UNITED STATES - CERTAIN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING (COOL) REQUIREMENTS UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO REGARDING PROCEDURES UNDER ARTICLES 21 AND 22 OF THE DSU
Document: Agreed Procedures
Date: 13 June 2013
Document codes: WT/DS386/24
Complainant: Mexico
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, EU, Guatemala, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Peru, Taiwan
Dispute stage: Implementation & Compliance
Agreements cited: Art. III, X:3(a), IX  GATT 1994Art. 2, 12  Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT)Art. 2, 5, 7  Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS)Art. 2  Rules of Origin

UNITED STATES - CERTAIN COUNTRY OF ORIGIN LABELLING
(COOL) REQUIREMENTS
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND MEXICO
REGARDING PROCEDURES UNDER ARTICLES 21 AND 22 OF THE DSU
 The following communication, dated 10 June 2013, from the delegation of the United States
and the delegation of Mexico to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, is circulated at
the request of these delegations.

Mexico and the United States would like to inform the Dispute Settlement Body of the
attached "Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding"
between Mexico and the United States with respect to the above captioned dispute.

We respectfully request that you circulate the attached agreement to Members of the
Dispute Settlement Body.

(Signed)
Clete Willems
Legal Advisor
Permanent Mission
of the United States

(Signed)
Hugo Romero
Counsellor
Permanent Mission
of Mexico

Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding

United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling
(COOL) Requirements (WT/DS386)

The Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") adopted its recommendations and rulings in the dispute
United States – Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements (WT/DS386) on
23 July 2012.

Pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), the arbitrator fixe d the reasonable period of time ("RPT") for the
United States to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB at 10 months from
23 July 2012 (). The RPT expired on 23 May 2013. On that date, the US
Department of Agriculture adopted a final rule modifying the U.S. COOL regulations. 78 Fed. Reg.
31,367 (24 May 2013).

Mexico and the United States (the "Parties") have agreed on the following procedures for the
exclusive purposes of this dispute. They are design ed to facilitate the resolution of the dispute and
reduce the scope for procedural disputes and are without prejudice to either Party’s views on the
correct interpretation of the DSU:

1. If Mexico considers that the United States has adopted a measure to comply with the
recommendations and rulings of the DSB in DS386 that is inconsistent with the covered
agreements or there is disagreement between th e Parties as to the existence of a measure
taken to comply, Mexico may request the establishment of a panel pursuant to DSU
Article 21.5 at any time.

2. Mexico is not required to hold consultations with the United States prior to requesting the
establishment of an Article 21.5 panel.

3. The Parties shall cooperate to enable the DSU Article 21.5 panel to circulate its report within
90 days of the panel’s establishment, excludin g such time during which the panel’s work
may be suspended pursuant to DSU Article 12.12.

4. Either Party may request the DSB to adopt the report of the DSU Article 21.5 panel at a DSB
meeting held at least 20 days after the circulation of the report to Members unless either
Party appeals the report to the Appellate Body.

5. In the event of an appeal of the DSU Article 21.5 panel report, the Parties shall cooperate to
enable the Appellate Body to circulate its report to the Members within 90 days from the
date of notification of the appeal to the DSB. Further, either Party may request the DSB to
adopt the reports of the Appellate Body and of the DSU Article 21.5 panel (as modified or
upheld by the Appellate Body report) at a DSB meeting held within 30 days of the circulation
of the Appellate Body report to Members.

6. In the event that the DSB, following a proceeding under DSU Article 21.5, rules that a
measure taken to comply does not exist or is inconsistent with a covered agreement, Mexico
may request authorization to suspend the application of concessions or other obligations
under the covered agreements to the United States pursuant to DSU Article 22. The United
States shall not assert that Mexico is precluded from obtaining such DSB authorization on
the ground that the request was made outside the 30-day time-period specified in DSU
Article 22.6. This is without prejudice to the right of the United States to refer the matter to
arbitration in accordance with DSU Article 22.6.

7. If Mexico requests authorization to suspend the application of concessions or other
obligations under the covered agreements to the United States pursuant to DSU Article 22,
the United States may object under DSU Article 22.6 to the level of suspension of
concessions or other obligations and/or claim that the principles and procedures set forth in
DSU Article 22.3 have not been followed, thereby referring the matter to arbitration
pursuant to DSU Article 22.6.

8. The Parties will cooperate to enable the arbi trator under DSU Article 22.6 to circulate its
decision within 60 days of the referral to arbitration.

9. If any of the original panelists is not available for either the DSU Article 21.5 panel or the
Article 22.6 arbitration (or both), the Parties will promptly consult on a replacement, and
either Party may request the Director-General of the WTO to appoint, within ten days of
being so requested, a replacement for the proceeding or proceedings in which a replacement
is required. If an original panelist is unavailable to serve in either of the proceedings, the
Parties will further request that, in making this appointment, the Director-General seek a
person who will be available to act in both proceedings.

10. The Parties will continue to cooperate in all matters related to these agreed procedures and
agree not to raise any procedural objection to any of the steps set out herein. If, during the
application of these procedures, the Parties consider that a procedural aspect has not been
properly addressed in these procedures, they will endeavour to find a solution within the
shortest time possible that will not affect the other aspects and steps agreed herein.

11. These agreed procedures in no way prejudice other rights of either Party to take any action
or procedural step to protect its rights and interests, including recourse to the DSU.