Provisional Translation
| OTO No. | 424 | Classification | MITI-109 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date of Acceptance | July 5, 1990 | Ministry/Agency Receiving Complaint | Economic Planning Agency |
| Responsible Ministries | Ministry of International Trade and Industry | Related Laws | Consumer Product Safety Law |
| Complainant | Domestic firm | Exporting Countries | Germany |
| Subject | Review of the SG standard for fold type footstool. | ||
| Details of Measures | It was explained that: The SG standards were set up by the Product Safety Association, a special organization established under the Consumer Products Safety Act. Regulations are studied and prepared at the council organized by men of learning and experience, inspection organizations, representative of consumers and manufacturers, etc., examined by a senior committee Safety Control Committee, and finally approved by the Minister for International Trade and Industry. The regulations offer a security for reparation for injuries. However, it is not compulsory to enter the system. As a matter of fact, there are many products with no SG mark attached as the past sales results for stools indicated. Regarding the fold type stools in this case, the initial SG standard (March, 1975) stipulated the maximum load as 300 Kg, but since many accidents occurred due to low strength of the products, the standard was revised in March, 1983 into 400 kg at maximum load for safety of users, and this was applied to the products made in and after December, 1983. Accidents decreased rapidly after the introduction of new standard. Incidentally, the revision was made referring to the US ANSI standard value (900 pound = about 408 Kg) of the types used by consumers in their daily life. At the 23rd and 24th Special Grievance Resolution Meetings in March and April 1991, there was a direct speech by the complainant, explanations of the situations by a representative of Product Safety Association, etc. As a result of deliberations on the purpose of SG standards and contents of the complaint, it was agreed that the complainant's assertion needed not to be accepted regarding the SG standards. |
||
| Classification of Processing | D | Directions | I-a |
| Remarks | |||