US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA) 
had down-classified many joint replacement prod ucts.  She urged the European Communities to 
carefully consider comments from all interested pa rties and to consult with the US FDA and other 
regulatory authorities.  She explained that under the US FDA's classification system, devices with 
                                                      
2 G/TBT/13, paragraph 28. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 4  
 
different characteristics but in a single category coul d be in different classes, depending on the degree 
of regulatory oversight necessary to achieve safety and effectiveness.  This flexibility had enabled 
FDA to maintain the Class III classification for some  joint replacement devices that posed a higher 
risk, while down-classifying other joint repl acement devices that presented a lesser risk. 
7. The representative of th e European Communities
 stated that the comments received by the 
United States were being reviewed and a written reply would be provided shortly. 
(iii) Peru: Labelling of footwear (G/TBT/N/PER/4) 
8. The representative of the European Communities  reminded the Peruvian delegation that, on 
25 February 2004, her delegati on had submitted comments on G/TBT/N/PER/4, concerning the 
labelling of footwear.  She welcomed the fact that the notified text took into consideration previous 
comments made (G/TBT/N/PER/1).  However, it stil l required the label to contain information on the 
country of origin of the good, and the corporate tax number of the manufacturer or importer.  The 
European Communities reiterated the concerns that these mandatory requirements might impose 
significant costs on producers and exporters.  She beli eved that the same objective might be achieved 
by a less trade restrictive measur e, in accordance with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement;  the country 
of origin labelling could be made voluntary, for example.  Moreover, she considered that the 
requirement to indicate the tax number was irrelevant  for the purpose of consumer information.   
9. The representative of Peru  recalled that the regulation on labelling of footwear had been 
notified twice, in G/TBT/N/PER/1 and G/TBT/N/PER/4.  It had been adopted six months after the last 
notification, and the competent authority in Peru had taken into account the comments received when 
the first regulation had been notified.  On the issu e of the tax number, her understanding was that this 
information could be obtained at a later stage from the importers.   
(iv) Belgium: Ban on the Importation and Commercia lization of Seal Skins and Seal Derived 
Products 
10. The representative of Canada  drew the Committee's attention to  a Belgian draft legislation, 
which banned the importation and commercialization of seal skins and seal derived products.  She 
was disappointed that Belgium had not notified the draft bill under the TBT Agreement, thus 
preventing Members from submitting comments.  In her view, this draft bill would have the effect of 
creating an unnecessary barrier to trade, as the prohib ition of all imports of seal skins and seal derived 
products was more trade restrictive than necessary to  fulfil the draft bill's objective of the protection 
and of the seal population.  Pursuant to the UN Conv ention on the Law of the Sea, seals were a living 
marine mammal resource under Canada's jurisdicti on.  She explained that Canada managed this 
resource on a sustainable basis, in accordance with it s rights and obligations under international law. 
Its practices were based on scientifically proven and sound conservation principles, as determined by 
internationally accepted standards a nd guidelines.  Canada also acted to ensure that sealing was 
humane by implementing strict regulations in this regard.  She requested, under Article 2.5 of the TBT 
Agreement, that Belgium explain its justification for the draft bill, including any risk methodology 
used as a basis.  She also ask ed Belgium to reconsider its proposed ban on the import and 
commercialization of seal skins and seal derived pro ducts, taking into account all relevant facts.  
11. The representative of the European Communities  took note of the concerns raised, and 
informed Canada that the draft bill in question was being examined at the European level, to asses its 
compatibility with both Community and international la w.  In light of this internal discussion, his 
delegation was not yet in a position to respond substantively to the comments of Canada.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 5 
 
 
(v) Jordan:  International Produc t Conformity Certification Pr ogram -  DAMAN (G/TBT/W/241) 
12. The representative of the United States  raised concerns on Jordan's International Product 
Conformity Certification Program, known more  commonly as DAMAN, a system which included 
testing, certification and accreditation.  She reca lled that Jordan had issued a document on its 
conformity assessment program (G/TBT/W/241).  Bilate ral discussions had been held with Jordan on 
this program.  In particular, the United States had sought fairer treatment in fulfilment of Jordan's 
legitimate objectives and had asked to look at a lternatives and at truly risk-based post inspection 
systems.  Several suggestions had been proposed , but no changes had been made to the program. 
13. The representative of Jordan  took note of the concerns expressed by the United States. 
2. Concerns Previously Raised 
(i) 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.)  
14. The representative of the European Communities3 made a presentation in response to 
comments submitted by Members under G/TBT/N/EEC/ 52.  The European Commission had made the 
REACH proposal because it had found that, over the years, the current European legislation on 
chemicals was not effective.  It had been difficult both to properly identify the risks arising from the 
use of chemicals and to manage them.  This was la rgely because, for many chemical substances on the 
market, there was a relative lack of information.   
15. Under the current EU law, there was no obliga tion on industry to provide information about 
the properties of the vast majority of chemicals.  Existing legislation put th e burden of proof on public 
authorities to demonstrate the safety of the use of a substance.  In addition, there was no efficient 
instrument to deal with the most problematic su bstances.  In the current system, so-called new 
substances, i.e. substances which had been on the market since 1981, were subject to much stricter 
testing and notification requirements than all of the other substances that had been on the market 
before 1981.  This discouraged the development of new, potentia lly "greener" substances, thus 
entailing a lack of incentives for innovation.   
16. The purpose of the REACH proposal was the creation of one system that covered all chemical 
substances.  Its most significant element was the requirement for substances that were produced or 
imported into the European Union in quantities above  one tonne per manufactur er or per importer per 
year, to be registered at a Central Agency.  This  obligation, spread over a period of 11 years, to 
provide data for about 30 chemical substances, wa s placed on EC manufacturers and importers alike.  
This information was also required to be passed dow n to users of chemicals in the European Union.  
This would allow downstream users of chemicals to  manage and control the risks from exposure to 
those substances more easily.  An evaluation stag e whereby a certain number of substances would be 
examined in more detail by the member States' authorities, was also proposed. 
17. A White Paper4, which set out the overall aims and pl ans for REACH had been published in 
February 2001.  Two years later, a first draft of  the Regulation had been published on the Internet.  
The summer of 2003 had been given for comments to be provided.  Over 6000 comments, many of 
which were from WTO Members, were received at that stage.  Following this, some significant 
changes were made to the first draft proposal and the current proposal had been adopted on 
29 October 2003 and notified to the TBT Committ ee in January 2004  (G/TBT/N/EEC/52).  An 
extended period for comments, until June 2004, had been allowed.  It was stressed that at the present 
time, the legislation was not finalized and that th e European Parliament and the Council of Ministers 
                                                      
3 Mr. Nicholas Burge (DG Enterprise) a nd Mr. Mark Blainey (DG Environment). 
4 COM (2001) 88 final,  available on the Commission’s website at http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/reach/index.htm  or 
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enviro nment/chemicals/whitepaper.htm  G/TBT/M/34 
Page 6  
 
were discussing the proposal in detail, under the co -decision procedure.  The European Parliament 
expected the first reading of the proposal to be completed in Autumn 2005.  Any major changes made 
resulting from the decision-making processes would be notified to the TBT Committee. 
18. The representative of the European Communities
 recalled that one of the key goals for 
REACH was to improve the level of health and e nvironmental protection within the European Union 
associated with  exposure from the use of chemi cals.  The vast majority of WTO Members had 
recognized the legitimacy of such an aim, a nd most WTO Members had implemented national 
legislation to achieve similar objectives.   
19. Written replies to the comments received had been sent out recently, accompanied by a 
substantive document which delved into the details  of the proposal.  Information was also regularly 
posted on the EC website.  Specifically, the main c oncerns raised by WTO Members were related to:  
(i) alleged discrimination between EU and non-EU ma nufacturers, focusing in particular on Article 6 
of REACH, which dealt with requirements for substan ces in articles;  (ii) the principle of least trade 
restrictiveness;  and, (iii) other concerns, including  concerns related to inc onsistent application by 
EU member States, compatibility with internati onal efforts, effects on innovation, protection of 
confidential information, and technical assistance and capacity building for developing countries.  
20. Starting with Article 6 of REACH, dealing with substances in articles, it was explained that 
the word "articles" included almost anything that was not a chemical substance or a mixture of chemicals.  Although the main purpose of REACH wa s to focus on chemical substances, and the main 
obligations of REACH fell on the manufacturers and the importers of chemical substances in the EU, risks could also arise from exposure to substances that were released from  articles.  Article 6 of 
REACH imposed various obligations on the manufacturers or importers of articles.  First, these 
substances had to meet the EU classification as da ngerous.  Second, they had to be present in 
quantities above one tonne per article  type per manufacturer or importe r per year.  Action would only 
be required if the substance in that article had not  been registered for that use further up the supply 
chain.  If those first conditions applied, and the substance was intended to be released (for instance 
like ink is released from a pen), there woul d be an obligation to register it.   
21. It could also happen that there was no intentio n for the chemical to be released, but it was 
known to be released anyway, for example into the e nvironment or in contact with the skin.  In such 
cases, a decision would have to be taken by the producer or importer of the article as to whether the quantity released could adversely affect human hea lth or the environment.  There would be an 
obligation to notify the Central Agency, which might then require registration.  This obligation would 
only come into force 11 years and 3 months after entr y into force of REACH, which would be in 2017 
or later.   
22. On the issue of alleged discrimination agains t non-EU producers of articles, it was stressed 
that the obligations in Article 6 applied both to EU  producers of articles and importers of articles.  A 
proposal had been made by some WTO Members to  limit this requirement further by listing the 
substances to which the provision in  Article 6 would apply.  Howeve r, this was not possible because 
the purpose of REACH was to help to identify the hazards of substa nces, and it would be difficult to 
identify the substances in advance.  In addition, th is would be inconsistent with the principle of 
industry responsibility.   
23. Another concern that had been raised wa s that REACH was more difficult for non-EU 
manufacturers to comply with than for EU manufacturer s.  In this regard, it was stressed that REACH 
applied throughout equally to EU and non-EU producers.  Other concerns were related to 
confidentiality requirements.  In this regard, Ar ticle 6(a) of REACH allowed non-EU manufacturers 
to appoint an single representative, who could, ther efore, keep that information confidential, and only 
pass it on to the Agency (and not to its customers with in the EU).  In order to make the proposal easy 
to operate, the European Commission was prepari ng extensive guidance mate rial, aimed equally at  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 7 
 
 
importers and EU manufacturers which would be finished towards the end of 2005.  It was the view of 
the EC representative that REACH was fully compat ible with Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement. 
24. On the principle of least-restrictiveness, the EC representative noted that some of the 
concerns raised included the potential for duplication of testing and risk assessment, the authorization 
procedure, and more general concerns about work ability and the burden that REACH would have on 
industry.  The European Communities was of the vi ew that individual registrations were necessary 
and that, as designed, the authorization procedures were limited in scope, workable, and that the 
decision were taken based on risk.  An extensiv e impact assessment on the proposal had been 
conducted, which had demonstrated that the be nefits from the proposal outweighed the costs.5  It was 
concluded that REACH was fully compatible with Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement. 
25. On the issue of registration, it was explained that its aim was for each EU manufacturer and 
importer to take responsibility for the substances they  produced or imported. This could be done in a 
number of ways.  First, by obtaining information to a ssess the intrinsic hazards of  a substance.  In this 
regard, animal testing should only be undertaken as a last resort.  The use of existing data, sharing of 
data, and other techniques should be considered by the manufac turer or importer before any new 
testing was carried out.  The second main task for the manufacturer or the importer was to assess the 
risks arising from identified uses of the substa nce, and to put in place or to recommend risk 
management controls for that substa nce.  Producers or importers had to  demonstrate that this had been 
done by sending all the information necessary to the ne w European Chemicals Agency in the form of 
a registration dossier.  REACH encouraged manufacturers and importers to come together in voluntary consortia to provide joint registrations .  The European Commission had considered the 
suggestion made by some EU member States of ha ving a "one substance, one registration" system 
(OSOR)  when the proposal was being designed, but a number of concerns had been raised about its 
workability in practice, particularly on the compul sory requirement to agree on core data, and about 
confidentiality.   
26. It was reiterated that the authorization com ponent of the REACH proposal applied only to 
substances of very high concern, and that its ai m was to ensure that these substances were properly 
controlled, or substituted.  These substances, about two and a half thousand, had certain properties, 
such as being carcinogens, mutagens, or toxic to re production (the so-called CMRs), or persistent, 
bio-accumulative and toxic (PBTs) or very persiste nt and very bio-accumulative (vpVbs).  There was 
a safety-net in REACH known as the "restriction" part of the process, which enabled the EC 
authorities to place use or marketing restrictions on certain substances where this was scientifically 
justified, based on risk.   
27. To ensure workability of the system, the s ubstances of very high concern would be 
prioritised, and progressively authorized as EC resour ces allowed.  Each substance would be given an 
individual deadline for the authorization process, but its continued use would be allowed until any 
decision was made.  Decisions on authorization would be taken by the Commission and would be 
based on expert opinions.  Any down-stream user coul d use an authorization gained by their supplier 
if the specific use is covered, and for transparency , the applicant and other interested parties could 
comment during the process.  The system was designed  to be risk-based, and authorizations would be 
granted if an applicant could adequately control th e risk and may be granted if it was demonstrated 
that social and economic benefits outweighed that risk.   
28. Another issue that had been raised was the po ssible inconsistent application by EC member 
States, which could lead to uncertainty and trade ba rriers.  They believed that this would not happen, 
since the legal instrument chosen – a Regulation – w ould be directly applicable in Members States.  
Furthermore, the European Chemi cals Agency ("the Agency") had been given the power to take 
decisions in certain cases, and to ensure consistenc y, particularly in the registration and evaluation 
                                                     
 
5 This is also available on the Commission’s website at the address given in footnote 4. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 8  
 
elements of REACH.  The Agency would also have a forum for exchange of information on 
enforcement where Members States could discuss th ese issues.  In order to promote consistent 
interpretation of REACH, guidance for authoriti es would be provided and an appeal would be 
possible both within the Agency and to the European  Court of Justice.  They believed that REACH 
would improve consistency of enfo rcement within the European Union and facilitate trade flows. 
29. A concern had been raised that REACH was inco mpatible with international initiatives, such 
as the ICCA HPV programme and the UN’s globally harmonized system for classification and labelling (GHS).  The European Communities belie ved that REACH was complementary to such 
programmes.  For example, information genera ted under the HPV programme could be used for 
REACH under certain conditions.  Information genera ted under other programmes could also be used 
if appropriate.  They noted that the European Co mmission was also planning to implement GHS.   
30. Other issues raised included that REACH was ba d for innovation.  While  this was not a WTO 
issue, it was stressed that, on the contrary, a number of elements w ould encourage innovation, 
including greater exemptions for research and devel opment.  Concerns had also been raised about 
protection of confidential information.  REAC H tried to achieve a balance between giving 
information on chemicals on one hand, but making sure that confidential information was not 
disseminated on the other.  Some key information would be made available on the Agency's webpage 
once it was established, but some information would always be treated as c onfidential.  All other 
information could be made available by the Agen cy upon request, but only after consultation with the 
owner of the information.  
31. One of the other concerns expressed was that  REACH was very difficult for developing 
countries to apply.  The European Communities reco gnized that it had obligations under Article 11.3 
of the TBT Agreement. In this respect, extensive guidance material would be provided and technical 
assistance and capacity building was planne d, for example through the Agency. 
32. The European Communities concluded that REACH was WTO compatible and expressed 
their willingness to continue efforts to explain REACH to WTO Members, to develop good quality 
guidance and to pursue bilateral and multilateral dialogues. 
33. The representative of Malaysia
, in relation to the issue of registration, sought clarification on 
the approach that was used for the privatization of substances for restriction.  He understood that 
production volume was the criteria for approximation fo r exposure.  However, the approach preferred 
by industry was a risk-based one, where intrinsic h azard of the substances, and level of exposure to 
humans and the environment were taken into account.  On the issue of data sharing and 
confidentiality, he noted that the proposal encouraged  companies to form consortia for registration of 
the same substances which were manufactured or imported.  He believed that this might have 
implications on intellectual property rights, because co mpanies, as part of a consortium, needed to 
reveal proprietary details such as the manufacturi ng process that might not have been patented. His 
country's industry was particularly concerned th at the information submitted should not compromise 
confidential data.  In relation to the evaluation process, he believed th at there could be inconsistencies 
from one member State to another, since member Stat es needed to carry out their own evaluation.  On 
the issue of authorization, he noted that some of the terms used, such as "adequate control", and 
"socio-economic benef its" that determined authorization to be granted were difficult to define.  This 
could result in disagreements since two similar s ubstances undergoing the same evaluation might have 
different outcomes or results.  There was concern th at it could happen that substances were withdrawn 
from the market for economic, rather  than safety reasons, since the companies or manufacturers could 
feel that the costs outweighed the profits.  He fu rther wondered how and to what extent information 
was made available to Members and to the public.  Da ta could be available on the internet, where they 
could be assessed by anyone.  Although there was a need to have access to as much information as 
possible, the information classified as non-confiden tial should be restricted to essential items only.  
He noted that the European Chem ical Agency would be funded from the income from REACH fees.   G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 9 
 
 
He believed that the role of ECA should be one of ensuring the harmonized enforcement of REACH 
across the European Union and th at the fee structure should not be an additional burden to the 
chemical industry. 
34. The representative of the United States  thanked the European Communities for the written 
responses to the comments submitted, and believed th at additional time was needed to evaluate the 
information received.  She noted that extensive discussion on the issue had also taken place at the 
recent review of the EC's trade policy regime.  It  was her hope that the European Communities would 
take into account the questions and concerns raised  in that context as well.  Her delegations had 
further questions, on a number of the EC's assertions , notably their prioritization and the estimate of 
the impact of the proposed regulations.  She belie ved that since the discussions continued with 
Parliament and member States, it was still too early to make assertions or draw conclusions on the 
WTO compatibility.  She wondered if an additiona l communication to WTO Members would be made 
after the conclusion of the first reading, in Autumn of 2005, and if, at that point, there would still be an opportunity for additional comments to be taken into account. 
35. The representative of Japan
 noted that his delegation was studying the replies received and 
might later raise some points for clarification.  He  thought that REACH raised some issues of trade 
restrictiveness from the persp ective of the TBT Agreement. 
36. With regard to substances in articles, he noted that in a previous EC response to Japan, it had 
been stated that obligations with regard to substanc es in imported articles were slightly easier than in 
the case of articles produced in the EU and left ample time for manufacturers and importers to get acquainted with the system.  This reply, however, did not directly respond to the concern raised by 
Japan about Article 6.5 of the proposed regulation, for which the registration of substances in articles 
should not apply to substances that had already been registered for that use by an actor up the supply 
chain. This could be disadvantageous for non-EU artic le producers.  He believed that there would be 
many cases where importers of articles containi ng chemical substances from non-EU manufactures 
might have to register the substances because the ups tream suppliers had not registered the substance 
in question. He stressed that this situation might  not be consistent with the principle of National 
Treatment stipulated by Article III.4 of the GA TT 1994 and Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement.   
37. Regarding the creation of a list of named subs tances, he recalled that the EC representative 
had explained that this would be inconsistent with the principle of  industry responsibility and that it 
would be difficult to identify the substances in a dvance.  However, the representative of Japan noted 
that if the provision for the scope of substances was too obscure, industries might not be able to 
identify substances that they had to register and th is could entail an excessive burden.  He reiterated 
that it was preferable to enhance effectiveness a nd transparency of the re gulation through making a 
positive list of substances or products subject to the registration.  With regard to the requirement for 
every manufacturer and importer to register a substan ce, he suggested that duplication of registration 
should be avoided for hazard data  and data of risk assessment for the same use of the same 
substances.   
38. The representative of Japan  understood the impor tance of the objectives of REACH, namely, 
safeguarding human health and environment and recognized that the regulation could not work 
effectively without the cooperation of third coun tries and their industries.  He hoped that the 
European Communities would continue to take into consideration the c oncerns of their trade partners 
and, in this sense, welcomed the EC's proposal  to have bilateral dialogues with the countries 
concerned for further detailed discussions. 
39. The representative of Mexico
 recalled that his delegation had made comments in the context 
of the EC trade policy review and in  the consultations in May 2003.  He regretted that Mexico had not 
received any response to these comments made in May 2003 and noted that, while the Communities 
had replied to other Members, the Mexican questions  had still not been answered.  He thought that the G/TBT/M/34 
Page 10  
 
presentation was useful, but that it was not a replaceme nt for the consultations at the bilateral level 
between the European Communities and Mexico on the ma tters previously raised.  He stressed that it 
was fundamental to be able to determine whethe r the REACH initiative had really been the object 
of an evaluation from the regulatory side before hand, and which elements had been taken into 
account.  He sought clar ification on how the European Communities were considering granting 
special and differential treatment to the developing countries.  He  believed that the guidelines on 
how to use the system which were under prep aration would not be enough for industries and 
firms to comply with REACH.   
40. The representative of Colombia
 thanked the European Comm unities for the information 
provided.  He noted that developing countries had ju st started to assimilate this regulation, and hoped 
that there could be greater communication of info rmation, technical assistance and capacity building. 
He shared the concerns raised by Malaysia on th e handling of confidentiality and intellectual property 
aspects of products which were to be registered, evaluated and authorized.  This involved the 
designation of an agent for the handling of this in formation. He believed that this represented an 
additional cost because a special agent had to be designated only to handle this specific matter.  He 
supported the comments made by Mexico to study the possibility of implementing the 
TBT Agreement as it referred to special and differen tial treatment for developing countries.  He also 
sought clarification on granting authorization on the basis of socio-economic considerations, if the 
risk involved in the product coul d not be adequately managed.  
41. The representative of Egypt  noted that the comments made in the TBT Committee had come 
from either developed or advanced developing countr y Members.  He feared that developing countries 
might not have understood nor evaluated the impact th at the regulation might have on them.  He asked 
whether the European Communities had made an ev aluation of the impact of REACH on the market 
in general, and on developing countries in partic ular. He wondered if information on the sharing of 
developing countries' exports to the European Comm unities of substances, either in quantity or in 
value, was available on the EC webs ite.  He suggested that this info rmation should be made available 
to help assess the impact of REACH on developing countries.  He feared that the capacity of 
developing countries to make an evaluation of some  substances would not be considered adequate by 
the European Communities, and asked what kind of  recognition and assistance was being considered 
on the specific issue of evaluation. 
42. The representative of China  appreciated the transparency th at the European Communities had 
provided on the REACH proposal, and the responses made to the Chinese enquiry point.  He 
welcomed the fact that Members would be in formed on major amendments to the proposal as 
commented in the EC response.  He appreciated th e expressed readiness to continue efforts to explain 
the REACH proposal to WTO Members and to continue to pursue bi-lateral and multilateral dialogue with their trading partners.  His country was study ing the response received and further concerns on 
REACH had arisen. Therefore, he reserved the ri ght to provide further comments to the European 
Communities. 
43. The representative of Australia
  shared a number of the questions raised by previous speakers.  
Her delegation had submitted comments both directly  and through the Trade Policy Review process 
and she thanked the European Communities for th e replies received.  However, her delegation 
remained concerned about the WTO implications of the proposal. 
44. The representative of Thailand  thanked the European Commun ities for their responses to the 
comments and noted that more time was needed to study them.  She was not sure whether her 
country's concerns and comments had been answered  and taken into account,  in particular with 
reference to the proposal made by Thailand to exam ine the registration of the substance in articles. 
She noted that the European Comm unities had stated that the proposal had given rise to a number of 
misunderstandings and wondered whether the Eur opean Communities could point out all of the 
misunderstandings wherever possible.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 11 
 
 
45. The representative of Chinese Taipei  shared the concerns expressed by the previous speakers.  
His delegation also needed more time to discu ss the response provided by the European Commission 
with the local industry.  She noted that in th e EC's presentation, it was mentioned that the 
requirements for the registration of substances and articles would come into force only 11 years and 3 months after the entry into force of the REAC H Regulation.  She wondered whether it could be 
presumed that until that time most of the substances  would have been registered, and if it would be 
possible for manufacturers to get information on what  substances were being registered and for what 
uses, instead of asking for this informati on to be provided from the supply chain.  
46. The representative of Chile
 thanked the European Communi ties for the replies to the 
comments received, which were being reviewed.  Sh e sought clarification about whether the study on 
environmental impact was available, so that the vari ables which were used to calculate the cost of the 
system could be analysed.  She was doubtful whet her the REACH system was a risk-based one, since 
it was an obligation for the producer to demonstrate whether there was a risk, in order for a substance 
to be authorized. She thought it was still unclear wh ich substances would reach that stage, and what 
the costs to demonstrate the existe nce of a risk would be.  She was worried that until a guide would be 
made available, which could be by the end of 2005, it would not be possible to evaluate the impact of 
the cost and how the system would affect the expor ts of different countries.  With respect to the 
obligation under Article 11.3 of the TBT Agreement to provide tec hnical assistance, she noted that 
funding was not always available and the needs were  different for different countries.  Her delegation 
would continue bilateral discussions  in order to have a better unders tanding, especially about the costs 
associated with the application of the  regulation.   
47. The representative of Korea  noted that more time was needed to study in depth the 
information provided by the European Communities.   As a general point, he raised a concern 
regarding the fact that importers of chemical subs tances would be likely to request from exporters the 
data necessary for registration. The exporters' pr oper understanding of the regulations was then 
critical for its successful implementation.  He not ed that according to the current draft of the 
regulation, exporters were not able to register.  Ho wever, Korea was of the view that exporters should 
also be permitted to register, either directly or through importers.  He sought clarification about the 
non-GLP data mentioned in the EC presentation.  He noted that following 1.3 SAL (Structure Activity 
Relationship) over QSAL in Annex 4 of the REACH dr aft, SAL data could be accepted.  However, it 
had not been mentioned how SAL programs having diffe rent systems or logic would be verified and 
accepted.  This problem needed to be clarified. 
48. The representative of Cuba  raised four specific questions.  First, on the compatibility of the 
REACH system with other international efforts to  control chemical products, such as GHS and ICA, 
he asked whether compatibility with other interna tional treaties and conventions such as the Basel 
Convention would be valid too.  Second, he asked  whether the requirements of REACH for specific 
substances, and the consequences and risks for human health associated with some of these 
requirements, were in all cases demonstrated scientifi cally.  Third, he noted that, with respect to the 
difficulties of implementing REACH for developing countries, the European Communities had argued 
that on the basis of Article 11.3 of the TBT Agr eement, capacity building and technical assistance 
would be provided and that this could be d one through the Agency.  He asked how the 
European Communities intended to implement this ac tion.  Fourth, he wondered if there was any 
substantive reason that had led the European Co mmunities to set the specific limit of 11 years and 
3 months with respect to Article 6 of REACH.  
49. The representative of El Salvador  reiterated the concerns that her delegation had expressed in 
the trade policy review of the European Communities.   She stressed that the measures applied by the 
European Communities should not be more stringen t than those applied in other international 
agencies.  G/TBT/M/34 
Page 12  
 
50. The representative of the Dominican Republic
 recognized the right of all WTO Members to 
implement measures based on legitimate objectives, such as the objectives of REACH to provide a 
high level of protection for the environment, and human health.  However, she stressed that the 
REACH system constituted a complex and costly initi ative which might have a negative impact on the 
EC's trading partners.  She urged the European Communities to incorporate special and differential 
treatment measures in their draft regulation and to  establish a structured system of technical co-
operation and assistance for developing countries and their small and medium-sized enterprises.   
51. The representative of Canada  shared the goals of REACH to protect human health and the 
environment, to promote competiveness of the ch emical industry, and to increase transparency and 
integration within international efforts.  She belie ved that international co-operation was essential to 
achieve these goals and wished to continue the on-going dialogue on chemical policy with the 
European Communities, including through regulatory co-operation.  She recalled that her delegation 
had submitted comments in writing at each step in  the process and had a number of additional 
questions to pose to the EC experts.  She sought clar ification on the following issues:  (i) if forest 
products such as pulp, cellulose, and recovered pape r were exempt from the proposed legislation;  
(ii) if waste would be included under the registra tion process of REACH, except in the case of 
unintentional release, and what was the definition of the phrase "unintentional release";  (iii) if the European Communities intended to allow an applicant to use pre-ex isting animal test data in its 
registration package, even though it might not be the fi rst to register the substance.  She believed that 
the proposed phase-in process in REACH would requi re much duplicative and repetitive testing and 
sought information on the steps that the Europ ean Communities were ta king to encourage the 
submission of all available data regardless of th e volume threshold reached by potential registrants 
when the substance was first registered;  (iv) if cr iteria had been set out for the recognition of foreign 
testing bodies;  and (v) if the European Communities intended to provide procedures for the recognition of data which were already available.  She raised concerns on the process to be put in 
place to ensure the consistent application of REAC H across the member States and asked if the data 
recognized by one member State would automatically be recognized by all member States.   
52. The representative of Uruguay
 stated that it would be important to have access to the study 
about the impact of this regulatory initiative carri ed out by the European Communities.  She raised 
concerns about the impact on market access for deve loping countries, in view of the complexity and 
cost of the system and encouraged the European Commission to provide concrete shape to any form 
of assistance which would help to clarify and to implement the REACH system before it came into 
effect. 
53. The representative of Brazil  supported the comments made by Mexico and by the 
Dominican Republic on the special and differential tr eatment for developing countries.  She noted that 
the REACH system foresaw that the required test s would be undertaken by laboratories accredited 
according to OECD standards.  Brazil, as other developing countries, had based its accreditation 
system on ISO standards.  She noted that some kind of communicability between those systems 
should be ensured and asked the EC representative to address this issue. 
54. The representative of the European Communities , in relation to the concern raised by Mexico 
on the non-response to comments made in May 2003 , explained that the European Communities had 
not replied formally to any of the 6000 comments th at had been made in response to its internet 
consultation.  The response to these comments was th e change to the proposal that had been made.  
The way in which those comments had been take n into account was set out in the explanatory 
memorandum accompanying the proposal.  Neverthe less, the European Communities was willing to 
continue the dialogue in case there were outstanding  questions from Mexico, or from other Members.  
55. It was noted that a number of questions referred to the issue of the impact assessment and the 
extent to which REACH had been subject to an ev aluation beforehand.  It was explained that an 
impact assessment had been completed, and it was available on the EC website  above.  It had taken  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 13 
 
 
into account both the direct costs to manufacturers and importers of complying with REACH as well as indirect costs to other industries.  However, in relation to the question raised by Egypt, the impact assessment had not been carried out country by coun try.  It had been conducted as an overall impact, 
bearing in mind that the overall phasing in of the substances to be registered was spread over an 
11 year period.   
56. On the question raised by Malaysia concerning problems that might be associated with 
intellectual property rights in connection with the fo rmation of consortia, it w as noted that the purpose 
of the creation of these consortia was for companies to benefit from the sharing of information and 
expertise.  This was particularly important fo r small companies and companies from developing 
countries, which would be able to share and pool expertise when putting together a registration.  
However, the concern raised by Malaysia was a valid one, and this was why REACH proposed that 
consortia formation should be voluntary.  If, in the development of a joint submission, concerns 
would arise about sharing information which an individual company would prefer to keep confidential, the proposal did not force that sharing of information, unless it was animal test data.  In 
contrast, the “one substance one registration” prop osal would force companies to form consortia, and 
this was one of the reasons the European Commiss ion does not think such a proposal would work.  
57. On the definition of "adequate control", it was re called that, for the substances that had to be 
authorized for use, an authorization would be gr anted if the company, or the group of companies 
could demonstrate that the risks from exposure to t hose substances could be adequately controlled.  
The term "adequate control" meant that  the comp any had identified a DNEL (derived no effect limit) 
below which there was no risk, and risk management measures were in place in order to ensure that 
exposures were kept below that level.  On the authorization granted for socio-economic reasons, 
guidance might be needed in order to improve the understanding of these principles and provisions. 
58. It was explained that some non-confidential in formation (e.g. on the hazardous properties of 
the substance) would be made available to the public via the Agency's website.  The particular type of 
information was set out in Article 116 of the prop osal.  This was limited to information that was 
required for health, safety and environmental reasons.  
59. The Agency would ensure a harmonized enforcement among the EC member States, 
particularly in the evaluation stag e, and would ensure the decisions taken as a result of an evaluation 
in one member State were consistent with those th at had been taken in another member State.   
60. On the timing of the next notification to the TB T Committee, it was stated that the first major 
amendment to the proposal would be made followi ng the first reading of the European Parliament, 
whose completion was tentatively expected in the Autumn of 2005.  The Commission would then 
need some additional time to finalize an amendment,  and it would at that point update the current 
notification to the TBT Committee. 
61. It was stressed that it was difficult to draw up a list of substances to be subject to controls on 
the basis of existing knowledge.  Only by requiring  information on the properties of the substances 
which were not fully known, or on uses which were not fully known, would it be possible to 
understand whether the substances could pose any probl em.  The risk of drawing a list on the basis of 
the existing knowledge might be th at the substances for which more information was available might 
be penalized, whereas substances for which less inform ation was available could be considered safer.  
One purpose of the project was rather to raise the level of information on all substances.   
62. In reply to several comments on the possibility to  grant special and differential treatment to 
developing countries, it was stated that it was not yet possible for the European Communities to be 
specific about exactly how this would be done, since the legislation was still at a discussion stage.  
The agency, which would play a major role in the ma nagement of the legislation and a major role in 
capacity building exercises, had not been established yet, and it would not be established until some G/TBT/M/34 
Page 14  
 
months after the entry into force of the legisla tion.  They stressed that the European Communities 
would fully abide with all of the obligations under the TBT Agreement, would take all possible measures in order to be able to ensure sufficient technical assistance, capacity building and training. 
63. On the issue of prioritization in registration and on why the proposal had not been formulated 
on a more risk-based approach, it was explained that  the proposal was based on volume, which was an 
approximation of exposure, and hazard.   Nevertheless, a lot of other prioritization was foreseen in the 
proposal:  it included the lower requirements for in termediates, the exemption of polymers and the 
requirements for substances in articles not coming into force until 11 years and 3 months after the 
entry of force of REACH.  An advantage of a volume based system was that it provided legal 
certainty for companies to know when they had to regi ster their substance.  The period of 11 years and 
3 months for the provisions on substances in articles ha d been chosen on the basis of the need to have 
these requirements come in after the last registra tion date for substances themselves, so that the 
information that was gained during the registrati on of those substances could be used, and allowing 
3 additional months for importers and manufacturers to assess that information. 
64. Some Members had been concerned about the nomination by third country exporters of a 
single representative who would take over the duties of registration, and about the additional costs 
that this might imply.  In this respect it was noted that this was a voluntary requirement and was 
offered in order to help third country manuf acturers, who could chose to appoint a single 
representative, in order to avoid gi ving confidential information to importers.  The choice was theirs.  
65. On the questions raised by Canada as to whet her pulp cellulose and paper or waste paper were 
covered by REACH, it was stated that cellulose fi ber would be a chemical substance, and as such 
would be covered, except in the cases foreseen in A nnex III whereby they would be taken out if they 
were not chemically modified.  This meant that  cellulose would not normally be required to be 
registered, unless it had been chemically modified.  Pape r would be considered to be an article.  As far 
as waste was concerned, it was neither a substance, a preparation nor an article, so it would not have 
to be registered and was outside the scope of REAC H.  However, in the asse ssment that was done of 
chemical substances, the consequences for the waste stage of their life-cycle would need to be taken 
into account.   
66. In response to Canada’s questions about recogn ition of existing test data and accreditation of 
foreign test bodies, the representative of the Euro pean Communities noted that all existing data and 
other information that was not necessarily test data should be used to provide the information 
requirements and only as a last resort should new test data be generated.  Su ch test data could be 
generated anywhere in the world, so there was no need for any accreditation of any foreign test 
bodies.  To be used, data had to be fit for purpose,  and that all available data should be registered 
along with the precise requirement.   
67. It was stated that REACH was d esigned in such a way to be compatible with international 
conventions, such as the Stockholm Convention on Pers istent Organic Pollutants (POPs).  Finally, on 
the evaluation stage of REACH, it was stressed that the proposal made sure that certain parts of the 
evaluation were subject to strict deadlines.  This  was also valid in cases when member States were 
evaluating individual dossiers:  they would be requested to notify the start and the finish of their evaluation process to the Agency. 
(ii) Argentina:  MERCOSUR Regulation on Definitio ns Relating to Alcoholic Beverages Other 
than Fermented (G/TBT/N/ARG/159) 
68. The representative of Mexico
 raised concerns on the MERCOSUR technical regulation on 
definitions relating to alcoholic beverages,  that had been notified by Argentina in 
G/TBT/N/ARG/159, dated 16 April 2004.  His delegation had sent comments to the Argentina enquiry 
point, but he was unaware of whether these co mments had been taken up in the MERCOSUR  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 15 
 
 
Technical Sub-group 3, which was the body competent to analyze them.  Mexico wished to continue 
the dialogue with Argentina and the other MERCOSUR members.  It was noted that being MERCOSUR Members as well as WTO Members, the measure should have been notified also by 
Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay.   
69. The representative of the Dominican Republic, speaking also on behalf of
 Barbados, Trinidad 
and Tobago and Jamaica , was concerned by the negative impact which this draft technical regulation 
of MERCOSUR could have on trade in wine and spir its of Caribbean countries. Her concerns were 
related, in particular, to the characterization of  sugar cane based alcohols as well as simple alcohols, 
and to the reference in the regulation to rum as a totally or partially ferm ented beverage.  Comments 
had been submitted to Argentina both through th e Permanent Mission in Geneva, and to capital 
officials.  Her authorities would continue studying the issue and she hoped that MERCOSUR would 
address the concerns raised. 
70. The representative of the European Communities  reiterated comments submitted to Argentina 
on 18 June 2004.  He considered that the reply prov ided by Argentina, on 29 June 2004, had not been 
satisfactory and invited the Argentin ian delegation to take the concerns  into account and to provide a 
full written response. 
71. The representative of Barbados  endorsed the intervention made by the representative of the 
Dominican Republic.  She recalled that at the prev ious TBT meeting, on 1 July 2004 the delegations 
of the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Trinidad an d Tobago and Barbados had elaborated their 
concerns, relating, inter alia,  to the definition of alcoholic beve rages as contained in the technical 
regulation notified by Argentina.  These had also  been submitted in writing.  She reiterated her 
delegation's willingness to continue the dialogue between the respective technical experts.   
72.  The representative of Argentina  recalled that at the last meeting of the Committee, his 
delegation had stated that the competent aut horities were open to consider any comments and 
concerns expressed.  On that occasion, it had also been pointed out that these comments were going to 
be addressed at the MERCOSUR level, in the Technical  Sub-group 3.  He highlighted that this was a 
draft  regulation, and that any comments would be taken into account.  His country notified 
MERCOSUR regulations once they were incorporated  in the national legislation. He asked the 
EC representative to clarify what they had meant when stating that the responses received were not 
satisfactory.   
73. The representative of Brazil , in reply to the concern expressed  by Mexico, explained that  
Brazil had not notified the MERCOSUR draft resoluti on because it had not yet been incorporated into 
its national legislation.  It was necessary to amend the Brazilian Decree 4851 before this could be 
done.  Both the MERCOSUR draft regulation and the Brazilian Decree 4851 were being reviewed, 
and a notification would be submitted to the TB T Committee at the end of this process.   
74. The representative of Paraguay , as a Member of MERCOSUR, had taken due note of all the 
concerns raised, which would be conveyed to na tional authorities.  He pointed out that all 
WTO Members had the right to adopt regulations or measures  to protect health, security, safety and 
environment, and supported the statement made  by the representative of Argentina.   
75. The representative of Guatemala  stated that his authorities were  studying the draft regulation 
and might make comments in the future. 
(iii) Argentina:  Legal Appellation System  for Wine Products (G/TBT/N/ARG/107) 
76. The representative of the European Communities  reminded  the Argentinean delegation of the 
comments sent on 27 August 2004 on the legal designation system for wine notified by Argentina in 
G/TBT/N/ARG/107.  He raised concerns on th e labelling requirements, which would create G/TBT/M/34 
Page 16  
 
unnecessary barriers to trade, and on the misuse by Argentina of the geographical indications for 
Champagne and Cognac.  He invited Argentina to  provide written answers to these concerns.   
77. The representative of Argentina
 recalled that a preliminary response to some of the comments 
made had been provided to the European Communiti es; a copy of the replies sent on 4 October 2004 
had been given to the EC delegation.  His delegati on remained open to discuss the issue further and to 
provide additional information.   
(iv) European Communities:  Regulation on Certai n Wine Sector Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/15, 
Corr.1-2 and G/TBT/N/EEC/57) 
78. The representative of the United States  recalled that the Committee had been discussing the 
issue of the EC wine labelling regulations for so me years. On 23 August 2003, the United States had 
submitted extensive comments and questions to wh ich the European Commission had promised a 
written response, which had yet to be fulfilled.  Some plurilateral meetings, hosted by relevant 
Commission officials, had been held in October 2002 and in July 2003, prior to the submission of her country's written comments.  She expressed frust ration with the Commission's continued assertion 
that questions and concerns had been addressed at those meetings.  Her delegation was given the same 
response for the 24 questions that it had raised in the recent EC trade policy review.  If that was the 
case, why could the European Communities not provi de an explanation in writing?  Outstanding 
questions and ambiguities remained, which made it di fficult for suppliers to know how to comply.  
She believed that an explanation would seem to be in the Commission's interest if, as it had been 
stated, the purpose of the regulation was "to ensure that quality wine sector products are truthfully labelled".   
79. It was the understanding of the United States that two wine industry associations in two 
EC member States had developed publications in an  attempt to give guidance to their industries on 
how to comply with the regulations, and that th e information contained in these publications was 
conflicting.  It seemed that even European wi ne industries were experiencing difficulties with 
compliance.  She also understood that additional amendments to the regulations might have been 
made, but that these had not been notified.  Sh e urged the European Commission to provide a 
clarification and written explanation in res ponse to the questions and concerns raised. 
80. The representative of New Zealand
 joined the United States in raising concerns about the 
Wine Labelling Regulations  753/2002 and 316/2004.  She recalled that these concerns, both of a 
substantive and procedural nature, had been ra ised on a number of occasions. On substance, she 
considered that the limitation on the use of terms relating to vine varieties, production methods, and 
vintage to wines carrying a GI seemed to disreg ard fundamental TBT requirements as they could 
prevent accurate information from being conveyed to c onsumers.  On procedure, she recalled that her 
delegation had raised concerns that the notification and consultations (of 753/2002) had to be in line 
with TBT requirements.  New Zealand had welcomed the delays in implementation of the Regulation.  
However, she was surprised at the short time peri od between the publication and the notification of 
the amending Regulation (316/2004), on 24 Fe bruary 2004, and its implementation on 
15 March 2004.  This had not provided sufficient time for Members to make comments and for those 
comments to be taken into account, as per the obliga tion in Article 2.9 of the TBT Agreement.  The 
representative of New Zealand remained di sappointed that the amendments by the 
Regulation 316/2004 had not adequa tely addressed all the concerns expressed.  Nevertheless, she 
commended the European Communities for providing wr itten responses to recent questions raised in 
relation to the REACH Regulation an d reiterated her request that a wr itten response in relation to the 
Wine Labelling Regulations be provi ded to help to understand justification for the Regulations.   
81. The representative of Mexico  supported the comments made by previous speakers.  He 
believed that the Wine Regulations  should be treated by the European Communities with the same 
open attitude shown in relation to the REACH Regul ation.  Written responses to comments made, and  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 17 
 
 
detailed explanation of these Regula tions would be useful to be ab le to understand what the objective 
pursued was, and to determine that the Regulations  did not create unnecessary barriers to international 
trade. 
82. The representative of Australia  associated herself with the comments made by previous 
speakers.  She noticed the difference in appro ach between the explanation that the European 
Communities had provided on REACH and the lack of r esponses with regard to the wine regulation.  
She sought written responses to questions posed by her delegation. 
83. The representative of Uruguay  shared the concerns stated by previous speakers and stated that 
the amendment made to Regulation 753/2002 did not cover all the concerns expressed by his 
delegation.  He remained concerned about the impa ct that this regulation might have on trade.  
84. The representative of Argentina  was disappointed that the scope and coverage of 
Regulation 753/2002 had not been clarified.   
85. The representative of the European Communities  noted that legislation pursued a number of 
legitimate objectives, inter alia , the promotion of quality wines, and the protection of consumers' 
interests.  He pointed out that, where appropr iate, the European Communities had demonstrated, 
through amendments to wine labelling legislatio n adopted earlier in the year, its willingness to 
respond substantively to third countries' concerns.  A number of informal cons ultations had also been 
held with interested Members to clarify the legisl ation in question.  His delegation had taken note of 
the comments made, and would continue to reflect on these points. 
(v) Brazil:  Decree on Beverages and Spirits (G/TBT/N/BRA/135 and G/TBT/N/BRA/160) 
86. The representative of Barbados  recalled that, at the TBT Committee Meeting of 
7 November 2003, her delegation as well as the dele gations of the Dominica Republic, Jamaica, and 
Trinidad and Tobago had raised their concerns in relation to the Braz ilian Decree 4851, which 
contained amended definitions of rum, cachaza , aguardiente , and other spirit drinks.  They believed 
that the amendments proposed in Decree 4851 would have a significant adverse affect on the trade of 
the Caribbean WTO Members involved in the production and trade of rum. 
87. In subsequent written communications to th e Brazilian authorities in November 2003 and 
February 2004, as well as at the TBT meetings of March and July of 2004, Barbados and the other 
Caribbean delegations had raised the issue of De cree 4851 again, and had outlined in detail their 
queries and proposed amendments.  She thanked th e Brazilian authorities for a communication, sent 
on 22 October 2004, in which they had sought to respond to the concerns raised.  She sought 
additional clarification from Brazil, in particular with regards to the relationship between Decree 4851 
and a pending Decree which, in her understa nding, would revoke and replace Decree 4851.   
88. Furthermore, the representative of Barbados dr ew the Committee's attention to Brazil's new 
draft technical regulation outlining minimum quality requirements for spirituous beverages, notified 
in G/TBT/N/BRA/160, on 3 September 2004.  Her de legation, in conjunction with the governments of 
the Dominican Republic, Jamaica, and Trinidad  and Tobago on 13 October 2004 had submitted 
written comments to the Brazilian authorities on this ne w draft.  They had also requested that Brazil 
suspended the implementation of the new draft techni cal regulation for a reasonable interval, so that 
amendments accommodating the concerns raised c ould be made.  She believed that this new 
regulation in its current form would have significan t adverse affects on trade in distilled spirits on 
Caribbean rum producers.  Generally, her delegation's c oncerns were similar to those raised in relation 
to G/TBT/N/BRA/135.  More specifically on G/TBT/N/BRA/160, she sought clarification on:  
(i) why a definition for rum and other distilled spirit s had not been included in the new draft technical 
regulation;  (ii) the technical aspects in the new draft regulation concerning the distillation processes, G/TBT/M/34 
Page 18  
 
and the absence of language on fermentation;  and,  (iii) the content outlined in the new draft 
regulation on aged sugar cane.  
89. In the joint letter dated 13 October 2004, the four  delegations had also requested clarification 
on the relationship between Brazil's different techni cal regulations concerning definitions and quality 
requirements of spirituous beverages.  These di fferent regulations on sp irituous beverages would 
include Decree 4851, the new draft regulation notif ied in G/TBT/N/BRA/160, and the pending decree 
which might or might not replace Decree 4851. In addition, she mentioned the MERCOSUR's 
regulation on definitions relating to alcoholic be verages which had been notified by Argentina in 
G/TBT/N/ARG/159.  She reiterated her delegation's appreciation for Brazil's initial response to some 
of the concerns with regard to Decree 4851, and noted  that further clarification would be requested.  
Her delegation remained interested in continuing dialogue in all competent fora on the full range of 
regulations which concerned trade in distilled spirits. 
90. The representative of the Dominican Republic
 thanked Brazil for the replies to comments 
made in relation to G/TBT/N/BRA/135. She shar ed the concerns expressed by Barbados and 
reiterated her delegation's readiness to continue discussions on this matter at a technical level.  
91. The representative of the United States  recalled that she had raised concerns on the Brazilian 
Decree 4851 at past Committee meetings, and sh ared the comments made by Barbados, the 
Dominican Republic, Jamaica and Trinidad and T obago.  Her delegation would appreciate any 
updated information from Brazil. 
92. The representative of the European Communities  thanked Brazil for the reply to the 
comments made on both notifications G/TBT/N/BRA/135 and G/TBT/N/BRA/160.  However, there 
was no reply concerning the issue of definitions, and the differences between products as defined in 
Articles 91, 92 and 93 were not clear.  He reiterated  his delegation's concerns on compliance with the 
TRIPS Agreement, and invited Brazil to take these co ncerns into account and to provide answers.  He 
expressed his delegation's readiness to pursu e dialogue at a technical level.   
93. The representative of Brazil  thanked the delegations of Ba rbados, the Dominican Republic, 
Trinidad and Tobago, and Jama ica for the written comments received on G/TBT/BRA/160.  These 
comments, along with those of the European Commun ities, had been replied to in writing. A response 
to the US comments would be given in due time.  Sh e recalled that Members, in several interventions, 
had emphasized technical differences between thei r definition for spirits and the Brazilian one, 
arguing that they might impede trade.  She stressed that Article 34 of the Brazilian Decree 2314 of 1997 foresaw the possibility to import rum, and other alcoholic beverages, even though its 
composition differed from the Brazilian requirements if  a certificate was presen ted, stating that the 
product:  (i) had typical, regional and peculiar characte ristics from a country;  (ii) was in conformity 
with that country's legislation;  or (iii) was c onsumed regularly and its na me and composition were 
known in the region or country of origin.  Hence, th e aim of this Decree was not to impede trade.  
Moreover, she specified that G/TBT/N/BRA/160 had notified Ministerial Act number 59, whose 
objective was to lay down minimum quality requirements for cachaza  and aguardiente de cana .  
Therefore, while Decree 4851 was a comprehensive document containing bevera ge definitions and set 
out the general requirements, the Ministerial Act number 59 detailed tho se requirements.  She 
reiterated that any technical differences between th e dispositions laid down by Ministerial Act No. 59 
and those of other countries would not impede trade to Brazil.   
(vi) Korea:  Import of Fish Heads 
94. The representative of New Zealand 
once again raised concerns on th e issue of edible fish head 
imports by Korea.  She was concerned that duri ng recent bilateral discussions, Korea had informed 
New Zealand of its intention to continue to prohib it imports of fish heads from New Zealand, but that 
it would allow imports of fish heads from certa in other exporting countries.  She understood from  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 19 
 
 
discussions with the Korean authorities that they were concerned that opening the market to New 
Zealand hake heads would lead to requests fro m other hake-exporting nations for market access, 
which would in turn impact on Korea's domestic  industry.  Her delegation did not regard these 
concerns as a legitimate justification for the ban on hake head imports, whether considered in terms of 
GATT Article XI or under the relevant provisions of  the TBT Agreement.  While Korea allowed the 
importation of fish heads from certain species, it argued that these products and New Zealand hake 
head were not like-products, because the two species  were biologically different.  New Zealand did 
not accept that this was a legitimate distinction, partic ularly as a variety of edible fish heads, including 
hake heads, sourced from Korean fishing boats or from imported whole fish were consumed in 
Korean restaurants and homes on a daily basis. 
95. The representative of New Zealand  recalled that Korea had previously stated that it did not 
allow the importation of hake heads for human c onsumption because it regarded it as a waste product, 
and this despite the popularity of the product as a food item in Korea's domestic market.  She 
reiterated her assurance that hake heads for export to Korea could be prepared to an edible standard, 
and that her government could provide the appropria te sanitary assurances.  Her country considered 
that, provided the product was accompanied by offi cial certification giving assurance that the product 
was fit for human consumption, Korea ought to allow the importation of edible fish heads.  This was 
the practice with most other seafood products exporte d to Korea and would seem to be the least-trade 
restrictive measure available to address all legiti mate concerns.  She encouraged Korea to move 
quickly to meet its WTO obligations in this regard. 
96. The representative of the European Communities  shared the concerns expressed by 
New Zealand and thanked Korea for the bilateral di scussions underway.  He hoped that market access 
would be granted soon for these products.  
97. The representative of Norway  shared the concerns expressed by New Zealand, and recalled 
that his delegation had also raised the same issu e at previous meetings.  His country was holding a 
constructive dialogue with the Korean authorities and was of the view that a solution should be based 
on the MFN principle, in line with the provisions of the WTO Agreements. 
98. The representative of Korea  was fully aware of New Zealand's concerns and remained open to 
seeking a possible solution through bilateral consu ltations.  It was his understanding that the two 
parties had undertaken several consultations on this matter since the last meeting of the 
TBT Committee, and that there was still a different point of view on how to solve this issue in a 
mutually satisfactory manner.  He noted that this  issue would also be dealt with at the meeting 
between Korea and the Joint Committee on Econ omic Co-operation, which would be held on 
10 November.  He appreciated New Zealand's willin gness to provide appropriate sanitary assurance 
for Hake head.  In this regard, his country w as hoping that New Zealand would provide relevant 
information and data to the Korean authorities as s oon as possible, as it would facilitate the bi-lateral 
discussion.  He believed that the issue could be r esolved in a mutually satisfactory manner through 
consultations, and noted that fruitful cons ultation were also taking place with the 
European Communities and Norway. 
(vii) Switzerland:  Ordinance on the Emission Level  of Passenger Cars with Compression Ignition 
Engines (G/TBT/N/CHE/39) 
99. The representative of the European Communities  recalled that on 3 June 2004 it had 
submitted comments on G/TBT/N/CHE/39 regarding the determination of the particle number 
emission level of passenger cars with compression ign ition engines.  She reiterated the request to 
Switzerland to provide an answer to the comments sent. 
100. The representative of Switzerland  noted that her delegation had been hoping to be in a 
position to reply to comments made by the European Communities and the United States for the G/TBT/M/34 
Page 20  
 
current meeting.  However, the process of internal  decision concerning this draft was complicated, as 
it was the fruit of the work of an environmental group in the Parliament.  She explained that the 
proposal was being re-discussed on the basis of comments received and that a decision would probably not be taken before the spring of 2005;  she would inform the Committee of the result. 
(viii) United States:  Measure on Refillable Lighters 
101. The representative of the People's Republic of China
 reiterated her concerns regarding the 
US safety standard on lighters. She recalled that th e concerns expressed were related to the rationale 
for maintaining a relationship between product, pr ice and safety.  China had requested the United 
States to make a notification to the WTO in a ccordance with Article 1.6 and 2.9 of the TBT 
Agreement.  Her delegation had also questioned w hy the international standard ISO 9994 for lighters 
could not meet the objectives of the United States.  She stressed that Article 2.4 of the TBT 
Agreement requested Members to use the relevant international standard as a basis for technical 
regulations and recalled that in the EC-Trade Description of Sardines6, the Appellate Body had 
upheld the Panel's finding to the effect that Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement applied to measures that 
had been adopted before 1 January 1995, but which had not ceased to ex ist, and that Article 2.4 of the 
TBT Agreement applied to existing technical regul ations. She considered that, although bilateral 
discussion had taken place, China's concern had not been adequately addressed and therefore sought 
further clarification from the US delegation regardin g the link between price and safety for lighters.  
She also reiterated the request to the United States that it notify the measure to the WTO, providing a 
comment period for Members. 
102. The representative of the United States  believed that the record from the discussions at the 
last meeting was clear on her delegation's views on wh ether this proposal should have been notified.  
She recalled that it had been published for comments some time ago, and that there had not been a 
change to the regulation.  Substan tial information had been provided to China in this regard.  She was 
not yet in a position to respond to the question of wh ether the regulation could change in light of the 
recent adoption of an international standard a nd would come back to that in due course. 
(ix) New Zealand:  Ban on the Importation of Trout 
103. The representative of Canada  reverted to the issue of New Zealand's ban on trout imports.  
She recalled that, on 7 December 1998, New Zealand had passed an order in Council entitled  
Customs and Import Prohib ition (Trout) Order 1998 , which had passed a temporary ban on the 
commercial importation of trout.  In the meantime Ca nada had raised concerns on the trout ban with 
the New Zealand authorities, including at the Minister ial level, and also at previous meetings of the 
TBT Committee, including at the October 2001, March 2002 and July 2004 meetings.  Her country 
did not consider the ban to be scientifically jus tified and had never received, nor had been made 
aware, of any science-based evidence from New Zeala nd.  As such, she considered the ban to place 
New Zealand in a position of being inconsistent with  its trade obligations under the TBT Agreement.  
Her delegation was disappointed to learn that New Zealand had recently extended the ban for the fifth 
time, for another three years, until November 2007.  The representative of Ca nada urged New Zealand 
to immediately restore trade in trout. 
104. The representative of New Zealand  reminded the Canadian delegation of the background of 
this measure.  Trout fishing was an important recr eational sport in New Zealand, and the conservation 
of trout continued to be a subject of particular con cern.  For this reason, the Conservation Act of 1997, 
prohibited the purchase or sale of trout in New Zeala nd.  To ensure the effectiveness of the domestic 
sales ban, imports of trout in commercial quantities had been prohibited by successive customs orders.  
The New Zealand Government had decided to extend  the import ban through a new order in Council 
to ensure that the integrity of  the domestic sale prohibition was not  undermined.  Moreover, the new 
                                                      
6 WT/DS/231/AB/R.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 21 
 
 
order did not prohibit the importation of all trout in to New Zealand, but specifically provided for the 
importation of non-commercial quantities for personal consumption.  In this way, it ensured that both 
domestic and imported trout were s ubject to the same treatment.   
105. The representative of New Zealand  further stated that in exte nding the customs order, the 
Government had tasked officials to report back on a lternative measures to retain the unique status of 
trout well before the expiry of the temporary measur e in 2007.  This approach had been adopted as an 
indication of willingness to work together with tr ading partners to address this issue of mutual 
concern.  Her delegation did not ag ree with Canada's suggestion that the measure raised questions in 
relation to New Zealand's obligatio ns under the TBT Agreement.  The order was not discriminatory, 
nor protectionist;  it addressed legitimate obj ectives and was fully in accordance with trade 
obligations.  There were significant concerns that  the sale of trout, whether domestic or imported, 
would foster the poaching of the stock in New Zeal and.  This would undermine conservation of the 
stock and frustrate the legitimate objective that underpinned New Zealand's domestic conservation 
regime for trout. 
(x) Netherlands: "Vos" Bill on Wood Products (G/TBT/N/NLD/62)  
106. The representative of the United States  appreciated the Netherlands's early notification of the 
Vos Bill on the sustainable production of wood produc ts (G/TBT/N/NLD/62).  She noted that this 
proposal addressed a number of the US concerns, whic h had been raised in response to a previously 
notified amendment to the Environment Management Act, in 1998.7  However, she believed that 
additional changes might still be warranted to elim inate certain ambiguities and elements that could 
inappropriately restrict trade.  She recalled that, in response to the concerns raised at the last 
Committee meeting by Canada, the European Co mmunities had informed the Committee that the 
Dutch notification was under examination to assess its compatibility with Community law, and at that 
time no comments had been received from third countri es.  She noted that both the US Government 
and industry comments had since been submitted a nd looked forward to the European Communities' 
written response. 
107. The representative of the European Communities  informed the Committee that the draft 
Dutch regulation was still under examination by the European Commission and the member States to 
assess its compatibility with Community law.  The need to avoid the creation of unnecessary obstacles 
to trade was taken into account and, once this ev aluation was concluded, the European Communities 
would reply to the comments. 
(xi) United Arab Emirates:  Conformity A ssessment System and Halal Certification 
108. The representative of the United States  recalled that, at the previous meeting of the 
Committee, she had raised concerns on the functioni ng of the United Arab Emirates enquiry point and 
notification authority, and on the lack of notifica tions.  At the time, her delegation had been seeking 
information about a proposed conformity assessment  programme known as the Emirates Conformity 
Assessment System (ECAS), whose status was not known, nor the reasons why it had not been 
notified.  She informed the Committee that her dele gation had since held bilateral discussions and that 
it was her understanding that the programme would be a voluntary one, and as such there would be no 
reason to make a notification.   
(xii) Mexico:  Standard for Glazed Pottery Ware, Glazed Ceramic Ware and Porcelain Ware 
(G/TBT/N/MEX/69) 
109. The representative of the European Communities  reminded the Mexican delegation that on 
10 November 2003 comments had been s ubmitted on G/TBT/N/MEX/69 regarding gl azed pottery 
                                                      
7 See discussions on notification G/TBT/Notif. 98.448  in G/TBT/M/13, para. 5 (November 1998). G/TBT/M/34 
Page 22  
 
ware, glazed ceramic ware and porcelain ware.  She reiterated the request to Mexico to provide answers.  The concerns expressed were relate d, in particular, to the lead an d cadmium limits introduced by the 
notified draft measure regarding flat  ware, which were more stringent than those laid down in relevant 
ISO international standard s.  She sought clarificat ion on whether the Mexican authorities would accept 
the result of conformity assessment procedures of ceramic table wear produced in the European 
Communities in compliance with ISO standards.   
110. The representative of Mexico
 recalled that the European Communities had informed his 
delegation of their comments regarding the o fficial draft standard PROY-NOM-231-SSA1-2002.  
When the comments had been submitt ed, the comment period had already expired by one month.  The 
Health Secretariat had received these comments and an alysed them carefully.  However, since they 
had not been presented within the deadline for pub lic consultation under the Mexican legislation, 
there was no obligation to publish the responses in the Official Gazette.  The draft standard in 
question had taken into account, with some devia tions, the international standard to which the 
European delegation had referred.  These deviations  had been based on the special circumstances of 
Mexico, as allowed under the TBT Ag reement.  He invited the Eur opean Communities to consult the 
statement of regulatory impact, available on the website of the Economy Secretariat, to analyze the 
reasons for which Mexico required a greater level of protection than those offered by the international 
standards.  He highlighted that, with regard to  the possibility of accepti ng the conformity assessment 
results for ceramic produces in the European Union,  Article 6 of the TBT Agreement promoted the 
recognition of conformity assessment by central g overnment bodies and set out the procedure for such 
recognition.  He invited the European Communi ties to follow this procedure to obtain such 
recognition. 
(xiii) European Communities:  Tra ceability and Labelling of Biot ech Food and Feed Products 
(G/TBT/N/EEC/6-7 and Add.1-3;  G/TBT/N/EEC/53 and Add.1) 
111. The representative of Canada  recalled that at the July 2004 meeting, Canada had raised 
concerns regarding the European Communities tr aceability and labelling of biotech food and feed 
products (G/TBT/N/EEC/6-7 and Add.1-3; G/TBT/N/ EEC/53 and Add.1).  With respect to the GMO 
moratorium and authorizations, she remained scepti cal that the authorization process was functioning 
as intended.   In fact, despite positive scientific assessment, the decision to approve had not been 
made at the regulatory committee level, nor at the le vel of Council of Ministers, thereby forcing the 
Commission to authorize a product after 30 days.  Canada continued to monitor the pending canola 
applications, which were currently at various stages in the authorization process.  Canada considered 
that one authorization did not afford sufficient ev idence to imply that the European Communities was 
acting in full compliance with its oblig ations under the WTO Agreements.   
112. The representative of Canada believed that th e adopted regulations dealing with traceability 
and labelling were burdensome, and might creat e unnecessary barriers to trade.  Canada would 
continue to monitor their implementation, with th e objective that exported goods did not experience 
undue delays when imported into the European Comm unities.  She pointed out that the labelling and 
traceability measures were creating uncertainty fo r Canadian exporters, since the European 
Communities had failed to clarify how the regulations  would be applied.  She wondered how it could 
be possible for foreign suppliers, especially smalle r manufacturers of value added products, to know 
when they were in compliance with  the measures in the absence of clear guidance.  Canada noted the 
notifications of the Commission's recommendation regarding sampling and detection 
(G/TBT/N/EEC/53 and Add.1).  However, it rema ined unclear how the traceability and labelling 
requirements could be implemented effectively in the absence of segregation systems and of internationally accepted testing methodologies to validate the presence of GMOs. 
113. The representative of the United States
 supported the comments made by Canada.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 23 
 
 
114. The representative of the European Communities  recalled that the measures on traceability 
and labelling of GMOs were notified in G/TBT/N/EE C/6 and 7.  Addenda to these notifications had 
been provided in order to keep Members fully br iefed.  In addition, the European Commission had 
recently adopted a non-binding recommendation provi ding guidance on sampling and detection of 
GMOs that would be published shortly.  The Commission's proposal for this recommendation had 
been notified in G/TBT/N/EEC/53 and Add.1.  He stressed that the Europ ean Communities had, at 
every stage in the process, followed the highly tran sparent approach in-line with its international 
obligations. The legitimate objectives of the measur es, as explained on other occasions, were related, 
inter alia  to the protection of human, animal and plan t health or safety, and environmental and 
consumer protection.  These objectives had been pursu ed in the least trade restrictive manner.  He 
informed the Committee that, while the traceability and labelling regulation had been in force for over 
six months, no reports of major difficulties concerni ng the imports of GMOs and derived products had 
been brought to the EC's attention. 
C. OTHER MATTERS  
1. Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange (held on 2-3 November 2004) 
115. The Chairman  recalled that the Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange was 
held pursuant to the Committee's deci sion to convene, on a biennial b asis, regular meetings of persons 
responsible for information exchange, including  persons responsible fo r enquiry points and 
notifications.8  At the meeting, Members had had an opport unity to discuss, at a technical level, the 
activities and concerns relating to information excha nge in the context of the TBT Agreement, and to 
review the functioning of notification procedures an d enquiry points.  The di scussions had taken place 
in panel sessions and had focused on four key i ssues: the notification process, the handling of 
comments, the transparency obligations under the Code of Good Practice, and the functioning of enquiry points.  He highlighted three key cro ss-cutting aspects of transparency brought up by 
participants:  (i) the importance of internal coordina tion;  (ii) the increased and better use of electronic 
tools;  and (iii) the dissemination of information.   
116. Internal coordination  had been deemed as essential at all st ages of transparency procedures.  
The Chairman recalled that participants had em phasized the need to establish mechanisms and 
procedures to ensure lasting institutions whic h could help a better implementation of the 
TBT Agreement.  One example of such a mechanism was the creation of a "national TBT Committee" 
to oversee and coordinate the implementation of the TBT Agreement by various agencies.  The 
importance of good regulatory practice had also been linked to this discussion. 
117. The Chairman stressed that the use of electronic tools  was growing, also in developing 
countries. However, resource constraints and t echnological disparities between countries remained 
and capacity building in this regard needed to be improved.  He recalled that, in line with a 
recommendation of the Third Triennial Review
9, a proposal to develop a facility to fill in notifications 
on-line had been reiterated, in order to simplify a nd accelerate the notification procedure.  This would 
be complementary to other approaches currently in  use.  Moreover, the use of websites to share 
information related to specific notifications had been encouraged, for instance with regard to 
comments formulated on a particular notification.  Also, following presentations on existing databases on notifications (such as the "Documents Online" fa cility of the WTO Secretariat), the importance of 
using them to their full extent had been highlighted.  
118. The Chairman recalled the need for improving the dissemination of information .  One way of 
doing this was to  filter and sort the information contained in the notifications in order to better target 
it to the interests of the relevant national stake holders.  In this context, various web-enabled 
                                                     
 
8 The programme of the meeting is contained in document  G/TBT/GEN/13.  See also "Transparency Requirements and 
Procedures", Note by the Se cretariat, to be issued. 
9 G/TBT/13, paragraph 27. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 24  
 
applications put in place by national enquiry points had been presented.
10   Other alternative means of 
disseminating information, such as bulletins and p ublications, had also been mentioned.  The 
language barrier had again been seen as a major im pediment to the circulation and dissemination of 
information and, in this respect, some examples ha d been given of how translations were handled.  
For example, it had been suggested that resources be focused on the translation of essential 
information only and that enquiry points speaking the same language be encouraged to share the 
burden of translation.   
119. In conclusion, he believed that the work of enquiry points was essential to a better 
implementation not only of all transparency provisi ons, but also of the principles enshrined in the 
TBT Agreement in general.  He noted that enqui ry points enjoyed a unique position to act as focal 
points on trade barrier issues for all relevant stake holders;  this went beyond the simple role of 
information providers as foreseen in the TBT Agreemen t.  He stressed that this Special Meeting had 
particularly highlighted the close link between  transparency and the avoidance of unnecessary 
obstacles to trade.  The dissemination of TBT notif ications and other TBT -related information by 
enquiry points to national stakeholders was a first step towards the identifi cation and formulation of 
national positions and policies on TBT-related trad e issues, including the identification of specific 
trade concerns.  The need for technical assist ance and capacity building to assist Members in 
implementing their obligations under the TBT Agre ement, as well as the importance of cooperation 
between various enquiry points in different countri es, had been recognized in this context.  He 
recalled that a proposal had been made to cr eate a webpage on the WTO website containing 
information on, and contact details of, all TBT enqui ry points.  A summary report would be included 
in the minutes of the present meeting.11 
120. The representative of Canada  drew the Committee's attention to the Third Triennial Review 
Recommendation contained in paragraph 27 of G/TB T/13 (first tiret) and recalled that Canada had 
made this proposal.  The idea was to offer Members an alternative to the way in which they currently 
submitted notifications, by creating an electronic no tification form which c ould be added on to the 
WTO website, filled in on-line and automatically  sent to the CRN.  The notification would be 
received by the Secretariat, scanned to ensure its completeness and accuracy and then forwarded 
through the usual channels.  While recognizing that  not all Members might be in a position to take 
advantage of an e-form, this was an attempt to maximize the amount of time to make comments on other Members' notifications.  The representative of  Canada proposed that the Secretariat could look 
into the feasibility of setting up such  a facility.  The Committee so agreed
.  
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW 
A. ISSUES ARISING FROM THE THIRD TRIENNIAL REVIEW  
1. Good Regulatory Practice 
121. The Chairman  said that the discussion in the TBT Committee at its last meeting had provided 
a good starting-point to the identification of elements of good regulatory practice at the domestic 
level, which was the subject of the first of the three relevant recommendations contained in 
paragraph 14 of the Third Triennial Review (G /TBT/13).  He recalled that several Members, 
including Colombia and Mexico, had shared their na tional experience in this area.  The representative 
of Chile had also informed the Committee about  a Seminar on Good Regulatory Practice held by 
APEC and OECD.  A number of elements of good re gulatory practice had been mentioned during this 
discussion, such as transparency, harmonization, equivalence, regulatory impact assessment, 
consensus, representation and non-duplication. 
                                                      
10 These included "Export Alert!" in Canada, "Alerta Exportador" in Brazil, "Notificanorm" in Mexico. 
11 See Annex 2 on page 38.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 25 
 
 
122. The representative of Mexico  drew attention to the submission in document G/TBT/W/248 
which identified some of the elements involved in g ood practices used in his country.  In particular, 
the document set out seven disciplines of good practi ces that had been identified and three examples 
of measures which had helped toward s better regulation in Mexico.   
123. The representative of Chile  recalled that her country had hos ted the APEC Workshop in 2004, 
and, in that context, seminars on competition policy and regulation had been held.  She explained that 
this was part of an APEC-OECD initiative whic h was initiated in 2000.  She drew the Committee’s 
attention to Job(04)/163 in which Chile had summa rized the main aspects of the APEC OECD co-
operation. A checklist of regulatory reform had al so been distributed (circulated as a Room 
Document).  In September 2004, a conference on go od practice, standards and conformity assessment 
had been held in the framework of APEC.  It ha d dealt, among other things, with issues related to 
coordination and infrastructure. 
124. The representative of OECD  introduced relevant work on good regulatory practice and 
market openness in the OECD.12  He recalled that the OECD had been working on trade-related 
regulatory reform since the mid 1990s.  The starting poi nt of the work had been the recognition of the 
importance of good regulatory practice at the nationa l level, and the objective had become to develop 
a conceptual framework for reviewing national expe riences with good regulatory practice.  To refine 
the understanding of good regulatory practice, country  peer reviews of regulatory reform had been 
undertaken. Some 20 OECD countries had been revi ewed and some non-Member countries, such as 
Russia, were being reviewed as well.  
125. He noted that the OECD had been cooperating w ith APEC in a series of discussions focusing 
on country experiences, and had partic ipated in the development of an integrated checklist, which was 
designed for self assessment of good regulatory practice.  The checklist would be adopted formally by OECD and APEC in 2005.  The OECD conceptual framework was based on six principles of efficient 
regulation, considered as key for assessing market openn ess implications of regulatory practice.  He 
explained that these were similar to the principles that APEC and other bodies had identified and that, 
conceptually, they underpinned WTO principles, especially those of the TBT Agreement.  These 
were: transparency, non-discrim ination, avoidance of unnecessary trade-restrictiveness, use of 
internationally harmonized measures, streamlining conformity assessment procedures and integration 
of competition principles into regulatory approaches.  
126. In his view, five interrelated issues seemed to be pa rticularly relevant to the field of standards, 
technical regulations and conformity assessment.  The first was the choice of instruments for 
achieving regulatory objectives in a trade-friendly e nvironment, which had been discussed to some 
extent in the TBT Committee as mandatory versus vol untary measures.  He pointed out that there had 
been a general move away from mandatory measur es towards voluntary, indu stry-led standards and 
related conformity assessment procedures.  This te ndency was based on the realization that voluntary 
standards, being market driven, were more economi cally efficient, took less time to elaborate and 
offered more flexibility in implementation.  He noted  that an exception to this trend could be seen for 
certain consumer products which presented health a nd safety risks, or which might be characterized 
by information asymmetries.  
127. The second issue was related to transparency mechanisms.  He  stressed the importance of 
having the necessary information readily availabl e, and of ensuring the predictability of the 
procedures used for elaborating and implementing st andards, technical regulations and conformity 
assessment procedures.  The effec tive use of public consultation in the development of standards and 
technical regulations, and the existence of codified  procedures, open to all stakeholders, with well 
timed opportunities for public comment, were particularly  important is this regard.  He also stressed 
                                                     
 
12 Reference was made to the OECD document "Integrating Mark et Openness into the Regulatory Process: Emerging Patterns in 
OECD Countries", TD/TC/WP(2002)25/FINAL, 17 February 2003. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 26  
 
the need for regulatory coordination between centr al and sub-central authorities, and with non-
governmental parties, in order to strengthen the regulatory quality by involving technical expertise. 
128. The third issue was related to the use of regul atory impact assessment mechanisms (RIAs).  
He noted that many countries relied on RIAs to im prove regulatory quality, although often these were 
not formulated specifically in terms of market access or market openness considerations.  Some 
countries, however, explicitly subjected proposed technical measures to transparent RIAs, involving 
analysis of the problems, identification of alternativ e solutions, analysis of costs and benefits of these 
solutions including with respect to trade, and assess ment of feasibility of enforcement mechanisms.   
129. The fourth issue was related to equivalency.  He emphasized that there were often significant 
difficulties in accepting equivalency and that a high level of regulatory confidence underlying 
systemic compatibility was needed.  The most  common approaches for recognizing equivalence 
included unilateral recognition, when regulatory sy stems were already broadly complementary, and 
regional recognition in cases where there was regulat ory confidence and systemic compatibility.  
Cross-border regulatory co-operation had been used  in a number of cases where work had been 
undertaken to enhance understanding of national syst ems in various areas.  Finally, he stressed that 
government-business dialogue could promote greater understanding and acceptance of equivalence.   
130. In relation to streamlining conformity assessment procedures, he stressed that duplicative or 
unduly restrictive procedures should be avoided.  A ttempts to do this had come through unilateral 
recognition or through mutual recognition, of whic h several forms existed, such as government to 
government agreements.  He noted that these were often resource intensive and seemed to work best 
in sectors that were already closely integrated.  Agreements among private certification bodies could 
also be useful, entailing recognition of accreditation of  private bodies in other countries.  He pointed 
out that supplier's declaration of conformity (SDo C) was sometimes viewed as  promising due to the 
flexibility that it entailed, but it required professional integrity and an operative system of product liability and market surveillance.  He emphasize d that these emerging findings were still to be 
considered as work in progress, and hoped to co ntinue sharing experience and further findings with 
the TBT Committee in this area. 
131. In summing up, the Chairman
 noted that the discussion on good regulatory practice had 
concentrated on the first of the three recommenda tions from the Third Triennial Review, which was 
the exchange of national experiences. He re called that paragraph 14 contained two further 
recommendations.  The first was to continue th e exchanges on Members' experiences and to hold 
focused discussions on (i) the choice of policy in struments and the decision as to whether to use 
mandatory versus voluntary measures; and (ii) the use of regulatory impact assessments to facilitate 
good regulatory practice.  Second, the Committee was to initiate a process of sharing experiences on 
equivalency, and particul arly with regard to how  the concept was implemented in practice.  He 
encouraged Members to come forward at the next meeting with submissions on these elements or on any additional elements of good regulatory practice. 
2. Transparency Procedures 
132. The Chairman
 noted that wide-ranging discussions had been held on the issues covered by the 
recommendations of the Third Triennial Review.  For instance, recommendations relating to the 
handling of comments or concerning the electronic tr ansmission of information had been at the centre 
of the discussion in the Special Meeting on Pr ocedures for Information Exchange held on 
2-3 November 2004 (Annex 2).  He drew attention to the proposal made by Canada on the creation of 
an electronic notification form (paragraph 120, above).  He invited Members to share their views on 
any additional issue the Committee mi ght discuss in respect of transp arency procedures in the follow-
up to the Third Triennial Review.   G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 27 
 
 
3. Conformity Assessment 
133. The Chairman  recalled that in Paragraph 40 of the Third Triennial Review (G/TBT/13), the 
Committee had agreed on a Work Programme inte nded to improve Members' implementation of 
Articles 5-9 of the Agreement and promote a better understanding of Members’ conformity 
assessment systems.   
(a) SDoC 
134. The Chairman   drew the attention of the Committe e to the recommendation agreed at the 
Third Triennial Review "to exchange informa tion and experiences and hold a workshop on SDoC 
covering issues such as:  the regulatory authorit ies, sectors and suppliers which use SDoC;  the 
surveillance mechanism, liability law and penalties used to ensure that products comply with 
requirements;  the incentives for suppliers to comp ly with requirements; and the legislation that 
underpins the relationship between buyers a nd sellers" (G/TBT/13, paragraph 40).  
135. He noted that, with respect to the exchange of information and experiences on SDoC, Brazil, 
Chinese Taipei, the European Comm unities, New Zealand and Australia had shared their experiences 
in implementing SDoC programmes.  Members ha d discussed issues such as the appropriateness of 
SDoC in view of the nature of the risks involve d; the importance of market surveillance and product 
liability laws; and the reduction of compliance costs.   He also recalled that the Committee had decided 
to hold the SDoC Workshop on 21 March 200 5, back-to-back with its regular meeting.13  He informed 
the Committee that the activity had been included in the 2005 Technical Assistance and Training Plan 
to secure funding for the particip ation of capital-based officials from developing country Members.  
The programme for the workshop would be issued in early 2005.  He encouraged Members, especially 
developing countries Members, to come forward with proposals for case studies to be presented at this 
event.  
(b) Accreditation Fora 
136. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to th e recommendations agreed in the Third 
Triennial Review to "exchange information and experiences on the participation of Members in 
national, regional and inte rnational accreditation schemes" and to "invite representatives from relevant 
international and regional accreditation fora to provide information on their operation and the 
participation of Members, in par ticular, developing country Members, in their systems" (G/TBT/13, 
paragraph 40).   
137. He recalled that at the previous meeting, the International Laboratory Accreditation Co-
operation (ILAC), the International Accreditati on Forum (IAF), the European Co-operation for 
Accreditation (EA) had made presentations on the opera tion of these fora, and on the participation of 
Members, in particular, developing country Members, in their activities.  The Committee had also heard a presentation on the new ISO Standard for accreditation (ISO/IEC 17011).  The Chairman noted that the recommendation of the Third Triennial Review stated that "users, such as certification 
bodies, should also be invited to share their experien ces in this respect".  He suggested that a number 
of "users" could be called upon to give input in this  respect, for instance in the context of the future 
workshop on approaches to conformity  assessment (see paragraph 139 below). 
(c) Other Issues related to Conformity Assessment  
138. The Chairman
 recalled that the Committee had also agreed "to exchange information and 
experiences on existing conformity assessment pro cedures and practices, the use of relevant 
international standards, guides and recommendations".  He noted that valuable information had been 
                                                      
13 G/TBT/M/32, paragraph 86.   G/TBT/M/34 
Page 28  
 
provided to the Committee at the previous meeting by the presentations of Jordan and the European 
Communities, and by reports on the work of the BIPM, the IEC, the OECD, and the OIML.   
139. At the Third Triennial Review, Members had also  agreed to hold a workshop on the different 
approaches to conformity assessment, including the acceptance of conformity assessment results 
(G/TBT/13, paragraph 40).  He informed the Co mmittee that the Secretariat would suggest the 
inclusion of this workshop in the 2006 TA Plan at the time of its preparation. Finally, in accordance 
with Paragraph 41 of the Review, progress made on the Work Programme on conformity assessment was reflected in the Committee's Annual (2004)  Report to the Council for Trade in Goods.
14 
4. Technical assistance 
140. The Chairman  recalled that at the Third Triennial Review the Committee had agreed to 
consider the creation of an information coordina tion mechanism, including the possible development 
of voluntary notification procedures (G/TBT/13, paragraph 54).  Key to such a mechanism would be the communication of current and forward looking information.  Members had also noted that aside from the five specific proposals
15 addressing the creation of such a mechanism (both with respect to 
the internet facility and the management approach ) many other proposals made in the run-up to the 
Triennial Review remained on the table, in cluding the numerous responses to the survey 
questionnaire.16 At the July 2004 meetings, the Comm ittee had also heard presentations on the 
WTO/OECD Trade and Capacity Building Database and the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) in the SPS context.  As a way of  advancing the debate, he proposed to produce an 
"issues and options paper" which would seek to facilit ate further discussions and to find possible ways 
forward for the Committee.  This paper would take  into account the discussion and submissions made 
to date on technical assistance to the TBT Committee. 
141. The representative of Switzerland
 made two specific proposals.  First, he suggested to add 
value to the OECD/WTO Database by including a more qualitative assessment of the information 
contained therein.  He recalled that work had al ready been done by the Secretariat when doing the 
survey (referred to by the Chairman in the paragr aph above) and that other agencies, such as UNIDO, 
had also analyzed this information.   This work could be used in analyzing the data contained in the 
OECD database.  Second, he proposed to build on  the information contained in the survey;  the 
information contained in the OECD database could be analyzed to match th e needs expressed in the 
replies to the survey questionnaire and related to th e areas that had been identi fied by the Secretariat 
in its analysis of the replies to the survey.  That  information could also be linked to the progress of 
implementation of the TBT Agreement.  A website system with three components could be set up:  
(i) the needs reflected in the repli es of the survey questionnaire;  (ii) the technical assistance provided 
which was reported to the OECD/WTO database;  and,  (iii) information related to the implementation 
of the Agreement, taken from Trade Policy Revi ews and the work done by the Committee.   
142. The representative of Brazil  stressed that his delegation attached great importance to the 
Committee's mandate in this area and was concerned th at, in the last few meetings, not much progress 
had been made.  His delegation was flexible with respect to their own proposal (G/TBT/W/232) and 
was willing to engage in an excha nge of views with other Members to move the process forward.  He 
believed that a mechanism could be set up at minima l cost and that any duplication with the work 
done in other international orga nizations had to be avoided.  He noted that flexibility and 
predictability in the activities on technical coopera tion and technical assistance was needed;  these 
tended to be scattered and provided  by many different organizations .  This could be assembled in a 
                                                      
14 G/L/710, 8 November 2004, para. 3. 
15 New Zealand (G/TBT/W/212 and 216, 27 and 30 June 2003), Egypt (G/TBT/W/225, 14 July 2003), Canada and New Zealand 
(G/TBT/W/233, 20 October 2003) and Brazil (G/TBT/W/232, 21 October 2003). 
16 The questionnaire is contained in G/TBT/W/178;  a compilation of  responses in G/TBT/W/186 and Add.1;  and, an analysis of 
the priorities identified is contained in G/TBT/W/193.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 29 
 
 
simple website and users could be  provided with a mechanism so that they could find the best 
alternative to have their needs and specific concerns addressed.   
143. The representative of Egypt  supported the proposal to produce an "issues and options paper".  
He recalled that the recommendations in paragraph 54 of the Third Triennial Review were based on 
the proposals made by Canada and New Zealand on th e establishment of an internet facility, and on a 
proposal to have a management tool, as suggested by Egypt (G/TBT/W/225) and Brazil.  He noted 
that the discussions in the Committee had mainly fo cused on the internet facility.  This should not 
duplicate activities from other relevant organizations, and the costs associated with the creation of such a mechanism needed to be taken into account.  The product should be user friendly, especially 
for developing countries.  He believed that the second component of the recommendation, relating to 
the management tool, had not had an equal degree of  attention. He invited Members to provide their 
comments in a constructive manner on how to put in  place such a management tool and make it 
operational.   
5. Other Elements 
144. No issues were raised under the item. 
B. P
REPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW  
145. The Chairman  recalled that at its March 2004 meeting, the Committee had ag reed that, before 
the end of 2004, the Chairperson would develop a pr ocedural work programme for the preparation of 
the Fourth Triennial Review.17  In the Committee's subsequent discussions of the draft work 
programme it was stressed that:  (i) the duration of the three stages set out in the work programme 
should be seen as flexible;  (ii) it would be po ssible for the Committee to  revert to issues and 
submissions discussed on previous occasions;  and, (iii) at its first meeting in 2006, the Committee 
might need to continue its discussion of topics identified for review, and not only focus on the stocktaking exercise.  Taking into acco unt these points, the Committee endorsed
 the work programme 
contained in Annex 1 to this document (page 36). 
IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION 
146. The representative of the European Communities  noted that its submission contained in 
G/TBT/W/244 was made in response to one of the recommendations from the Third Triennial Review, contained in paragraph 54, which inv ited Members to communicate to the Committee 
information regarding technical assistance activities.  He  noted that this was the fourth time that such 
information had been submitted;  the informa tion was not only related to projects from the 
Commission, but also to projects funded by member  States.  All projects listed were on-going, some 
were of a "framework type", and di d not only cover TBT-related work.   
147. The representative of Switzerland
 explained that its submi ssion contained in G/TBT/W/247 
described the overall approach of Switzerland in th e field of standards, and went beyond purely TBT-
related issues, to include, for inst ance, SPS measures. The paper was di vided into five main chapters: 
the first dealt with the strategic orientations, the second with the general approach, the third described 
the main measures, the fourth was about lessons learned and the last chapter presented the projects 
which were on-going.  These had been divided into  four main categories:  (i) strengthening 
institutional infrastructure;  (ii) promoting bette r participation in international standard-setting 
organizations;  (iii)  facilitation and compliance of quality standards for market access;  and, 
(iv) promoting organic production and fair trade in the Swiss market.   
                                                      
17 G/TBT/M/32, paras. 111-115. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 30  
 
148. The representative of Mozambique
 thanked the European Communities and Switzerland for 
the support given to Mozambique.  She noted that some information contained in their respective 
papers regarding the assistance provided to her countr y in the past few years was not accurate.  She 
stressed that assistance was much needed in order to implement a quality policy.  The Chairman  
suggested that Mozambique clarify the issues with the European Communities and Switzerland 
bilaterally.   
149. The representative of the ISO  informed the Committee that the  ISO Strategic Plan for the 
period 2005-2010 had been adopted at the General Assembly of the ISO in 2004 (G/TBT/GEN/14).  
He pointed out that the ISO had also completed its Code of Ethics, which put together a number of 
statutory rules and principles implemented in th e development of standards and international 
standards.  The action plan for developing countri es was based on surveys and consultations with ISO 
members, and also on collaboration with WTO and other international organizations to identify the 
needs in this area.  It was intended for ISO members and for regional and sub-regional organizations who were involved in standardization, and it was directed to international, regional and national 
funding agencies.  He noted that the ISO itself was not a funding agency;  funds received from ISO 
members were used to initiate some actions, su ch as workshops and assisting participation in 
international standardization activities.  The plan was based on five major objectives:  (i) to improve 
awareness;  (ii) to build capacity of ISO members to take part and devel op standardization activities 
and infrastructure;  (iii) to increase regional and nationa l co-operation;  (iv) the use of IT tools;  and 
(v) to involve developing countries in the technical  activities, for instance through arrangements such 
as twinning.   
150. The representative of the IEC
 reported to the Committee on the functioning of the IEC 
Affiliate Country Programme, launche d in June 2001.  He stressed that the Programme facilitated the 
participation of developing  countries in the elaboration of intern ational electrotechnical standards, and 
encouraged their use as a basis for national standards.  It was unique in that it gave those individuals 
responsible for standardization activities the tools a nd abilities to get fully involved.  He underlined 
that the Programme had a number of benefits, includi ng:  (i) access rights to technical  work programs 
and working documents (including draft standards)  selected according to th e needs of the country 
concerned;  (ii) a basic library of standards in elect ronic format;  (iii) a facilitated adoption procedure;  
(iv) the potential for participation in one of the three IEC conformity assessment schemes.  He noted 
that there was no participation fee.  The leader of  the Affiliate Country Programme, Mr. Mesai Girma, 
the Director General of the Quality and Standa rds Authority of Ethiopia, had been active in 
representing the collective voice of the Affiliates in the IEC management bodies, and had been able to 
secure the commitment for assistance from the IE C schemes to provide a dedicated guidance 
document aimed at helping the Affiliates understand better how to use and participate in the IEC's 
global conformity assessment schemes.  Currently, 67 countries were participating in the Programme;  
an Affiliate country had become a full IEC Member  (currently 63 members).  Countries were starting 
to adopt IEC international standards, either usi ng the catalogue notification processes as specified in 
the ISO/IEC Guide 21 or making use of the fac ilitating process established to support the Affiliate 
Country Programme, which facilitated republication of the IEC International Standards as National 
Standards.  The IEC had also started to receive the first comments from Affiliates on standards under development.   
151. The representative of the OIML
 informed the Committee that the OIML had held, in 
conjunction with its 12th International Legal Metrology Conf erence, a Forum called "Metrology - 
Trade Facilitator".  The aim of the new event was to find out the needs of developing countries in 
terms of metrology and to analyse what was ava ilable from national, regional or international donors 
in this field.  The event also emphasized the im portance of metrology as a part of a package of 
measures which formed the technical structure to conformity assessment.  The Forum was attended by 
both Members and non-Members of the OIML, and to ok the format of round table discussions.  He 
noted that from the beginning of November 2004, all OIML publications were available free of charge  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 31 
 
 
on the OIML website in electronic format, and th at paper versions of these documents would no 
longer be produced.  
152. The representative of the ITC  drew the Committee's attention to two recent national 
workshops on the TBT Agreement, which had b een conducted in Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic, on 
21-22 October 2004 and in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, on 25-26 October, resp ectively.  He explained that 
these workshops were aimed at a better preparation by the business sector to trade successfully under 
the terms of the TBT Agreement and at a better unders tanding of the potential benefits associated with 
its implementation.  The objective was to facilita te a more effective national strategy in the 
multilateral trading system, through a better private sect or participation in the formulation of national 
trade policy, in particular in the field of standa rds, technical regulations and conformity assessment 
procedures.  These workshops were funded by SECO (the State Secretariat for Economic Affairs of 
Switzerland).   
153. The representative of Japan  thanked the representatives from the ISO and the IEC for their 
update.  He appreciated the five year action plan of the ISO and the existing IEC efforts for the participation of developing countries to ISO and IEC community.  He believed that the Affiliate 
Country Progamme was helpful in enabling developing countries to take an active part in the 
development process of international standards, and also in encouraging them to use international 
standards in their technical regula tion field.  He stressed the impor tance of developing countries' 
active involvement in the international standard de veloping process, as it woul d also help them to 
implement the TBT Agreement.  
154. The representative of the Secretariat
 reported on the five categories of TBT–related technical 
assistance activities that the Secr etariat had been engaged in 2004, and foreseen for 2005.18  S h e  
recalled that the purpose of the Secretariat's tec hnical assistance activities was to assist beneficiary 
countries in their understanding of the main disciplin es and rules of the TBT Agreement, and also to 
update capital-based officials on the issues currently  taken up in the TBT Committee.  The programs 
and presentations for these activities were constructe d to meet and respond to national or regional 
interests including any specific trade concerns.  They were adapted to take into account the level of 
awareness of the participants.   
155. The Secretariat stressed communication of information from Members themselves was an 
invaluable input to workshops and efforts were made to ensure that  participants discussed cases based 
on country experiences.  In 2004, the substance of  the workshop programs had been enhanced by the 
presentation made by TBT Members themselves. The representative of the Secretariat thanked 
Mrs. Danielle Shonte Avenel from Mexico, Mrs.  Annalina Comboim from Brazil, Mr. George Opoyo 
from Uganda and Mr. N'dungu Evanson from Kenya – w ho had also served as panellists at the Special 
Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange – for their inputs and presentations at the regional 
workshops for Central and Latin America, and for East Africa and other COMESA Members, 
respectively.    
156. Looking ahead, in 2005 the intention was to give  weight to some of the other issues arising 
from the Third Triennial Review, for instance on the work programme on conformity assessment 
procedures.  As for the mode of delivery, in sch eduling the workshops, coordination was sought with 
the SPS team in the Secretariat, to organize TBT events back-to-back with SPS ones, especially in 
national workshops.  The Secretariat would organi ze, where possible, national workshops back to 
back with regional ones.19  The 2005 technical assistance activiti es were still subject to formal 
approval by the Committee on Trade and Developmen t of the 2005 Technical Assistance and Training 
Plan.20 
                                                      
18 This information will be included in the Annual Review to be issued ahead of the next TBT Committee meeting. 
19 The TBT web page on technical assistance included informa tion on the Secretariat's past and future TA activities. 
20 Subsequently adopted and circulated as  WT/COMTD/W/133/Rev.2 on 16 December 2004. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 32  
 
V. OBSERVERS 
A. R
EQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS  
157. On the issue of requests for observer status, the Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to 
document G/TBT/GEN/2, which set out the situation with respect to observership by intergovernmental organizations in the Committee.   There were still four organizations whose 
requests for observer status were pending:  the Office International de la Vigne et du Vin  (OIV), the 
Bureau International des Poids et Mesures  (BIPM), the Gulf Organiza tion for Industrial Consulting 
(GOIC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity ( CBD).  He noted that consultations were still 
needed on the issue of observership at the General Council level.  
B. U
PDATING BY OBSERVERS  
158. The representative of Codex  explained that, in addition to the summary of the recent Codex 
activities presented in G/TBT/GEN/12, more info rmation, especially on the results on the 27th session 
of the Codex Alimentarius Commission could be obtained on the website of the Codex.21   
159. The representative of UNCTAD  informed the Committee that, in the context of the UK -
DFID funded project on "Building Capacity fo r Improving Policy Making and Negotiations on Key 
Trade and Environment issues", UNCTAD had organized a technical meeting in Costa Rica on 
17-18 August 2004, to discuss progress on draft case studies on environmental requirements and their impact on exports of selected agricultural products in 8 countries in Central America, Cuba and the Dominican Republic.  These studies would be discussed  in a regional workshop scheduled to take 
place at the beginning of 2005.  A sub-regional wo rkshop on environmental requirements, market 
access and export competiveness for the agricultural  sector had been held in Thailand, from 
29 September to 1 October 2004.  The discussions had taken place in the form of case studies 
prepared by national experts from participating countries, and the EUROPGAP Secretariat was among 
the private sector representatives.  The sub-regiona l workshop had then been followed by a national 
training workshop on the same subject for Ba ngladesh on 4-5 October 2004.  These Workshops 
articulated concerns on the treatment of tropical fruit and vegetables in recent and upcoming 
pesticides regulations on maximum residue levels in  various developed countries.  Recommendations 
had been made that interested developing countri es might develop national or sub-regional codes of 
good agricultural practice for agriculture exports that were benchmarked to key codes in export 
markets, such as EUROPEGAP.   
160. On 28-29 October, the Foundation for Intern ational Environmental Law and Development 
(FIELD), in cooperation with the UNCTAD Secr etariat, had held a workshop on consultative 
processes and impact assessment related to the pr oposed EC Regulation "REA CH", involving experts 
from the European Commission, European indus try, NGO's and the key chemical exporting 
developing countries, including Brazil, China, Costa Rica, India, the Philippines, and Thailand.  He explained that a large number of experts from vari ous Directorates of the European Commission had 
provided clarification of actual or potential impa ct of REACH on developing country exports of 
chemicals and downstream products.  The meeting ha d also provided an opportunity to exchange 
views on developing countries' concerns on the regist ration and evaluation requirements of REACH.   
161. He informed the Committee that the first s ubstantive meeting of UNCTAD’s Consultative 
Task Force on Environmental Requirements and Market Access would take place on 5-6 November 2004.  Finally, he informed Member s that the third meeting of the joint UNCTAD/ 
FAO/IFOAM International Task Force on Harmoniza tion and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture 
was scheduled to take place in Rome, from 17-19 November. 
                                                     
 
21 The report of this meeting is contained in the Codex document ALINORM 04/27/41.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 33 
 
 
162. The representative of the United States  recalled that, at the last meeting, UNCTAD had 
circulated a paper on the meeting held in Rio de Janeiro, and since then a more detailed report had 
been obtained.  She noticed that the meeting had also included private sector participation, and she 
thought that there seemed to be some confusion and potential misunderstanding with respect to the 
coverage of the TBT Agreement, for example on the definitions of standards and technical 
regulations, on the publication of dr afts versus publication of work programs and on the role of 
enquiry points.  She encouraged coordination between the participants in UNCTAD work and 
government representatives in the TBT Committee.   
VI. ANNUAL TRANSITIONAL REVIEW (TRM) MANDATED IN PARAGRAPH 18 OF 
THE PROTOCOL OF ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA 
163. The Chairman  recalled that Paragraph 18 of the Pr otocol of Accession of the People's 
Republic of China (WT/L/432) put in place a "Trans itional Review Mechanism".   Accordingly, he 
drew attention to documents by the European Communities  (G/TBT/W/242), Japan (G/TBT/W/243) 
and the United States (G/TBT/W/245) containing questi ons put to China in this respect.  He also 
noted that China had submitted a paper providing inform ation relating to Annex 1A of its Protocol of 
Accession (G/TBT/W/246). 
164. The representative of the People's Republic of China  stressed that enormous efforts and 
substantial progress had been made by his country w ith respect to the notification of TBT measures 
and regulations.  He pointed out that 18 TBT notif ications had been made to the Committee in 2004. 
With regard to some of the notifications where it had been claimed that they did not provide enough time for public comments, he emphasized that these measures were notified as emergency measures. 
He stressed that with many WTO Members, includi ng China, the regulation and administration of the 
TBT-related measures involved many different gov ernment authorities and that, in addition, TBT 
measures were highly technical.  According to the st atistics of TBT notifications collected by China, 
there was still much room for improvement in  some developed country Members of WTO. 
165. With regard to China's national standardiza tion and regulatory system, he explained that 
foreign enterprises and joint ventures were increasingl y participating in the standards-setting process.  
He noted that under the "CCC" Certification Scheme , after the issuance of a new or revised national 
standard, the Chinese government revised the rele vant implementation rules of certification in a 
timely manner and allowed a certain transitional peri od for the products meeting the existing national 
standards.  China's Law on Standardization stipulat ed the adoption of international standards. Besides 
the standards of ISO, IEC and ITU, China had pr eliminarily recognized standards developed by 40 
international organizations as international standa rds. A large number of standards developed by 
regional standardization organiza tions and other developed countries had also been adopted.   
166. He emphasized that, in terms of the "CCC" Ce rtification Scheme, pursu ant to paragraph 192 
of the Working Party Report of China's accession, Ch ina would not maintain multiple or duplicative 
conformity assessment procedures, nor would it impose requirements exclusively on imported 
products. In this regard, the Chinese government had taken steps to eliminate the old double 
conformity assessment requirements, i.e. the CCIB Safety Mark and the "Great Wall" Mark, which 
were unified into the single "CCC" Certificati on Scheme.  He added that, in accordance with 
paragraph 196(b) of the Working Party Report, Chin a's current "CCC" certification procedures could 
be finished within 3 months.  He noted that the list of products subject to the "CCC" Certification 
Scheme had been determined on the basis of risk assessment. With the upgrading of product 
technology and improvement of the industrial manufacturing capacity, there might be some 
adjustments in the products list in  accordance to the risk situation. 
167. He further recalled that the Provisions on the Environmental Administration of New 
Chemical Substances of China had been enforced  on 15 October 2004, in compliance with paragraph 
196(a) of the Working Party Report.  China had issu ed administrative instructions thereafter.  He G/TBT/M/34 
Page 34  
 
explained that the chemicals listed in the "inventor y chemicals" annexed to the above new law were 
exempted from the registration obligation. Furthe rmore, a uniform application and registration 
procedure applied to both domestic and importe d chemicals. The rules and procedures of the 
applications on the new chemical substances were available on the website of the Chemicals Registration Center of the State Envir onmental Protection Administration (SEPA).
22  He stressed that 
China was ready to pursue a bila teral dialogue with WTO Members. 
168. The representative of the United States  appreciated China's efforts to implement the 
TBT Agreement.  She noted that her delegation' s submission (G/TBT/W/245) contained a number of 
general and specific questions on the operation of the Chinese system.  She believed that useful 
information had been obtained in China's presen tation on the operation of its enquiry point and 
domestic coordination mechanisms, given at the Special Meeting on Procedures for Information 
Exchange, and welcomed the increased use of websit es for the provision of information.  She recalled 
that discussion had taken place on China's evolving conformity assessment procedures and clarification had been provided on some changes in  the catalogue of products subject to compulsory 
certification.  China had also provided detailed info rmation in response to specific questions on scrap 
recycling regulations, distilled spirits, chemicals,  radio frequency identification, and cosmetics. 
169. The representative of the European Communities
 thanked China for their statement and 
recalled that there were five areas of priority fo r his delegation: the "CCC" system, automobiles, 
cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and foodstuff.  On the C CC system, the main concerns related to the list 
of products subject to certification, fees and double certification.  On automobiles, the main issues 
was related to the design, adoptio n and implementation of standards and the notification, adoption and 
implementation of technical regulations.  In the cosm etic area, his concerns related to the registration 
and labelling of cosmetic products, and on BSE issu es.  On pharmaceuticals, the main concern was 
related to active pharmaceutical ingredients, require ments, registration and transparency.  Finally, on 
foodstuffs, the European Communities was concerne d about the labelling standards for wine and 
spirits.  He noted that bilateral discussions were  ongoing and looked forward to a continuing dialogue. 
170. The representative of Japan  appreciated China's efforts to make its regulatory system more 
transparent and efficient.  His delegation still had con cerns in some areas, for instance:  in respect of 
the implementation of the CCC marking system; in  the electric devices area; and in the areas of 
automobiles, digital camera and chemical products .  He asked China to take these concerns into 
consideration. 
171. The representative of China  clarified that, regarding the concerns expressed on automobiles, 
China would fulfil its WTO obligations and publish a notice on the corresponding technical 
regulations, notify them and allow reasonable time for comments.  On the "CCC" certification scheme 
for electrical products, he explained the procedure coul d be finished within the specified time of three 
months.  He noted that, according to the internat ional practice, mutual recognition of mandatory 
certification testing results, were based on bilate ral or multilateral agreem ents, between governments 
or between bodies recognized by governments.  Ch ina supported mutual recognition of certification 
testing results, on the basis of equivalence, in or der to avoid technical barriers arising from redundant 
testing and certification.  He recalled that China was a Member of the IECEE Scheme, therefore the CB certificates issued by the Member s of the IECEE Scheme were recognized under the CCC system.  
Moreover, under the CCC scheme, after the insuran ce of the newly formulated or revised national 
standard, the Certification and Accreditation Ad ministration of the People's Republic of China 
(CNCA) would revise the relevant implementation ru les of certification in a timely manner, and make 
them known to the public allowing a certain transitional period for products to comply. 
                                                     
 
22 www.crc-sepa.org.cn.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 35 
 
 
172. The Committee adopted  its 2004 Report to be submitted to the Council for Trade in Goods on 
the Transitional Review mandated in  China's Protocol of Accession.23 
VII. REPORT (2004) OF THE COMMITTEE ON  TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE 
173. The Committee adopted  its 2004 Report to the Council for Trade in Goods.24 
VIII.  DATE OF NEXT MEETING 
174. The Chairman announced that the next regular meeting of the Committee would take place on 
22 and 23 March 2005, and woul d be preceded, on 21 March, by the Workshop on Supplier's 
Declaration of Conformity (SDoC).   
                                                      
23 Subsequently circulated as  G/TBT/W/249, 8 November 2004. 
24 Subsequently circulated as G/L/710, 8 November 2004. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 36  
 
ANNEX 1: 
WORK PROGRAMME FOR THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW 
 
1. Article 15.4 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) provides 
that:  "Not later than the end of the third year fro m the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement 
and at the end of each three-year period thereaf ter, the Committee shall review the operation and 
implementation of this Agreement, including the prov isions relating to transparency, with a view to 
recommending an adjustment of the rights and obli gations of the Agreement where necessary to 
ensure mutual economic advantage and balance of rights and obligations, without prejudice to the 
provisions of Article 12.  Having regard, inter alia,  to the experience gained in the implementation of 
the Agreement, the Committee shall, where appropria te, submit proposals for amendments to the text 
of this Agreement to the Council for Trade in Goods". 
2. The Committee concluded the First, Second and Third Triennial Reviews of the Operation 
and Implementation of the TBT Agreement on 13 November 1997 (G/TBT/5), 10 November 2000 
(G/TBT/9) and 7 November 2003 (G/TBT/13), respectiv ely.  In light of the mandate quoted above, 
the aim is to conclude the Fourth Triennial Re view at the Committee's last meeting in 2006. 
3. Article 15.4 states that the Committee shall at the end of each three-year period undertake the 
review work.  In order to prepare for this review work and to ensure efficiency, the work programme 
(overleaf) sets out three stages:  identification, discussion and drafting.  In essence, this approach 
means that, by mid-cycle (June 2005), the Committee would shift its focus from the follow-up of the 
Third Triennial Review to the preparation of the Fourth.   
4. Three formal meetings of the TBT Committee have been scheduled for 2005 and another 
three are foreseen to be held in 2006.   
5. It is proposed that the review work be initiate d at the First meeting in 2005 with a preliminary 
identification of topics for review.  It is stressed that this list will be preliminary and that Members 
would be able to add to or modify it during th e discussion phase of the review work.  At its Second 
and Third meetings in 2005, it is proposed that the Committee hold focused discussions on topics that 
have been identified.  Members will be encourag ed to submit papers on the issues identified for 
consideration.  To facilitate the discussion, the Secretariat will prepare factual background notes on 
specific topics under discussion.   
6. At its First meeting in 2006, the Committee s hould be in a position to take stock of the 
discussions.  To assist the Committee in this stockt aking exercise, the Secretariat will prepare a  
summary of the key issues discussed, under each topic iden tified.  This draft will be factual in nature 
and will not contain any recommendations.  
7. The Second meeting in 2006 will mark the start of the drafting phase.  For that meeting, the 
Committee will have before it a first draft of the Fourth Triennial Review, including both the factual 
elements and any recommendations on which there is general agreement.   
8. In respect of the conduct of the review work it self, it is proposed that substantive discussions 
pertaining to the review will normally be held in formal mode under an agenda item dedicated to the 
review process (currently Agenda Item 3 "Triennial  Review").  After circulation and discussion of the 
first draft of the Fourth Triennial Review, incl uding both the factual part and any recommendations on 
which there is general agreement, necessary drafting will take place in open-e nded informal meetings.  
These meetings will, to the extent possible, be held  back-to-back with the regular meetings of the 
Committee.  The Chairman will subsequently re port on the results in the formal meeting.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 37 
 
 
9. The Committee to adopt the final text of the Fourth Triennial Review at its Third meeting in 
2006. 
10. The work programme should be seen as flexible  and may be modified in light of any new 
developments.   
Work Programme for the Fourth Triennial Review  
 
Dates / Time Frame Proposed Action 
Identification phase  
mid-February 2005 Preliminary identificati on of topics for review by delegations 
2-3 March 2005 Meeting Listing of topics and organization of discussion 
 
Discussion phase  
end-April 2005 Circulation of S ecretariat note on topics to be discussed at the next 
meeting 
mid-May 2005 Submissions by dele gations on topics to be di scussed at the next meeting 
22-23 June 2005 Meeting Discussion on topics identified 
mid-September 2005 Circulation of  Secretariat note on topics to  be discussed at the next 
meeting 
mid-October 2005 Submissions by de legations on topics to be di scussed at the next meeting  
1-3 November 2005 Meeting Discussion on topics identified 
end-January 2006 Submission by delegati ons of proposals for recommendations  
end-February 2006 Circulation by the Secretariat of draft of factual elements of the review  
First meeting in 2006  Stocktaking:   
Discussion of draft of factual elements of the review as well as any 
proposed recommendations. 
 
Drafting phase  
mid-June 2006 Circulation of first draft text of the Fourth Triennial Review, including 
both the factual part and any recomme ndations on which there is general 
agreement 
Second meeting in 2006 Discussion of draft text of the Fourth Triennial Review 
mid-September 2006 Circulation of the draft fi nal text of the Four th Triennial Review 
Third meeting in 2006 Adoption of the final text of the Fourth Triennial Review 
 
 
 G/TBT/M/34 
Page 38  
 
ANNEX 2: 
SUMMARY REPORT OF THE FOURTH SPE CIAL MEETING ON PROCEDURES FOR 
INFORMATION EXCHANGE 
11. The "Fourth Special Meeting on Procedures for Information Exchange", held in Geneva on 
2-3 November 2004, aimed at discussing at a tec hnical level the activities and concerns of the 
TBT Agreement, in particular with regard to th e functioning of notification procedures and enquiry 
points.
25  It provided a forum for Members to excha nge experiences regarding the implementation of 
transparency provisions of the TBT Agreement.26  Panel sessions addressed seven topics:  (i) prior to 
notifications;  (ii) preparation and submission of notifications;  (iii) processing and circulation of 
notifications;  (iv) handling of comments;  (v) tr ansparency obligations under the Code of Good 
Practice;  (vi) the functioning of enquiry points;  and (vii) benefiting from transparency provisions 
through dissemination of information.  The following is a summary of the various experiences presented, including any additional info rmation provided dur ing the discussions.
27 
A. PRIOR TO NOTIFICATIONS  
1. The Chilean National Commission on TBT28 
12. The representative of Chile  indicated that coordination among regulatory bodies was 
considered a determining factor to ensure that relevant protection levels were achieved by the 
standards set and that regulatory interventions did not distort market performance.  For that purpose, Chile created in 1997 a National Commission on TBT.  The Commission was comprised of representatives of the different ministries that deve loped, adopted and applied technical regulations, 
their respective agencies and officials from th e Foreign Affairs Ministry and the National 
Standardization Institute.  The task of the Commissi on was to coordinate and thus provide consistency 
to the work of the various institutions involved with the drafting of technical regulations and 
conformity assessment procedures. 
13. Responsibilities of the National TBT Commission included:  Reviewing and analyzing 
standardization, regulation and conformity assessme nt systems;  providing periodic updates on 
WTO/TBT activities;  analysing WTO-related issu es that required a national position;  taking 
measures to strengthen market surveillance;  revi ewing the public availability  of national technical 
regulations;  and identifying capacity building requ irements.  Examples of topics discussed by the 
Commission in order to come to a national position were:  eco-labelling, the Cartagena Protocol and 
the REACH system.  
14. The National TBT Commission worked on a Decr ee implementing Law 19.912.  The scope of 
the Law, and therefore the Decree, related to  the principles of the TBT Agreement and good 
regulatory practices.  This included the use of international standards, non-discrimination, the 
avoidance of unnecessary barriers to trade and transp arency.  The Decree put in place a system of 
public consultations with a period of no less th an 60 days for comment and required regulatory 
agencies to make relevant information available to  the public.  The Decree contributed to enhancing 
the various agencies' awareness of the benefits of having clear and uniform rules on how technical 
regulations and conformity assessment procedures should be developed, ad opted and applied.  
15. In order to improve public availability of tec hnical regulations, a new website containing all 
Chilean technical regulations would be established under the coordination of the Ministry of Economy  
                                                     
 
25 The programme of the meeting is contained in document G/TBT/GEN/13. 
26 See "Transparency Requirements and Procedures",  Note by the Secretariat, to be issued. 
27All slideshows presented during the Special Meeting are available at 
http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tbt_e/m eeting_nov04_e/info_excha nge_nov04_prog_e.htm 
28 Presentation made by Mrs. Ana María Vallina, Head of th e Foreign Trade Department, Ministry of the Economy, Chile.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 39 
 
 
and with the participation of all agencies invol ved in the National TBT Commission (this website 
would be financed in the context of an EU cooperation programme).  To improve the general 
understanding of the TBT Agreement, the Chilean  National Commission planned to organize training 
of regulatory agencies and the business sector.  The Commission also intended to increase the 
knowledge of consumers on technical regulations. 
2. The "Notice and Comment" Procedure in the United States29 
16. The representative of United States  noted that for the development of new technical 
regulations, US federal regulatory agencies worked  together with interested parties.  The 
Administrative Procedures Act was the key la w governing the US regulatory process under which 
federal agencies created the regula tions needed to implement governme ntal legislation.  It ensured 
transparency in the establishment of new regulations , providing for the participation of interested 
parties in the process and ensuring that agencies met the same obliga tions for all regulations.  As 
defined by the Administrative Procedures Act, the US process for developing  regulations involved 
three steps, known as the "Notice and Comment" procedure.  
17. First, a notice of the proposed re gulation was published in the US Federal Register as a 
"notice of proposed rulemaking".  This notice signalle d to the public a new regulation, described the 
regulation in detail (including information on a cost -benefit analysis of alternative solutions, risk 
assessments and impact statements) and solicited public comments.  Second, within a period of 
60 days (maximum 90 days), all interested domest ic and foreign parties could submit comments, 
which were all equally considered.  Public comme nts enhanced the agency's knowledge of general 
and specific technical information on the proposed re gulation and allowed it to take corrective action, 
if necessary.  Decision-makers needed to take in to consideration all the substantive views expressed 
before the issuance of a final regulation.  In case of significant differences of opinion, the agency 
would allow a second opportunity for public comment s.  Third, after the consideration of all 
comments, the final rule was issued, including information on how comments had been addressed.  
18. The "notice and comment" procedure for all new t echnical regulations could be tracked at the 
federal level in a daily publication, the US Federal Register .  To be able to notify final rules to the 
WTO, the US enquiry point depended on regulatory agencies to alert it.  To track regulations at the sub-federal level, the US enquiry  point used an electronic tool, RegAlert , which allowed it to monitor 
all fifty States for changes in technical regula tions and conformity assessment procedures.  A new 
website
30 further contributed to the transparency and accountability of the US regulatory system.  It 
was used as a portal where comments on regulations were submitted online.   
B. PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF NOTIFICATIONS  
1. The Experience of Canada: the Standards Council and Export Alert! 31 
19. The representative of Canada  said that International Trade Ca nada (ITCan) retained overall 
responsibility for the coordination and implementati on of all the WTO Agreements.  Since January 
1980, ITCan contracted the operation of the nationa l notification authority and the national enquiry 
point to the Standards Council of Canada (SCC).32  Canada's experience showed that combining the 
two entities into one office allowed for a better and more rapid coordination.   SCC was responsible 
for fulfilling the transparency obligations of the TBT, SPS and NAFTA Agreements, distributing 
WTO notifications, answering enquiries and providi ng information to foreign enquiry points on 
Canadian standards, technical regulations and c onformity assessment procedures.  While notification 
                                                      
29 Presentation made by Ms. Anne Meininger, U.S. Enquiry  Point, National Institute for Standards and Technology. 
30 See http://www.regulations.gov . 
31Presentation made by Ms. Andrea Spencer, Coordina tor of the Canadian WTO/NAFTA Enquiry Point. 
32 See http://www.scc.ca . G/TBT/M/34 
Page 40  
 
activities fell under the jurisdiction of the enquiry  point, the response to technical enquiries was 
handled by the Information and Research Service.  
20. At the federal level, proposed measures were published in the Canada Gazette .  To ensure 
proper consultation among the Canadi an public, regulators were requi red to provide, along with the 
proposed regulation, a Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS), which included a description of 
the regulation as well as an analysis of alternatives, costs, and benefits.  Regulators were also required 
to provide a comment period of at least 75 days for re gulations that affected trade.  The SCC reviewed 
the proposed regulations to determine whether they should be notified.  Sub- national regulations were 
published on different schedules in their respective provincial gazettes, which were also reviewed 
regularly to identify the regulations that had to be notified.  Sub-national notifications continued to be 
a challenge for Canada, because many provinces only published their regulations once adopted.  
21. Canada notified technical regulations and c onformity assessment procedures at the draft 
stage.  Once completed, the notification format  was sent to the WTO CRN (Central Registry of 
Notification), with copies to the Canadian authoriti es and NAFTA counterparts.  Since Canada started 
to include, in July 2000, the URL to the regulati on in the notification format, the number of requests 
for regulatory texts from foreign enquiry points had decreased.  Canada believed that this type of 
instant coordination and cooperation ensured that all stakeholders had th e same information and 
opportunity to provide comments. Every three years,  Canada organized a workshop for regulators on 
the TBT Agreement during which an emphasis was put on the need to share comments with the 
enquiry point because often comments were sent dir ectly to regulators without going through the 
enquiry point.   
22. In order to filter the information contained in  notifications received, the Standards Council of 
Canada developed a system known as Export Alert! .
33  Export Alert! was a web-based application free 
of charge to Canadians used to disseminate WTO no tifications to a variety of stakeholders ranging 
from industry, regulatory agencies and standards deve lopment organizations to academia.  The service 
helped companies keep abreast of regulatory change s in global markets before they became law and 
provided input on measures that might affect thei r trading activities.  Canada had launched a second 
version of Export Alert! , which currently enabled users to:  Tr ack regulatory developments in selected 
countries, in addition to subject areas;  request regulatory texts more easily;  and receive HTML 
e-mail notifications.  The SCC de veloped a Spanish version of Export Alert!  to help Latin American 
countries disseminate WTO notifications to national st akeholders.  Bolivia would be the first country 
to use the service. 
2. The Notification Procedure of the Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards34 
23. The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  noted that the Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of 
Standards (TTBS), the national enquiry point since 1996, complied with its notification obligations 
under the TBT Agreement by sending notifications on standards proposed for compulsory status to 
the WTO.  Voluntary standards were adopted by the TTBS board and compulsory standards 
(equivalent to technical regulations) by the Mini stry responsible for Trade and Industry after 
recommendation by the committee responsible for the development of the standard.  The notification 
process at TTBS began when its Standardization Di vision sent a notice of a draft standard for public 
comment.  Draft standards were advertised for p ublic comment in local daily newspapers.  The 
enquiry point checked whether the standard was co mpulsory and if so extracted the information 
necessary to complete the WTO notification format .  The completed form was then forwarded by 
e-mail to the Ministry of Trade and I ndustry (notification authority).   
                                                      
33 To register at Export Alert! , a profile indicating areas and countries  of interest must be filled in on www.scc.ca . 
34 Presentation made by Mrs. Devitra Maharaj-Dash, Head of the Standards Information Centre of the Trinidad & Tobago Bureau 
of Standards (TTBS).  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 41 
 
 
24. At the enquiry point, the notification proce dure took between one and two days after the 
advertisement for public comment had been made.  TTBS was developing a new website where draft 
standards would be available online with an open forum for comments.  Due to the number of steps 
that were necessary before the no tification reached the WTO, the e nquiry point used a variety of 
available technological tools to speed up the process.   Notifications were checked at the Ministry of 
Trade and Industry and then forwarded to the Tr inidad and Tobago Mission in Geneva via e-mail, 
which sent it to the WTO CRN.  The Ministry also  sent to the mission the original documents for 
information. 
25. Food, Drugs and Cosmetics Regulations were handled by the Chemistry, Food and Drugs 
Division.  While there was a well established relati onship between this Division and TTBS, different 
procedures existed in the two agencies with regard to how regulations were handled.  After internal 
consultations, it had been agreed that regulations, be fore being sent to the Ministry of Legal Affairs, 
would be notified through the enquiry point for comme nt.  Also, measures were being implemented to 
ensure that existing technical regulations w ould be made available on the new TTBS website. 
3. The Notification Procedure of the Thai Industrial Standards Institute 35 
26. The representative of Thailand  said that in 1995, the Thai Industrial Standards Institute (TISI) 
had been appointed as the single national enquiry  point for both the TBT and SPS Agreements.  
Following reforms in 2002, two separate national e nquiry points were established:  TISI, for all 
industrial products;  and the Na tional Bureau of Agricultural Commodities and Food Standards, for 
food and agricultural products.  To ensure the fulf ilment of the notification obligations, coordination 
with relevant regulatory bodies was ensured throug h the establishment of national committees.  These 
committees included representatives from relevant govern ment organizations and the private sector.  
To ensure effective coordination, representa tives from the two national enquiry points were 
represented in each other's TB T and SPS national committees. 
27. TISI remained informed about new technical regulations by monitoring the cabinet website, 
receiving advice from regulatory bodies and checking information through the media.  Regulatory 
bodies were reminded of their obligation to notify every three months.  In case TISI had doubts on 
whether or not to notify, it would always notify.  Once filled-in, the notification was sent to the WTO Permanent Mission which in turn submitted it to the WTO CRN.   
28. Thailand's notification procedure had six steps:   (i) check for new or proposed measures;  
(ii) assess if a notification was required;  (iii)  decide whether it had to be notified under the 
TBT Agreement and/or the SPS Agreement;  (iv) decide whom to notify;  (v) complete the 
notification form;  and, (vi) submit it to the WTO.   Thailand encountered certain specific difficulties:  
insufficient awareness of the notification obligat ions at the operational level;  problems in 
distinguishing between TBT or SPS notifications;  inco mplete notification forms;  delay in translating 
technical regulations into English, due to budgetary  constraints;  and occasionally late notification of 
regulations.  
C. P
ROCESSING AND CIRCULATION OF NOTIFICATIONS  
1. The Processing of Notifications by the WTO Secretariat36 
29. The representative of the Secretariat  indicated that three instances were involved in the 
internal processing of a TBT notification once it had reached the WTO:  (i) the Central Registry of 
Notifications (CRN);  (ii) the Trade and Environm ent Division;  and (iii) the Document Management 
System (DMS).  The lifecycle of a TBT notification began when a Member sent a notification to the 
                                                      
35 Presentation made by Mrs. Rampaipan Naka satis, Director of the Standa rds Bureau of the Thai I ndustrial Standards Institute 
(TISI). 
36 Presentation made by Mrs. Stefania Bernabè, WTO Secretariat, Trade and Environment Division. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 42  
 
CRN, by post, fax or e-mail.  Then, the notifica tion was put on a file, given a record number and 
forwarded to the Trade and Environment Division.  It was important that notifications be sent via 
e-mail as otherwise they had to be retyped by the Secretariat. 
30. Once the notification had reached the Trade a nd Environment Division, it was checked, and 
when necessary, clarification was requested.  If a notification contained SPS elements, the Trade and 
Environment Division asked the Agriculture a nd Commodities Division to check whether it had 
received the same notification.  If this was not the case, the Trade and Environment Division contacted the notifying Member to draw its attenti on to the fact that the notification contained SPS 
elements.  It was then up to the Member to deci de whether to notify the measure under TBT, SPS or 
both Agreements. 
31. Once checked, the notification was transmitted to  the DMS, which automatically sent it for 
translation.  Once the notification was attributed  a number, it was circulated to the permanent 
missions in Geneva (in paper c opy) and posted on the WTO website.  An automated weekly e-mail 
distribution had been set up to fac ilitate Members' access to notifications.
37  Normally, the internal 
processing of notifications by the Secretariat took two working days. 
2. How to Use the WTO Website and the CRN Database?38 
32. The representative of the Secretariat  said that there were two ways to access notifications on 
the WTO website:  the traditional way through "D ocuments Online";  and through the CRN search 
interface.  To begin a search in "Documents Online", one could go to the "Advanced Search"39 
interface of "Documents Online" and fill in some b asic fields (e.g. "G/TBT/..." for TBT documents).  
The search could be restricted by type (e.g. "notifi cation"), by date or by Member.  If one searched by 
Member, both documents submitted by that Member or which included that Member's name would 
appear.  The search could be also restricted by en tering text in the "full text" field and only those 
notifications containing those words would be retrieved.  
33. The CRN search interface permitted the retrieval of notifications using specific data fields of 
the CRN database.  The search mechanism operated in the same way as the standard search interface 
of "Documents Online" on the public WTO website.  The difference was that it included a search by 
trade coverage of notifications and a search by th e requirement under which they were submitted.   
34. In both systems, retrieved documents were pr esented in the standard display format of 
"Documents Online" and could be consulted directly on-screen or downloaded to a local computer.  
Documents could be downloaded and saved by clic king on the right mouse button.  To download a 
series of documents, one could use the "download" f eature which appeared at the top of the page.  
D. HANDLING OF COMMENTS  
1. The Experience of the TBT Enquiry Point of the European Communities and its 
TBT Website40 
35. The representative of the European Communities  noted that the role of the TBT enquiry point, 
managed by the European Commission, was, inter alia , to:  (i) analyse, with the help of companies, 
the regulations notified;  (ii) coordinate the issuing of comments;  (iii) transmit EC notifications to the 
WTO Secretariat;  (iv) ensure the follow-up of comments received by the European Communities;  
and (v) answer requests for information about notified projects.  Once or twice a year, the 
                                                      
37 http://www.wto.org/english/trat op_e/tbt_e/tbt_mailing_list_e.htm . 
38 Presentation made by Mr. John Dickson, WT O Secretariat, Docume nts System Section. 
39 http://docsonline.wto.org/gen_search.asp?searchmode=advanced .  
40 Presentation made by Mr. Cyril Hanquez, Europ ean Commission, Directorate General Enterprise.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 43 
 
 
European Commission held meetings of notification authorities of EC members States in order to discuss the implementation of the TBT Agreement. 
36. To enhance the participation of economic opera tors and to ensure the highest level of 
transparency vis-à-vis WTO Members, the European Communities launched in June 2004 a 
TBT website.
41  Available in the three WTO languages, it provided:  (i) information on the 
TBT Agreement and on the objective and scope of TBT notification procedures;  (ii) a list of all 
national enquiry points and notification authorities (WTO Members were encouraged to send their 
respective websites);  (iii) a compilation of no tifications of WTO Members which had led to 
comments by the European Communities and EC notifications which had led to comments by WTO Members along with a complete list of notif ications throughout the month submitted by all 
WTO Members;  and (iv) a search facility of the EC database for notifications.  The EC/TBT website 
also offered a mailing list service for subscribers to be  informed via e-mail of new notifications made.   
37. Notifications coming from one of the 25 member States were available in all the 20 official 
languages.  The European Communities hoped that th e practice of making draft texts available and 
indicating in the notification a link to the PDF vers ion would be followed by other Members.  If the 
European Commission, a member State or an econom ic actor showed an interest in a particular 
notification by a WTO Member, the EC/TBT enquiry point verified the time delay for the submission 
of comments and, if necessary, requested an exte nsion.  If a service of the European Commission 
wished to comment, an internal procedure of cons ultation of the relevant services of the Commission 
and possibly the national member State authorities was put in place.  Once finalized, the comments 
were sent to the WTO Member concerne d and published on the EC/TBT website. 
38. In case of comments on a notified EC text, th e European Communiti es took the comments 
into account and made every effort not to adopt the text before having replied to the comments.  The 
response, drafted by the relevant services of the Commission, was sent to the TBT enquiry point of 
the WTO Member concerned.  With regard to no tifications by one of the 25 member States, the 
Commission wrote the final answer together with th e member State concerned and sent it in the name 
of the European Communities.  As the European Communities had an exclusive competence in the 
area of common commercial policy, a member State notifying a draft regulation directly to the WTO Secretariat had to inform the European Co mmission of the comments received on its national 
draft.   
E. 
TRANSPARENCY OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE CODE OF GOOD PRACTICE  
1. The Malaysian Standards Infrastructure42 
39. The representative of Malaysia  said that the Malaysian standards system was made up of two 
institutions:  (i) the SIRIM Berhad, and (ii) the Department of Standards Malaysia (DSM).  DSM 
appointed SIRIM Berhad as the sole standards de velopment agency.  DSM was responsible for all 
policy matters with regard to standardization and also operated the national accreditation program for 
operating laboratories and certification bodies. SIRIM Berhad had operational responsibility, 
organized Malaysian representation in  regional and international sta ndards bodies, published, printed, 
sold and distributed Malaysian Standards. 
40. In 1996, DSM notified its acceptance of the TBT Code of Good Practice to the ISO/IEC 
Information Centre.  As the officially recognized national standardizing body in Malaysia, DSM's role 
was to ensure that the national standards system was in compliance with the Code.  The Standards 
Malaysia Act required the publication of all ap provals and withdrawals of standards in the 
government gazette and included mandatory provi sions for providing opportunities to comment 
                                                      
41 http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/tbt/ . 
42 Presentation made by Ms. Salmah Mohd Nordin, Senior Sta ndards Executive of the Standards Management Department of 
Malaysia. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 44  
 
before the adoption of standards.  To ensure th at the development of standards was in compliance 
with the Code of Good Practice, a "Quality Manual  by Operating Procedures and Work Instructions" 
had been established describing the various processes , e.g.:  Process for obtaining public comments;  
process for the publication of standards;  and process of harmonization with international standards.  
41. Public comment was one of the most important and critical stages in the development of 
Malaysian standards.  All draft standards were  issued for public comment by announcement in 
national newspapers and published on SIRIM Berhad’s website fo r a comment period of sixty days, 
where they could be downloaded free of charge.
43  Draft Malaysian Standards which followed the 
exact content of international standards were, how ever, not placed on the website due to copyright 
restrictions, but available at a charge upon request. 
42. All interested parties had the possibility of par ticipating in the standards development process, 
through sectoral or technical committees, working groups, or through the public comment process.  
Procedures were in place to provide for balanced representation of all stakeholders in the various 
committees.  The obligations contained in Paragraph J of the Code of Good Practice were fulfilled by 
publishing the work programme twice a year in the Standards and Quality News .  Additionally, the 
approval of new projects and the withdrawal of st andards was announced in national newspapers and 
on websites on a regular basis.  Pursuant to Para graph K of the Code of Good Practice, DSM was a 
national member of ISONET and SIRIM Berhad an Associate Member of ISONET. 
43. With regard to the harmonization provisions contained in the Code of Good Practice, 
Malaysia had implemented a policy of adopting the mo st relevant parts of international standards as a 
basis for the development of Malaysian standards.   Both at the national and regional level (e.g. 
APEC), there were initiatives to align standards with international standards.  Malaysia had 
undertaken numerous actions to increase its partic ipation in international standardization:  
Promotional and educational events on the benefits of participating in international standardization 
had been held, and international standards meetings hosted.   
2. The Activities of the ISO/IEC Information Centre44 
44. The representative of ISO  noted that the objective of the In formation Centre, jointly operated 
by the International Organization for Standardisa tion (ISO) and the International Electro-technical 
Commission (IEC), was to provide stakeholders with  information on standards, standardization, and 
related matters.  Linked to the ISO/IEC Information Centre, there were websit es and activities related 
to the World Standards Services Network (WSSN)45 and to international standards organizations.  
ISO also operated the information network ISON ET, which was monitored by the ISO Central 
Secretariat.  The ISO/IEC Information Centre also se rved as an information office on draft standards.   
45. The ISO/IEC Information Centre provided four types of services:  an ISO/IEC information 
website (opened in November 2004);46  answers to enquiries;  information to the WTO Secretariat;  
and maintenance of a library of ISO and IEC publications.  The ISO/IEC website contained 
information on standardisation and conformity assessment, the TBT Agreement, the TBT Standards 
Code Directory, which was updated annually, othe r standards publications, general vocabulary on 
standardization and general classification of standard s widely used.  The website also contained an 
enquiry service where questions could be posted, wh ich were, depending on the scope of the enquiry, 
directed to IEC, ISO or other standardizing bodies.  The enquiry service was provided by the 
IEC customer information centre and ISO informa tion services, in accordance with their respective 
areas of competence.   
                                                      
43 http://www.sirim.my/std_dev/public_comment_page.htm . 
44 Presentation made by Mr. Evgueni Patrikeev , Director of ISO information services. 
45 http://www.wssn.net/WSSN/index.html . 
46 http://www.standardsinfo.net .  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 45 
 
 
46. The information services provided to the WTO included the registration of notifications 
received from standardizing bodies, e.g. on the acceptance of the Code of Good Practice and the 
existence of work programs.  ISO/IEC also pub lished, once a year, the WTO TBT Standards Code 
Directory with updated information on the acceptance of the Code of Good Practice;  it was normally 
circulated to all Members every year at the firs t meeting of the TBT Committee.  The Information 
Centre's library, which was mainly used by st udents and experts from Small and Medium-Sized 
Enterprises (SMEs), was a useful resource containing the wide range of ISO and IEC publications. 
F. THE FUNCTIONING OF ENQUIRY POINTS  
1. The Functioning of the Brazilian Enquiry Point and the Services Developed to Assist 
Exporters47 
47. The representative of Brazil  said that to promote the implementation of the TBT Agreement, 
Brazil remodelled the activities of the enquiry point  and notification authority under the responsibility 
of the National Institute of Metrology, Standardi zation and Industrial Quality (INMETRO).  In order 
to help Brazilian exporters overcom e technical barriers to trade, INMETRO launched in March 2002 a 
new online service.  Brazilian exporters used this to  contact the enquiry point directly and access all 
information on technical regulations, as provided by WT O Members, before they entered into force.  
This service was free of charge and coul d be accessed through the INMETRO website.48 
48. INMETRO also carried out a series of workshops to promote exporters' awareness of the 
importance of participating in the notification process.   In order to provide Brazilian exporters with a 
fast access to technical regulations and conformity  assessment procedures in force, it was decided to 
launch one more service:  a list of technical regulati ons in force by country and product available on 
INMETRO's website. 
49. AlertaExportador , implemented with the assistance of the Canadian enquiry point SCC, set 
up an automatic early notice of proposed technical  requirements to provide companies with the 
opportunity to adapt their products before the relevant  requirements were in force and to thus prevent 
delays in the delivery of goods.  Once registered online, exporters received an automated e-mail every 
time the database was updated with a new propo sal by a WTO Member.  A summary of the 
notification was available in Portuguese to provide exporters with the most relevant information on 
the possible impact on the market.  After having received an early warning notice and deciding upon its relevance for access to a partic ular market, exporters could request  the full text of any technical 
regulations and conformity assessment procedures notif ied.  They were then able to present comments 
through the internet facility.  Exporters could also send a complaint concerning a technical barrier to 
trade, which was then analyzed by the staff of INMETRO to launch the necessary procedures and 
possible consultations with other agencies of the Brazilian government.  In August 2004, an 
agreement had been reached under the auspices of th e standardization organizations of Brazil and of 
other MERCOSUR countries to provide these countries with an access to AlertaExportador .
49   
2. The Chinese Experience in Enhancing the Role of the Enquiry Point50 
50. The representative of the People's Republic of China  noted that in 1997, in preparation for its 
WTO membership, a TBT enquiry point had been es tablished, which was fu rther strengthened after 
the country's accession in December 2001.  Located at the State General Administration for Quality 
Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ), the "WTO/TBT National Notification and Enquiry 
Center of the People’s Republic of China" had 15 staff members which serviced three departments, 
                                                      
47 Presentation made by Ms. Annalina Camboim,  Head of the Brazilian Enquiry Point. 
48 http://www.inmetro.gov.br/barreirastecnicas . 
49 During the discussion, Mozambique expresse d its interest in taking part in the Br azil-MERCOSUR agreement to also benefit 
from access to AlertaExportador.  In this context, it pointed to  the problems of translation it encountered as a Portuguese spe aking country 
and the necessity of sharing translations and information from different workshops and seminars among WTO Members. 
50 Presentation made by Mrs. Guo LiSheng, De puty Director of the Chinese enquiry point. G/TBT/M/34 
Page 46  
 
the Department of TBT Notifications and Enqui ry, the Department of TBT Research, and the 
Department of Networks.  The enquiry point recr uited highly qualified pe rsonnel, and equipped its 
offices with an advanced IT infrastructure. 
51. The TBT enquiry point was responsible for the technical check of Chinese TBT notifications 
filled out by various ministries.  A system of thr ee-level examination had been adopted to ensure the 
quality of notifications.  To facilitate the strict adherence to the rules and procedures recommended by 
the TBT Committee, 85 resolutions and recommendations  had been translated into Chinese, compiled 
into a brochure and published.  Although, in Chin a, some technical regulations were adopted by the 
local government bodies (i.e. provincial, municipal,  autonomous and regional) , so far, only national 
technical regulations had been notified.  
52. Concerning notifications by other WTO Members, China translated all TBT notifications into 
Chinese within two to three working days, and dist ributed both the Chinese and English versions to 
government departments, industrial sectors and ot her related organizations.  At the same time, 
notifications were submitted to the Chinese TBT/SPS website
51 and were made available to the public 
free of charge.  The enquiry point compiled and publ ished a number of reports on technical barriers to 
trade, such as a the "WTO/TBT Express", "Reports  of the TBT-SPS Enquiry Points", "Understanding 
of the TBT Agreement" and a nationwide periodi cal containing information on technical trade 
barriers.  Additionally, TBT information was dissem inated via traditional media channels, weekly on 
China's central TV station.  The TBT enquiry point  carried out research on key issues in international 
trade and published reports which were used as reference material for selected industries. 
53. The Chinese enquiry point replied to reasonable enquiries from governmental, import and 
export enterprises as well as domestic and foreign tr ade associations by providing interested parties 
with the full text of notifications from the WTO database and/or referring them to the relevant 
regulatory agencies and ensuring coordination among different agencies, when necessary. 
54. When China received TBT notifications from other Members, the TBT enquiry point 
distributed them to government agencies, the industr ial sector and related or ganizations for comment.  
To increase companies' knowledge of the TBT Ag reement, the enquiry point carried out selected 
publishing and training activities.  It also organized  workshops on formulating effective comments on 
notifications.  Comments received from other WTO Members concerning China’s notifications were 
conveyed to competent departments and tran slated into Chinese, if necessary.   
55. China's experience demonstrated that the followi ng elements were of crucial importance for a 
successful operation of a national TBT enquiry poin t:  the full attention of the central government, 
clear working procedures, highly qualified staff a nd advanced office equipment along with an active 
participation in meetings of the TB T Committee and other related activities. 
3. The Kenyan Experience in Establishing and Running a National Enquiry Point52 
56. The representative of Kenya  recalled that in 1995, the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS)53 
was officially designated as the TBT national en quiry point.  However, its implementation and 
functioning was only realized in 1999, aided by  technical assistance from WTO/UNCTAD/ITC under 
Phase I of a JITAP54 project, which provided technical facilities, helped setting up a technical 
regulation database, and organized a study tour to  European enquiry points.  In the process of 
establishing the national enquiry point, it was realized  that its functions and operations were closely 
related to those of the KEBS Standards Inform ation Resource Centre (SIRC), which stored all 
                                                      
51 The TBT/SPS website included information on tec hnical barriers to trade in China and abroad. 
52 Presentation made by Mr. Evanson Ndung'u of  the Kenya Bureau of Standards (KEBS). 
53 The Kenya Bureau of Standards was established in 1974. 
54 Joint Integrated Technical Assistance Programme.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 47 
 
 
standards and technical regulations for Kenya.  To avoid a duplication of activities, the national 
enquiry point was integrated into the existing SIRC. 
57. To speed up the process of receiving TBT notifications, one of the two staff of the national 
enquiry point downloaded TBT and SPS notifications directly from the WTO website and stored them 
on the local server.  Then, the national enquiry po int summarized each notification and compiled this 
information in a monthly publication, the "WTO /TBT Notification Update Bulletin" which was 
distributed electronically to over 400 organizations  and individuals.  As this bulletin was only 
compiled and circulated monthly, a selective di ssemination of information had recently been 
introduced.  Notifications on specific products were se lected on a daily basis and then sent to specific 
clients.  This service would gradually be offe red (free of charge) to the industry in 2005. 
58.  The response time to enquiries received by th e national enquiry point depended on the nature 
of the information required;  an average of two da ys for information available in Kenya and up to one 
week for information from other countries.  Th e national enquiry point had experienced some 
problems and challenges, which could be addr essed through technical assistance:  The limited 
awareness of industry on the trade benefits of th e notification procedure;  the lack of office 
technology to make Kenya's enquiry point a one-stop-information-service-point;  the difficulties of 
translation and reception of full texts when requested  from other national enquiry points;  the lack of 
internet access for many SMEs;  the limited server capacity of the enquiry point;  and the need to create an interactive website, which could allow full text searches. 
G. B
ENEFITING FROM TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS : DISSEMINATION OF INFORMATION  
1. The Experience of the Mexican TBT/SPS Enquiry Point 55 
59. The representative of Mexico  said that the Mexican TBT/SPS enquiry point, located at the 
Under-Secretariat of the Foreign Affairs Ministry, had been operating since 1995.  One problem was the difficulty to evaluate and assess the enquiry point s' role, as the benefits provided to the business 
community were often indirect and not visible.  In sufficient budgets resulting in  the lack of material 
and human resources were issues of common concern which made it difficult to respect deadlines.  
The lack of continuity and follow-up, especially after a change of government, was an aspect which 
burdened the work of some Members' enquiry po ints.  It was thus necessary to establish clear 
processes and procedures.   
60. Several tools could help to satisfy users of  the enquiry point and provide the relevant 
information in a timely manner:  Internet portals were a means to ensure appropriate accessibility to 
the information and establish more effective co mmunication amongst the stak eholders involved;  
knowledge exchange between Members could help to generate ideas;  technical assistance could play 
an important role.  Moreover, it was necessary to be  in contact with stakeholders nationally, such as 
chambers of commerce, associations and businesses.  As information providers, enquiry points needed 
to function as a link between private and public bodi es nationally and internationally.  In providing 
their services, enquiry points should construct the ma nagement of information strategically and stand 
ready to advertise the benefits of the services provided.   
61. After a paper bulletin had been in place be tween 1995 and 1997,  and later replaced by an 
online bulletin, the Mexican enquiry point developed, between 2001-2004, Notificarnom-Alert ,
56 a 
service accessible online.  Notificarnom-Alert  functioned in the same way as the web Canadian and 
Brazilian facilities.   
                                                      
55 Presentation made by Mrs. Danielle Schont Aven el, representative of the Mexican enquiry point. 
56 http://www.economia.gob.mx/?P=85 . G/TBT/M/34 
Page 48  
 
2. The Experience of Chinese Taipei and the Pr oduct-Classified Notification Dissemination 
System 
57 
62. The representative of Chinese Taipei  noted that the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and 
Inspection (BSMI) was responsible for the impl ementation of notification procedures under the 
TBT Agreement.  Electronic tools were used fo r checking and downloading notifications from the 
WTO website, translating and categorizing them an d subsequently uploading and distributing them 
via e-mail to the public and the private sector concerned.  A product-classified notification dissemination system introduced in early 2004 aided in distributing the right notifications to the relevant public and private sector entities, groupe d notifications into 14 different categories and 
classified them by HS code.  Translated notifications could be accessed at the BSMI website
58 and 
also in a monthly publication. 
63. To handle feedback appropriately, BSMI assisted  the public and the private sector in making 
requests for additional information from other WT O Members.  The enquiry point accumulated and 
filed comments on Members' regulations, discussed those with authorities and associations before 
finalizing them and sending them to WTO Members.   A survey undertaken among 20 companies and 
associations had indicated that most of them were sat isfied with the dissemination of notifications and 
that their business operations benefited from these notifications.  Chinese Taipei was dedicated to the 
transparency of notifications and had undertaken different activities in this regard.  While the 
notification dissemination system was greeted pos itively by the private and public sectors, the 
awareness of the private sector, mainly SMEs, on TB T issues needed to be further increased.    
3. The Uganda TBT/SPS Coordination Committee 59 
64. The representative of Uganda  indicated that the infrastructure for implementing the 
TBT Agreement was threefold.  First, the Mini stry of Tourism, Trade and Industry was the 
WTO focal point and the national notification author ity for TBT and SPS.  It was responsible for the 
notification procedures and for bilateral and plur ilateral trade negotiations.  Second, the Uganda 
National Bureau of Standards (UNBS) was the na tional enquiry point for TBT and SPS as well as the 
national contact point for the Codex Alimentarius Commission.  It was responsible for answering 
enquiries about technical regulations, standards, conformity assessment procedures and sanitary and 
phytosanitary measures.   
65. Third, the TBT/SPS Coordination Committee (chaired by the UNBS) was an institutional and 
multi-sector committee consisting of regulatory and private sector organizations responsible for the 
implementation of the TBT and SPS Agreements at th e national level.  This Committee provided the 
backbone for the distribution of TBT notifications .  Notifications that required comments were 
identified by the members of th e Committee and then brought to the attention of the national 
notification authority, which requested their texts.   When the notified draft regulations had been 
obtained, the national notification authority distributed them to members of the Committee for comments.  Each member of the Committee submit ted written comments to the national notification 
authority which then compiled, merged and circ ulated them for discussion during the Committee's 
coordination meeting.  When the Committee met,  the comments that were agreed upon were 
forwarded to the national notification authority of  the notifying WTO Member.  Subsequently, the 
Ugandan notification authority ci rculated feedback received from the notifying Member to the 
TBT/SPS Coordination Committee including information on how the comments were handled. 
66. There were some gaps in the implementation of the transparency provisions of the 
TBT Agreement in Uganda:  As the TBT/SPS Coor dination Committee was only one year old, an 
efficient IT infrastructure still needed to be set up to facilitate the dissemination of information;  the 
                                                     
 
57Presentation made by Mr. M. S. Chen, Section Chief of the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection. 
58 http://www.bsmi.gov.tw . 
59 Presentation made by Mr. George  Opiyo, Manager of the TBT and SPS notification point of Uganda.  G/TBT/M/34 
 Page 49 
 
 
Committee had yet to obtain legal status;  the lack of personnel at the nationa l enquiry point (only one 
staff member, the presenter himself);  budgetary co nstraints which resulted in the inability of capital-
based officials to attend meetings of the TBT Committee;  awareness among the private sector and 
regulatory bodies on the benefits of the SPS and TB T Agreements needed to be raised;  and  
notifications were distributed through electronic means,  but internet access, especially by the private 
sector, was still inadequate.   
__________