Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION 3914
A. Request for Consultations and Request for the Establishment of a Panel 3914
B. Establishment and Composition of the Panel 3914
C. Panel Proceedings 3915
Ⅱ. FACTUAL ASPECTS 3916
A. History of the Dispute 3916
B. Measure at Issue 3918
Ⅲ.PARTIES’ REQUESTS FOR FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3918
Ⅳ. ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES 3919
A. Introduction 3919
B. Parties’ Requests and Arguments on Opening the Panel Meeting for Public Observation 3919
1. Arguments of the European Communities 3920
（a） Whether panels are permitted to open hearings under Article 12 （including Appendix 3）， Articles 14.1 and 17.10 of the DSU 3920
（b） Legal implications of open hearings on covered persons under the Rules of Conduct 3921
（c） Systemic and political impact of opening hearings 3921
（d） What procedures can be adopted to protect confidential information in an open hearing 3922
2. Arguments of the United States 3922
（a） Whether panels are permitted to open hearings under Article 12 （including the Appendix 3）， Articles 14.1 and 17.10 of the DSU 3922
（b） Legal implications of open hearings on covered persons under the Rules of Conduct 3923
（c） Systemic and political impact of opening hearings 3924
（d） What procedures can be adopted to protect confidential information in an open hearing 3925
C. First Written Submission of the European Communities 3925
1. Introduction 3925
2. Factual aspects 3925
3. Legal arguments： Part - Violation of Articles 23， 21.5， 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU and Articles Ⅰ and Ⅱ of the GATT 3926
（a） The structure of Article 23 of the DSU 3926
（b） Applicability of Article 23 - Article 23.1 of the DSU： Seeking the redress of a WTO violation 3926
（c） Violation of Articles 23.2（a） and 21.5 and of Article 23.1 of the DSU 3927
（d） The United States’ continued suspension of concessions and related obligations is in violation of Article 23.1， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU 3929
（e） The United States is in violation of Article Ⅰ：1 of the GATT 1994 because of the continued suspension of concessions and related obligations 3934
（f） The United States is acting inconsistently with Article Ⅱ of the GATT by the continued application of countermeasures on products originating in the European Communities 3935
4. Legal Arguments： Part Ⅱ- Conditional claim in the event that the Panel does not find any violation of Article 23 of the DSU as set out in Part Ⅰ 3935
（a） The United States is violating Article 22.8 of the DSU because the measure found to be inconsistent has been removed by the European Communities 3935
（b） The United States is in violation of Articles Ⅰ and Ⅱ of the GATT 1994 following the continued application of suspension of concessions 3937
D. First Written Submission of the United States 3937
1. Introduction 3937
2. Factual background 3938
（a） The six hormones used for growth promotion purposes 3939
3. Legal arguments 3940
（b） The EC has failed to demonstrate that the United States has breached DSU Article 22.8 because the EC has neither demonstrated that it has “removed” the WTO-inconsistencies of the original hormones ban， nor demonstrated how the amended ban has provided a solution to the nullification or impairment of benefits to the United States 3941
（c） The EC has failed to demonstrate that its amended import ban on meat and meat products treated with hormones for growth promotion purposes is WTO-consistent 3942
（d） The United States has not breached any other WTO obligations by continuing to suspend concessions to the EC 3944
（i） The United States continues to satisfy its obligations under Article 23 of the DSU 3944
（ii） The US suspension of concessions does not breach Articles 23.2（a）， 21.5 and 23.1 of the DSU 3945
（iii） The United States has not violated Article 23.1 of the DSU， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU 3947
（iv） The United States has not breached its obligations under Article Ⅰ or Ⅱ of the GATT 1994 3948
4. Conclusion 3948
E. Oral statement of the european communities during the first substantive meeting 3948
1. Introduction 3948
2. Seeking redress - Article 23.1 3948
3. Article 23.2（a） of the DSU in conjunction with Article 21.5 of the DSU 3949
4. Article 23.1 in conjunction with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 3950
5. Concluding statement of the European Communities 3954
F. Oral statement of the united states during the first substantive meeting 3957
1. Introduction 3957
2. The European Communities’ amended ban 3957
3. The six hormones used for growth promotion purposes according to good veterinary practices 3958
4. The EC’s assertion of its own compliance 3959
5. Burden of proof 3959
6. “Presumption of good faith” 3960
7. The EC’s interpretation of the DSU 3960
（a） Article 21.5 3960
（b） Article 23 3961
8. Conclusion 3962
9. Concluding statement of the United States 3962
G. Second written submission of the european communities 3967
1. Introduction 3967
2. PART 1： Violation of Articles 23.1， 23.2（a）， 21.5 and 22.8 of the DSU （systemic issues） 3967
（a） The United States is in violation of Article 23.1 and 23.2（a） read together with Article 21.5 3967
（b） The United States’ continued suspension of concessions and related obligations is in violation of Article 23.1， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 3971
3. PART 2： The WTO-consistency of the EC compliance measure 3972
（b） Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement 3973
（c） Article 5.1 of the SPS Agreement 3977
（d） Article 3.3 of the SPS Agreement 3978
H. Second written submission of the united states 3978
1. Introduction 3978
2. Legal arguments 3979
（a） The EC has failed to demonstrate a US breach of DSU Articles 21.5， 22.8 or 23 3979
（b） The EC has neither removed its WTO- inconsistent bans nor provided a solution to US nullification or impairment within the meaning of Article 22.8 of the DSU 3982
（i） The EC has failed to demonstrate that its import ban is a provisional measure within the meaning of SPS Article 5.7 3982
（ii） The EC has failed to base its import ban on meat from cattle treated with oestradiol-17β for growth promotion purposes according to good veterinary practices on a risk assessment within the meaning of SPS Article 5.1 3984
（iii） The EC fails to demonstrate that there is a risk of failure of controls or failure to satisfy good veterinary practices 3986
3. Conclusion 3989
I. Oral statement of the european communities on experts opinions during the second substantive meeting 3989
J. Oral statement of the united states on experts opinions during the second substantive meeting 3997
K. Oral statement of the european communities on legal issues during the second substantive meeting 4002
1. Introduction 4002
2. Article 5.1 of the SPS Agreement 4003
3. Article 3.3 of the SPS Agreement 4005
4. Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement 4006
5. Article 5.5 of the SPS Agreement 4006
6. Conclusion on the SPS Agreement 4006
7. Concluding statement of the European Communities 4007
（a） Introduction 4007
（b） The scientific debate 4008
（c） The context of the scientific debate 4011
（d） Conclusion 4014
L. Oral statement of the united states on legal issues during the second substantive meeting 4014
1. Oral statement 4014
2. Concluding statement by the United States 4018
Ⅴ. ARGUMENTS OF THE THIRD PARTIES 4020
A. Australia 4020
1. Introduction 4020
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4020
3. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4020
4. Article 21.5 of the DSU 4021
B. Brazil 4023
1. Introduction 4023
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4023
3. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4024
4. Article 21.5 of the DSU 4025
5. Burden of proof 4025
C. Canada 4026
1. Introduction 4026
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4026
D. China 4027
1. Introduction 4027
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4027
3. The current status of the DSB authorized suspension of concessions 4027
4. Article 21.5 of the DSU and burden of proof 4029
5. Article 23.2 of the DSU 4031
E. India 4033
1. Introduction 4033
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4033
F. Mexico 4035
1. Introduction 4035
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4035
3. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4036
4. Article 21.5 of the DSU 4036
G. New Zealand 4037
1. Introduction 4037
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4037
3. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4037
4. Articles 21.5， 22.8 and 23 of the DSU 4038
5. Burden of proof 4040
6. Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement 4041
7. Article 5.1 of the SPS Agreement 4043
H. Norway 4046
1. Opening Panel meetings for observation by the public 4046
2. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4046
3. Article 21.5 of the DSU 4048
I. Separate customs territory of taiwan， penghu， kinmen and matsu 4050
1. Introduction 4050
2. Opening Panel meetings for public observation 4050
3. Whether the DSB authorization remains in effect 4051
4. Article 21.5 of the DSU 4052
5. The relationship between DSU Article 22.8 and Article 23 4053
Ⅵ. INTERIM REVIEW 4055
A. Introduction 4055
B. Parties’ comments on the descriptive part 4057
C. parties’ comments regarding the findings of the Panel 4059
1. Preliminary remarks 4059
2. Parties’ requests for review related to aspects of the report on procedural issues 4060
（a） Comments by the European Communities 4060
（b） Comments by the United States 4065
3. Comments of the parties regarding the Panel’s findings of violation of Article 23.2（a） read together with Articles 21.5 and 23.1 of the DSU and on the EC claims on Article 23.1， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU 4067
（a） Comments by the European Communities 4067
（b） Comments by the United States 4069
4. Comments of the parties on the compliance of the EC ban on meat and meat products treated with the six hormones at issue for growth promotion purposes with the SPS Agreement in relation to the Panel’s findings on the EC claims on Article 23.1， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU 4072
（a） Comments by the European Communities 4073
（i） Introductory comments 4073
（ii） General comments on the Panel’s analysis regarding oestradiol-17β 4081
（iii） Comments on “risk assessment techniques” 4082
（iv） Assessment of the scientific arguments 4085
（v） Comments on the Panel analysis regarding the other five hormonal substances 4095
（b） Comments by the United States 4109
Ⅶ.FINDINGS 4111
A. Procedural issues 4111
1. Opening of the Panel meetings with the parties and experts for public observation 4111
（a） Introduction 4111
（b） Summary of the main arguments of the parties 4111
（c） Summary of the arguments of the third parties 4114
（d） Decision of the Panel 4118
2. Panel’s decisions relating to the consultation of individual scientific experts and international organizations 4123
（a） Decision to consult scientific experts 4123
（b） EC request for a single expert review group 4125
（c） Experts selection process 4128
3. Other procedural issues 4136
（a） Request by the European Communities that relevant scientific evidence and data be provided by the United States 4136
（b） Request by the United States to exclude materials not cited in the EC risk assessment as well as those published after the completion of its risk assessment by the European Communities and the adoption of the ban 4139
（c） A new version of Exhibit EC-107， submitted by the European Communities on 29 May 2006 4142
（d） Procedure for allowing the parties to comment on each other’s replies to questions after the second Panel meeting 4142
（e） Request by the European Communities to be allowed to correct factual errors allegedly contained in the other party’s comments on its replies to questions following the second Panel meeting 4143
（f） Request by the European Communities for tape recordings of the transcript of the Panel meeting with scientific experts 4144
4. Scope of the Panel’s mandate 4150
（a） The measure at issue and the claims of the European Communities 4150
（b） Are the indications provided by the European Communities on how it wants its claims to be addressed part of the mandate of the Panel？ 4152
（c） Meaning of ”read together with“ and ”in conjunction with” in the EC submissions 4154
（d） Conclusion 4156
5. Approach of the Panel on the basis of its mandate 4156
B. First series of EC claims： violation of Article 23.2（a） read together with Articles 21.5 and 23.1 4158
1. Summary of the main arguments of the parties 4158
2. Reasoning of the Panel 4162
（a） Introduction 4162
（b） “[S]eeking the redress of a violation of obligations or other nullification or impairment of benefits under the covered agreements” （Article 23.1 of the DSU） 4163
（c） Violation of Article 23.2（a） 4166
（i） Introduction 4166
（ii） Did the United States make a determination that the EC implementing measure violates the WTO Agreement？ 4167
（iii） Did the United States fail to make such determination through recourse to dispute settlement in accordance with the rules and procedures of the DSU？ 4174
（iv） Did the United States fail to make any such determination consistent with the findings contained in the panel or Appellate Body report adopted by the DSB or an arbitration award rendered under the DSU？ 4174
（v） Conclusion 4175
（d） Violation of Article 21.5 of the DSU 4175
（e） Violation of Article 23.1 of the DSU 4176
3. Conclusion 4176
C. Second series of EC claims： violation of Article 23.1， read together with Articles 22.8 and 3.7 of the DSU 4176
1. Summary of the main arguments of the parties 4176
2. Approach of the Panel 4180
（a） Duty of the Panel to make an objective assessment of the matter before it 4180
（b） Order of review of the second series of main claims by the European Communities 4182
3. Violation of Article 22.8 of the DSU 4183
（a） Preliminary remarks 4183
（b） Jurisdiction of the Panel 4185
（i） Introduction 4185
（ii） Does the Panel need to determine whether the EC implementing measure actually complies with the SPS Agreement in order to address the EC claim of violation of Article 23.1 read together with Article 22.8 and Article 3.7 of the DSU？ 4186
（iii） Conclusion 4201
（iv） Does the Panel have jurisdiction to address the compliance of the EC implementing measure with the SPS Agreement？ 4203
（c） Burden of proof 4209
（d） Compartbility of the EC implementing measure with the provisions of the SPS Agreement 4211
（i） The EC implementing measure 4211
（ii） Scope of the Panel review 4216
（iii） Standard applicable to the review of the compatibility of the EC implementing measure with the SPS Agreement 4219
（iv） Whether the EC implementing measure is an SPS measure 4224
（e） Compatibility of the EC implementing measure with Article 5.1 and Article 5.2 of the SPS Agreement with respect to oestradiol- 17β 4226
（i） Introduction 4226
（ii） Is there a risk assessment within the meaning of Article 5.1 of the SPS Agreement？ 4228
（iii） Is the measure “based on” a risk assessment？ 4265
（iv） Conclusion 4267
（f） Compatibility of the EC implementing measure with Article 5.7 of the SPS Agreement 4267
（i） Introduction 4267
（ii） Summary of the main arguments of the parties 4267
（iii） Approach of the Panel 4269
（iv） When will “relevant scientific evidence“ be deemed ”insufficient”？ 4273
（v） Alleged insufficiencies which should be addressed by the Panel 4289
（vi） Issues common to all five hormones for which evidence was not provided on a hormone-specific basis 4292
（vii） Is relevant scientific evidence insufficient in the case of progesterone？ 4312
（viii） Is relevant scientific evidence insufficient in the case of testosterone？ 4317
（ix） Is relevant scientific evidence insufficient in the case of trenbolone acetate？ 4321
（x） Is relevant scientific evidence insufficient in the case of zeranol？ 4328
（xi） Is relevant scientific evidence insufficient in the case of melengestrol acetate （MGA）？ 4335
（xii） Conclusion 4342
（g） Compatibility of the EC implementing measure with Article 3.3 of the SPS Agreement with respect to all hormones at issue with the exception of melengestrol acetate 4344
（h） Conclusion on Article 22.8 of the DSU 4346
4. Violation of Articles 23.1 and 3.7 of the DSU 4347
D. Violation of Article Ⅰ.1 and Article Ⅱ of the GATT 1994 4347
E. Conditional claim of violation of Article 22.8 of the DSU made in the alternative 4347
F. Conclusion 4348
Ⅷ.RECOMMENDATIONS 4348