RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/TBT/SPEC/1
22May1995
ORGANIZATION(95-1337)
Committee onTechnical Barriers toTrade
REQUEST FOR FURTHER SUGGESTIONS INRELATION TODOCUMENT G/TBT/W/2
(Draft Updating oftheDecisions andRecommendations taken bythe
Tokyo Round Committee onTechnical Barriers toTrade Regarding
Procedures forNotification andInformation Exchange)
Communication from theSecretariat
Atitsmeeting of21April 1995, under agenda item2.6(ii),theWTO TBTCommittee
helddiscussions based ontheSecretariat 'sbackground document G/TBT/W/2 withaviewto
adopting updated decisions andrecommendations onprocedures fornotification andinformation
exchange under theWTO TBTAgreement. Thefollowing suggestions toimprove document
G/TBT/W/2 were made bydelegations during thediscussion:
1. Onpage2,thethirdlineofparagraph 1,regarding Members submitting relevant
information intheform ofwritten Statements onImplementation andAdministration ofthe
Agreement, "Members should" should bereplaced by"Members shall" soastokeepthesame
language asinthefirstlineoftheparagraph. Inrelation tothat,aquestion wasraised about
whether itisnecessary forSignatories oftheTokyo Round Agreement tore-submit theiroriginal
Statements ortomake completely newStatements since thebasic structure ofthe
recommendations would remain thesame;
2. Onpage2,point 2(b),doubts were raised onthevalue ofincluding "theexpected length
oftimeallowed forpresentation ofcomments" inthestatements, since itwasrecommended
elsewhere bytheCommittee that60daysshould beprovided normally and45daysunder special
circumstances;
3. Onpage2,point 2(d),doubts were raised onthevalue of"consultation points", given the
newintegrated dispute settlement mechanism established under theWTO;
4. Onpage3,point (iii),regarding notifications under Articles 3.2and7.2,"proposed and
adopted technical regulations/procedures forassessment ofconformity" should bereplaced by
"proposed oradopted technical regulations/procedures forassessment ofconformity" toreflect the
distinction between theobligations under Article 2.9andArticle 2.10oftheAgreement;
5. Inrelation toinformation provided under theCode ofGood Practice, specifically
paragraphs J,LandOofAnnex 3oftheAgreement, doubts were raised about whether itwas
possible tosubmit thatinformation intheinitial statement byMembers without knowing which
standardizing bodies would accept theCode ofGood Practice; and
6. Itwassuggested thatParagraph Nofdocument TBT/16/Rev.7 "Labelling Requirements"
should alsobeincluded asadecision relating tonotifications.
Members arerequested toaddress further suggestions inrelation todocument G/TBT/W/2
totheSecretariat (Ms. Vivien Liutel.7395455) ortheChairperson before 15June1995, sothat
informal consultations canbeheldaccording tothesuggestions made.