EU/US SUMMIT, WASHINGTON, DC, DECEMBER 18, 2000,
CONCLUSIONS
Report of the Transatlantic Economic Partnership
Steering Group
The Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP) Steering Group met on
September 12 and November 9, 2000. The next meeting is scheduled for late
January 2001.
Achievements for the 2nd Semester 2000
The Steering Group noted with satisfaction that significant progress has been
achieved over the last six months in fulfilling elements of the TEP Action Plan.
In the area of technical barriers to trade, the Steering Group welcomed the
substantial progress we made on an agreed text of a mutual recognition
agreement (MRA) on marine equipment. The Steering Group was also pleased
by the finalization of a Joint Declaration on a Framework for
US-EU
Cooperation in the field of Metrology in Support of Trade area (see Annex 1
below) as a step to reduce further barriers to transatlantic trade. In addition,
the Steering Group noted that the two sides have made progress and have
released for comment to the transatlantic dialogues a joint draft bracketed
text on guidelines for regulatory cooperation and transparency. The Steering
Group also acknowledged progress on regulatory cooperation in the fields of
cosmetics, elevators, telecommunications equipment, and consumer product
safety.
In the area of services, both sides have been encouraged by the finalization
of a work plan for further discussion and negotiation on mutual recognition
arrangements in the architectural and engineering services sectors (see Annex
2 below), as well as by the progress made in the insurance sector.
Regarding discussions within the framework of the TEP Working Group on
biotechnology, US and EU officials have made good progress towards
agreement on issues affecting US corn exports to Spain and Portugal. Since
the last Summit, the experts in sampling and testing methods from
US, EU
and Member State agencies have made significant progress in identifying
reliable and consistent approaches to verification. Parallel discussions on the
administrative aspects are also making progress. Discussion continues on the
issue of obtaining access to the data and reference material needed for tests
on new GMO events. This access is currently being pursued on the basis of
confidentiality undertakings with testing laboratories. On this basis, policy
officials will aim to make further progress early in the New Year. In addition,
regarding the TEP pilot project on biotechnology, regulators from the
US and
the EU have made significant progress in comparing the molecular
characterization components of their review processes for transgenic plants.
Furthermore, discussions continued on conditions that could allow the
withdrawal of sanctions imposed by both sides in 1993 due to a dispute over
telecommunications-related procurement.
On the multilateral front, we continued working together on a number of
important issues in the WTO [World Trade Organization]. In particular, the
US and the EU approaches to the accession of China to the WTO have been
characterized by frequent and constructive coordination. We also took note
of the implementation debate recently concluded in the WTO General Council.
The Steering Group discussed additional items under the Early Warning
Mechanism established by the June 1999 US-EU Summit and began an
examination of how to refine the practical procedures that should govern the
treatment of issues brought up under this mechanism.
Priorities for the 1st Semester 2001
The Steering Group will monitor and give encouragement to completing the
process of bringing into force the MRA on marine equipment, including the
identification of an initial scope of product coverage. In addition, the Steering
Group will press for early finalization of the guidelines for regulatory
cooperation and transparency. Both sides will support continued regulatory
cooperation in the areas of road safety equipment, cosmetics, lifts
(elevators), and telecommunications equipment and explore possible additional
areas for cooperation.
Regarding services, the Steering Group will encourage progress in the
discussions concerning mutual recognition in this area, and looks forward to
renewed discussions and negotiations early in the new year.
On the new Round we will continue to work together over coming months in
order to increase the already existing support amongst WTO members in favor
of an inclusive and balanced round. As regards China's protocol of accession,
we intend to continue our close cooperation toward bringing the negotiations
to a successful and expeditious conclusion.
With respect to the rest of the TEP Action Plan, both sides will seek further
progress in as many areas as possible. In addition, the Steering Group will be
open to consideration of new possibilities for cooperation that could be
established within the context of the TEP.
The Steering Group will aim to finalize concrete recommendations for
procedures that could streamline and make more effective the process of
identifying and addressing issues under the Early Warning Mechanism. It will
also continue to encourage contributions by the various dialogues to early
warning discussions.
Annex 1 - Joint Declaration on US-EC Cooperation in the Field of
Metrology in Support of Trade
Annex 2 - Agreed TEP Workplan for Architectural and Engineering
Services
Annex 1 Joint Declaration on US-EC Cooperation in the field of metrology in support of trade
1. Purpose
This declaration sets out the policy basis and orientation for a joint technical
program of work between the United States and the European Community in
view of supporting and furthering mutual recognition of test reports,
calibration and measurement certificates provided for regulatory and market
place compliance purposes. The goal is both to improve regulatory efficiencies
and to facilitate trade. These aims will be achieved by reducing unnecessary
duplicative measurements, tests and calibration requirements and by
improving regulator confidence in measurements, tests and calibrations
performed by qualified laboratories in both the United States and the
European Community.
Steps to this effect may include, but are not limited to:
a) Recognition of the measurement capability of the National Measurement
Institutes (NIST for the United States) and other institutes that are
signatories to the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA).
b) Establishment of the equivalence of national measurement standards based
on the CIPM MRA.
c) Recognition of the measurement capability of designated calibration
laboratories based on the equivalence of each other's systems to assess and
monitor their competence.
d) Recognition by the importing Party's regulatory bodies of the calibration
and measurement certificates issued by the National Measurement Institutes
and designated calibration laboratories of the other Party.
e) Acceptance/recognition of reference materials developed and produced by
the other Party on the basis of the relevant international standard
(ISO/IEC
Guide 34). This declaration does not commit the US or the EC to any
sector-specific initiatives; and precise decisions will have to be taken
explicitly at the appropriate time on a case-by-case basis.
2. Current Situation
Tests and measurements play an important role in commercial transactions
and trade, for industry and regulators alike. Product-testing protocols
increasingly require measurements that are directly related to the importing
nation's national standards or those recognized as being equivalent. In many
cases, product tests and associated measurements refer to underlying
physical measurement standards realized and maintained by National
Measurement Institutes (NMIs). NMIs in the United States and Europe are
legally responsible for developing, maintaining and disseminating national
measurement standards, making them available to industry, government
agencies, and the public; they are not, however, required to establish
equivalence of national standards with other countries, although some do
undertake this responsibility as well.
Regulators and industrial customers will not accept product tests and
measurements verifying conformance to contract or regulatory requirements
unless they are confident that the underlying physical measurement standards
are valid. Mutual recognition of measurement standards between the United
States and the European Community (EC) would facilitate acceptance of the
results of conformance testing or product certification performed by
manufacturers, testing laboratories or certification bodies in the United States
and the EC in key sectors where measurement comparability is important.
Participation in measurement intercomparisons is critical in assuring that one
Party will not reject products exported by the other Party simply because
different methods are used to perform a measurement or test. As new
technologies emerge and world economies grow, the number, frequency and
coverage of such comparisons is rising rapidly. Sound, accurate and reliable
measurements, be they physical, chemical or biological in nature, are
therefore essential.
While physical measurements are realized and maintained at the highest level
by NMIs in the United States and the EC, most tests and measurements in
support of trade are performed by commercial laboratories, not by NMIs. Thus
it is important to address both mutual recognition of the measurement
capability of NMIs and the measurement capabilities of calibration and testing
laboratories whose work is traceable to national or international
measurements. The current lack of recognition gives rise to problems that
affect trade, such as failure to accept calibration and measurement
certificates issued by laboratories in the exporting country; unnecessary
duplication of tests, measurements and assessments; and lack of mutual
understanding of how measurement-related issues are handled. It has caused
specific problems in certain sectors, e.g., aviation, pressure vessels, exhaust
emissions, electromagnetic compatibility.
3. Metrology-related Trade Impediments
The table below summarizes some of the general measurement-related trade
impediments that could unnecessarily burden US-EC trade and suggests
some approaches for possible solutions.
Impediments to Trade
1. Regulatory authorities (and industry) require traceability to physical
standards maintained by different National Measurement Institutes.
Solutions: a) Recognition of calibration and measurement certificates issued
by NMIs, based on the CIPM-MRA framework. b) Increased awareness and
understanding of metrology-related requirements (see point 5).
2. Different approaches to demonstrating measurement capability
Solutions: a) Recognize equivalence of respective systems and their results.
b) Cooperation between NMIs. c) Cooperation between accreditation
organizations.
3. Different approaches to developing and certifying reference
materials
Solutions: a) Recognize equivalence of respective systems for value
assignment and their results. b) Scientific and technological co-operation. c)
Joint development of reference materials.
4. Reliance on different test methods
Solutions: a) Alignment to international standards. b) Harmonization and/or
convergence of EC and US standards. c) Regulatory co-operation. d)
Scientific and technical co-operation.
5. Lack of awareness among regulators and economic operators of how
to deal with measurement-related requirements
Solutions: a) Regulatory co-operation. b) Exchange of best practices. c)
Improve dialogue between regulators and economic operators on the one
hand, and NMIs, CIPM, accreditors etc. on the other hand.
6. Instruments Available to Achieve the Objective
Trade facilitation and improved regulatory efficiencies can be achieved by
recognizing certain key elements related to the acceptability of calibration
and measurement certificates; promoting scientific and technological
co-operation based on existing US-EC agreements; and promoting
cooperation, awareness and understanding of measurement issues among
regulators and industry. Examples of instruments and relationships that
already exist or are being put into place and that can be used include:
-
The CIPM (Comité International des Poids et Mésures) Arrangement on
Mutual Recognition of national measurement standards and calibration
certificates issued by National Metrology Institutes and other MRA
signatories.
-
The US-EC Agreement on scientific and technological co-operation
and the Implementing Arrangement in the field of metrology and
measurement standards.
-
Cooperation between US and EC metrology organizations
Bilateral, regional and international cooperation between
US and
EC
accreditation systems.
7. Elements for a Bilateral Co-operation Framework
To further our mutual objectives, and fully utilize the identified instruments,
the US and EC agree to consider the following cooperative activities and to
develop work plans for specific technical activities. These activities include:
a) Encourage regulators and industry in both the United States and the
European Community Member States to rely on and make use of the CIPM
Mutual Recognition Arrangement with a view to avoiding duplicative
measurements and calibrations.
b) Make use of the US-EC Agreement on scientific and technological
co-operation and the Implementing Arrangement in the field of metrology and
measurement standards, to aid in finding solutions to measurement and test
related problems that impede or could impede trade.
c) Establish cooperation between regulators on measurement-related
requirements in regulations. Encourage exchange of information and
experience among regulators, identification of best practices and networking.
d) Promote awareness and understanding among regulators and industry of
measurement-related requirements and issues. Promote dialogue between
regulators, industry and metrology organizations
e) Encourage and support the use of international standards related to
laboratory competence. Encourage cooperation and agreements between
US
and EC accreditation organizations and support the related activities at the
international level. Support regional and international programs for laboratory
inter-comparisons.
f) Pursue an agreement on the mutual recognition of calibration and
measurement certificates.
Annex 2 Transatlantic Economic Partnership
ELEMENTS OF THE WORK PLAN
Introduction
Six elements were identified to form part of the work plan for architectural
and engineering services. Each element is listed below with a brief description.
At some point, it may be necessary to set forth separate work plans for each
profession.
Respect of each others' regulatory systems
-
purpose of regulation.
-
extent to which home country regulations and host country regulations
apply to an individual practicing in another country or jurisdiction. For
example, when is disciplinary action appropriate and what
jurisdiction(s)
should take the action?
-
requirements for licensing/registration/certification in a host country.
-
procedures to be used in processing applications from licensed and
unlicensed practitioners from other countries.
-
services that may be provided in architecture and engineering by
individuals without licensure/registration/certification. (See also "scope
of practice")
-
limitations on use of the title "architect" or "engineer," if any.
-
licensure/registration/certification requirements for companies (info only,
not MRA).
-
period of validity of registration or licensing.
-
need for continuing professional development.
Determining equivalence of education
-
purpose of education requirements for licensing or registration of
professionals.
-
process by which equivalency of education will be determined and who
will make the determination in each jurisdiction.
-
applicability of existing agreements on educational requirements, as
appropriate.
-
role of organizations which accredit degree-granting programs and/or
institutions, as appropriate.
Determining equivalence of qualifications other than education
-
purpose of requirements, such as experience and examinations, in
determining whether an individual is qualified to practice the profession.
-
equivalencies of examination.
-
equivalencies of practice qualifications.
-
process by which equivalence will be determined and who will make the
determination.
-
role of quasi-governmental and non-governmental organizations, if any,
that would be involved in the process.
Notification to the World Trade Organization of the intent to negotiate
mutual recognition
Scope of practice
-
functions performed by licensed or registered individuals, including
functions in particular branches of engineering.
-
services that may be provided in architecture and engineering by
individuals without licensure/registration/certification. (See also "respect
of each others' regulatory system")
Implementation of agreements
steps to be taken by others (professional associations and/or other
national or sub-national organizations) that may be necessary to make
the agreement work.
