UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT (SECOND COMPLAINT)
Document: Understanding between the European Union and the United States Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU
Date: 27 April 2012
Document codes: WT/DS353/14
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, South Korea
Dispute stage: Implementation & Compliance
Agreements cited: Art. 3.1, 3.2, 5, 6.3, 1.1, 2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. III:4  GATT 1994

UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE
IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT
(SECOND COMPLAINT)

Understanding between the European Union and the United States
Regarding Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU

 The following communication, dated 24 April 2012, from the delegation of the
European Union and the delegation of the United Stat es to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated at the request of these delegations.

The United States and the European Union would like to inform the Dispute Settlement Body of the
attached "Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding and
Article 7 of the SCM Agreement" between the European Union and the United States with respect to
the dispute United States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft (WT/DS353).

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

United States – Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft
(WT/DS353)

Agreed Procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding
and Article 7 of the SCM Agreement

The European Union and the United States ("the par ties") have agreed to the following procedures in
the event that the Dispute Settlement Bo dy ("DSB") recommends in the dispute United States –
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft that the United States bring its measures into
conformity with the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ("SCM Agreement").
These procedures are for the exclusive purposes of this dispute. They are designed 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 and the SCM Agreement.

1. If the DSB recommends that the United States br ing its measures into conformity with the
SCM Agreement and the European Union cons iders that the situ ation described in
Article 21.5 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of
Disputes ("DSU") exists, the European Union will request that the United States enter into
consultations with the European Union.
1 The parties shall hold such consultations within 15
days from the date of receipt of the request . After this 15-day period has elapsed, the
European Union may request the establishment of a panel pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU
at any time.
2. At the first DSB meeting at which the EU request for the establishment of an Article 21.5
panel appears on the agenda, the United States shall accept the establishment of that panel.
3. The parties shall cooperate to enable the Article 21.5 panel to circulate its report within 90
days of the panel’s establishment, excluding such time during which the panel’s work may be
suspended pursuant to Article 12.12 of the DSU.
4. Either party may request the DSB to adopt the report of the Article 21.5 panel at a DSB
meeting held at least 20 days after the circulation of the report to the Members unless either
party appeals the report.
5. In the event of an appeal of the Article 21.5 pa nel 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
report of the Article 21.5 panel and the report of the Appellate Body at a DSB meeting held
within 20 days of the circulation of the Appellate Body report to the Members.
6. The European Union may request the DSB to authorize countermeasures pursuant to Article
22.2 of the DSU and Article 7.9 of the SCM Agre ement if it considers that the United States
has failed to comply with the DSB’s recomme ndations and rulings within the time period
referred to in Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement or if the DSB following a proceeding under
Article 21.5 of the DSU rules that a measure take n to comply does not exist or is inconsistent
with a covered agreement. The United States shall not assert that the EU is precluded from
obtaining such DSB authorization because its request was made outside the time period
specified in the first sentence of Article 22.6 of the DSU. This is without prejudice to the
right of the United States to have the matt er referred to arbitration in accordance with
Article 22.6 of the DSU.

1 This is without prejudice to the European Union's right to make a request under Article 22.2 of the
DSU and Article 7.9 of the SCM Agreement as specified in paragraph 6 below.

7. If the European Union requests authorization to suspend concessions or other obligations
pursuant to Article 22.2 of the DSU, the United States shall have the right to object under
Article 22.6 of the DSU to the level of suspen sion of concessions or other obligations and/or
claim that the principles and procedures set fo rth in Article 22.3 of the DSU have not been
followed. In the event of such objection, the matter will be referred to arbitration pursuant to
Article 22.6 of the DSU.
8. If the matter is referred to arbitration prior to adoption by the DSB of its rulings following an
Article 21.5 proceeding, the United States and th e EU shall, at the earliest possible moment,
request the arbitrator under Article 22.6 to suspe nd its work. In the event that the DSB rules
that a measure taken to comply does not exist or is inconsistent with a covered agreement,
either party may request the Article 22.6 arbitrator to resume its work.
9. The parties will cooperate to enable the arbitrat or under Article 22.6 of the DSU to circulate
its decision within 60 days of the referral to arbitration.
10. If any of the original panelists is not availabl e for either the Article 21.5 compliance panel or
the Article 22.6 arbitration (or both), or an y person serving in such proceeding becomes
unavailable to serve, the parties will promptly c onsult 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 e ither of the proceedings, or a person serving in
such proceeding becomes unavailable to serve, 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.
11. The parties to this dispute will continue to cooperate in a ll matters related to these agreed
procedures and shall not raise any procedural objection to any of the steps set out herein. If,
during the application of these procedures, the pa rties consider that a procedural aspect has
not been properly addressed in these procedures, they will endeavor to find a solution within
the shortest time possible that will not affect the other aspects and steps agreed herein.
12. On or before the date on which the Artic le 21.5 compliance panel or the Article 22.6
arbitrator is composed, the parties shall propo se the adoption for purposes of each proceeding
of procedures for the protection of confidentia l information based on the Additional Working
Procedures for DS353 – Procedures for the Prot ection of Business Confidential Information
and Highly Sensitive Business Information used by the Panel in US – Measures Affecting
Trade in Large Civil Aircraft , along with any modifications to those procedures that the
parties agree to propose.
2
Signed in Geneva, 12 January 2012

For the European Union

Mr. Detlev Brauns
Chargé d’affaires a.i.
For the United States

Mr. David P. Shark
Chargé d’affaires a.i.