RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
ORGANIZATION 28June1995
(95-1768)
Committee onTechnical Barriers toTrade
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING HELD ON21APRIL 1995
Chairperson: Miss C.L.Guarda (Chile)
1. TheWTO andtheGATT Committees onTechnical Barriers toTrade heldjointly their
firstandforty-ninth meetings, respectively, on21April 1995.
2. Thefollowing agenda contained inWTO/AIR/52 andGATT/AIR/3679 wasadopted:
Page
A. Election ofofficers 2
B. Rules ofprocedure 2
(i) Rules ofprocedure adopted bytheWTO Council for
Trade inGoods 2
(ii) Decision on"Transitional Arrangements -Avoidance of
Procedural andInstitutional Duplication" 4
(iii) Participation ofObservers 4
(a) Governments 4
(b) International Organizations 4
C. Status ofratification oftheWTO TBTAgreement 5
D. Termination oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement 5
E. Notifications under Articles 2.9,2.10, 3.2,5.6,5.7,7.2and
Article 15.2oftheWTO TBTAgreement 6
(i) Recommendations endorsed bythePreparatory Committee 6
(ii) Procedures fornotification andinformation exchange
under theWTO TBTAgreement 6
(iii) Information tobesubmitted totheSecretariat byMembers 8
F. Procedures fornotification under Paragraphs CandJofthe
Code ofGood Practice forthePreparation, Adoption and
Application ofStandards 8G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page2
Page
G. Technical Assistance 10
H. Statements onimplementation andadministration oftheAgreement 12
I. Other business 15
A. Election ofofficers
3. TheGATT andWTO TBTCommittees elected Miss C.L.Guarda (Chile) Chairperson
for1995.
B. Rules ofprocedure
(i) Rules ofprocedure adopted bytheWTO Council forTrade inGoods
4. TheChairperson noted thatinaccordance withArticle IV:6oftheWTO Agreement, the
WTO TBTCommittee would establish itsrules ofprocedure subject totheapproval ofthe
Council forTrade inGoods. Sherecalled thatatitsmeeting on3April, theCouncil forTrade in
Goods hadadopted itsrules ofprocedure ascontained indocument G/C/W/2. Ithadbeenagreed
thattheRules ofProcedure formeetings oftheGeneral Council contained indocument WT/L/28
should apply mutatis mutandis formeetings oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods withcertain
amendments. Ithadalsobeenproposed thatthose subsidiary bodies oftheCouncil forTrade in
Goods which decided thattheyneeded rules ofprocedure fortheirownpurposes might consider
using therules ofprocedure oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods, withadaptations where necessary.
5. Sheproposed thattheWTO TBTCommittee consider adopting thefollowing Rules of
Procedure:
"The Rules ofProcedure formeetings oftheGeneral Council, asamended bytheCouncil
forTrade inGoods, shallapply mutatis mutandis formeetings oftheCommittee onTechnical
Barriers toTrade, withthefollowing amendments:
(1) Rule1shallbemodified toreadasfollows:
TheCommittee onTechnical Barriers toTrade shallmeetasnecessary, butnot
lessthanonceayear.
(2) Thefirstsentence ofRule2shallbemodified toreadasfollows:
Meetings oftheCommittee onTechnical Barriers toTrade shallbeconvened by
theDirector-General byanotice issued, preferably three weeks, andinanyevent notlessthan
tencalendar days, prior tothedatesetforthemeeting.
(3) Delete Rule5(regarding proposed agenda)
(4) Rule16(regarding quorum) shallbeamended toreadasfollows:G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page3
TheChairperson mayconsider postponing ameeting intheevent thatheorshe
feelsthatdoing somayresult inamore representative levelofparticipation byWTO Members.
(5) Rule33shallbemodified toreadasfollows:
Where adecision cannot bearrived atbyconsensus, thematter atissue shallbe
referred totheCouncil forTrade inGoods."
6. Therepresentative ofJapan requested clarification ofthestatus ofinformal consultations
onrules ofprocedure applied tothesubsidiary bodies under theCouncil forTrade inGoods, and
saidthatsubject tothem having beenconcluded satisfactorily hisdelegation could agree thatthe
standard format ofrules ofprocedure forsubsidiary bodies should beapplied totheWTO
TBTCommittee.
7. Referring tothequestion raised bytherepresentative ofJapan, theSecretariat informed
theCommittee thattheinformal consultations inquestion hadbeenconcluded satisfactorily andthe
results would beformally adopted atthenextmeeting oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods. If
delegations feltitnecessary, hesaidthattheWTO TBTCommittee might consider adopting the
draftRules ofProcedure aspresented adreferendum theadoption ofastandard format inthe
Council forTrade inGoods.
8. Therepresentative ofCanada asked forconfirmation thatRule34ofChapter VII
(Decision-Making) under theRules ofProcedure forMeetings oftheGeneral Council would not
beapplicable inthecaseoftheWTO TBTCommittee.
9. TheChairperson confirmed thatitwasthecase.
10. Therepresentative ofBrazil saidthathisdelegation could agree withtheDraft Rules of
Procedure oncondition thattheamended Rule16replaced Rule16oftheRules ofProcedure for
Meetings oftheGeneral Council.
11. TheChairperson confirmed thatitwasthecase.
12. Therepresentatives oftheUnited States, theEuropean Communities, NewZealand and
Korea supported adoption oftheDraft Rules ofProcedure fortheCommittee.
13. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed toadopt theRules ofProcedure aspresented.
14. Therepresentative ofCanada saidthatitwould beuseful tohaveanunderstanding within
theCommittee thatanyMember proposing toraiseabilateral issue attheCommittee meeting
should giveadvance notice totheSecretariat andtheMember concerned. Thiswould allow
substantive discussion totakeplace withaviewtoresolving anydifferences before themeeting
tookplace andasaresult could savetimefortheCommittee. Therepresentatives ofthe
European Communities, Switzerland andNewZealand supported theCanadian proposal.
15. TheCommittee tooknoteoftheCanadian proposal andthestatements made.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page4
(ii) Decision on"Transitional Arrangements -Avoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional
Duplication"
16. TheChairperson drew attention tothefactthatthePreparatory Committee oftheWTO
hadadopted theDecision on"Transitional Arrangements -Avoidance ofProcedural and
Institutional Duplication" toprovide forco-operation between bodies established under the
Tokyo Round andWTO withrespect tonotifications andholding ofmeetings. TheDecision had
beenadopted bytheCONTRACTING PARTIES attheirSixth Special Session andtheWTO
General Council atitsmeeting of31January 1995, ascontained indocument WT/L/29.
17. TheGATT andWTO TBTCommittees tooknoteofthedecision contained inWT/L/29.
18. Regarding participation inmeetings bycertain signatories oftheFinal Acteligible to
become Original Members oftheWTO, theChairperson drew attention todocument WT/L/27
andthefactthattheGeneral Council, atitsmeeting on31January 1995, haddecided thatduring
aperiod ofseven months following thedateofentry intoforce oftheWTO Agreement,
Signatories oftheFinal ActEmbodying theResults oftheUruguay Round thatwere Contracting
Parties totheGATT 1947 andwere eligible tobecome original Members oftheWTO might be
present andspeak atformal orinformal meetings ofthebodies established under the
WTO Agreement andshould haveaccess toalldocuments made available toMembers ofthe
WTO forsuchmeetings. Such Signatories would nothavetherighttoparticipate inthedecision-
making oftheBodies established under theWTO Agreement.
19. TheGATT andWTO TBTCommittees tooknoteoftheGeneral Council 'sdecision as
contained indocument WT/L/27.
(iii) Participation ofObservers
(a) Governments
20. TheChairperson noted thatcertain governments which were intheprocess ofacceding to
theWTO, orhadinitiated negotiations todoso,orhaddeclared theirintention todosointhe
nearfuture, hadbeeninvited toattend meetings oftheGeneral Council asobservers. Shedrew
attention toAnnex 2ofdocument WT/L/28 "Rules ofProcedure forSessions oftheMinisterial
Conference andMeetings oftheGeneral Council", "Guidelines forObserver Status for
Governments intheWTO", ofwhich paragraph 6stated that"...governments withobserver
status intheGeneral Council mayparticipate asobservers atmeetings ofworking parties and
other subsidiary bodies oftheGeneral Council asappropriate, withtheexception ofthe
Committee onBudget, Finance andAdministration".
21. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed thatsuchgovernments beinvited toattend meetings of
theCommittee, except iforwhen itwasdecided bytheCommittee toholdaclosed session with
participation ofMembers only.
22. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed toadopt theguidelines contained inparagraphs 3,9
and10ofAnnex 2ofWT/L/28 asitsrules ofprocedure relating toObserver Status for
Governments intheCommittee.
(b) International Organizations
23. TheChairperson drew attention tothefactthatattheinformal meeting ofHeads of
Delegations totheGeneral Council on9February, ithadbeenagreed thatpending finalG/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page5
agreement onguidelines forobserver status forinternational organizations intheWTO, the
Chairman ofeachsectoral Council would consult onwhether toinvite certain organizations tothe
firstmeetings oftheirrespective subsidiary bodies (WT/GC/COM/2). Atthefirstmeeting ofthe
Council forTrade inGoods, itsChairman hadindicated thattheIMF, UNCTAD, ITC
(UNCTAD/GATT), ISO,IEC, FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission andOIEwould
qualify forinvitation tothefirstmeeting oftheWTO TBTCommittee. Shesaidthataccordingly
these international organizations hadbeeninvited asobservers tothismeeting. Following the
meeting oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods on3April 1995, AdHocArrangements forthe
Participation ofInternational Intergovernmental Organizations inMeetings oftheCouncil for
Trade inGoods anditsSubsidiary Bodies hadbeenagreed.
24. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed toadopt thedecision oftheCouncil forTrade inGoods
that,pending theadoption ofcriteria andconditions forobserver status forinternational
organizations intheWTO, theWTO TBTCommittee would decide which international
organizations should beinvited toitsnextmeeting. Inthisrespect, theWTO TBTCommittee
agreed toinvite those international organizations which hadbeeninvited tothismeeting toattend
itsnextmeeting.
C. Status ofRatification oftheWTO TBT Agreement
25. TheChairperson drew attention toalistcontaining thelatest membership ofthe
WTO TBTAgreement fortheinformation oftheCommittee. Sherecalled thaton30December
1994, theUnited States hadnotified itswithdrawal from theTokyo Round TBTAgreement
(LET/1971) andinaccordance withArticle 15.11 oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement, the
withdrawal hadbecome effective on28February 1995.
26. TheCommittee tooknoteofthestatement made.
D. Termination oftheTokyo Round TBT Agreement
27. TheChairperson drew attention todocument TBT/W/192, adraftdecision toterminate the
Tokyo Round TBTAgreement andsaidthatinresponse toproposals bythePreparatory
Committee, decisions hadbeentaken toterminate theGATT 1947. Shethought thatsince the
Tokyo Round Agreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade interpreted andsupplemented the
GATT 1947, itmade littlesense tokeepitinexistence beyond thedateonwhich theGATT 1947
would terminate. Sheproposed thattheGATT TBTCommittee consider adopting thedecision on
theTermination oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement ascontained inTBT/W/192, whereby the
Agreement would beterminated attheendof1995.
28. Therepresentative ofJapan saidthathisdelegation supported thedecision perse,that
"The Agreement isherewith terminated oneyearafterthedateofentry intoforce ofthe
WTO Agreement. Inthelightofunforeseen circumstances, theParties maydecide topostpone
thedateoftermination bynomore thanoneyear." However, hethought thattheTokyo Round
TBTAgreement wasacompletely different legalagreement from theGeneral Agreement on
Tariffs andTrade (GATT 1947), andthetermination oftheGATT 1947 didnotnecessarily mean
theTokyo Round TBTAgreement needed tobeterminated. Hesaidthatfurther consultation on
thelanguage ofthereason forthetermination oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement wasneeded
andsuggested thatthereason could betoavoid duplication between theWTO andTokyo Round
TBTAgreements.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page6
29. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities supported thecomments made bythe
representative ofJapan andthought thatfurther clarification might beneeded ontheintention of
thewording "inthelightofunforseen circumstances". Heasked ifitcovered issues notified
under theTokyo Round Agreement among Signatories oftheTokyo Round Agreement which had
notbeensettled satisfactorily could continue tobetreated under thenewWTO TBTAgreement.
30. TheChairperson saidthatshewould holdinformal consultations withinterested Parties of
theGATT TBTCommittee todecide onhowtoterminate theTokyo Round TBTAgreement.
Theissue would betaken upagain atthenextmeeting.
E. Notifications under Articles 2.9,2.10, 3.2,5.6,5.7,7.2and15.2ofthe
WTO TBT Agreement
(i) Recommendations endorsed bythePreparatory Committee
31. TheChairperson recalled thatatitsmeeting on28October 1994, theGATT TBT
Committee hadadopted recommendations regarding notification procedures under the
WTO TBTAgreement aimed atensuring thatadequate procedures would beinplace toallow
notifications tobemade andprocessed during theperiod between entry intoforce ofthe
WTO TBTAgreement andthefirstmeeting oftheWTO TBTCommittee. Those
recommendations (contained inPC/IPL/10/Rev.1) hadbeenendorsed bythePreparatory
Committee oftheWTO andhadbeenadopted bytheGeneral Council oftheWTO. The
Secretariat hadbeeninstructed, pending thefirstmeeting oftheWTO TBTCommittee, to
undertake thework thatwould benecessary toimplement them.
(ii) Procedures forNotification andInformation Exchange under the
WTO TBTAgreement
32. TheChairperson drew attention toitem(iii)ofthedocument PC/IPL/10/Rev.1 regarding
notifications made under theobligations oftheWTO TBTAgreement which stated that
WTO Members should follow therecommendations andguidelines relating tonotification
procedures contained inTBT/16/Rev.7. Shepointed outthatTBT/16/Rev.7 related tothe
obligations oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement andnottothose oftheWTO TBTAgreement,
anddrew attention todocument G/TBT/W/2 inwhich theSecretariat hadupdated thedecisions
andrecommendations taken bytheTokyo Round TBTCommittee regarding procedures for
notification andinformation exchange contained inTBT/16/Rev.7 toreflect theprovisions ofthe
WTO TBTAgreement. Theexercise hadbeenundertaken inpartinapurely mechanical way.
However, anattempt hadalsobeenmade toindicate hownewandadditional obligations regarding
notification andinformation exchange thathadbeenincluded intheWTO TBTAgreement might
beincorporated intotheprocedures ifWTO TBTMembers feltthere wasaneedtodoso.She
invited theWTO TBTCommittee toholddiscussions ofthisagenda itembased onthe
Secretariat 'sbackground document withaviewtoadopting updated decisions and
recommendations onprocedures fornotification andinformation exchange under the
WTO TBTAgreement.
33. Therepresentative ofNewZealand thought thattheproposals setdown inthedocument
G/TBT/W/2 were generally acceptable. However, hemade thefollowing suggestions: (1)on
page2,regarding theStatement onImplementation andAdministration oftheAgreement, the
thirdlineofparagraph 1,"Members should" should bereplaced by"Members shall" soastokeep
thesame language asinthefirstlineoftheparagraph; (2)onpage3,point (iii),regarding
notifications under Articles 3.2and7.2,"proposed andadopted technical regulations" should beG/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page7
replaced by"proposed oradopted technical regulations" toreflect thedistinction between the
obligations under Article 2.9andArticle 2.10oftheAgreement.
34. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities supported thefirstproposal made bythe
representative ofNewZealand. Also, hedrew attention toParagraph Nofdocument
TBT/16/Rev.7 regarding Labelling Requirement andsaidhethought thatitshould alsobe
included asadecision oftheWTO TBTCommittee because itreferred tonotification obligations.
35. Therepresentative oftheUnited States alsosupported thefirstsuggestion made bythe
representative ofNewZealand. Shesaidthatsome oftherecommendations contained in
TBT/16/Rev.7 were made bytheGATT TBTCommittee atanearly stage oftheimplementation
oftheTokyo Round TBTAgreement. Regarding page2ofG/TBT/W/2, thestatement on
implementation andadministration oftheAgreement, shemade thefollowing comments: (1)point
(d),shequestioned whether "consultation point" wasstillrelevant under Article 14ofthe
WTO TBTAgreement given thedispute settlement mechanism established under theWTO;
(2)point (b),shequestioned thevalue ofincluding "theexpected length oftimeallowed for
presentation ofcomments" inthestatements, since itwasrecommended bytheCommittee that60
daysshould beprovided normally and45daysunder special circumstances. Shethought thatany
deviation would bevaried bycaseandwould bedifficult topredict attheearly stage of
implementation, when presenting thestatement; and(3)inrelation toinformation provided under
theCode oftheGood Practice, specifically paragraphs J,LandOofAnnex 3oftheAgreement,
shequestioned whether itwaspossible tosubmit thatinformation intheinitial statement by
Members since theCode ofGood Practice wasopened toacceptance withaseparate notification.
36. Therepresentative ofArgentina shared thedoubts expressed bytheUnited States overthe
needtomaintain consultation points. Headded thatfortechnical consultations, there were
enquiry points.
37. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities supported thecomments made bythe
United States andArgentina onconsultation points. Referring tothecomment made bythe
representative oftheUnited States onthelength oftimeforcomments, hesaidthatindicating a
dateforcomment period wasveryuseful forindustries, especially ifmore than60dayswas
provided byMembers, andtheyshould havetheopportunity ofmaking itexplicit.
38. Therepresentative ofBrazil thought thatthere wasanurgent needtoadopt decisions and
recommendations relating totheStatement onImplementation andAdministration ofthe
Agreement under Article 15.2oftheWTO TBTAgreement. Inthatconnection, heasked whether
itwasnecessary forSignatories oftheTokyo Round Agreement tore-submit theiroriginal
Statements ormake acompletely newStatement since thebasic structure oftherecommendations
would remain thesame. Hesupported thesuggestion made byNewZealand that"Members
shall" submit relevant information intheform ofwritten statements. Heshared thedoubts raised
bytheUnited States onthevalue of"consultation points" andthought thatdelegations knew the
addresses andtelephone numbers ofallother delegations incasebilateral discussions onissues
were needed before bringing them todispute settlement procedures. Healsosupported theview
expressed bytherepresentative oftheUnited States regarding comment periods.
39. TheWTO TBTCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made. TheChairperson invited
interested Members toaddress suggestions inrelation todocument G/TBT/W/2 totheSecretariat
orherself andsaidshewould holdinformal consultations according tothesuggestions made.
Pending anydecision bytheCommittee, WTO TBTMembers should continue following the
notification recommendations contained indocument PC/IPL/10/Rev.1.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page8
(iii) Information tobesubmitted totheSecretariat byMembers
40. TheChairperson drew attention todocuments G/TBT/W/3, G/TBT/W/5 andG/TBT/W/6
andreminded Members oftheWTO TBTAgreement thattheywere requested toinform the
Secretariat assoonaspossible ofthenames, addresses, telephone andtelefax numbers oftheir
Enquiry Points, theappropriate authority towhom requests forconsultation might beaddressed,
asnecessary, andoftheaddresses towhich theywished notifications sent.
41. Concerning G/TBT/W/6, shedrew attention tothefactthatduetotheincreasing number
ofMembers itwould bedifficult andexpensive fortheSecretariat todistribute notifications to
several different destinations foreachMember. Sheproposed theCommittee reflect onthe
possibility ofhaving themost effective andeconomic way, ofcirculating notifications, for
example, circulating notifications onlytoMembers 'localGeneva addresses.
42. Therepresentatives ofNewZealand andBrazil supported thesuggestion thatnotifications
becirculated toonlyoneaddress perMember.
43. TheWTO TBTCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made andagreed thatnotifications
would bedistributed tothemissions inGeneva ortoanaddress (oneonly) provided bythe
delegation. Failing toindicate anaddress meant thatthenotifications would besenttothe
missions ofdelegations inGeneva. TheChairperson confirmed thatinthelightofthestatements
made regarding consultation points, itwould notbenecessary forMembers toupdate orreply in
respect toG/TBT/W/5.
F. Procedures forNotifications under Paragraphs CandJoftheCode ofGood Practice
forthePreparation, Adoption andApplication ofStandards
44. TheChairperson recalled thatunder Paragraphs CandJoftheCode ofGood Practice for
thePreparation, Adoption andApplication ofStandards contained inAnnex 3oftheWTO
TBTAgreement, standardizing bodies were required tonotify theiracceptance orwithdrawal from
theCode andtheexistence oftheirwork programme totheISO/IEC Information Centre. Ashad
beenagreed bythePreparatory Committee, theDirector-General oftheWTO hadbeeninvited to
enter expeditiously intoanagreement withtheISOCentral secretariat toestablish a
WTO Standards Information Service operated byISO. There hadbeenanexchange ofletters
between theDirector-General andtheSecretary-General oftheISOCentral Secretariat toreach an
understanding between thetwoorganizations toestablish aWTO-ISO information system andthe
Memorandum ofUnderstanding agreed upon hadbeencirculated indocument G/L/1. Pursuant to
Paragraph 2oftheMemorandum ofUnderstanding andinorder toensure auniform andefficient
operation oftheprocedures fornotifications, theISOSecretariat andtheWTO Secretariat had
developed notification formats andrelated guidelines which were tobeusedbystandardizing
bodies accepting theCode ofGood Practice. Those guidelines andformats fornotifications had
beencirculated toWTO TBTMembers indocument G/TBT/W/4 forinformation. Shedrew
attention totheamendments made totheformats attached toG/TBT/W/4 forindicating the
country, customs territory orregional arrangement where standardizing bodies accepting the
Code ofGood Practice were established andwhether theywere central government, local
government ornon-governmental bodies. Sheinformed theCommittee thatafewnotifications
hadbeenreceived already from standardizing bodies accepting theCode ofGood Practice. Those
notifications hadbeentransmitted from ISOtotheSecretariat andcirculated toWTO Members for
information indocuments withthesymbol G/TBT/CS/N.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page9
45. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities suggested thatdocument G/TBT/W/4
should bederestricted fortheinformation ofstandardizing bodies.
46. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed toderestrict document G/TBT/W/4.
47. Therepresentative from theISOconfirmed thataMemorandum ofUnderstanding had
beenreached toestablish aWTO Standards Information Service operated byISO. Hesaidthat
theChairman ofISOInformation Committee (INFCO) hadreported totheISOGeneral Assembly
heldon8-10September 1994, onmatters ofinformation onstandards development related to
provisions oftheWTO-TBT Code ofGood Practice. TheISOGeneral Assembly, thehighest
governing body ofISOhadadopted thefollowing resolution related totheCode:
"The General Assembly ofISO,commits itself topromoting positive responses tothe
provisions oftheWTO TBTCode ofGood Practice forthePreparation, Adoption andApplication
ofStandards (Annex 3totheWTO Agreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade) regarding
information onstandards development."
48. Heinformed theCommittee thattheMemorandum ofUnderstanding onWTO Standards
Information Service Operated byISOhadbeenapproved bytheISOCouncil inNovember 1994
andsince then, inaccordance withitem2oftheMemorandum, theISOCentral Secretariat
together withtheWTO Secretariat hadprepared notification arrangements related totheCode of
Good Practice. Thedocument containing notification forms andrelevant instructions fortheiruse
hadbeenapproved bytheCommittee forInformation andtheISOGeneral Assembly. He
confirmed thatISOhadalready received notifications onacceptance oftheWTO-TBT Code of
Good Practice andontheavailability ofwork programmes from twostandardizing bodies:
DINDeutsches Institut fürNormung (Germany) andBureau ofProduct Standards (Philippines).
These notifications hadbeenpromptly forwarded totheWTO Secretariat according toitem4of
theMemorandum ofUnderstanding.
49. Hesaiditwasdifficult toestimate theresources needed bytheISO/IEC Information
Centre fortheapplication oftheWTO Standards Information Service operated byISOsince the
number ofstandardizing bodies accepting theWTO-TBT Code ofGood Practice wasnotknown.
Anassumption might bemade thatthenumber would notexceed 670standardizing bodies and
based onthatassumption, anapproximate estimation ofthetotalcostneeded bytheISO/IEC
Information Centre fortheservice wasCHF 200,000 covering theneedforadditional staff,
publication ofISO/WTO Directory ofstandardizing bodies accepting theWTO Code (annually, in
English, French andSpanish), publication ofupdates intheISOBulletin ofinformation and
mailing cost.
50. Regarding theimplementation ofclause 3oftheMemorandum ofUnderstanding
concerning classification, stage codeandreference numbers, heinformed theCommittee that
ICS(International Classification forStandards) hadbeenrecommended forusebytheGeneral
Assembly ofISO,committing ittopromote theInternational Classification forStandards foruse
bystandardizing bodies within theircountries, andtourgethose ISOmembers which hadnotyet
implemented theICSintheirnational catalogues todosoassoonaspossible. ISOCouncil had
alsoformally recommended theuseofaharmonized stage codedeveloped byISO/IEC atthe
international levelincooperation withregional standardizing bodies CEN/CENELEC inWestern
Europe. Hesaidthatthose harmonized stage codes would meettherequirement ofthe
WTO TBTCode ofGood Practice. Theharmonized stage codes hadalsobeenrecommended by
theISO/IEC/ITU Information Technology Strategies Cooperation Group. i.e.bythethree apex
international standardizing bodies. Concerning thereference number, hesaidthatpromotion of
theuseofrelevant ISO/IEC guides would becontinued.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page10
51. Therepresentative ofJapan saidthathisgovernment could support thenotification
procedures stipulated indocument G/TBT/W/4. However, fortheimplementation oftheCode of
Good Practice heexpressed concern about ISONET Rules withwhich standardizing bodies
notified work programmes. Hethought thatthestage codesystem wastoocomplicated foruseby
standardizing bodies, especially non-governmental bodies. Hesaidthatexplanation ofthe
ISONET rules toMembers wasessential andfurther discussion inISOwasnecessary forthe
improvement oftheRules. Heindicated thathisdelegation might come backtotheissue infuture
TBTmeetings.
52. TheWTO TBTCommittee tooknoteofthestatements made. TheChairperson saidthat
shewould inform theChairman oftheBudget Committee regarding thefinancial requirements
made known bytheISOrepresentative.
G. Technical Assistance
53. TheChairperson recalled that,inorder togiveSignatories theopportunity todiscuss the
activities andproblems relating toinformation exchange, theGATT TBTCommittee hadadopted
adecision thatmeetings ofpersons responsible forinformation exchange including persons
responsible forenquiry points should beheldonaregular basis. Thelastmeeting ofthatkind
hadbeenheldinNovember 1992. Sheproposed thatanother meeting onprocedures for
information exchange beheldintheautumn. Sheinformed theCommittee ofasuggestion made
bytheChairman oftheSPSCommittee thatthere should beajointmeeting forthispurpose for
theSPSandtheTBTCommittees since there were similar obligations under thetwoAgreements.
Sheasked iftheCommittee would agree onajointmeeting organized intheautumn. Shethought
thatthismight alsobehelpful fornewMembers oftheAgreement tosetuptheirenquiry points
andfulfil theirobligations under Article 10.1oftheWTO TBTAgreement.
54. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities supported theproposal oforganizing a
meeting onprocedures forinformation exchange fortheTBTCommittee. However, hesaidthat
itwasnotnecessary tohaveajointmeeting withtheSPSCommittee because hethought thatthe
TBTandSPSAgreements were twocompletely different systems, although theywere builtupon
similar linesandsome reference points could befound. Heproposed thatthere could be
twoseparate meetings attheoperational levelheldclose together.
55. Therepresentative oftheUnited States saidthatmeetings ofenquiry points hadproved to
beuseful fortheoperational levelbecause representatives could make contacts anddiscuss
common problems associated withtheimplementation ofinformation exchange. Shesaidthat
although there wasaquestion ofresources formany delegations, itwasparticularly important to
holdsuchameeting soonwhile theWTO TBTAgreement wasentering intoforce andgiven that
changes hadbeenmade from theTokyo Round TBTAgreement. Shesupported theproposal of
having ajointmeeting onprocedures forinformation exchange withtheSPSCommittee. She
thought thatalthough there were substantial differences between theSPSandTBTAgreements,
thetransparency provisions were identical. Sherecalled thatinthepast,fortheefficiency of
resources, meetings ofenquiry points hadbeenscheduled closely withtheISO/INFCO meetings
because ofsimilar participants. Shethought thatajointmeeting would alsoprovide participants
withanoccasion todiscuss differences interms ofcoverage between thetwoAgreements andhow
tobestcopewiththefunctioning ofthetwoAgreements, whether ornottheywere handled bythe
same enquiry point. Sheinformed theCommittee thatinhercountry, thesame enquiry point was
handling thefunctions fortheTBTandtheSPSAgreements.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page11
56. Therepresentative ofCanada informed theCommittee thathiscountry alsohadone
enquiry point functioning forboththeTBTandSPSAgreements. Canada hadfound this
approach costeffective and,given boththesubstantive reasons raised bytherepresentative ofthe
United States andtheneedtoreduce travel costs, therepresentative ofCanada shared theview
expressed bytherepresentative oftheUnited States thatitwould beadvantageous tohaveajoint
meeting withtheSPSCommittee. Hesaidthatevenifwasabacktobackmeeting, there should
besome jointsessions forparticipants tocompare theirexperiences incarrying outtheir
obligations.
57. Therepresentatives ofBrazil, Indonesia, speaking onbehalf oftheASEAN countries, and
Japan alsosupported thesuggestion ofhaving ajointmeeting onprocedures forinformation
exchange withtheSPSCommittee. Therepresentative ofBrazil raised concerns about the
possibility ofhaving divergent recommendations interms oftheinformation systems ifthere
would betwoseparate meetings.
58. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities saidthatifcosteffectiveness wasthe
reason, theinformation exchange meetings fortheSPSandtheTBTCommittees could beheld
separately onthesame day,eachlasting forhalfaday.
59. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed toholdameeting onprocedures forinformation
exchange intheautumn. TheChairperson would consult withtheChairman ofthe
SPSCommittee andinterested delegations regarding theform ofthemeeting.
60. Therepresentative ofCosta Ricarecalled thatanagreement hadbeenreached inthe
SPSCommittee onthepossibility ofholding meetings fortheheads ofenquiry points ona
regional basis soastoreduce travel costs forparticipants. Shesuggested theCommittee consider
alsothepossibility ofhaving jointmeetings ataregional level.
61. Therepresentative ofISOsaidthatanewstage ofcooperation hadbegun between the
WTO andISOwiththeimplementation oftheWTO TBTCode ofGood Practice andthenewrole
oftheISO/IEC Information Centre. Heemphasized theimportance ofproviding technical
assistance todeveloping countries whose institutional standardization infrastructures were notfully
developed, andinsome cases non-existent, soastofacilitate theimplementation ofthe
TBTAgreement. Hedrew attention toArticle 11oftheTBTAgreement which allowed
developing countries torequest advice andtechnical assistance inawiderange ofareas andsaid
thatMembers should, ifrequested, provide technical assistance. Hethought thatunder the
Tokyo Round TBTAgreement, implementation hadbeenverylimited because thenumber of
Signatories wasrelatively small. Herecalled thatthere hadbeenindividual donors providing
financing forthetraining ofdeveloping countries, suchasthePRODEC andRESOURCE
seminars onTechnical Barriers toTrade heldin1993 and1994, financed byFinland andthe
European Communities respectively. Heregretted thatlittleaction hadbeentaken by
WTO Members toprovide technical assistance todeveloping country Members under Article 11
oftheAgreement.
62. Heinformed theCommittee thatwithin theISO,aspecial Committee onDeveloping
Country Matters (DEVCO) which wasestablished in1961, hadbeenoperating since 1980 a
Programme forDeveloping Countries (DEVPRO). DEVPRO hadproved overtheyears tobeof
substantial benefit todeveloping country members andeconomies intransition. Theprogramme
consisted of:
-Publication ofDevelopment Manuals intheareas ofstandardization andrelated matters
ofwhich eight manuals hadbeenpublished andthree more were planned;G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page12
-Training instandardization andrelated matters through:
*Regional training seminars,
*Training fellowships withestablished national standards bodies, and
*Training forISOtechnical committee secretariat functions;
-Sponsorship ofparticipation inISOstandards committee meetings;
-Assistance andguidance intheestablishment ofInternational Standards needed by
developing countries; and
-Assistance indocumentation, information andpromotion ofstandardization.
63. HesaidthatDEVPRO wasadministered byasmall staff, fullyfinanced from theregular
budget ofISO. However, funding fortheelements oftheProgramme came from sources external
totheISObudget, suchasindustrialized countries whooffered training intheirregular training
courses andspecialized attachment training freeofcharge fortrainees from developing countries.
Itremained necessary, however, tofinance theother expenses oftheProgramme suchastravel
andsubsistence offellows inthevenue country, expenses oflecturers andtrainees inregional
seminars, publication ofmanuals andothers. Hesaidthatthelackoffunds forfinancing those
activities wasputting severe limitations ontheextent oftechnical assistance provided bythe
Programme while thenumber ofcountries eligible forassistance hadincreased. InitsResolution
12/1994, DEVCO hadcalled forcloser cooperation between theWTO/TBT andtheISO/DEVCO
aswellasbetween theirSecretariats toexplore ways forachieving thecommon goals ofthe
twoOrganizations regarding technical assistance todeveloping countries. Heinformed the
Committee thatwritten information onthetriennial 1995-1997 ISOprogramme fordeveloping
countries andthetypeoftechnical assistance provided byISOwasavailable andcould besentto
interested WTO Members.
64. Therepresentative ofFAO drew attention toapaper concerning technical assistance from
theFAO which wasmade available atthebackoftheroom. Herecalled thatthere hadbeena
regional seminar organized under theSPSAgreement inBangkok andanother onewhich would
takeplace inMexico withtheparticipation ofCodex Alimentarius.
65. Therepresentative ofITCinformed theCommittee thathisorganization wasaUNagency
specializing inassisting developing countries ontrade promotion andimport management inthe
areaoftechnical barriers totrade.
66. TheChairperson saidthattheSecretariat wasstudying ways ofproviding technical
assistance. Theproblem wasbudgetary, andifanydelegation could contribute intheform of
technical assistance todeveloping countries requiring suchassistance orcould provide resources
enabling theSecretariat toprovide technical assistance suchoffers would bewelcomed.
67. TheGATT andWTO TBTCommittees tooknoteofthestatements made.
H. Statements onImplementation andAdministration oftheAgreement
68. TheChairperson drew attention todocuments TBT/1/Add.40 and41andwelcomed the
statements submitted byMalaysia andIsrael inaccordance withArticle 15.7oftheTokyo Round
TBTAgreement, that"Each Party shall, promptly afterthedateonwhich theAgreement enters
intoforce fortheParty concerned, inform theCommittee ofmeasures inexistence ortaken to
ensure theimplementation andadministration oftheAgreement ...".G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page13
69. Therepresentative ofNewZealand welcomed thetransparency oftheMexican
regulation/standard notification system. Heasked foranexplanation ofthesignificant increase in
thenumber ofnewandamended Mexican technical regulations andstandards thathadbeenissued
recently, andasked whether itwasapartoftheprocess ofMexico coming intolinewithits
trading partners.
70. Herecalled thatatthelastTokyo Round TBTCommittee Meeting, hisdelegation had
raised concerns about Mexico 'slabelling andconsumer information regulations
NOM-050-SCI-1994, andNOM-051-SCI-1994. Hesaidthathisauthorities hadsince received
advice from Mexico informing them thatthedraftregulations were atpresent "onhold" andmight
beredrafted. Heurged Mexico toprovide anyupdated information onthecurrent situation.
71. Hedrew attention toG/TBT/Notif.95.37 inwhich Mexico hadnotified itsproposed
regulation NOM-106-SCI-1994 which established thecharacteristics, requirements andconditions
fortheuseofanofficial Counter Mark. Article 2oftheMexican regulation suggested thatthe
requirement toexhibit theMark applied toapotentially widerange ofproducts. Hequestioned
therationale, necessity andcoverage oftheregulation; andwhether theregulation metthe
obligations forconformity assessment under Article 5.1oftheWTO TBTAgreement withrespect
tosuchissues asimport suppliers 'access totheMark andthepossibility forconformity
assessment tobeundertaken atthesiteoftheexporter 'sfacilities. Heasked forfurther
clarification from Mexico onthenecessity oftheprocedures inorder togiveMexico confidence
thatimported products conformed withregulations.
72. Heraised concerns relating tothepackaging andlabelling provisions ofMexico 's
proposed newmeatregulations (NOM-030-ZOO-1994). Sub-paragraph 4.7oftheMexican
regulation required (i)theoriginal labeloftheplant withproduct andplant details, thepacking
dateetc,inthelanguage ofthecountry oforigin; and(ii)alabelinSpanish withthe
corresponding information. Heasked ifadhesive labels were acceptable andwhether theSpanish
language labelcould beaffixed inMexico. Healsoasked forclarification onsub-paragraph 4.6
which stated thatcarcasses would onlybeaccepted ifproperly identified withthesealofthe
approved establishment, whether itmeant thatacarton sealhadtobeapplied toeachcarcass or
whether Mexico would accept thatthebrands printed onthecarcass itself mettherequirement.
Heurged Mexico tosupply further information which would answer these questions.
73. Therepresentative ofMexico confirmed thatnewdrafts would bedrawn upforstandards
NOM-050 andNOM-051 andthedefinitive versions ofthedrafts would bebrought tothe
attention oftheTBTCommittee. Referring totheother questions raised bytherepresentative of
NewZealand, hesaidthathewould referthem tohisauthorities andreplies would begiven
promptly.
74. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities expressed concern overthefunctioning
oftheIsraeli enquiry point because hisdelegation hadencountered difficulties inreceiving replies
onsome enquiries, suchastheIsraeli standard 215concerning interlocking clayrooftilesof
which hisauthorities hadmade thefirstenquiry inJuly1994. Hesaidthatsubstantive changes in
standard 215hadaffected negatively ECexports toIsrael andtherevised standard nowappeared
tobemandatory. Heregretted thatnoreply onsubstance hadbeenreceived from theIsraeli
enquiry point andtheregulation hadnotbeennotified. Heurged theIsraeli enquiry point to
answer theenquiries andtonotify themandatory standard. Hedrew attention tosome other
incidents, suchasenquiries relating tosealgatevalves, porcelain tableware andwelding products
when unsatisfactory replies hadbeenprovided inOctober 1994. Although hisdelegation had
made comments atthebeginning of1995, noinformation hadbeenreceived. Hereiterated the
importance ofthefunctioning ofenquiry points which could affect therights andinterests ofotherG/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page14
Members. Heurged Israel tolookintothematter andfindasolution tothesubstantive issues as
soonaspossible.
75. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities drew attention toTBT/Notif/93.458
notified bytheUnited States inDecember 1993 regarding aproposal onMotor Vehicle Content
Labelling. Hesaidthathisauthorities hadexpressed concern andmade comments onitin
January 1994, butregretted thatthecomments hadnotbeenconsidered. Thefinalrulehadbeen
published intheFederal Register inJuly1994 andestablished amandatory labelling requirement
forallnewmotor vehicles, beginning on1October 1994, indicating thedomestic andforeign
content oftheirequipment. Thelabels hadtoshow thepercentage oftheequipment inthevehicle
thatoriginated intheUnited States andCanada; theforeign countries which were themajor
sources ofthevehicle 'sequipment; thepercentage byvalue oftheequipment originating ineach
ofthese countries; thecountries oforigin ofthevehicle 'sengine andtransmission; andthe
location where thevehicle wasassembled. Herecalled thathisdelegation hadbrought theissue to
theattention oftheGATT TBTCommittee because ofitsconcern andthegeneral interest inthe
issue. Herecalled thatatthelastmeeting, therepresentative oftheUnited States hadtoldthe
Committee thatherauthorities would review thesubstance ofthematter andadditional
information would beprovided when itwasavailable. Heregretted thatnoinformation hadbeen
received despite areminder senttotheUSauthorities on2February 1995. Heurged again the
delegation oftheUnited States toprovide information ontheregulation.
76. Therepresentative ofJapan alsoindicated Japan'sinterest inreceiving information onthe
issue.
77. Therepresentative oftheUnited States confirmed thattheregulation hadbeenadopted as
afinalregulation; thatexplained whythere wasnoinformation onanychanges. Shesaidthat
shecould notrespond insubstance oftheissue atthemoment butwould report totheregulatory
authorities thecomments made andwould respond atthenextmeeting.
78. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland informed theCommittee thathisauthorities would
provide astatement tothedelegation ofKorea concerning theKorean marks oforigin system. He
recalled thatduring several interventions inthepast,hisdelegation hadexpressed concern onthe
Korean marks oforigin system andrelated labelling requirements. Hewelcomed theinformation
which hadbeenprovided bythedelegation ofKorea uptothepresent. However, hethought the
information didnotmeetfullyhisauthorities 'expectations anditwasnotclear iftheinformation
hadanybearing onthepractical implementation ofthelaws. Hesaidthataftercloser
examination, hisdelegation wasstilloftheopinion thatthecurrently applied marking and
labelling requirements were inconsistent withArticle XIoftheGATT; therecommendation of
21November 1958; andtheAgreement onTechnical Barriers toTrade. Hesaidthatitwasalso
clear tohisdelegation thatmarks oforigin andrelated labelling requirements were covered by
boththeTokyo-Round andtheWTO TBTAgreements.
79. Headded thatbeside theproblem oforigin marking, hiscountry alsohadproblems with
theburdensome application oftheorigin regulations forwatches, themarking regulations for
woollen fabrics andthemandatory marking inKorean language onmany home appliances. He
concluded thatsofarnosatisfactory solution hadbeenoffered bytheKorean authorities onanyof
theproblems raised bySwitzerland. Heurged again theKorean delegation togivedue
consideration toSwitzerland 'sconcerns, tosubmit induecourse therelevant lawsandregulations
andtowork withhisdelegation withaviewtoreaching satisfactory solutions. Hesaidthathis
delegation would continue bilateral discussions withKorea andwould giveprior notice tothe
Secretariat andtheKorean delegation iftheissue wastobebrought backatthenextCommittee
meeting.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page15
80. Therepresentative oftheRepublic ofKorea inresponding totheSwiss delegation 's
comment saidthatbilateral consultations were continuing inhiscapital andhehoped that
satisfactory solutions could bereached. Hesaidthathisdelegation would provide thelawsand
regulations inquestion assoonaspossible.
81. Therepresentative ofJapan alsoexpressed hisgovernment 'sconcern overtheissue of
Korean marks oforigin which hadbeendiscussed foralongtimeinmeetings oftheTokyo Round
TBTCommittee. Herequested theSwiss delegation toprovide theCommittee withrelevant
information ontheissue. Therepresentative ofSwitzerland agreed tomake thefulltextofhis
statement available toanyinterested delegation.
82. TheCommittees tooknoteofthestatements made.
I. Other Business
83. TheChairperson saidthattheWTO TBTCommittee might wishtoconsider howtotreat
theother decisions andrecommendations contained inTBT/16/Rev.7 taken under the
Tokyo Round TBTCommittee, andsaidthatshewould holdinformal discussions withMembers
onthismatter before theautumn meeting.
84. Shenoted thatunder Article 15.3oftheWTO TBTAgreement, theCommittee should
review annually theimplementation andoperation oftheAgreement taking intoaccount the
objectives thereof. Inconnection withthat,shealsonoted thatunder theMinisterial Decision
adopted bytheTrade Negotiations Committee onReview oftheISO/IEC Information Centre
Publication, theWTO Committee onTechnical Barriers toTrade should "...atleastonceayear
review thepublication provided bytheISO/IEC Information Centre oninformation received
according totheCode ofGood Practice forthePreparation, Adoption andApplication of
Standards inAnnex 3oftheAgreement, forthepurpose ofaffording Members opportunity of
discussing anymatters relating totheoperation ofthatCode." IntheTokyo Round
TBTCommittee, anannual review hadusually beenconducted atthelastmeeting oftheyearon
thebasis ofaSecretariat working document which wassubsequently finalized bytheSecretariat in
thelightofcomments given bytheCommittee ordiscussions atthatmeeting.
85. Shesaidthatshewould holdinformal meetings withinterested Members onthevalue of
having anAnnual Review for1995, given theshort period since theWTO TBTAgreement had
entered intoforce, andonhowtoapproach andcarry outanannual review whether forthisyear
orforsubsequent years.
86. TheWTO TBTCommittee agreed thattheChairperson would holdinformal discussions
withinterested Members onhowtotreattheother decisions andrecommendations contained in
document TBT/16/Rev.7 andonhowtoapproach andcarry outannual reviews.
87. Therepresentative ofBrazil recalled thatatthelastmeeting oftheSub-Committee on
Trade andEnvironment oftheWTO Preparatory Committee heldattheendof1994, his
delegation hadmade astatement ontherelationship between eco-labelling schemes andthe
TBTAgreement, trying toanalyze towhatextent eco-labelling schemes were covered byboththe
Tokyo Round andtheWTO TBTAgreements. Hethought thatthiswasanissue which would
havetobedealtwith, whether intheTBTCommittee ortheCommittee onTrade and
Environment. Heexpressed hisdelegation 'sinterest intheissue andreiterated hisdelegation 's
observation thateco-labelling schemes were covered bytheTBTAgreement andsubject to
notification.G/TBT/M/1
TBT/M/48
Page16
88. Therepresentative ofCanada alsoexpressed hisdelegation 'sinterest intheissue and
shared theviewexpressed byBrazil thateco-labelling wasanissue thatneeded tobeaddressed.
Heinformed theCommittee thathisdelegation hadreflected ontheissue atthelastmeeting ofthe
Committee onTrade andEnvironment, andsaidthatcopies ofthestatement made atthatmeeting
were available tointerested Members. Herestated hisdelegation 'sbelief thatitwastherighttime
topursue thelinkage between voluntary eco-labelling programmes andtheTBTAgreement and
thatthere wasastrong basis topursue consensus thatvoluntary programmes, suchaseco-labelling
schemes, were covered bytheCode ofGood Practice forthePreparation, Adoption and
Application ofStandards contained inAnnex 3oftheWTO TBTAgreement. Hethought thatit
would needconsiderable work, probably onaninformal basis inboththeTBTCommittee andthe
Committee onTrade andEnvironment atthisstage given thatanyquestions which dealtwiththe
TBTAgreement should involve theTBTCommittee formally orinformally.
89. TheCommittees tooknoteofthestatements made.
Dateofthenextmeeting
90. TheChairperson drew attention toArticle 13.1oftheWTO TBTAgreement that"the
Committee shallmeetasnecessary, butnolessthanonceayear...". Shesaidthatunder the
Tokyo Round Agreement, theCommittee usually heldtworegular meetings eachyear, oncein
spring andonceinautumn. Shesuggested thattheWTO TBTCommittee might consider
following thesame practice andthiswould enable thetwoCommittees toholdjointmeetings as
envisaged inthe"Transitional Arrangements -Avoidance ofProcedural andInstitutional
Duplication". Sheproposed thattheWTO TBTCommittee consider following thispractice and
thenextmeeting ofthetwoCommittees beheldsome timeintheautumn, withtheexact dateto
befixed bytheChairperson inconsultation withinterested delegations.
91. Therepresentative oftheUnited States thought thatthepresent meeting hadbeenfocusing
onprocedural matters andthere were outstanding points which needed tobeclarified andagreed
upon before theWTO TBTAgreement could befullyimplemented. Shesuggested thatthere
might beaneedfortheCommittee toholdameeting before theendofthesummer.
92. Therepresentative ofCanada shared theviewexpressed bytheUnited States andthought
thatthere should beflexibility onthedateofthenextmeeting, given thefactthatthere might be
substantive issues thatneeded tobeaddressed.
93. Therepresentative oftheEuropean Communities saidthatsince theCommittee didnotyet
know whether itwould benecessary tohaveameeting before thesummer, andintheinterests of
costeffectiveness, hesupported theCanadian proposal thatthedateofthenextmeeting should be
leftopen. Ifthere were really alotofsubstantive work tobecompleted before thesummer break
theChairperson could summon ameeting, butotherwise anautumn meeting should besufficient.
94. TheTokyo Round TBTCommittee andtheWTO TBTCommittee agreed tothe
Chairperson 'sproposal thatajointmeeting would beheldintheautumn withtheexact datetobe
worked outbyherself inconsultation withdelegations. Regarding theneedforameeting before
theendofthesummer, theChairperson saidthatshewould holdconsultations withinterested
delegations. Should there needtobeameeting before thesummer break, itwould beshort and
would focus onmatters remaining pending from thepresent meeting andanysubstantive issues
Members might suggest.