| TOP |
| 7th Report of Market Access Ombudsman Council (March 18, 2002) |
1. Complainant: Tokyo Chamber of Commerce and Industry
2. Ministry concerned: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
3. Complaint:
An importer wishing to apply for JAS Standard grading for foreign-made structural glued laminated lumber is required to convert the performance table, product characteristics, etc. based on exporting country's standards into ones based on JAS standards. (Japan Agricultural Standard on glued laminated lumber)
Although the JAS system on glued laminated lumber is a voluntary system, whether a product is graded by JAS standard or not has a far-reaching effect on sales of the product on the Japanese market. Therefore, imported goods are in effect required to be in conformity with the JAS standard.
Recently, we tried to import glued laminated lumber from New Zealand by converting New Zealand standards (NZS3603, etc.) into the JAS standard but were unable to do so. Due to the differences in unit, testing method, etc. we were unable to convert the performance, product characteristics, etc. based on the New Zealand standard into ones based on the JAS standard. As a result, we were unable to make application and had to give up on importing the lumber.
If the Japanese registered grading organization had accepted the test results (performance value, characteristics, etc.) conducted by a registered grading organization of the exporting country (without changing the unit, etc.) as application materials, instead of requiring the importer to convert the exporting country's standard into the JAS standard, we would have been able to import the lumber smoothly.
Therefore, we want the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries to take the necessary measures so that the registered grading organization accepts test results conducted in the exporting country (without changing the unit, etc.) as application materials.
We also want the ministry to explain why New Zealand is not recognized as a country having a system equivalent to the JAS system and to tell us how it is going to deal with the matter in the future.
* < Response to *1 from the Tokyo Chamber of Commerce and Industry >
(1) The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries says in its inquiry to the complainant that "we do not allow such a grading system as accepting the data based on the standard of a foreign country as the data for JAS standard grading... With regard to JAS standard grading of foreign products other than those produced by certified manufacturers, the following two methods are available:1] Grading by a registered grading organization after the product is imported,2] Grading by a registered grading organization (or a registered foreign grading organization) in the exporting country before the product is imported."
As we stated before, we have to judge at the initial stage whether a foreign lumber can be used or not. In doing so, we need to make an initial judgement as to which category of JAS grades the lumber falls under. As the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries does not allow grading based on overseas data, which we need for the initial judgement, we tried to convert the overseas data into JAS standard, but to no avail.
(2) As to the method 1], we think it is a grading method for the materials that are imported with confidence that their performance will conform to the JAS standard.
(3) As to the method 2], since we do not have enough time to import the lumber after acquiring a grade in the exporting country, it is important for us to make an initial judgement as to whether the performance of the lumber is satisfactory or not. The time when we acquire a grade will overlap with the time when the product is being manufactured and transported.
(Second complaint)
(1) With regard to "initial judgement," isn't is possible for a government agency to give in general terms what category of JAS grades the product in question fall under, rather than having the plant do the grading or asking a testing organization to do the grading?
The point is the problem of the unit change. It would not be a heavy burden on the part of the government agency to do the above services.
(2) More than one year has passed since the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries asked the New Zealand Embassy in Tokyo to present documents. We would like the ministry to ask New Zealand how it is going to deal with the matter.
4. Corresponding Policy of the Ministries concerned:
(1) Regarding the grading method
The complainant says, "An importer wishing to apply for JAS Standard grading is required to convert the performance table, product characteristics, etc. based on exporting country's standards into ones based on JAS standards." But, such an application method is not allowed under the JAS Law. As we have explained in our "Inquiry to the Complainant" *1, only those that conform to the JAS standard, which has been established to meet the needs of the Japanese people, can be graded. Since the items and criteria values of performance required and their testing methods differ between the JAS standard and the standard of a foreign country, we can accept neither the data based on the standard of a foreign country as the data for JAS standard grading nor the products graded based on the standard of a foreign country as the products graded by the JAS standard.
*1 < Excerpts from Inquiry to the Complainant >
The complainant says in the first paragraph of the complaint that "An importer wishing to apply for JAS Standard grading is required to convert the performance table, product characteristics, etc. based on exporting country's standards into ones based on JAS standards." However, since the items and criteria values of performance required and their testing methods differ between the JAS standard and the standard of a foreign country, we do not allow a grading system such as accepting the data based on the standard of a foreign country as the data for JAS standard grading. With regard to JAS standard grading of foreign products other than those produced by certified manufacturers, the following two methods are available:
1] Grading by a registered grading organization after the product is imported,
2] Grading by a registered grading organization (or a registered foreign grading organization) in the exporting country before the product is imported.
In either case, these organizations implement inspection and perform grading. There is no conversion of standards as pointed out by the complainant. The complainant may have a misunderstanding about the system.
(2) Regarding "initial judgement"
If the "initial judgement" referred to in the response (* in the above) from the Tokyo Chamber of Commerce and Industry means a judgement to ascertain if products to be imported conform to the JAS standard before they are graded, then we believe it is possible for the factory to judge if the products meet the criteria values prescribed in the JAS standard by conducting tests on its own or by asking a testing organization to test the products, because the JAS standard is a published document and it describes the testing method and the criteria value for each quality item. However, it goes without saying that such a "judgement" is not a formal grade and that the products have to obtain a regular grade.
(3) Grading methods prescribed by the JAS Law for foreign products
With regard to the grading of foreign products by JAS Law, the following methods are available:
1] Grading by a registered grading organization after the product is imported,
2] Grading by a registered grading organization in the exporting country before the product is imported,
3] Grading of a certified foreign manufacture by registered grading organization based on the old JAS Law (In this case, the registered grading organization can grade on the basis of inspection data provided by designated foreign inspection organization.)
4] A foreign plant performs grading by itself after being certified as a certified foreign manufacturer by a registered certification organization based on the revised JAS Law (Enforced in June 2000).
If the product in the complaint is not a product of a certified foreign manufacturer based on the old JAS Law, the product can get JAS grading under method 1] or 2] above. If a foreign plant is certified as a certified foreign manufacturer as in the method 4], the manufacturer in question can perform grading on the product of its own manufacture.
(4) Regarding why New Zealand is not recognized as a country having a system equivalent to the JAS system and how the ministry is going to deal with the matter in the future.
Under the revised JAS Law, an organization of a foreign country can be registered as a registered foreign grading organization or as a registered foreign certification organization. But the foreign country has to be one of those designated by the ordinance of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries as a country having a grading system for agricultural or wood products equivalent to the grading system under the Japanese Agricultural Standard.
After receiving a request for an equivalency examination of the New Zealand's grading system for wood products and the JAS system on October 6, 2000, the ministry on the 13th of the same month asked the New Zealand Embassy in Tokyo to present documents necessary for the equivalency examination. But, so far, the embassy has failed to submit such documents. As soon as the documents are submitted, the ministry will start the proceeding for the equivalency examination.
(Second corresponding policy)
(1) As we have explained earlier, since the items and criteria values of performance required and their testing methods are different between the JAS standard and the New Zealand standard, it is difficult to compare the two standards. With regard to glued laminated timber, for example, the testing timber, testing method and conformity requirements differ between the JAS standard's "degree of adhesive strength" and New Zealand's Glueline Integrity. Therefore, the products that conform to the New Zealand standard do not necessarily conform to the JAS standard.
(2) As to the equivalency examination concerning New Zealand's wood products, following an inquiry from the New Zealand embassy in Tokyo on January 29, 2002 concerning the equivalency examination and procedures for application for registered foreign certification organization, we explained to an official of the New Zealand Embassy in Tokyo on January 31, 2002 and February 4 of the same year about the documents necessary for the equivalency examination and the type of wood products to be examined.
5. Remarks
The complainant accepted this policy.