RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/TBT/M/39 
31 July 2006 
 (06-3654) 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 7-9 JUNE 2006  
 
Chairperson:  Mr. Margers Krams (Latvia)
 
 
Note by the Secretariat1 
 
  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA......................................................................................................... .......2  
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT ...................................2  
A. STATEMENTS  FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 .................................................................2  
B. SPECIFIC  TRADE  CONCERNS..............................................................................................................2  
 1 New C oncerns ................................................................................................................ ..................2  
 2. Concerns Previ ously Raised ..................................................................................................... .......6  
C. OTHER  MATTERS ........................................................................................................................ ........15  
 1. Presentation by the European Commun ities:  Exporter s' Helpdesk ..............................................15  
 2. Codex Committee for Food Labe lling............................................................................................1 6 
 3. List of Members' Publications in relation to  Technical Regulations, Conformity Assessment 
   Procedures and Standards .................................................................................................... ........17  
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW............................................................................................................... ..........17  
A. NEW SUBMISSIONS ............................................................................................................................... .....17  
 1. Canada on Counterfeiting of Certification Marks Affixed to Goods where there Exists a Health 
   and/or Saf ety Con cern....................................................................................................... .............17  
 2. Chile on Good Regu latory Practice an d Transparency.................................................................18 
 3. Costa Rica on the Fourth Triennial Review.................................................................................. .20 
B. PREPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW REPORT ...................................................................21  
IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION......................................................................................................... 24 
V. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS .......................................................................................................... ..24 
VI. DATE OF NEXT  MEETI NGS.......................................................................................................... ...25 
 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretaria t's own responsibility and is without prejudice to the 
positions of Members and to their rights and obligations under the WTO. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 2  
 
   
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee adopted the agenda contained in WTO/AIR/2826.   
II. IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
A. STATEMENTS
 FROM  MEMBERS  UNDER  ARTICLE  15.2 
2. The Chairman  noted that, since the last meeting of the TBT Committee, Bangladesh 
(G/TBT/2/Add.88) and the Kingdom of Saudi Ar abia (G/TBT/2/Add.89) had submitted their 
statements on implementation and administration of the Agreement under Article 15.2, and that 
Uganda had submitted a supplement to its statemen t (G/TBT/2/Add.23/Suppl.1).  Since 1995, a total 
of 106  Members had submitted at least one such statemen t.  The Chairman also drew the Committee's 
attention to the latest list of TBT Enquiry Poin ts (G/TBT/ENQ/27) and note d that, since the last 
meeting, some delegations had sen t updated information about their enquiry point contacts.  This 
information would be included in the next vers ion of the ENQ document and was available on the 
WTO website.2   
3. The Committee took note  of the statement made. 
B. SPECIFIC  TRADE  CONCERNS 
1. New Concerns 
(i) China – Labelling Audit System for Im ported Food and Cosmetic Products 
(G/TBT/N/CHN/190) 
4. The representative of the European Communities  noted that the above notification, dated 
3 April 2006, had informed WTO Members of the AQSIQ Notice No. 44 on: "Modifying the 
Labelling Audit System for Import and Export Food s and Cosmetics" (24 March 2006).  With this 
notice, the enforcement of mandatory labelling requirements by a central pre-registration mechanism on imported foodstuffs and cosmet ic products had been replaced by a decentralized system.  
According to this system, the c ontrol needed to be carried out after  the arrival of the goods and during 
the inspection and quarantine processes.  While hi s delegation was in favour of this measure and 
welcomed in particular the removal of the pre-re gistration requirements on labelling, some concerns 
existed regarding the uniform implementation of Noti ce No. 44 by local office s, now responsible for 
ensuring that the product labels we re in conformity with existing Chinese regulations and standards.  
For instance, it was noted that there existed divergi ng interpretations of the requirements and different 
application at local level for imports of alcoholic beverages and cosmetic pr oducts.  The delegation of 
China was requested to inform Members about the m easures it intended to take to ensure uniform and 
coherent enforcement at local level of the existi ng labelling requirements.  China was also asked to 
provide the Members with copies of the relevant gui delines, procedural rules and any other instruction 
which had been or would be issued regarding the implementation of Notice No. 44 by local authorities.  He stressed that this request did not prejudice any future position of the European 
Communities regarding the substantive requirements th at imported foodstuffs and cosmetic products 
needed to meet upon importation to China. 
5. The representative of China
 explained that the nature of the measure taken was one of trade 
facilitation.  In effect, the former pre-registrati on system had been change d to the new "check upon 
arrival of shipments" in order to facilitate  trade.  He noted that AQSIQ had direct control over local 
                                                      
2 http://www.wto.org/english/trato p_e/tbt_e/tbt_ enquiry_points_e.htm.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 3 
 
 
  authorities and that, therefore, uniform application of  this measure, as well as other relevant measures, 
was ensured. 
(ii) Belgium and The Netherlands – Seal products (G/TBT/N/BEL/39 and G/TBT/N/NLD/68) 
6. The representative of Canada  was concerned about the impe nding Belgian and Dutch ban on 
the importation of seal products.  These two delegations  were requested to revise or reconsider the 
relevant legislation, as Canada was of the view that it was inconsistent with the obligations under 
WTO Agreements.  It was recalled that comment s had been submitted to the Belgian and Dutch 
authorities together with a request for a meeting to  discuss the matter further.   The seal hunt was a 
sustainable activity based on scientifically proven an d sound conservation principles;  in fact, the seal 
population in Canada had grown significantly since the early 1970s.  This fact had been echoed by the 
European Commission on 11 May 2006 , which had noted that "the seal population in the Northwest 
Atlantic has grown significantly since the early 70' s, from just under 2 million to around 5.8 million in 
the case of harp seals".  The Canadian delegation welcomed the statement made by the European 
Commission on 11 May 2006, that "there is no scientific basis linked to the conservation of the harp and hooded seals for extending the scope of appli cation of Council Directive 83/129/EEC", which 
oversaw the importation into EC member States of  skins of certain seal pups and products derived 
therefrom.  Canada was therefore of the view th at the seal population was no t endangered.  It was 
furthermore pointed out that the matter was not regul ated by the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species (CITES).   
7. The representative of Norway
 shared the concerns expressed by Canada.  She pointed out that 
the information provided had not allowed Norway to fully understand and evaluate the scientific basis 
and the risk assessment upon which the notified measur es were based, as required in Article 2.2 of the 
TBT Agreement.  Moreover, the measures could be more trade restrictive than necessary.  It was 
noted that Belgium had invoked reasons of public op inion, and that The Netherlands had invoked the 
protection of public morals as the objectives of their draft measures.  Norway was of the view that 
these objectives did not conform with the requirements of the TBT Agreement.  The delegations of 
Belgium and The Netherlands were requested to  provide necessary documentation to justify the 
measures, in accordance with Article 2.5 and 10 of th e TBT Agreement.  Norway was of the view that 
the ban should not be put in place unless the scientif ic underpinnings demonstr ated and justified the 
need and the appropriateness of these measures. 
8. The representative of th e European Communities  recalled that the measures at issue had been 
notified on the grounds of protection of animal life, as set out in Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement.  
She took note of the comments made and pointed out that the draft measures were being examined to 
assess their compatibility both with European Comm unity and international law.  A substantive 
response would be provided once this procedure was concluded.  
(iii) India - Mandatory labelling for biotechnology  food products (G/TBT/N/IND/12) and India 
trade policy requiring approval for impor ting biotechnology products (G/TBT/N/IND/17) 
9. The representative of the United States  was concerned that comments would not be taken into 
account regarding the notified measure for the approval for the importation of biotechnology 
products.  India was to implement the regulati on the day after the deadline to submit comments 
(8 July 2006);  in fact, the notification had been made the day after the regulation had been adopted.  It was noted that the United States had many questions regarding th e two above-mentioned 
regulations and on how India would implement these rules, including their enforcement procedures to 
ensure non-discriminatory application to imported products.  The representative of the United States 
hoped that further discussions could be held with India on the development of these regulations and 
noted that concerns had already been raised b ilaterally and would also be raised in the SPS 
Committee.   India was requested to suspend i ndefinitely the implementation of these measures G/TBT/M/39 
Page 4  
 
  pending clear guidance on non-discriminatory implem entation and enforcement, in order to avoid 
potential trade disruption. 
10. The representative of India
 recalled that bilateral talks had been held with US representatives 
ten days before and that his dele gation had informed the United States that the measure notified by the 
Ministry of Commerce and Industry was not a new re gulation, but an existing one which had been in 
force since 1989.  It was explained that the regul ation, which was contained in the Environmental 
Protection Act, provided that any GM food would ha ve to be approved by the Genetic Engineering 
Approval Committee (GEAC), as per Indian laws.  Howe ver, this did not apply to importers:  the new 
regulation was elaborated to enforce the existing re gulation also for other countries, and was notified 
to the WTO for transparency purposes.  He recalled that when concerns had been raised, the operation 
of this regulation had been suspended until 7 July 2006.  He pointed out that his authorities were 
examining the matter further and that replies to th e specific questions raised by the United States 
would be provided bilaterally. 
(iv) European Communities – Batteries (G/TBT/N/EEC/98) 
11. The representative of China  noted that while his delegation agreed with efforts by the 
European Communities to protect the environment a nd consumers, it was stressed that more stringent 
requirements (as set out in the above-mentioned notifi cation) could not be adopted without taking into 
account the current level of technology and production in the world, especially the developing world.  
Over-stringent requirements and sta ndards could be regarded as trade restrictions which were not in 
compliance with the core principle of the TBT Ag reement of choosing the least trade restrictive 
measure.  The representative of China was of the view that the requirements on hazardous substances 
in batteries were twelve times more restrictive than the previous criteria.  Therefore, in his 
delegation's view, the measure was restricting tr ade more than protecting the environment and 
consumers.  Moreover, China found the definition of  the scope of products subject to exemptions 
from the directive unclear, and requested the Eur opean Communities to provide detailed information 
on the matter, so that the Chinese industry could operat e accordingly.  Finally,  China was of the view 
that the minimum criteria for battery recycling were  not based on science and requested the European 
Communities to provide scientific evidence.  The European Communities was invited to respond to 
the written comments which had been provided, and to provide an additional transitional period for 
developing country Members. 
12. The representative of the European Communities  confirmed that comments had been received 
by the EC Enquiry Point, and that a response w as being prepared.  With regards to the limits on 
cadmium, it was stressed that this target had been  selected according to several impact assessment 
studies, and that a partial ban was the most efficien t way to protect the environment.  The ban would 
only apply to portable batteries and to batteries wh ere substitutes of cadmium were available.  
Regarding the exemptions from th is prohibition, the representative  of the European Communities 
noted that these were defined in Article 4.3 of the directive, which listed three types of products for 
which substitutes were not availabl e:  emergency and alarm systems, medical equipment and cordless 
power tools.  It was also pointed out that recyc ling targets had been agreed on the basis of impact 
studies carried out in 2003 and 2004;  the EC dele gation could provide copies of these studies to the 
Chinese authorities.  With regards to the transitional period, it was stressed that once the directive was 
adopted there would be a two year transitional period  for EC member States to adopt it, thus leaving 
enough time for other countries to adapt to the new requirements. 
(v) Japan - Amendment to Enforcement Order of Industrial Safety and Health Law 
(G/TBT/N/JPN/166) 
13. The representative of China was concerned that the requirements on bicycles contained in the 
above-mentioned measure were over-restrictive an d therefore not in compliance with the TBT  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 5 
 
 
  principle of choosing the least trade restrictive alte rnative.  It was pointed out that there was no 
scientific evidence that showed th e risks of asbestos when used as a friction material for brakes on 
bicycles.  He believed that technology was not sufficiently advanced to produce a substitute for 
asbestos, and that its use should not be completely r estricted in production.  China requested Japan to: 
take the current situation into account;  abide by  the provisions of the TBT Agreement;  provide 
technical assistance to developing Members upon requ est;  and, provide developing Members with at 
least a two year transitional period so that industry could adapt its production and accelerate their research on substitute materials. 
14. The representative of Japan
 took note of the comments made by China. 
(vi) Greece – Ban on wheat 
15. The representative of Canada  expressed concern about the f act that Greece continued to 
maintain inspection and testing requirements for im ported, non-EU grain, and that these requirements 
were unnecessary, discriminatory, unjustifiable a nd contravened international trade obligations.  
While the Greek measure had significant SPS-related elements, her delegation was of the view that 
there were also technical elements which we re inconsistent with the provisions of the 
TBT Agreement.  In particular, the Canadian dele gation stressed that:  (i) the regulations were 
discriminatory as they applied only to grain impor ted from third countries (and not Greece or the EC 
members States);  (ii) the conformity assessment requirements were more trade restrictive than necessary, therefore creating unnecess ary obstacles to trade;  (iii) the regulations required the 
inspection of all shipments for the presence of genetically modified organisms, including GM 
varieties of wheat, even though no such variety w as approved in Canada or was commercially grown 
anywhere in the world, and no validation methodologies for GM wheat existed.  This would result in a 
significant proportion, possibly even 100 per cent of Canadian shipments being inspected without any 
justification.  It was the Canadian understanding that also the European Commission was concerned 
about the Greek measures and had provided written co mments;  her delegation appreciated the efforts 
of the European Communities on this matter and urged Greece to remove these WTO inconsistent 
regulations.  It was pointed out that other avenues to  address this issue might be sought if the concerns 
were not satisfactorily addressed. 
16. The representative of the European Communities
 recalled that the issue had been discussed in 
the SPS Committee for some time.  Her delegation hoped to provide a detailed response to the TBT 
Committee at its next meeting. 
(vii) Israel – Connection Boxes for Electrical Installations  
17. The representative of th e European Communities  raised concerns on certain requirements 
imposed by the Israeli standard SI 145, regardi ng connection boxes for electrical installations.  He 
noted that the standard SI 145, when it was origin ally adopted in 1994, was identical to the relevant 
IEC international standard.  In 2000, however, requirements had been introduced that did not 
correspond to the requirements or recommendations  of IEC 60670-1 and IEC 60670-2 on boxes and 
enclosures for electrical accessories for household and similar fixed electrical installations.   One of 
the additional requirements was the obligation to u se a mechanical partition inside the connection box 
in order to keep each device separated from each other.  The introduction of the partition had been 
justified by the Israeli authorities with the po ssible danger arising from the presence of different 
devices in the same box.  He pointed out that, according to the opinion of the experts in this field, the 
presence of partitions inside the boxes did not bring about any additional protection.  Therefore, it had 
not been foreseen by the relevant international st andard.  Another requirement which deviated from 
IEC 60760 was that the "glow wire test value" was se t for all parts of connection boxes at the value of 
850° Celsius.  However, the IEC standard required this high test value only for certain parts of the 
box.  According to the IEC standard, a test value of 650° Celsius, which was significantly lower than G/TBT/M/39 
Page 6  
 
  the value required by the Israeli standard, was suff icient for parts of the insulating material, not 
necessary to retain current-carrying parts in the partition boxes.   
18. The European Communities had been informed that at the forthcoming meeting of the 
relevant technical committee of the Israeli sta ndardization body, the standard SI 145 would be 
discussed.  He expressed his delegation's encouragemen t to the Israeli authorities to align the legal 
requirements of this standard with the requirements of  the relevant internationa l standard, and to apply 
national regulations in accordance with the TBT Agre ement – i.e., in a non discriminatory way and in 
a way which was not more trade-restrictive than necessary. 
(viii) China – Leather and leather products (G/TBT/N/CHN/174) 
19. The representative of Argentina
 enquired whether if the measure to which the notification 
referred had already entered into force or not. 
20. The representative of China  noted that his delegation would provide the information required 
bilaterally. 
(ix) China – Duplicative testing and certification requirements for medical devices 
21. The representative of the United States  recalled that her delegation had raised bilaterally with 
China the issue of duplicative testing and cer tification requirements on medical devices.  She 
welcomed the recent commitment made by China to  eliminate these duplicative requirements, which 
were applicable to eight categories of imported medi cal devices.  To this end, a notice (Notice N° 70) 
containing an announcement of a single unified testing laboratory process had been published on 
30 April 2003.  The United States sought further info rmation from China on its plans to eliminate the 
remaining redundancies, in particular the two application processes to the State Food and Drug 
Administration (SFDA) and to China National Accreditation Administration (CNCA), the two 
application fees and the two on-site  factory inspections and audits. 
22. The representative of China  noted that a relevant reply would be provided either through 
bilateral channels or at the next meeting of the TBT Committee. 
2. Concerns Previously Raised 
(i) Norway - Restrictions on the Use of  Deca-bromo diphenylether (deca-BDE) 
(G/TBT/N/NOR/6) 
23. The representative of Japan  recalled that, at the previous meeting of the Committee, her 
delegation had asked Norway to explain, in accord ance with Article 2.5 of the TBT Agreement, the 
justification for the proposed prohibition of deca-BDE.   She noted that Norway's explanation was that 
the draft regulation was based on scientific evidence  and public hearings, and requested Norway to 
provide information about the risks based on scientific  data.  Her delegation was also interested in 
knowing more about the discussions held during public hearings. 
24. The representative of Norway  informed the Committee that the proposed regulation would 
not enter into force, as originally planned, on 1 Ju ly 2006.  She explained that the Norwegian Ministry 
of Environment was considering several inputs fro m different groups and that these would be taken 
into account before finalizing the position regardi ng the regulation.  She took note of the comments 
made by Japan.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 7 
 
 
  25. The representative of Jordan  thanked Norway for the update, and hoped that the revised 
decision on the ban on deca-BDE would also take into account the comments made by WTO Members.  He shared the comments made by Japan. 
26. The representative of the United States
 recalled that her delegation had also raised concerns 
and thanked Norway for the update. 
(ii) Korea - Import of Fish Heads 
27. The representative of New Zealand  recalled her delegation's concern with respect to the issue 
of edible fish head imports by the Republic of Ko rea, a matter that her delegation had been raising 
since 2001 in the TBT Committee.  She noted that edible hake heads were caught in New Zealand 
waters and processed by New Zealand boats, but  were prohibited from entering the Republic of 
Korea.  By contrast, hake heads caught in New Z ealand waters but processed by Korean boats were 
allowed entry into the Korean market.  She also  recalled that, in August 2005, Korea had proposed 
new requirements that would continue to prevent the import of hake heads from New Zealand, and 
stressed that her delegation had demonstrated th rough correspondence with Korea how these proposed 
requirements would continue to prevent trade.  The representative of New Zealand urged Korea to 
grant hake heads caught in New Zealand waters and processed by New Zealand boats a treatment no 
less favourable to that accorded to hake heads caught by Korean boats.  She stressed that, despite the 
bilateral talks with Korea and the many times the issue had been raised in the TBT Committee, Korea 
had not been able to provide on  any occasion, a WTO justification for its discrimination against 
products caught by New Zealand boats.  Her delega tion was in the hope that rapid progress towards 
the resolution of the issue could be made. 
28. The representative of Norway  shared the concerns expressed by New Zealand and recalled 
that her delegation had also been e ngaged in bilateral talks with Korea,  in addition to raising the issue 
in the TBT Committee.  Her delegation hoped that  Korea and all concerned Members could come 
together to discuss all aspects of the issue in orde r to find a mutually satisfactory solution as soon as 
possible. 
29. The representative of the European Communities  reported that good progress had been made 
with Korea under the on-going bilateral discussion.  She hoped that the two parties would be able to 
finalize an arrangement in the next few months. 
30. The representative of Korea  stressed that his country was re ady to allow the import of edible 
fish heads;  however, for safety issues, his author ities were trying to establish sanitary standards for 
the product.  He noted that while bilateral di scussions with New Zealand were still on-going, New 
Zealand had not agreed on the proposed standards.  It  was stressed that Korea would treat the issue in 
a non-discriminatory manner. 
(iii) European Communities – Regulation on Certai n Wine Sector Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/15, 
Corr.1-2 and G/TBT/N/EEC/57) 
31. The representative of New Zealand  remained concerned with the overall EC approach to wine 
labelling, as reflected in Regulation 753/2002 an d in the amending Regulation 316/2004.  These 
appeared to remain in conflict with the core prin ciple of the TBT Agreement, in particular with 
Article 2.  She recalled that her delegation had raised its concerns , both substantial and procedural, 
bilaterally with the European Communities as well as at almost every TBT Committee meeting since 
2002;  yet the issue remained unresolved. 
32. The representative of Mexico  associated his delegation with the comments made.  G/TBT/M/39 
Page 8  
 
  33. The representative of the European Communities
 took note of the concerns expressed and 
reminded the representative of New Zealand that sev eral informal discussions had been held on the 
issue of wine labelling.  Her delegation looked forwar d to engaging in additional fruitful discussions 
on the matter. 
(iv) Sweden – Restrictions on the use of  Deca-bromo diphenylether (deca-BDE) 
(G/TBT/N/SWE/59) 
34. The representative of Japan  recalled that, at the previous meeting, her delegation had 
requested Sweden to provide a justification to its proposed prohibition of deca-BDE, in accordance 
with Article 2.5 of the TBT Agreement.  She also recalled that the European Communities had 
explained that the regulation was being examined, and requested them to provide details of this 
evaluation. 
35. The representative of the United States  referred to the previous meeting of the Committee, 
where it had been noted that the European Co mmunities had conducted a risk assessment of deca-
BDE which had not identified any risk posed by the substance.  On the basis of that result, the 
European Communities had decided to exempt deca-B DE from the scope of the RoHS Directive.  She 
hoped that Sweden would take into account the concer ns raised by Members and the potential impact 
on trade of its proposed prohibition. 
36. The representative of Jordan  recalled that his delegation too had expressed concerns, and 
sought an update of the situation. 
37. The representative of the European Communities  informed the Committee that the internal 
consultation process had not been c oncluded yet and that her delegati on would revert to the issue at 
the next meeting. 
(v) United States - Energy Conservation Stan dards for Certain Consumer Products and 
Commercial and Industrial Equipment (G/TBT/N/USA/154) 
38. The representative of the United States  provided an update on the concern raised by China at 
the previous meeting of the Committee.  She recalled that on 23 November 2005 the US Enquiry 
Point had notified a Federal Register publication by  the U.S. Department of Energy, which was a 
technical amendment and clarified that the notificatio n had been made by mistake.  The purpose of the 
technical amendment was to incorporate the energy conservation standards and related definitions that 
the Congress had prescribed into the Code of Fede ral Regulations which, it was explained, was the 
compilation of all regulations.  It was not a proposal for comments as foreseen in WTO rules.  She noted that written comments by China had been r eceived and that the Enquiry Point had transmitted 
them to the Department of Energy, which had provided a written response to China. 
(vi) India – Regulation on Medical Devices (G/TBT/N/IND/19) 
39. The representative of th e European Communities
 recalled that on 6 October 2005, India's 
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare had declared that a list of ten sterile medical devices had to be 
considered as drugs under the relevant acts.  Guidelines for import and manufacture of medical 
devices described both the import licensing and the manufacture procedures to be respected in India 
for these ten medical devices.  It was noted th at these guidelines appeared to set mandatory 
requirements and that they therefore had to be co nsidered as technical regulations or conformity 
assessment procedures in terms of the TBT Agreemen t.  Thus, his delegation regretted that these had 
not been notified pursuant to Article 2.9.2 and 5.6.2 of the Agreement and that interested parties from 
Members had not been given an opportunity to pr ovide comments before the guidelines had entered 
into force.  Therefore, the attention of the Indian authorities could not be drawn at an early stage to the  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 9 
 
 
  fact that the submission of medical devices to the lega l regime applicable to drugs was contrary to the 
global regime.   The many unanswered questions re ndered the task of compliance more difficult for 
the European industry.  India was requested to allo w for a reasonable transition period for industry to 
comply with the guidelines.  In addition, India was requested to involve stakeholders in the development of clear and detailed guidance on the im plementation of the guidelines, as well as with 
respect to the ensuing comprehensive regulations for medical devices which were under preparation, 
and which needed also to be notified to the TBT Committee.   
40. Concerning conformity assessment, the re presentative of the European Communities 
requested India to ensure that adequate and ap propriately qualified resour ces were made available 
within the government and private bodies to ensure efficient, impartial, transparent and predictable 
conformity assessment procedures.  He sought c onfirmation from India on the following points:  
(i) that India would accept CE marking as evidence of substantial compliance with India's requirements;  (ii) that international standa rds and Global Harmonization Task Force (GHTF) 
guidance would be recognized without national de viations as a primary basis for demonstrating 
compliance with India's regulatory requirements;  a nd, (iii) that for all medical devices, the guidelines 
would be applied in a non-discriminatory fashion and w ithout regard to the country of origin.  Finally, 
the representative of the European Communities stressed the potential va lue of India's participation in 
regional and international regulatory harmoniza tion initiatives, such as the Asian Harmonization 
Working Party and the Global Harmonization Task Force.  Additional detailed technical comments 
would be provided directly to the delegation of India. 
41. The representative of the United States
 associated herself with the request to India to make a 
notification of these proposals to the TBT Committee and sought an update of the situation from 
India. 
42. The representative of India  noted that the standards at issue were country specific, and that 
the United States and the European Communities had their own standards as well, as no international 
standard was available.  If there was a need to harmonize them at interna tional level, India would 
certainly associate itself with this process, as this w ould improve trade.  He stressed that his country 
understood and was committed to the WTO principles, and that these measures would be notified.3 
(vii) European Communities - Disposable lighters (G/TBT/N/EEC/89) 
43. The representative of China  remained concerned about the above-mentioned measure, and 
recalled that his delegation had had many discussions  on the issue with the European Communities.  
His delegation's concerns related mainly to the fo llowing points:  (i) the discriminatory treatment of 
lighters:  refuelable lighters with over five years lifetime were exempted from having to be child-
resistant whereas other lighters were obliged to comply with this requirement;  (ii) the TBT 
Agreement provided that technical regulations should be based on perfo rmance rather than descriptive 
characteristics or design, and normal lighters with child-resistant or equivalent device could fully 
meet these requirements;  (iii) the transitiona l period:  while the European Communities were 
providing a ten month transitional period, the time needed by industr y and enterprises to adapt their 
production to the new requirements was longer, and a pe riod of at least twenty months needed to be 
provided;  and, (iv) equivalent measures need ed be taken into account as the TBT Agreement 
recognized that different measures with the same obj ective might be considered as equivalent:  child-
resistant devices were not the only option and ot her measures such as increasing weights over 8.5 
pounds could prevent children from igniting lighters.   
44. The representative of the European Communities  informed the Committee that the 
EC decision had been adopted on 11 May 2006, and that the new requirements would enter into force 
                                                      
3 Subsequently notified as G/TBT/N/IND/19 on 16 June 2006. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 10  
 
  in March 2007.  She explained that the Commissi on was drafting a practical implementation guide 
which would indicate how the requirements would ha ve to be met and thanked the Chinese authorities 
for providing inputs in this respect.  On the Chinese re quest for an extension of the transitional period, 
she pointed out that Chinese companies were alrea dy complying with the requirements in standards 
from other countries, such as the United States and Canada, so they had already adapted their 
production.  The European Communities hoped that China could meet the ten month transitional 
period provided. 
(viii) 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) 
45. The representative of the United States
 recalled that on many occasions her delegation had 
stated its support for the objectives of the protec tion of human health and the environment sought by 
the REACH proposal, but that the regulatory approach  to meet these objectives had to be workable.  
In her delegation's view, the REACH proposal remain ed, in overall terms: expensive, burdensome and 
difficult to implement effectively.  She encour aged the European Communities to adopt a more 
streamlined and transparent regulation, based  on science and on cost-effectiveness.  The 
US delegation had identified some areas for priority  attention.  On the implementation, it was noted 
that many important workability decisions would be made during the REACH implementation project, and expressed her delegation's interest in working with the European Communities to develop 
useful and workable documents.   
46. The United States was of the view that it was critical that the Europ ean Communities review 
the REACH proposal in order for it to be made consis tent with other international chemical regulatory 
efforts.  On the issue of the coverage of articles,  in order to increase the workability and flexibility of 
the regulation, her delegation supported the Eu ropean Council's version which required only 
intentional release substances in articles to be re gistered, if above one tonne.  The United States also 
supported the retention of Council language in Article 6.5 of the regulation, which excluded 
substances in articles already registered for a pa rticular use from the registration and notification 
requirements.  Additionally, if any substances rele ased unintentionally from imported articles required 
a notification, she recommended a limited inclusion of such unintentionally released substances to 
those on the list contained in Annex 13.  The re presentative of the United States further stressed that, 
in her delegation's view, it was difficult to justif y the REACH provision that required registration of 
non registered monomers in polymers, as these monom ers were reactive, and not chemical substances 
being imported.  On authorization, the US continue d to believe that an approach which allowed for 
risk-based decisions in determining the list in Anne x 13 would ensure that re gistration data would be 
better used and allow a more cost-effective regulatio n.  On substitutes, it was stressed that decisions 
needed to be made on the basis of the risk and performance attributes, for example energy or product 
efficiency associated with substitutes.  The Unite d States supported the European Council's  inclusion 
of the consideration in Articles 61.4 of the risks th at might arise from the use of substitutes, although 
the need for the qualification was still questioned.  Finally, the representative of the United States 
questioned the practicality of the five years maximu m time limit on authorization, which was added in 
the European Parliament version.  Depending on how this was interpreted and implemented, it could 
result in a forced phase-out period without regard to  the risks of the alternatives.  She urged the 
European Communities to take into account the concerns of its trading partners at this crucial stage in 
the decision making process. 
47. The representative of Mexico
 thanked the European Communities for its transparency and 
openness on the issue of REACH, but stressed that  his delegation remained concerned about the 
proposed regulation and agreed with the points made by the United States.  In light of the broad impact that the regulation would have, Mexico stress ed the need for technical assistance (Article 11), 
and special and differential treatment (Article 12).  In particular, Article 12 of the TBT Agreement 
provided for various situations in which special and differential treatment could be provided to  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 11 
 
 
  developing countries.  For example, a tiered entering  into force of the regulation could be a way to 
enable countries to implement the regulation more effectively and smoothly.   
48. The representative of Chile  appreciated the efforts made by the European Communities to 
improve the draft regulation in light of the comments received.  She recalled that during bilateral meetings her delegation had made  various proposals on the proposed regulation.  One of these was 
that greater relevance needed to be given to risk  assessment and to scientific evidence with respect to 
the authorization process.  Another was that minera ls and metals should be completely excluded from 
the scope of application of REACH, with the ex ception of those which were dangerous.  Also, the 
regulation should not be extended be yond the borders of the European  Communities, as was the case 
with respect to quality labels for articles and the so  called "duty of care".  Finally, Chile was of the 
view that the registration of substances containe d in articles should be limited only to those which 
were considered dangerous.  Chile concurred with  Mexico's comments in r espect of the need for 
technical assistance to third countries to fac ilitate the implementation of the regulation. 
49. The representative of Australia
 thanked the European Communities for its willingness to 
consider Members' concerns in the development of the proposed regulation.  Nevertheless, her 
delegation remained concerned that some aspects  of REACH, in particular its authorization 
requirements, were more trade restrictive than n ecessary to meet its objectives.  For instance, the 
authorization requirements on ores and ore concentrates containing substitutes that presented minimum dangers to public health were unnecessar y to achieve the objective of protecting human 
health and the environment.    In her delegation's view, subjecting such a broad range of materials to 
authorization was unnecessary for two reasons.  First, materials would be captured which, while 
containing the requisite amount of a substance, pr esented little danger to human health.  Second, the 
safety aspects of minerals and metals were adequately  regulated by other legislation in the European 
Communities, for example Council Directive 96/61/EC.  A clear exclusion of ores and ore concentrates posing a minimal risk to public hea lth and the environment from the scope of REACH 
would be a less trade restrictive alternative, wh ich would not compromise the ability of REACH to 
meet its objectives, as those substances that posed significant risks to health and safety would remain 
within its scope. 
50. The representative of China
 recalled that recently the United States had raised concerns on 
some specific items, such as the list of hazardous substances, information release and substitution.  
China shared all these concerns and supported the point s made by the US delegate.  He expressed his 
delegation's request to the European Communities to take into account the comments received from 
Members, including China, and to bring the regula tion into compliance with the TBT Agreement, thus 
reducing the negative impact on international trade.  He also urged the Eur opean Communities to take 
into account the special interest and concerns of  developing members in the drafting process of 
REACH.  Finally, he thanked the European Comm unities for providing detailed information and 
hoped that this would continue.   
51. The representative of the European Communities  welcomed the positive feedback received 
concerning the transparent and cooperative manner in  which his delegation had dealt with the issue 
and thanked the United States for their positive co mments on the European Council's version of the 
proposed regulation.  He explained that the Europ ean services were waiting for the formal adoption of 
the common position by the Council, which was expected to take place in the near future.  After that, 
the Parliament and the Council could complete  a second reading and REACH could possibly be 
adopted by the end of 2006, to enter into force in the spring of 2007.  It was stressed that, at all stages 
of the procedure, the institutions involved ha d ensured that WTO rules were respected.   
52. The Council text, which was fully supported by the European Commission, did not show any 
discrimination between European producers and exporte rs sending substances to the European Union.  
The current text was more effective and more wo rkable, and addressed some specific concerns voiced G/TBT/M/39 
Page 12  
 
  by Members.  For example, it exempted minerals, ores and ore concentrates from the registration 
obligation, if these substances were not chemicals,  not modified and not dangerous.  On technical 
assistance, the representative of the European Co mmunities agreed that guida nce was needed for the 
stakeholders, to ensure consistent, cost eff ective and smooth implementation of REACH.  He 
informed the Committee that th e European Commission was in the process of preparing such 
guidance, and that the agency which was going to be  set up would also be asked to provide technical 
assistance and scientific support, as well as training and information seminars to interested parties.  
He noted that, once the common position was adopted , an amendment to the original notification 
would be submitted to the TBT Committee, outlining the main changes that had been introduced, and 
explaining in details some provisions, for instance Article 5.3 on monomers.   
(ix) China - Revision of list of toxic chemicals se verely restricted in the People's Republic of 
China in the regulation for environmental management on the first import of chemicals and the import and export of toxic chemicals 
53. The representative of th e European Communities
 once again raised concerns about the new 
requirements on toxic chemicals in China, which ha d entered into force on 1 January 2006.  It was 
recalled that at the previous meeting of the Committee, China had been requested to provide 
clarification with regard to the absence of a TBT notification – as well as clarification on how the 
risks had been assessed.  An answ er was still pending.  The EC delegation requested an extension of 
the transition period which would allow for the a pplication for the registration certificate and the 
release notice at the same time.  Clarification was sought on progress made on the rules for mixtures.  
In addition, the European Communities requested Ch ina to lower the registration fees so that they 
reflected the real administrative cost of the service rendered. 
54. The representative of the United States  shared the comments made by the European 
Communities and sought an update on China's plans to  notify the regulation.  While the representative 
of the United States appreciated the fact that two grace periods had been granted, she was of the 
opinion that a six month extension should be given in order to address all the questions and concerns 
raised. 
55. The representative of Japan  echoed the comments made. 
56. The representative of China  recalled that in order to protect human health and the 
environment, the chemical regulations had b een modified in 2005 and that POPs and PICs 
conventions had been integrated in to the Chinese control list.  Taki ng into consideration the concerns 
by Members, China had provided a three month tr ansitional period, and this period had been  
extended for an additional three months.  Concerns  raised by Members were under consideration by 
the environmental protection authorities and inform ation would be provided in due time.  With 
regards to the notification concerns, the Committee was informed that the relevant notification was 
under preparation and woul d be submitted shortly. 
(x) China – Administration on the Control of Po llution Caused by Electronic Information 
Products (G/TBT/N/CHN/140) 
57. The representative of the European Communities  thanked China for the response provided to 
comments made and noted that further comments were being prepared as some issues remained 
unclear.  The European Communities asked if China could provide a specific timetable for issuing a 
catalogue of products which would be covered by th e measure.  Also, in relation to the mandatory 
certification under the CCC certification scheme, which was required for products listed in the 
catalogue, the EC representative enquired whether anot her procedure, such as the self declaration of 
conformity (SDoC) had been considered.  Finally, the European Communities was seeking  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 13 
 
 
  clarification on certain definitions: for instan ce, the "designer", the "manufacturer" and the 
"producer", so that responsibilities as regards product conformity could be clarified. 
58. The representative of Japan  recalled that his delegation too had raised concerns on the issue 
and requested China to provide a response. 
59. The representative of the United States  recalled that China had pointed out that the regulation 
was of a framework nature and that specific catalogues of products subject to it would be developed in 
the future.  She wondered if these catalogues would be  notified, with an additional opportunity for 
comments provided.  It was also flagged that th e US industry had particular concerns about the 
anticipated entry into force of the measure, on 1 March 2007.  In particular, the industry was 
concerned about its ability to comply with the new labelling requirements, and had estimated that they 
needed 12-18 months to adjust to the ne w requirements once the details were known. 
60. The representative of China  highlighted that the catalogue of products was under preparation, 
and pointed out that his country would fulfil its transparency obligations, including to provide a 
comment period.  He noted that a reply to Japan's comments was being prepared. 
(xi) Saudi Arabia – International Conformity Certification Programme (ICCP) 
61. The representative of Japan  stressed that Japanese comp anies found the Saudi Arabia 
programme too complicated and strict, and that too many procedures were in place in order to get the 
certification.  Another problem was the unclear prod uct coverage of ICCP.  His delegation hoped that 
Saudi Arabia could simplify the progra mme and make it more transparent. 
(xii) European Communities – Directive 2002/95/EC on the Restriction of the Use of Certain 
Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment (RoHS) 
62. The representative of the United States  noted that the RoHS Directive would enter into force 
in July 2006.  It was her delegation's understandi ng that the technical adaptation committee, which 
could decide on the coverage exem ptions, would meet before the entry into force of the measure.  
However, that meeting had been postponed and this  was creating a difficult situation for companies 
seeking exemptions and which could be found in violation of using banned substances, even if an 
exemption was subsequently granted by  the technical adaptation committee. 
63. The representative of the European Communities  pointed out that several exemptions had 
already been granted for different products and that  this was an on-going process.  She would provide 
more information about exemptions given at a later stage at the next meeting of the Committee.  It 
was also pointed out that a guidance document on th e implementation of the RoHS Directive had been 
developed and, although it was not legally bindin g, it would provide clarity to industry on how 
producers might demonstrate compliance with RoHS requirements.  The guidance document would be 
reviewed whenever more specifications were agreed.  The representative of the European 
Communities further noted that the practical resp onsibility of assuring compliance with the RoHS 
directive remained with the EC member States,  which had already reached a common understanding 
on the approach to take on RoHS compliance.  From 1 July 2006, products placed on the market 
would be considered as RoHS-compliant if the pr oducer could demonstrate this with a supplier's 
declaration of conformity (SDoC).  In case serious concerns about a product arose, the market surveillance authorities would carry out the necessary tests.  It was also noted that the European 
Commission was carrying out a conformity check of national measures transposing the directive so as to address any possible conformity issues in a systemic manner. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 14  
 
  (xiii) China - Wireless Local Area Network Products  with WAPI functions (G/TBT/N/CHN/189) 
64. The representative of th e European Communities
 expressed his delegation's continued interest 
in the Chinese encrypted standard on Wireless Au thentication and Privacy Infrastructure, known as 
WAPI, and thanked the Chinese authorities for their willingness to engage in a dialogue.  He sought 
clarification on the scope of application of WAPI :  in particular, he w ondered whether WAPI was 
mandatory only for public procurement of wireless local  area network or if it we nt beyond this sphere, 
for instance covering not only government procurem ent but also procurement for other state owned 
entities.  The representative of the European Co mmunities referred to the on-going international 
standardization work aimed at integrating  encr yption requirements into the existing international 
standards on wireless local area network equi pment (ISO IEC 8802-11).  He expressed his 
delegation's encouragement to China to continue working with the ISO and IEC, with a view to 
developing a satisfactory globally standardized soluti on, which was able to ensure the interoperability 
of wireless local area network equipment worldwide.  He stressed that a unilateral decision by China 
to adopt mandatory specific encryption requirements in an area where an international standard was 
being prepared would be inconsis tent with Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement, which stated that, 
where international standards existed or their co mpletion was imminent, Members should use them as 
a basis for their technical regulation.  Finally, he pointed out that the European Communities and most 
other economies left the setting of encryption mechanis ms to the market, and this raised the question 
of whether there was a need to regulate at all in this field. 
65. The representative of Japan  recalled that, at the previous meeting of the Committee, her 
delegation had asked specific questions4 on the issue, and invited China to provide a reply. 
66. The representative of China  recalled that WAPI standards we re developed to protect national 
information safety, and stressed that this was in  line with the TBT Agreement.  The process of 
development of these standards had started in 2003;   a notification had been made and comments 
from Members had been taken into account.  He furthe r stressed that attention had been paid to the 
work of the ISO and IEC and that his authorities would continue to do so.  He took note of the 
concerns expressed, which would be transmitted to the competent authorities in capital. 
(xiv) European Communities – Directive 2005/32 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energy-
using products and amending Council Dire ctive 92/42/EEC and Directives 96/57/EC and 
2000/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council 
67. The representative of Japan  recalled that the European Communities had explained that the 
above measure was of a framework nature, and that  product categories and detailed regulations would 
be described in the subsequent implementing meas ures.  It was her delegation's understanding that 
some studies had suggested that there would be  implementing measures for 14 product categories, 
such as copiers and computers, and she believed that implementing measur es stipulating concrete 
numerical criteria might be more trade restrictive than necessary.  She expressed her delegation's 
request to the European Communities to clarify wh en the implementing measures would be drafted. 
68. The representative of China  shared the concerns expressed by Japan, and sought further 
information from the European Communities on th e drafting of the catalogue for energy using 
products ("EuP").  He stressed the impor tance of transparency in the process. 
69. The representative of the United States  associated herself with the comments made, and 
welcomed the statement made at the previous  meeting by the European Commission that a 
notification of the implementing measures would be made.5 
                                                      
4 G/TBT/M/38, para. 34.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 15 
 
 
  70. The representative of th e European Communities  confirmed that, at this stage, no notification 
had been made since studies were being conducted;   moreover, no implementing measures had been 
drafted to date.  The candidate products for the implementing measures were taken from the catalogue 
which was provided in the EuP Directive.  Conc rete proposals for the implementing measures would 
be subject to the European consultation mechanism,  which included public consultation;  these were 
expected at the earliest for the summer of 2007.  This  date would coincide with the expiration of the 
transition deadline for EuP Directiv e in EC member States.  She stressed that third countries, as well 
as their manufacturers or other economic operators, would have the possibility to submit comments at 
the first stage of the preparation of the proposal s, by means of an open on-line consultation.  
Governments would then have the possibility to  submit comments in the context of the TBT 
notification. 
(xv) Korea - Recycling of Electrical and Electronic Products and Automobiles 
71. The representative of Japan  welcomed the answer provide d by Korea to the comments 
submitted by the Japanese delegation to the effect that the Korea would observe WTO rules.  She 
noted that further comments had been sent through the national Enquiry Point in May 2006, and 
invited Korea to provide an answer to those as well. 
72. The representative of Korea  recalled that several comments on the proposed regulation had 
been received from Members and that replies had b een provided.  He noted that consultations were 
still ongoing and that his authorities were in the process of finalizing the draft, the final version of which would be communicated to WTO Members. 
(xvi) European Communities - Draft Commission Deci sion regarding the Classification of the  
Reaction to Fire Performance of Cons truction Products (G/TBT/N/EEC/92) 
73. The representative of Japan
 noted that at the Eu ropean Communities' 62nd meeting of the 
Standing Committee on Constructi on Products, a positive opinion had been expressed on the draft 
Commission decision regarding the classification of reactions to the fire performance of electric 
cables.  Her delegation wondered if the comments made by WTO Members and the discussions in the 
previous meeting of the TBT Committee had been taken into account by the Standing Committee. 
74. The representative of the European Communities  confirmed that the Standing Committee on 
Construction Products had supporte d the European Commission draf t decision, and noted that a 
comprehensive answer to all comments received was under preparation.  He stressed that the acidity 
criteria which had raised concerns among Member s was an optional classification criteria, which 
allowed EC member States to require the use of certain cables in certain construction works, for 
instance in tunnels.  The reply would be sent to all Members who had submitted comments, and also 
posted on the EC TBT website, where all comments and replies were made available.6 
C. OTHER  MATTERS 
1. Presentation by the European Co mmunities:  Exporters' Helpdesk 
75. The representative of the European Communities  made a detailed presentation on the 
EC Exporters' Helpdesk, an online facility aimed at assisting developing countries to access the 
                                                                                                                                                                     
5 G/TBT/M/38, para. 92. 
6 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/tbt/  G/TBT/M/39 
Page 16  
 
  European market.  The presentation was done on-line
7 and an explanatory brochure was provided at 
the meeting. 
76. The representative of Mexico  appreciated the presentation made and noted that the facility 
was a very useful tool which was much utilized by exporters in Mexico.  He wondered how long it 
had taken to develop the facility, what the budget was and how many people were involved in the 
daily running of the system.  He also asked whethe r the system included standards and regulations for 
services, conformity assessment procedures and a reference to draft technical regulations and standards. 
77. The representative of the European Communities
 explained that the database used mostly 
internal data, except for import requirements and taxes,  which were provided by external consultants.  
She further informed the Committee that it had taken nearly three years to develop the database, and 
that this had been done in three stages.  On the budg et, she pointed out that the external consultants' 
budget was 1,400,000 Euros for a three year service contract, and that the European Communities 
were in the process of launching a new tender to cover the period 2007-2009.  In terms of manpower, 
she noted that all European Comm unities services, including EC delegations abroad, provided data.  
The daily management of the facility required five  people, with a further two IT experts and a 
network of approximately fifty add itional experts.  She noted that  the database included information 
only on goods, not on services.  Finally, she clar ified that the information provided on technical 
regulations and conformity assessment procedures w as related only to those measures which were in 
force, not to draft texts.  Further information, including all communications, could be found through 
the link to Eurolex.8 
2. Codex Committee for Food Labelling  
78. The representative of Canada  raised an issue concerning country of origin labelling in relation 
to the work in the Codex Committee for Food Labe lling.  She pointed out that the Codex Committee 
on Milk and Milk Products had adopted sixteen revi sed standards for cheese, which included revised 
provisions for mandatory country of origin labelling.  The revised standards had then been referred to 
the Codex Committee on Food Labelling for endorseme nt.  While there was general consensus at 
Codex that there was value on updating the standards, as many of them had not been reviewed since 
1960, many delegations could not come to an agreem ent with respect to the Codex Committee of Milk 
and Milk Products proposed mandato ry code provision for Article 7.2.  However, she noted that the 
Codex Committee Food Labelling had decided to move  the standard to the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission, at Step 8, without the endorsement of the Codex Committee on Food Labelling.  The 
representative of Canada called on TBT Committ ee Members to consult with the corresponding 
Codex representatives, prior to the July meetings of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, to make 
them aware of this development on country of or igin labelling.  She hoped that a constructive and 
fruitful discussion on this important issue could be he ld to ensure that it was given due consideration 
in light of past discussions in TBT Committee on mandatory country of origin labelling. 
79. The representative of New Zealand  supported the comments made by Canada and believed 
that coordination between the Codex and the WTO was essential. 
80. The representative of the Codex  explained that the meeting of the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission would take place in July.  She noted th at there had been an agreement in the Committee 
on Milk and Milk Products to revise the standards, which included some sections on labelling.  Some 
delegations had not agreed with the provisions on co untry of origin labelling, which already existed in 
some adopted standards for milk and milk prod ucts or other products, for instance fruit and 
                                                      
7 http://exporthelp.europa.eu/.  The presen tation was made by Ms. Marta Moya Diaz. 
8 http://eur-lex.europa.eu   G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 17 
 
 
  vegetables.  These revised standards had therefore not  been endorsed, because of  lack of consensus, 
and, in accordance with established practice, had been sent to the Codex Alimentarius Commission 
for consideration.  She pointed out that the Co mmission could have a gene ral debate and possibly 
send the standards back to the relevant Committee, or adopt them without the labelling provisions.  
The outcome would depend on the discussion in the Commission.   
3. List of Members' Publications in relation to Technical Regulations, Conformity 
Assessment Procedures and Standards 
81. The representative of the United States  thanked the Secretariat for the document containing 
the list of Members' publications in relation to technical regulations, standards and conformity 
assessment procedures, contained in Job(06)/50,  and noted that her de legation woul d provide 
additional detailed website information.  She s ought clarification on whether the document included 
information on publications related to voluntary standards. 
82. The Secretariat  highlighted that the information contai ned in the document had been extracted 
from the statements on implementation and administ ration of the Agreement, submitted by Members 
under Article 15.2.  It included, when available, in formation on the publications  related to standards. 
83. The representative of th e European Communities  noted that his delegation would also provide 
additional details on electronic sources of information. 
III. TRIENNIAL REVIEW 
A. NEW SUBMISSIONS  
1. Canada on Counterfeiting of Certification Ma rks Affixed to Goods where there Exists a 
Health and/or Safety Concern 
84. The representative of Canada  introduced her delegation' s submission contained in 
G/TBT/W/265/Rev.1.  She proposed that the issue could be discussed in the context of the Fourth Triennial Review in the section dedicated to conformity assessment. 
85. The representative of Japan
 noted that this was a new topic which might need further 
consideration by the Committee.  He asked Canada  to provide more concrete examples that would 
illustrate the extent of the problem in the Cana dian market.  On the basis of these examples the 
Committee could then consider whether this was a ge neral problem or whether it was limited to some 
specific areas. 
86. The representative of the United States  noted that her delegation was interested in hearing 
more about the specific problems that Canada was experiencing in its market.  She was not sure 
whether the issue was appropriate  for the TBT Committee.  She also wondered how the discussion 
could then be distinguished from discussions taking place in other fora on intellectual property rights 
and counterfeit certification marks. In addition, th e United States sought information on actions that 
the Canadian authorities had taken to address their problem, and asked if the issue was limited to 
counterfeit of certification marks or if it was due to the lack of enforcement of compliance with 
technical regulations and standards. 
87. The representative of Mexico  indicated that his country also experienced problems of 
falsification and counterfeit.  However, Mexico was of the view that the issue went beyond the scope 
of the TBT Agreement as it had many different aspects linked to intellectual property, customs control, verification at sales and retail points and conformity assessment.  His country regarded the 
problem as a crime, which was subject to other rules of international law.  His delegation's approach G/TBT/M/39 
Page 18  
 
  would be one of enhancing the exchange of information on how countries ensured that their 
conformity assessment procedures and certification ma rks were legally used.  For instance, in his 
country, a computerized system linked the various fabrication and customs authorities, allowing them 
to constantly exchange information with respect to the characteristics of certificates and certification 
marks. 
88. The representative of the European Communities
 agreed that there were increased incidents 
of counterfeit products circulating in the markets.   For instance, in the European Communities in 
2004, the customs authorities had seized 100 million c ounterfeit articles, representing an increase of 
nearly one thousand per cent over the last four or five years.  However, his delegation was not sure about the linkage to the work of the TBT Committee,  and believed that the issue affected mainly 
customs.  For instance, in th e European Communities, the authorities were taking measures to 
strengthen customs control and to establish cooperativ e relationship with other countries.  He agreed 
with Mexico that it might be useful to share info rmation on the issue, but that the nature of the 
information which could be useful to exchange would need to be clarified.  He pointed out that, as 
Canada had suggested in its paper, a workshop could be a possibility:  but that it should not be limited 
to the TBT Committee.  It would need to involve other Committees of the WTO and different experts, 
as the problem went across a wide spectrum of resp onsibilities.  He sought clarification from Canada 
about what they considered the linkage with the TBT Agreement was. 
89. The representative of China
 noted that similar problems of c ounterfeit existed in his country.  
He stressed that this was a new topic and that more time was needed to enhance the understanding of 
the problem.  He sought clarification from Canada as  to what problems were encountered and what 
type of actions were taken.  He agreed with th e European Communities about the need to clarify the 
linkage to the TBT Committee, and also shared the view that there was not enough time left for discussion in order to include the issue as a sub-item in the Fourth Triennial Review. 
90. The representative of Korea
 was also of the view that more concrete information was needed. 
91. The representative of Canada  understood that this was a complex topic dealt with in a variety 
of fora.  Her delegation saw the linkage to the TBT Co mmittee in particular with respect to deceptive 
practices, and one of the aims of the proposal w as to focus on the specificity of the issue by 
exchanging information as to the problems in each country, and on how each country dealt with 
deceptive practices.  Some more concrete examples  and evidence of the problem in the Canadian 
market could be illustrated at the next meeting of the Committee, together with an explanation of the 
Canadian experience in terms of enforcement.  Her delegation was open to ways to analyse the issue, 
for instance the suggestion by Mexico to exchange  information on how to ensure that conformity 
assessment processes and certification marks were used legally.   
92. The representative of the UNECE  informed the Committee that  in the framework of the 
UNECE Working Party on Regulatory Cooperation and Standardization Policies under the Committee 
on Trade of the UNECE, there were initiatives in the field of counterfeit goods.  For instance, there 
was a proposal by the European Communities on the use of market surveillance as a complementary 
means to protect consumers against counterfeit, which would be discussed at the 16th session of the 
Working Party. As a member of the UNECE, Canada could consider raising their proposal also at the 
working party. 
2. Chile on Good Regulatory Practice and Transparency  
93. The representative of Chile  introduced her delegation's submission on good regulatory 
practice and transparency, contained in G/TBT/W/268.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 19 
 
 
  94. The representative of the European Communities  sought clarification on how domestic 
coordination was ensured in Chile:  was this done on  a regular basis?  on the basis of all the draft 
measures in the programme in a particular year?  did it involve physical meetings or was it done through electronic means?  The European Communiti es agreed with the principle of maximizing the 
opportunities for cooperation, as well as with the proposals on transparency. 
95. The representative of New Zealand
 noted that her country was undertaking a review of its 
standards and conformity assessment infrastructure.  One of the issues that was being considered in 
this review was how to establish some regulatory fo rum.  She had the same questions as those raised 
by the European Communities. 
96. The representative of China  noted that four recommendations were contained in the 
submission by Chile and that the first two we re related to the national commission for the 
coordination of TBT issues.  He pointed out th at in China there were different coordination 
mechanisms, but that there was no national committee – as this would be difficult to set up.  On transparency, he supported the suggestion to attach the text of a draft technical regulation to the 
notification. 
97. The representative of Chile
 explained that the national commission was made of 
representatives of all the agencies that published technical regulations, standards or conformity 
assessment procedures.  The contact points of th e various agencies were updated about what each 
agency was doing, and this was particularly u seful when other WTO Members sought information 
about technical regulations.  The national commissi on did not review technical regulations, but the 
agencies which were in the process of elaborating a technical regulation had to send it to the Ministry 
of Economy, which was overseeing the process.  Th e meetings of the national committee discussed 
issues such as the implementation of WTO rules and the implementation of such rules in the context 
of free trade agreements (FTAs).  She further noted that there was no set agenda and that issues were 
taken up as they came.  This system had worked ve ry well in her country;  all the various agencies 
were contributing voluntarily to discussion. 
98. The representative of Mexico  noted that his country had set up, in 1992, the National 
Standards Commission, which included fifteen representatives of ministries, standards-setting 
agencies and members of government agencies dealing with technical barriers to trade, such as the 
Ministry of Finance, the Consumer Protecti on Department and the Me xican Water Technology 
Institute.  The Commission also included representa tive from the private sector, mainly Chambers of 
Commerce and trade confederations, and representativ es from the universities.  The main goal of this 
Commission was to coordinate national standard s policy, which included the mechanism for the 
implementation of the national standards legisla tion, which had been in force since 1992.  The 
representative of Mexico explained that the 1992 La w oversaw the various channels and institutions 
through which Mexico complied with the TBT Agreem ent, including the transparency requirements.  
It also included provisions for impact assessments and the review of regulations, and for conformity 
assessment procedures as well as the accreditation of conformity assessment bodies.  The 1992 Law 
also stipulated that, when elaborating regulations, government agencies should comply not only with the WTO TBT disciplines, but also with other tr ade agreements, such as the North America Free 
Trade Agreement (NAFTA).  He emphasized that the National Commission had made it possible for 
Mexico to comply effectively with the obligations  under the TBT Agreement.  He also said that his 
delegation would provide an update to the stat ement under Article 15.2, reflecting all these 
developments. 
99. The representative of Korea
 was of the view that Members had different ways and means that 
provided mechanisms to ensure coordination among various agencies and that this flexibility should 
be maintained. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 20  
 
  3. Costa Rica on the Fourth Triennial Review 
100. The representative of Costa Rica
 introduced her delegation's pr oposal on the Fourth Triennial 
Review, contained in document G/ TBT/W/266, dated 7 June 2006. 
101. The representative of Mexico  noted that the three parts (II.A-C)  of Costa Rica's proposal were 
related to the discussion the Committee had had so far on the Fourth Triennial Review.  Regarding 
Section A ( ad hoc  consultations by the Chairman), while Me xico was of the view that this was a good 
idea which merited further consideration, some more  discussion was needed in terms of implications.  
Members' attention was drawn to the fact that in the SPS Committee this procedure existed and was 
provided for in the Agreement itself.  It was also noted that this would be a process that would take 
place prior to formal dispute settlement procedures under the DSU. 
102. The representative of the United States  noted the usefulness of exploring the experience in the 
SPS Committee of using the procedure for ad hoc  consultations, i.e. had the consultations been 
effective in resolving problems?  how were such  consultations set up?  was there any form of 
communisation that was provided to other Members a bout such discussions?  what was the link to the 
SPS Agreement, and, was there any link to the formal  dispute settlement process?  The US was of the 
view that answers to questions such as these woul d be helpful to the Comm ittee in further discussing 
Costa Rica's proposal (on ad hoc  consultations by the Chairman). 
103. The representative of the European Communities  was also of the view that much of what was 
contained in Costa Rica's proposal fit well in to the Committee's ongoing discussion under the Fourth 
Triennial Review.  Regarding the ad hoc  consultation mechanism, Members' attention was drawn to a 
proposal from the European Communities that had been  tabled in the context of discussions in the 
Negotiating Group on Market Access (hereafter "NAM A"):  this was a horizontal mechanism aimed 
at reducing the risk of future non-tariff barriers.  This proposal went in a similar direction as what had been proposed by Costa Rica excep t that instead of putting the Chair of the Committee in charge of 
the task to resolve possible differences of opinion on specific trade concerns, the EC proposal referred 
to a facilitator.
9   
104. The representative of Brazil  drew the Committee's attention to another submission made by a 
group of developing counties in the NAMA discussions ("NAMA 11")10 which proposed the creation 
of an NTB resolution mechanism wh ich also endeavoured to solve th e kinds of concerns that were 
addressed by Costa Rica's proposal, and was sim ilar to the proposal made by the European 
Communities.  The difference to Costa Rica's proposed ad hoc  consultation mechanism, as well as the 
EC NAMA proposal, was that it would be based on a roster of experts and facilitators to be 
maintained for this purpose of solving specific trade concerns.11   
105. The representative of Mexico  noted that the Committee needed to be careful not to mix or 
confuse the work of the TBT Committee with the on- going negotiations.  There was a fair amount of 
discussion outstanding about NTBs in the contex t of NAMA negotiations;  much knowledge was 
bring put forward in this group which was particular ly relevant to the work of the TBT Committee.  
106. The representative of Brazil  noted that it would be interesting for the TBT Committee to hold 
an information exchange with the Chair of the NAMA Group on this issue so that the TBT Committee was informed about relevant ongoing work.  He wa s of the view that it was important for the TBT 
                                                     
 
9 The EC proposal is contained in documen t TN/MA/W/11/Add.8, dated 1 May 2006.   
10 Argentina, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Brazil, Egypt, India, I ndonesia, Namibia, Ph ilippines, South 
Africa and Tunisia. 
11 The proposal is contained in TN/MA/W/68/Add.1, dated 8 May 2006. Argentina, Bolivarian Republic of 
Venezuela, Brazil, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Na mibia, Philippines, South Africa and Tunisia.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 21 
 
 
  Committee to be aware of the broader context in wh ich TBT issues were raised and discussed so as to 
avoid duplication of work. 
107. The representative of Malaysia  noted in respect of the two above-mentioned NAMA 
proposals (European Communities and NAMA 11) that  these were broad in coverage and did not 
restrict themselves to TBT per se ;  they related to non-tariff barriers.   This needed to be kept in mind 
with respect to any interaction with the NAMA Group. 
108. The representative of Costa Rica  wished to clarify with respect to the ad hoc  consultation 
mechanism that Costa Rica did not see their propo sed mechanism as a substitute to the DSU;  it was 
an alternative route for Members that could be less cumbersome and resource intensive as well as more expeditious.  With regard to the SPS Agre ement, paragraph 2 of Article 12 of the SPS 
Agreement states: “The Committee sh all encourage and facilitate ad hoc  consultations or negotiations 
among Members on specific sanitary or phytosanitary issues.”
12  In fact, the SPS Agreement did not 
define any particular procedure and it did not define a role for the Chairman.   Costa Rica was proposing that, in the TBT context, this role be de fined with greater precision.  In respect of NAMA, 
Costa Rica concurred that the TBT Committee ne eded to know the developments in the NAMA 
context.   
109. In concluding the discussion on the three new proposals
13, the Chairman  thanked the 
delegations of Canada, Chile and Costa Rica for their contributions. 
B. PREPARATION OF THE FOURTH TRIENNIAL REVIEW REPORT  
110. The Chairman  recalled that at the last meeting of the TBT Committee, the discussion of the 
factual elements of the Fourth Triennial Revi ew had been initiated on the basis of a summary 
document prepared by the Secretariat and contained in JOB(06)/24.  He noted that, according to the 
Work Programme for the Preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review14, the Committee would start the 
drafting of the report itself at the current meeting.  To facilitate this work, an in line with his proposal 
at the last meeting of the Committee, he had prepar ed a first draft which was contained in document 
JOB(06)/142 (issued on 19 May 2006).15  The Committee had held informal discussions on the 
drafting of the Fourth Triennial Review Report on 8 and 9 June; he summarized the informal 
discussions as follows.   
111. The Chairman stated that his sense was that de legations had considered the draft a good basis 
for the Committee’s Fourth Triennial Review report.   Several constructive general comments were 
made.  For instance, it was noted that it could be u seful to extract – or bring out more clearly – the 
recommendations under each element so as to enable the reader to quickly identify areas of future 
work.  The view was expressed that the Review wa s a stand-alone document which would be read by 
a larger public;  it would benefit, for instance, from the inclusion of references to some basic 
Committee documents such as the status of Statements on Implementation (G/TBT/GEN/1 series), Enquiry Points contacts (ENQ – series) and Publications (JOB(06)50). 
112. The Chairman further reported that the area of Good Regulatory Practice had received 
considerable attention in terms of submissions and debate.  In fact, most of the submissions received 
in preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review cove red this subject.  Several useful suggestions were 
                                                     
 
12 On the use, to date, of this procedure in the SPS Comm ittee which is also referred to as the "Good Offices" of 
the Chair, see para. 86 of G/SPS/36. 
13 It is noted that during the meeting, Brazil circul ated a submission on Good Re gulatory Practice which is 
contained in document G/TBT/ W/267, dated 8 June 2006.   
14 Annexed to the Annotated Draft Agenda (JOB(06)/156). 
15 G/TBT/M/38, para. 157. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 22  
 
  made.  For instance, the need to reflect more clearly in the draft the importance of openness, 
transparency and accountability in regulatory processes wa s stressed.  In certain areas, it was felt that 
there was a need to rebalance the text (equivalenc y, performance-based regulation).  In other areas, 
some delegations were of the view that the text could be further expanded (efficiency and 
effectiveness of regulations).   The importance of  different mechanisms and approaches to domestic 
coordination was emphasized, and the usefulness of further information exchange in the area of 
regulatory impact assessment was noted;  these were t opics that could also be addressed in the context 
of a workshop on the subject of Good Regulatory Practice.  
113. The Chairman noted that on conformity assessment, Members had proposed to group all the 
sub-sections relating to approaches aimed at fac ilitating the recognition of conformity assessment 
results.  Refinements of the scope of certain sub- sections were put forward, for instance on the 
identification of appropriate conformity assessment pr ocedures;  on the information to be provided by 
Members on the use of SDoC;  on the exchange of  information on MRAs;  on the participation of 
foreign conformity assessment bodies in national conf ormity assessment procedures;  on government 
designation;  and on accreditation.  It was also suggest ed to reflect in greater detail the results of the 
two workshops held on conformity assessment issues si nce the last triennial review and to refer to the 
need for technical assistance in the area of conformity assessment. 
114. On transparency, Members further discussed sev eral recommendations, including on the time 
period for the submission and consideration of comments on proposed technical regulations and 
conformity assessment procedures.  The preliminary views from the WTO Secretariat's IT staff were heard on some issues, for instance, on the access to  draft and final texts of notified measures.  In 
regard to the sharing of translations of notified texts, it was noted that the SPS Committee had already 
developed a format for the notification of translations of SPS measures.   
115. The Chairman further reported that on technical assistance, a number of Members had 
emphasized the importance they attach to this section as well as the view that it could benefit from further detail.  In particular, emphasis was put on effi ciency of delivery of tec hnical assistance:  in this 
vein it was suggested that the Committee could be nefit from an exchange of information on good 
practices in the delivery of technical assistance.  It  was also pointed out that timeliness in the delivery 
of technical assistance was important, as we ll as the sustainability of such activities.  
116. As was the case with technical assistance, the Chairman noted that Members wanted to see 
the part on special and differential treatment to be fu rther developed.  It was suggested there could be 
more focus on Committee actions on special and diffe rential treatment, beyond simple reporting on 
what special and differential treatment had been provided and how Members had benefited from such 
treatment.   
117. The Chairman recalled that he had stressed, durin g the informal meeting, that the content of 
his first draft was based on Members' contributions.  If Members wished to have further detail, or 
more material in the Report, they needed to provide this in terms of specific drafting suggestions.     
118. The Chairman went on to report that some “other issues” had also  been discussed.  For 
instance, the Committee woul d need to find a way to deal with issues that had been raised in the 
preparation of the Fourth Triennial Review but wh ere there was no consensus for their inclusion as an 
“element” of the review.  Also, the Committee had discussed the issue of the evolution of ISO/IEC 
Guide 2 on definitions since its 1991 edition.
16  In principle, delegations seemed to agree that some 
reference to the discussion on the matter was needed in  order to find a wording that was acceptable to 
all.  This work needed to be done in light of c onsultations the Chairman intended to hold before the 
next meeting, and on the basis of further information to be provided. 
                                                      
16 The information provided by the ISO was subse quently circulated in document G/TBT/GEN/38.  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 23 
 
 
  119. The representative of Brazil  noted that, as a general principl e, Brazil understood that all issues 
raised by delegations needed to be  referred in the Fourth Triennial Review, without exclusions.  In his 
view proceeding otherwise – or requiring consensus for references made to issues raised by Members – would, in fact, lead to a different kind of pro cedure that had not been followed before in the TBT 
Committee. 
120. The representative of Kenya
 asked what mechanism the Co mmittee would use to report on 
special and differential treatmen t given to developing countries. 
121. The representative of the European Communities  recalled in respect to the issue raised by 
Brazil, that in a previous triennial review, there had been some issues that the European Communities 
had proposed where there had been no consensus in the Committee.  It had then been decided that 
these would be put in the minutes of the meeting.  He nce, what appeared in the triennial review report 
was the consensus view and what could not be ag reed by consensus appeared in the minutes.   
122. The representative of Mexico  supported the statement by the European Communities:  as a 
matter of fact, the Chairman – or any delegation – co uld raise any issue for discussion in the Triennial 
Review.  Quite independently to this, the WTO wo rked by consensus and if there was no consensus 
for a particular topic to be included in the review, then it was premature to do so. 
123. The representative of China  associated his delegation with the view expressed by Brazil.  The 
report of triennial review was, essentially, a factual  reflection of the discussions.  Therefore, all elements needed to be included in the report. 
124. The representative of Chile
 supported the statements made by the European Communities and 
Mexico to the effect that it had always been the practice that the triennial review reports reflected 
decisions taken by consensus.  In effect, these deci sions were about plans of action (or “future work”) 
for the Committee that all Members needed to agree on.  However, such actions did not necessarily 
cover all issues addressed in the Review;  these were  in any case reflected in the minutes.   Chile was 
of the view that the Chairman’s summary had adequately summarized what the Committee had 
achieved so far in the process.   
125. The representative of the United States  also felt that the Chairman had made a good summary 
on the state of play.  She joined other delegati ons in supporting the current  process which was based 
on consensus and which had been followed in all previous reviews.   
126. The representative of Brazil  was concerned with the discussion on the subject of consensus.  
He noted that he did not want Members to be unde r the impression that there was currently consensus 
regarding any aspect of the draft, especially if  the understanding of Members was that the report 
contained consensually agreed terms even though th ese did not mean exactly the same thing.  Brazil 
was working under the understanding that the repor t was not necessarily consensus based, that it was 
a factual reflection of issues rai sed by delegations during the Fourth Triennial Review of the operation 
and implementation of the TBT Agreement.   
127. The Chairman  noted, regarding the issues raised by Members that there were some 
outstanding matters.  He intended to address these points in consultations ahead of the November 
meeting so as to find an acceptable solution to them.  In terms of next steps, an informal meeting would be held on 3-4 October 2006 to discuss a further draft.  He also recalled that the final draft would be adopted at the Comm ittee's 8-10 November meeting. G/TBT/M/39 
Page 24  
 
  IV. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION 
128. The Chairman
 recalled that, in November 2005, the Committee had adopted a format for the 
voluntary notification of technical assistance needs and responses, contained in document G/TBT/16.  He welcomed a new notification which had been  received from Costa Rica, issued as G/TBT/TA-
3/CRI.  He further recalled that two previous  notifications had been submitted by Jamaica 
(G/TBT/TA-1/JAM) and Armenia (G/TBT/TA-2/AR M).  He encouraged developing country 
Members to use this mechanism and the other Member s who were in the capacity to respond, to do so. 
129. The representative of Costa Rica
 stressed that his delegation attached great importance to 
technical assistance in the TBT area, and that new n eeds had arisen in the public and private sector.  
Hence, Costa Rica had submitted the relevant notification. 
130. The representative of the ITC  informed the Committee about a project that was being 
undertaken in the ASEAN region (G/TBT/GEN/35). 
131. The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to the information on the Secretariat's technical 
assistance activities, as outlined in  document G/TBT/GEN/34, and noted that more information on 
these activities, including programmes, lists of partic ipants and presentations delivered was available 
on the TBT website.17 
V. UPDATING BY OBSERVERS 
132. The Chairman  drew the Committee's attention to the information provided by the OIML 
(G/TBT/GEN/36) and the Codex (G/TBT/GEN/37). 
133. The representative of the UNCTAD  informed the Committee about a project to build capacity 
for improved policy making and negotiations on ke y trade and environment issues in developing 
countries.  The key findings of this project had been highlighted in the Trade and Environment 
Review 2006.  She pointed out that the Review provided conceptual and factual analysis of the relationship between environmental requirements a nd market access for developing countries.  The 
Review also included sector specific analysis in th e electrical and electronic equipment area, and in 
the organic agriculture sector.  In particular, this sector provided an example of how new 
environmental-related health concerns in majo r markets could create market opportunities for 
environmentally-preferable products from devel oping countries.  The representative of UNCTAD 
further explained that another sector of major in terest which had been analyzed was that of 
horticultural exports, and that the case studies which had been conducted had shown that the capacity 
of producers to respond adequately to environmen tal and social concerns, and related market 
requirements, was an important element of intern ational competitiveness.  She highlighted that the 
results of these studies and the inputs provided by several fora, including the TBT Committee, had 
significantly contributed to the activities of the consultative task force (CTS) on environmental 
requirements and market access for developing coun tries.  She noted that the annual session of the 
consultative task force would take place in Geneva in July 2006.  The meeting would address the key 
findings of the mentioned studies and capacity buildin g activities, together with issues related to 
facilitating access to existing on-line databases on envir onmental health and food safety requirements.  
She recalled that the consultative task force was a multi-stakeholder forum, open to environmental 
representatives, private sector, NGOs, academia and relevant interna tional organizations. 
134. The representative of the UNECE
 informed the Committee that a forum on common 
regulatory language for global trade would take place on 20-21 June 2006.  The purpose of the forum 
                                                      
17 http://www.wto.org/english/trat op_e/tbt_e/tbt_ac t_list_activ_e.htm  G/TBT/M/39 
 Page 25 
 
 
  was to exchange experiences from different regi ons on regulatory approaches and practices.  The 
forum was open, and participation was free. 
VI. DATE OF NEXT MEETINGS 
135. The Chairman  recalled that an informal meeting of the TBT Committee on the Fourth 
Triennial Review was scheduled for 3-4 October 2006 and that the next regular meeting of the 
Committee would take place on 8-10 November 2006. 
_______________