INTRODUCTION

On 22 April 2015, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted the Appellate Body Report and the Panel Report, as upheld by the Appellate Body Report, in United States – Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Shrimp from Viet Nam. This dispute concerns Viet Nam's challenge of certain anti-dumping measures imposed by the United States in the context of the US anti-dumping proceedings in Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (Shrimp), and of certain US laws, methodologies, and practices with respect to the imposition of anti-dumping duties. The Panel found the measures at issue to be inconsistent with several provisions of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Anti-Dumping Agreement), as well as with Article VI:2 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994). Most of the Panel's findings were not subject to appeal. Viet Nam's appeal was limited to the issue of whether the Panel acted inconsistently with Article 11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) in finding that Viet Nam had not established that Section 129(c)(1) of the US Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) is inconsistent “as such” with several provisions of the Anti-Dumping Agreement. At the meeting of the DSB held on 20 May 2015, the United States indicated its intention to implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings in this dispute in a manner that respects its World Trade Organization (WTO) obligations, and stated that it would need a reasonable period of time in which to do so.

By letter dated 17 September 2015, Viet Nam informed the DSB that consultations with the United States had not resulted in an agreement on the reasonable period of time for implementation pursuant to Article 21.3(b) of the DSU. Viet Nam therefore requested that this period be determined through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c). By joint letter dated 7 October 2015, Viet Nam and the United States agreed on the undersigned as the Arbitrator for this matter. I informed the parties of my acceptance of the appointment by letter dated 8 October 2015.