WT/DS386/35  
 
19 June 2015  
(15-3175)  Page: 1/2  
  Original: English  
 
 UNITED STATES – CERTAIN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING (COOL) REQUIREMENTS 
RECOURSE BY MEXICO TO ARTICLE 22.2 OF THE DSU 
The following communication, dated 17 June 2015, from the delegation of Mexico to the 
Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated pursuant to Article 22.2 of the DSU. 
  
_______________ 
  Mexico requests that a special meeting of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) be held on 
29 June 2015 to consider the following agenda item:  
 
United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements (DS386) 
– Recourse to Article 22.2 of the DSU by Mexico 
 Background of this request 
On 23 July 2012, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the Panel report as modified by 
the Appellate Body report. In these reports, it was found that the COOL measure of the United 
States was inconsistent with the obligations of Article 2.1 of the Agreement  on Technical Barriers 
to Trade  (TBT Agreement).
1 The DSB recommended that the United States bring the COOL 
measure into conformity with its obligations under the TBT Agreement.  
 The United States informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB recommendations and 
rulings for which it required a reasonable period of time (RPT). Mexico requested that the RPT be 
determined through binding arbitration under Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and 
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU). On 4 December 2012 the Arbitrator 
issued an award determining that the RPT for the United States to implement the 
recommendations and rulings of the DSB would expire on 23 May 2013.
2   
 On 23 May 2013, the United States Department of Agriculture adopted an amended COOL 
measure. In Mexico's view, the amended COOL measure did not bring the United States into 
compliance with the recommendati ons and rulings of the DSB.  
 
By communication dated 13 June 2013, Mexico and the United States jointly informed the DSB of 
"Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of  the Dispute Settlement Understanding", under 
which the parties agreed that Mexico retained the right to challenge the amended COOL measure 
under Article 21.5 of the DSU at any time.
3 The Parties also agreed that if following proceedings 
                                               
1 The COOL measure comprises: 
a. the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq.), as amended by the Farm Security and 
Rural Investment Act of 2002 and the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008;  
b. Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling of Beef, Po rk, Lamb, Chicken, Goat Meat, Wild and Farm-Raised 
Fish and Shellfish, Perishable Agricultural Commodities , Peanuts, Pecans, Ginseng, and Macadamia Nuts (7 CFR 
Parts 60 and 65), 74 Fed. Reg. 2658-2707; 
c. Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling of Beef, Po rk, Lamb, Chicken, Goat Meat, Wild and Farm-Raised 
Fish and Shellfish, Perishable Agricultural Commodities , Peanuts, Pecans, Ginseng, and Macadamia Nuts (7 CFR 
Parts 60 and 65), 78 Fed. Reg. 31367-31385. 
Panel Report, para. 2.1. 
2 WT/DS386/23, para. 123. 
3 WT/DS386/24. WT/DS386/35 
 
- 2 - 
 
  under Article 2.15, the DSB ruled that the amended COOL measure was inconsistent with a 
covered agreement, Mexico could resort to Article 22.2 of the DSU and request the DSB's authorization to suspend the application of concessions or other obligations under the covered agreements. The United States affirmed that in such a situation, it would not assert that Mexico 
was precluded from obtaining the DSB's authorizat ion on the grounds that the request was made 
after the 30-day time-period specified in Article 22.6 of the DSU.
4  
 
Mexico requested the establishment of a compliance panel, which was established on 25 
September 2013. The compliance panel found that the amended COOL measure is inconsistent with Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement and Article III:4 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade 1994  (GATT 1994).
5 The Appellate Body report circulated to WTO Members on 18 May 2015 
upheld the Panel's conclusions on Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement and Article III:4 of the 
GATT 1994.6 On 29 May 2015, the DSB adopted the Article 21.5 Appellate Body report and the 
compliance panel report, as amended by the Appellate Body Report. 
 
Mexico's request under Article 22.2 of the DSU 
Because the United States' COOL measure is not in compliance with the recommendations and 
rulings of the DSB and is inconsistent with the co vered Agreements, and in light of paragraph 6 of 
the understanding reached between the Parties on Agreed Procedures under Article 21 and 22 of the DSU, Mexico is entitled to redress under Article 22.2 of the DSU.   
In accordance with Article 22.2, Mexico requests authorization from the DSB to suspend the 
application to the United States of tariff concessions and other related obligations in the goods sector under GATT 1994 in an amount of USD $713 million annually. Mexico has applied the 
principles and procedures of Article 22.3(a) of the DSU in considering what concessions and 
obligations to suspend. As required by Articl e 22.4 of the DSU, the level of suspension of 
concessions proposed by Mexico is equivalent on an annual basis to the nullification or impairment 
of benefits accruing to Mexico, resulting from the United States' failure to bring its COOL measure 
in compliance by 23 May 2013 or otherwise comply with the recommendations and rulings of the DSB in United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements .  
 
Mexico will implement the suspension of tariff concessions and other related obligations by 
imposing additional tariffs on a list of US products to be established by Mexico in due course.   
 
__________  
                                               
4 Id., para 6. 
5 WT/DS386/RW. 
6 WT/DS386/AB/RW.