Eaglefly is making some rational observations here.
One point... the "Nicolau list" itself is gone. It's pretty clear that a West committee cannot simply plop down the Nicolau list as he published it, for two major reasons. Firstly, the presumed future "West Committee" cannot reorder folks on the East list. That order is clearly the purview of the East Committee. And there have been some changes since 2007 which need to be accounted for and the West clearly doesn't have the authority to arbitrarily "present" those needed changes as they see them, they need to argue for them, and there would be several points of contention. Secondly, the PA is pretty clear that the three existing lists are what goes into the negotiations. The Nicolau as originally published represents no existing seniority list.
Realistically, what the West Committee would want to do is plop down the West list as it currently exists and then argue for a seniority list integration that "mirrors" the methodology of the Nicolau from back then, plus adding the new hires (3rd listers) to create a combined "LCC list" which is then merged with AA. Sort of a 3 step process. First the AWA-US do-over, then the adding of the new hires (pre Dec. '13) then the LCC-AA. This may seem a fine point of contention vs. "presenting the Nic" but I think it's important.
Only problem is I don't envision the APA and the arbitrators will go for that. USAPA will certainly argue against it and I imagine so will APA. There's also the clauses in the MOU that prevent seniority integration methodologies that materially increase costs for the company. A lot to consider. I think ultimately the arbitrators will certainly consider the expectations engendered by the Nicolau award but I personally see it going down as "3 way" combining 3 lists at once instead of a 3 step process.