WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/TBT/W/152
15 November 2000
(00-4856)
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Original:  English
BACKGROUND ON PROTOCOLS TO THE EUROPE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND CERTAIN OTHER COUNTRIES ON
CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS (PECAS)
Communication from the United States
I. SUMMARY
1. The European Commission is negotiating Protocols to the Europe Agreement on Conformity
Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products ("PECAs") as part of its accession strategy of
facilitating the free movement of goods within the eventual expanded European Union customs area.
On 10 July 2000, the European Union initialed PECAs with the countries of the Czech Republic,Hungary, and Latvia.  The United States has been seeking information on the effects of these
agreements on trade with third countries, in particular since our understanding is that the agreements
with Hungary and the Czech Republic will ente r into force 1 January 2001, and sometime in the
spring of 2001 with Latvia.  While we have been informed that the texts of these three initialed
agreements will be available upon final approval, we  are raising this matter in the Committee for the
benefit of other Members who may have a similar interest.  We look forward to the notifications of
these agreements as foreseen under TBT Article 10.7.
II. BACKGROUND
2. The United States has reviewed a "model" PECA which we understand was the basis for the
agreements reached with the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Latvia, and for future agreements which
are expected between the EC and the European Economic Area Countries (Iceland, Liechtenstein, and
Norway) and with other Central and East European countries.   It is our understanding that the EC has
entered into discussions with Estonia, Slovenia, Slovakia, and Lithuania. The model PECA is an
incomplete document containing brackets for future text and cross-references.  Nevertheless, it has
been the basis for our analysis given the current unavailability of the actual texts of the initialed
agreements.
3. According to the model, the purpose of a protocol is " to facilitate the elimination by the
Parties of technical barriers to trade in respect of industrial products.  The means to this end is the
progressive adoption and implementation by (X Countr y) of national law, which is equivalent to
Community law."  The Protocol provides for:
(a) the mutual acceptance of industrial products, listed in the annexes on "mutual
acceptance of industrial products", which fulfil the requirements to be lawfully placedon the market in one of the Parties;
(b) the mutual recognition of the results of conformity assessment of industrial products
subject to Community law and to the equivalent (Country) national law, both listed in
the annexes on "mutual recognition of results of conformity assessment".G/TBT/W/152
Page 2
4. Our analysis has been confined to the potential impact on third countries of the provisions to
recognize the results of one another’s designated conformity assessment bodies.  It is our
understanding that the provisions for recognition of conformity assessment results would eliminate
the need for further product testing and certification of EU-origin products covered by the
PECA annexes upon importation into Hungary, the Czech  Republic, and Latvia, and vice-versa.  It is
unclear how these provisions would effect products originating in countries not party to the PECA,
including product tested and certified to EC requirements pursuant to a bilateral MRA.
5. Our uncertainty and potential concern arise with provisions on origin in Article 8 of the model
agreement.  We are concerned that third-country pr oducts which do not originate in the EU bearing a
valid CE mark granted by an EU-recognized not ified body may have to undergo redundant testing
upon importation to Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Latvia.  Article 8 provides:
The provisions of this Protocol shall apply to  industrial products which originate in the
Parties according to non-preferential rules of origin.  In the case of divergent rules, the rules
of the Party in whose territory the product is marketed are determining.  Proof of origin may
be demonstrated by a certificate of origin.  Such certificate is not required in the case of
importation of products covered by a proof of origin according to Protocol (___) of the
Europe Agreement.
6. Generic Annexes on the following areas of specific European Community Law are contained
in the model:
(i) Machinery;
(ii) Lifts;(iii) Personal protective equipment;
(iv) Electrical Safety;
(v) Electromagnetic Compatibility;
(vi) Equipment and Protective Systems intended for use in potentially explosive
atmospheres;
(vii) Hot water boilers;
(viii) Gas Appliances;
(ix) Pressure equipment;
(x) Medical Devices;
(xi) Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) for medicinal products for human use;
(xii) Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) for medicinal products for human use:
inspection and batch certification;
(xiii) Telecommunications.
7. The following is our information on the specific sectors covered in the agreements concluded
with the Community:
III. PECA PRODUCT COVERAGE BY COUNTRY
Czech Republic
Machinery;
Electrical Safety;
Electromagnetic Compatibility;Hot Water Boilers;
Gas Appliances;
Good Manufacturing Practices for Medicinal Products for Human Use;
Personal Protective Equipment;
Equipment and Protective Systems Intended for Use in Potentially Explosive Atmospheres (ATEX).G/TBT/W/152
Page 3
Hungary
Machinery;
Electrical Safety;Electromagnetic Compatibility;
Hot Water Boilers;
Gas Appliances;
Good Manufacturing Practices for Medicinal Products for Human Use;
Good Manufacturing Practices (Medical Devices).
Latvia
Electrical Safety;
Electromagnetic Compatibility;
Low Voltage;
Equipment and Protective Systems Intended for Use in Potentially Explosive Atmospheres (ATEX)  Construction Products;
Good Manufacturing Practices;
Toys.
__________