RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/RO/M/12
9 February 1998
(98-0460)
Committee on Rules of Origin
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 10-21 NOVEMBER 1998
Chairperson:  Mrs. L. Berrig (Philippines)
The agenda proposed for the meeting, contained in WTO/AIR/711/Rev.1, was adopted by the
Committee on Rules of Origin (CRO) as follows:
Page
1. Participation of international intergovernmental organizations with 2
observer status in non-official meetings of the CRO
2. Report of the CRO to the Council  for Trade in Goods (G/RO/W/21) 3
3. Third annual review of the implementation and operation of the Agreement
on Rules of Origin (G/RO/W/24) 4
4. Implementation of Article 2(h) of the Agreement on Rules of Origin 4
5. Notifications under Article 5 and paragraph 4 of Annex II of the Agreement
on Rules of Origin (G/RO/N/18) 4
6. Update of the Integrated Negotiating Text for the Harmonization Work
Programme (G/RO/W/13/Rev.3/Add.2) 5
7. Origin rules adopted by the CRO (G/RO/W/22) 5
8. Ninth Report of the Technical Committee on Rules of Origin (TCRO) to the
CRO (G/RO/19 and G/RO/19/Add.1): 5
(a) Chapters 50-58 (textiles);
(b) Chapters 44-49 (wood and paper), 64-71 (footwear, ceramic products,
glasses, precious stones and metals) and 92 (musical instruments);
(c) Chapters 72-73 (iron and steel) and 28-32 (chemicals);
(d) Chapters 25-27 (mineral products), 41-43 (leather) and 91 (clocks and
watches) (see document G/RO/W/23).
9. Other business
- Date of the next meeting 13G/RO/M/12
Page 2
1. Participation of international intergovernmental organizations with observer status in
non-official meetings of the CRO
This item was discussed in restricted session without the presence of the observers.
1.1 The Chairperson noted that there were two sub-issues under this agenda item:  (1) the
participation of the Chairman of the TCRO in meetings of the CRO;  (2) the participation of the WCO
Secretariat in non-official meetings of the CRO.
1.2 With regard to the question of the participation of the Chairman of the TCRO in meetings of
the Committee, the CRO, based on consultations that the Chairperson  had held with Members, agreed
that the Chairman of the TCRO should be invited to all meetings of the CRO (formal, informal or
plurilateral), and that he should have his own seat and plate.
1.3 On the question of the participation of the WCO Secretariat in non-official meetings of the
CRO, the Chairperson  stated that the views of the Members appeared to be divided.  A number of
Members believed that it would be beneficial for the CRO if the WCO Secretariat would participate in
such meetings in light of the special task given to the WCO under Article 4.2 of the Agreement in the
context of the Harmonization Work Programme for non- preferential rules of origin.  Other Members
maintained that the participation of observers in non-official meetings of the CRO might create a
precedent for other subsidiary bodies of the WTO.
1.4 The representative of the European Communities stated that during the negotiations of the
Uruguay Round Agreement, it had been decided that the technical work called for by the
Harmonization Work Programme should be carried out by the TCRO, which was established under
the auspices of the World Customs Organization.  Based on the division of labour laid down in the
Agreement, the CRO and the TCRO had worked together in a very cooperative manner over the last
years, which was shown by the fact that the CRO was working with documents prepared by the WCOSecretariat.  The documents contained a number of complicated issues which were formulated in a
highly technical language.  As technical explanations were needed occasionally, the presence of the
WCO Secretariat in non-official meetings of the CRO would be beneficial for the CRO.
1.5 The representative of the United States stated that although the WCO had a special
involvement in the Harmonization Work Programme, the presence of the Chairman of the TCRO
should suffice to meet the concerns expressed by the EC.  In light of ongoing negotiations on sensitive
matters, the presence of the WCO Secretariat was neither necessary nor desirable.
1.6 The representative of Switzerland noted that the WCO Secretariat had already been attending
informal meetings of the CRO.  As the negotiations now entered a highly complex phase, the WCO
Secretariat, with its outstanding expertise in origin matters and the Harmonized System, couldcontribute to the work of the CRO.  In order to avoid creating any precedent for other WTO
subsidiary bodies, he suggested that the CRO explic itly state that the special status of the WCO
Secretariat was directly derived from the Agreement, and the participation of the WCO Secretariat in
non-official meetings of the CRO would therefore not create a precedent.
1.7 The representative of Canada stated that in meetings where Members would discuss their
respective positions and effectively negotiate rules, the WCO Secretariat should not be present.  He
also shared the view that it would be sufficient to have the Chairman of the TCRO present in the
meetings of the CRO.  However, his delegation would remain open to a possibility that would allow
the WCO Secretariat to participate in those informal sessions where the CRO worked through the
agenda of the formal meeting and which were essentially rehearsals for the formal meeting.G/RO/M/12
Page 3
1.8 The representatives of Argentina, Australia , Japan , Norway  and the Philippines supported the
views of the EC and Switzerland.  The representatives of Argentina, Australia , EC , Japan  and the
Philippines stated that if the nature of a non-official meeting became a genuine negotiating session
among Members, and if Members felt uncomfortable with the presence of the WCO Secretariat, they
could request the WCO Secretariat to leave the meeting.
1.9 The representatives of Egypt, India and Mexico  stated that there was concern about the
systemic implications for other subsidiary bodies of the WTO if the WCO Secretariat were to
participate in informal sessions, and that further study on this matter was needed.
1.10 The representative of Japan stated that a compromise may be found in allowing the WCO
Secretariat to be present in the larger plurilateral meetings, while for smaller settings a decision could
be made on a case-by-case basis.
1.11 The Chairperson noted that there were thr ee types of meetings:  formal, informal and
plurilateral.  While it was clear that the WCO Secretariat would participate in formal meetings of the
CRO, no consensus existed in the CRO with regard to informal and plurilateral meetings.  Taking into
account the systemic implication of precedent-settin g, she suggested that the CRO invite the WCO
Secretariat to non-formal meetings on a case-by-case basis, and that such decisions would be taken
ahead of the relevant informal meetings.
1.12 The representatives of the United States and Canada  supported the proposal by the
Chairperson.
1.13 The representative of the EC expressed concern about the proposal.  In his view this could
lead to lengthy discussion on the participation of the WCO Secretariat in non-official meetings before
every meeting.  Therefore it would be better if a final conclusion on the status of the WCO Secretariat
could be reached now.
1.14 The Chairperson stated that she would undertake further consultations with Members on this
issue.1.15 The Committee took note of the statements made.
2. Report of the CRO to the Council  for Trade in Goods (G/RO/W/21)
2.1 The Chairperson drew attention to the draft of the CRO's Report to the Council for Trade in
Goods (G/RO/W/21);  such a report was required  under Article 6.1 of the Agreement on Rules of
Origin.
2.2 The representative of Canada proposed including a phrase in the draft report stating that the
endorsement of basket 1 decisions should be qualified that in accordance with Article 9.3(b) of the
Agreement the CRO should consider the results of the Harmonization Work Programme in terms oftheir overall coherence.
2.3 Based on consultations held by the Chairperson with Members, the CRO adopted
 the report,
with the following amendments to the text:  (1) paragraph 1 should be deleted;  (2) paragraph 4,
indent 3 should read "endorsed, at the meeting in October, the product-specific rules concerning
Chapters 25-27, 41, 43 and 91 which had been referred to the CRO as basket 1 decisions from the
TCRO (see G/RO/W/22)";  and (3) additional language proposed by Canada as described in
paragraph 2.2.  The CRO also agreed that the Report would be updated to take into account the work
of the CRO at the meetings from 10 to 21 November and would be circulated as a document in
the G/L/- series.G/RO/M/12
Page 4
3. Third annual review of the implementation and operation of the Agreement on Rules of
Origin (G/RO/W/24)
3.1 The Chairperson noted that the CRO had before it a background working document
(G/RO/W/24) prepared by the Secretariat for the th ird review of the implementation and operation of
the Agreement, as required by Article 6.1 of the Agreement.
3.2 The representative of Canada proposed including a sentence in the document stating that the
endorsement of basket 1 decisions should be qualified that in accordance with Article 9.3(b) of the
Agreement the CRO should consider the results of the Harmonization Work Programme in terms of
their overall coherence.
3.3 Based on consultations held by the Chairperson, the CRO agreed that it had conducted its
annual review of the implementation and operation of the Agreement on the basis of the Secretariat
background note (G/RO/W/24) with an amendment to paragraph 4.4, indent 2 of the background
working document, which should read, "endorsed the product-specific rules of goods forChapters 25-27, 41, 43 and 91 ...", as well as the addendum proposed by Canada as described in
paragraph 3.2.  The CRO also agreed that the Secretariat should issue a revised document in the
G/RO/- series, taking into account the work of the CRO at the meetings from 10 to 21 November.
4. Implementation of Article 2(h) of the Agreement on Rules of Origin
4.1 The Chairperson stated that, at the meeting on 3 October 1997, the CRO had mandated the
Secretariat to conduct a brief survey on methods and procedures applied by Members for the purpose
of implementing Article 2(h) as well as paragraph 3(d) of Annex II to the Agreement.  Pursuant to this
mandate, the Secretariat had sent out a note dated 8 October 1997 in which Members were requested
to provide the Secretariat, to the extent possible, with certain categorized information concerning this
survey, by 1 December 1997.  To date, the EC and Iceland had provided the requested information.
4.2 The representative of Egypt stated that his delegation had now received information from
their capital.  According to the system applied in Egypt, the concerned authority would issue the
export certificate of origin for one shipment or more than one shipment of the same kind of product,
or different kinds of products to be shipped to one importer by one means of transport provided that
all terms, conditions and documents were fulfilled.  With regard to the assessment of the origin before
trade in the good concerned begins, Egypt did not have such a system, and no cases had been
recorded.
4.3 The CRO took note of the statements made.
5. Notifications under Article 5 and paragraph 4 of Annex II of the Agreement on Rules of
Origin (G/RO/N/18)
5.1 The Chairperson recalled that since the last meeting the Secretariat had circulated a document
informing delegations of notifications received (G/RO/N/18).  To date, 56 Members had made
notifications of non-preferential rules of origin and 58 Members had notified preferential rules of
origin.  She expressed concern that a number of Members had not complied with the notification
requirements, and urged Members who had not yet notified to do so as early as possible.
5.2 The CRO took note of the statement by the Chairperson.G/RO/M/12
Page 5
6. Update of the Integrated Negotiating Text for the Harmonization Work Programme
(G/RO/W/13/Rev.3/Add.2)
6.1 The Chairperson recalled that at its meeting on 15 May 1997, the CRO had agreed that in
light of concerns with regard to the volume of the INT, only additions to the draft text of product-
specific rules would be circulated to Members.  She stated that the second addendum had been
circulated in document G/RO/W /13/Rev.3/Add.2, reflecting work done by the TCRO during its
Eighth Session from 23 June to 4 July 1997 in Brussels.  The text would be conveyed to the TCRO.
6.2 The CRO took note of the addendum made to the Integrated Negotiating Text.
7. Origin rules adopted by the Committee on Rules of Origin (G/RO/W/22)
7.1 The Chairperson stated that the Secretariat had circulated, in document G/RO/W/22, a list of
the origin rules endorsed by the CRO at the meeting on 3 October 1997.  This document would be
regularly updated and would compile all origin rules that would be endorsed by the CRO at its future
meetings.  The CRO had agreed that the rules contained in this document should not be reopened,keeping in mind that, in accordance with Article 9.3(b) of the Agreement, the CRO would finally
consider the results of the Harmonization Work Programme in terms of their overall coherence.
7.2 The CRO took note  of the document (G/RO/W/22) and the statement by the Chairperson.
8. Ninth Report of the TCRO to the Committee on Rules of Origin (G/RO/19/ and
G/RO/19/Add.1)
8.1 The Chairperson stated that in conformity with paragraph 2(c) of Article 9 of the Agreement,
the TCRO had submitted to the CRO its Ninth Report.  The Report had been circulated in documents
G/RO/19 and G/RO/19/Add.1.
8.2 Mr. Janezcko, the Chairman of the TCRO, stated that the TCRO had held its Ninth Session
from 8-26 September 1997, this session lasting a full three weeks with longer working hours.  At that
session the TCRO had devoted almost all of its time to continuing the work for specific products or
product sectors.  The work had involved a second examination of Chapters 44-49, 64-67, 68-70, 71,
92, 72-73, 50-58, 28-31 and headings 3201 and 3202.  The TCRO had also re-examined outstanding
questions concerning technical goods under Chapters 25 and 41.  In many cases consensus had been
reached by the TCRO.  Where the TCRO had not been able to reach consensus and the technicaldebate was exhausted, 36 templates had been created which were forwarded to the CRO.  In a small
number of cases, the TCRO had decided that there was benefit in having some more technical debated
before either reaching consensus or referring the items in question to the CRO.  He stressed that the
TCRO had two basic tasks:  firstly, to reach consensus on rules wherever possible;  and secondly,
based on exhaustive technical debate, to ensure that quality templates were referred to the CRO.
8.3 The Chairperson stated that on the basis of the Ninth Report of the TCRO, there were two
main issues before the CRO:  (1) endorsement of the draft rules of origin for goods in basket 1;  and
(2) examination of unresolved issues submitted to the CRO.
8.4 The representative of Canada stated th at there were some questions concerning
basket 1 decisions which should be clarified in bilateral or plurilateral meetings of the CRO.
Article 9.3(a) of the Agreement provided that the CRO should consider the interpretations and
opinions of the TCRO periodically in accordance with the time frames provided in subparagraphs (i),
(ii) and (iii) of paragraph 2(c) with a view to endorsing such interpretations and opinions.  It also said,
"the Committee may request the Technical Committee to refine or elaborate its work and/or todevelop new approaches".  Therefore the CRO should look at the interpretations and opinions asG/RO/M/12
Page 6
expressed as basket 1 decisions by the TCRO, and in doing so there should be no limitation upon the
work of the CRO in terms of endorsing basket 1 decisions.
8.5 The representative of the United States also wished to consult with other Members in respect
of one or two questions which could be clarified during bilateral meetings.
8.6 The representative of Colombia stated that if delegations wished to modify decisions that had
already been taken by consensus in Brussels, the proposals should be submitted ahead of the meeting
of the CRO, because, in light of the technical complexity of issues, the involvement of capital-based
experts in the discussions would be necessary.
8.7 The representative of the Philippines drew attention to the fact that the Report of the Ninth
Session was not yet officially approved by the TCRO.8.8 Mr. Janezcko confirmed that the Ninth Report would be formally adopted at the next session
of the TCRO.  He stated that there was a mechanism in the TCRO to avoid mistakes in the Reports.
At the end of each TCRO meeting, the results of the meeting would be circulated to every delegation.
Where delegations felt that a correction was needed in the formal record, they would get back to the
WCO Secretariat and make that view known.  That process would then be followed by the formaladoption of the Report at the next meeting.  The templates, which were the results of the work of the
TCRO, were also circulated in draft format to Members, and then formalized by the WCO Secretariat
and the Chairman of the TCRO, before they were submitted to the CRO.  Likewise, there was a
process within the TCRO by which all delegations could amend any mistakes in the templates.
8.9 The representative of Norway stated that the basket 1 decisions should not be reopened in this
Committee and emphasized that the role of the Committee according to Article 9.3 was to "endorse"
the opinions and interpretations of the TCRO.
8.10 The representative of the EC stated that in  case the report of the TCRO was not correct,
Members could send in their remarks in writing to the Secretariat of the WCO which would issue a
revised version to all the delegations.  If a delegation considered that the technical debates had not
taken account of certain important elements or certain data, then the problem should be raised again at
the plenary session of the TCRO, and delegations would be informed of the observations made by
other delegations.  A decision could be taken by the CRO to refer these problems to the TCRO forinterpretation, or to request the TCRO to continue with the technical debate.  Then, those items could
be put in square brackets while awaiting clarification from the TCRO.
8.11 The representative of Colombia shared the vi ew of the EC that the CRO should be informed
about any problems in basket 1 decisions, which co uld then be sent back to the TCRO for further
review, as had been done before.
8.12 The CRO took note of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this issue at the next
meeting.
8.13 As concerns the examination of unresolved issues submitted to the CRO, based on the
bilateral and plurilateral meetings which took  place from 10-20 November 1997, the CRO agreed as
follows:
"The Committee examined unresolved issues submitted to the Committee.
(1) On Chapters 25-27 (minerals), the Committee did not reach consensus on Issues for
Decision Nos. 1 and 2 (G/RO/W/23, pages 2 and 3).  Some Members stated that they
would consult with their industries with a view to finding agreed solutions.  TheCommittee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next meeting.G/RO/M/12
Page 7
The Committee reached consensus on Option A in Issues for Decision Nos. 3, 4, 5
and 6 (G/RO/W/23, pages 4-6).  Therefore,
- the origin rule of heading ex25.30(b), on page 10 of document G/RO/W/23,
should now read "CTH";
- the origin rules of headings ex26.01(a) to ex26.17(a), on page 11 of
document G/RO/W/23, should now read "CTHS";
- the origin rule of subheading 2701.20, on page 17 of document G/RO/W/23,
should now read "CTSH";
- the origin rule of subheading 2708.20 of document G/RO/W/23 should now
read "CTSH".
(2) On Chapter 30 (pharmaceutical products), the Committee did not reach consensus on
Issues for Decision Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (G/RO/19/Add.1;  WCO document 41.847,
pages 2-3).  However, as concerns Issue for Decision No. 2, delegations appeared tobe close to agreement that medicaments put into bottles or envelopes should not be
considered as having undergone their last substantial transformation.  The remaining
question concerned the production of tablet s or capsules of medicaments.  The
Committee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next meeting.
(3) As concerns Chapters 41-43 (leather), the Committee:
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 1 (G/RO/W/23, page 29).
However, most Members supported Option B;  some Members were infavour of Option A.  The Committee agreed to continue its examination of
this issue at the next meeting.
- reached consensus on Option B in Issue for Decision No. 2 (G/RO/W/23,
page 29).  Therefore, the origin rule of subheadings 4102.21 and 4102.29, on
page 37 of document G/RO/W/23, should now read "CTH";
- reached consensus on Option A in Issue for Decision No. 3 (G/RO/W/23,
page 30).  Therefore, the origin rule of headings 4201, 4204, 4205 and 4206
in pages 47 and 49 of document G/RO/W/23 should now read "CTH";
- agreed to request the Technical Committee to define clearly the terms
"provisionally prepared", "tanned", "retanned", "finished" and "parchment
dressed" in the Issues for Decision Nos. 4-7 (G/RO/W/23, pages 31-36) sothat they are uniformly understood by all Members.  The Committee
mandated the Chairperson to address a letter to the Chairman of the Technical
Committee.
(4) As concerns Chapters 44-49 (wood and paper), the Committee:
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 1 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.839, page 1).  However, some Members expressed flexibility in
joining Option A if it would narrow to a finger-jointing process only;G/RO/M/12
Page 8
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 2 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.839, page 2).  However, some Members stated that a solution
could be found by revising the description of the goods;
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 3 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.839, page 3).  However, some Members stated that they would
consult with their industries with a view to finding agreed solutions;
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 4 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.839, page 4);
- did not reach consensus on Issue for Decision No. 5 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.839, page 5).  However, most Members supported Option A;
some Members were in favour of Option B;
- agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next meeting.
(5) As concerns Chapters 50-58 (textiles):
- the Committee did not reach consensus on Issues for Decision Nos. 1-13
(G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO document 41.821, pages 2-14);
- some Members stated that the "core-spinning process" in the Issue for
Decision No. 6 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO document 41.821, page 6) was
related to the Issue for Decision  No. 7 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO document
41.821, page 7) and should be reconsidered;
- some Members stated that they had changed their position from Option B to
Option A/5 in the Issues for Decisi on Nos. 12 and 13 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.821, pages 11-13);
- the Committee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next
meeting.
(6) As concerns Chapters 64-67 (headgear, umbrellas and prepared feathers), the
Committee did not reach consensus on the Issues for Decision Nos. 1-8
(G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO document 41.823, pages 1-9):
- some Members stated that in Issue for Decision No. 6 (G/RO/19/Add.1,
WCO document 41.823, page 5) there might be a possibility for the question
of articles of feathers etc. to be separated from the question of removal of
feathers etc., therefore giving a better chance for a compromise among
Members;
- the Committee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next
meeting.
(7) As concerns Chapters 68-70 (ceramic products and glasses), the Committee did not
reach consensus on Issues for Decisi on Nos. 1 and 2 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO
document 41.824, pages 1-3):G/RO/M/12
Page 9
- several Members expressed flexibility in changing their positions from
Option A to Option B in the Issue for Decision No. 2 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCOdocument 41.824, page 2);
- the Committee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next
meeting.
(8) As concerns Chapter 71 (precious metals), the Committee did not reach consensus on
the Issue for Decision (G/RO/19/A dd.1, WCO document 41.846, pages 1-2):
- some Members stated that this issue is a horizontal issue in connection with
other metals;
- the Committee agreed to continue its examination of this issue at the next
meeting.
(9) As concerns Chapter 91 (clocks and watches), the Committee did not reach consensus
on Issues for Decision Nos. 1-6 (G/RO/W/23, pages 53-56):- some Members stated that there might be a possibility that Option B in the
Issues for Decision Nos. 4 and 5 (G/RO/W/23, pages 55-56) could be deleted
or combined with Option C;
- the Committee agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next
meeting.
(10) As concerns Chapter 92 (musical instruments), the Committee did not reach
consensus on Issues for Decision Nos.  1-2 (G/RO/19/Add.1, WCO document 41-841,
pages 1-3), and agreed to continue its examination of these issues at the next
meeting."
_______________
Members expressed the following views on Issues for Decision for products under
consideration:
Chapters 25-27 (minerals)
8.14 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether the production of cement from clinker is a
substantial transformation, the EC, Malaysia , Norway  and Singapore  supported Option A;  Australia ,
Colombia and Mexico  supported Option B.
8.15 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whethe r the crushing or powdering of natural steatite
and talc is a substantial transformation, the EC supported Option B.
Chapters 30-32 (chemicals)
8.16 On Issue for Decision No. 1, whether a medicament classified in heading 30.03 resulting from
a mixture of two or more constituents have undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia,
Colombia, EC , Japan , Korea , Malaysia , Singapore  and Switzerland  supported Option A;  Brazil  and
Mexico supported Option B.G/RO/M/12
Page 10
8.17 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whether medicaments put up into measured doses
have undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia, Colombia , Korea ,  Malaysia ,
Singapore and Switzerland  supported Option A;  Brazil , EC and Mexico  supported Option B.
8.18 On Issue for Decision No. 3, concerning whether opacifying preparations for x-ray
examinations and diagnostic reagents put up into measured doses have undergone their last substantial
transformation, Australia, Japan , Korea , Malaysia  and Switzerland  favoured Option A;   Brazil , EC
and Mexico supported Option B.
Chapters 41-43 (leather)
8.19 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether the de-wooling of sheep or lamb skins of
subheadings 4102.21 and 4102.29 is a substantial transformation, the EC supported Option B.
8.20 On Issue for Decision No. 4, concerning whether products resulting from tanning have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia, EC , Japan  and Switzerland  supported
Option A.
8.21 On Issue for Decision No. 5, concerning whether products resulting from retanning have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia, EC , Japan  and Switzerland  supported
Option A.
8.22 On Issue for Decision No. 6, concerning whether products resulting from finishing have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia and Switzerland  supported Option B, Japan
supported Option C and the EC supported Option E.
8.23 On Issue for Decision No. 7, concerning whether products resulting from parchment dressing
have undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia supported Option A, the EC  favoured
Option B and Japan expressed its support for Option C.
Chapters 44-49 (wood and paper)
8.24 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether products resulting from the planing,
sanding, finger- or end-jointing of wood have undergone their last substantial transformation, Mexico
favoured Option B.
8.25 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whether products resulting from the operations of
beading or moulding have undergone their last substantial transformation, Mexico and Philippines
favoured Option A.
8.26 On Issue for Decision No. 3, concerning whether products resulting from the lamination or
reinforcement by the addition of layers of wood, paper, metal or other materials have undergone their
last substantial transformation, Mexico supported Option B.
8.27 On Issue for Decision No. 4, concerning whether products resulting from the surface-working
of plywood by mechanical working or surface-covering have undergone their last substantial
transformation, Japan supported Option A;  Mexico  supported Option B.
Chapters 50-58 (textiles)
8.28 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether products resulting from garnetting have
undergone their last substantial transformation, the Philippines supported Option A;  Mexico
supported Option B.G/RO/M/12
Page 11
8.29 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whether products resulting from carding or combing
of fibres in preparation for spinning have undergone their last substantial transformation, Mexico
supported Option A.
8.30 On Issue for Decision No. 3, concerning whether yarns resulting from spinning of carded or
combed fibres have undergone their last substantial transformation, Mexico and Switzerland
supported Option B.8.31 On Issue for Decision No. 4, concerning whether products resulting from mercerisation have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Mexico and Philippines  favoured Option B.
8.32 On Issue for Decision No. 5, concerning whet her products resulting from texturing or bulking
have undergone their last substantial transformation, Switzerland supported Option A;  Argentina  and
Mexico favoured Option B.
8.33 On Issue for Decision No. 6, concerning whether yarns resulting from processes such as layer
yarn process, knopping, looping, core-spinning, co mpacted yarn process or slub yarn process have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Japan supported Option B;  Argentina  and Mexico
supported Option B.
8.34 On Issue for Decision No. 7, concerning whether yarns resulting from folding (twisting) or
cabling have undergone their last substantial transformation, Switzerland supported Option A;
Argentina and Mexico  favoured Option B.
8.35 On Issue for Decision No. 8, concerning whether the production of sewing thread from yarns
of the same Chapter is a substantial transformation, Argentina and Mexico  supported Option B.
8.36 On Issue for Decision No. 9, concerning whether cotton woven fabrics resulting from down
proof finishing have undergone their last substantial transformation, Switzerland supported Option A;
Argentina and Mexico   favoured Option B.
8.37 On Issue for Decision No. 10, concerning whether manufacturing of carpets and other textile
floor coverings of felt, not tufted or flocked constitutes the last substantial transformation, Argentina,
Mexico and Philippines  favoured Option B.
8.38 On Issue for Decision No. 11, concerning whether fabrics resulting from bleaching have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Argentina and Mexico  supported Option B.
8.39 On Issue for Decision No. 12, concerning whether products resulting from dyeing, including
dyeing white, have undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia, Pakistan , Philippines
and Switzerland supported Option A/1;  the EC  supported Option A/2;  Japan  supported Option A/5;
Argentina and Mexico  supported Option B.
8.40 On Issue for Decision No. 13, concerning whether products resulting from printing have
undergone their last substantial transformation, Australia, Pakistan , Philippines  and Switzerland  were
in support for Option A/1, the EC supported Option A/2, Japan  supported Option A/5, and Argentina
and Mexico supported Option B.G/RO/M/12
Page 12
Chapters 64-71 (headgear, umbrellas and prepared feathers)
8.41 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether blocking was a necessary manufacturing
process in conferring origin on products of heading 65.03 made from products of other headings,
Canada, EC , Japan , Malaysia  and Mexico  supported Option A.
8.42 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning wither products of heading 65.04 resulting from
blocking to shape and further finishing have undergone their last substantial transformation, Canada,
EC, Japan  and Mexico  supported Option A;  Korea  supported Option B.
8.43 On Issue for Decision No. 3, concerning whether products of heading 65.05 resulting from
assembly of parts of other headings have undergone their last substantial transformation, Canada, EC ,
Japan and Mexico  supported Option A;  Korea  supported Option B.
8.44 On Issue for Decision No. 4, concerning whether umbrellas of heading 66.01 resulting from
assembly of parts of other headings have undergone their last substantial transformation, Japan,
Korea, Malaysia  and Mexico  supported Option A;  the EC  supported Option B.
8.45 On Issue for Decision No. 5, concerning whether products of heading 66.02 resulting from
assembly of parts of other headings have undergone their last substantial transformation, Japan,
Korea, Malaysia  and Mexico  supported Option A;  the EC  supported Option B.
8.46 On Issue for Decision No. 6, concerning whether products of heading 67.01 resulting from
processing of products of heading 05.05 have undergone their last substantial transformation;  and
whether feathers, parts of feathers or down of heading 67.01 resulting from removing of these
feathers, etc. from the skins and other parts of birds with their feathers or down of the same heading
have undergone their last substantial transformation, Japan, Korea  and Malaysia  supported Option A;
the EC supported Option B.
8.47 On Issue for Decision No. 7, concerning whethe r artificial flowers resulting from assembly of
parts have undergone their last substantial transformation;  and also whether articles of artificial
flowers, foliage or fruit resulting from assembly of  artificial flowers, foliage or fruit have undergone
their last substantial transformation, Korea supported Option A;  the EC , Japan  and Malaysia
supported Option B.
8.48 On Issue for Decision No. 8, concerning whether products of heading 67.03 resulting from the
processing of materials of other headings have undergone their last substantial transformation, Japan,
Korea and Malaysia  supported Option A;  the EC  supported Option B.
Chapters 68-70 (ceramic products and glasses)
8.49 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether glazed products of heading 69.08 resulting
from processing of products of heading 69.07 have undergone their last substantial transformation,
Australia and Japan  supported Option A;  Brazil , EC , Korea , Malaysia , Mexico  and Philippines
supported Option B.
8.50 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whether surface ground or polished glass resulting
from unground or unpolished glass of headings 70.03 or 70.04 have undergone their last substantial
transformation, Japan, Korea  and Malaysia  supported Option A;  Australia , Brazil ,  EC  and
Philippines supported Option B.G/RO/M/12
Page 13
Chapter 92 (musical instruments)
8.51 On Issue for Decision No. 1, concerning whether musical instruments resulting from parts
classified in heading 92.09 have undergone their last substantial transformation, Canada, Japan ,
Korea, Philippines , Mexico  and Switzerland  favoured Option A; the EC  supported Option B.
8.52 On Issue for Decision No. 2, concerning whether musical instruments resulting from
processing of goods within Chapter 92 have undergone their last substantial transformation, Canada,
Japan, Mexico , Philippines  and Switzerland favoured Option A;  the EC  and Korea  supported
Option B.
9. Date of the next meeting
The Chairperson proposed that the Committee hold its next meeting from 25 February-
6 March 1997.
__________