MONTREAL PROTOCOL ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE THE OZONE LAYER

D ISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

All MBTOC members have updated their disclosure of interest forms for the 2011 CUN process, reflecting their national, regional, or enterprise involvement These declarations are available online at http://ozone.unep.org/Assessment_Panels/TEAP/index.shtml, with a member list included in Annex III of this report Consistent with previous assessments, some members opted out of specific CUN evaluations or offered technical advice only when requested, due to declared conflicts of interest The MBTOC co-chairs implemented recent TEAP guidelines from May 2011 to ensure proper application of these declarations.

2 Critical Use Nominations for methyl bromide

M ANDATE 2.2 F ULFILMENT OF D ECISION IX/6 2.3 C ONSIDERATION OF STOCKS - D ECISION E X 1/4 (9 F ) 2.3.1 Reporting of MB consumption for critical use - Decision XVII/9 2.4 T RENDS IN METHYL BROMIDE USE FOR CUE S SINCE 2005 2.5 A RTICLE 5 ISSUES 2.6 C RITICAL U SE N OMINATIONS REVIEW 2.7 M INORITY REPORTS

Under Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol, the production and consumption of methyl bromide (MB) must be phased out by January 1, 2005, for Parties not operating under Article 5(1) However, exemptions for critical uses of MB are permitted, provided they meet established criteria outlined in Decision IX/6 and other relevant decisions The Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) and its Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) offer guidance on these exemptions in line with the Protocol's decisions.

Decision XVI/2 tasked MBTOC with evaluating whether all CUNs complied with Decision IX/6 requirements When these requirements were satisfied, MBTOC endorsed the full nomination amount However, if certain conditions were unmet, MBTOC recommended a reduced amount, particularly when a viable technical alternative was identified or if the Party could not prove its ineffectiveness In this assessment round, MBTOC reviewed all relevant information submitted by the Parties up to the evaluation date.

Effective alternatives to methyl bromide (MB) have been identified for most applications, making it essential to establish regulations governing their use and to provide comparative economic feasibility data Continuous updates from Parties regarding regulatory changes and the economic viability of these alternatives in relation to MB are crucial for the assessment of current and future Critical Use Nominations (CUNs) Without this information, the methyl bromide technical options committee (MBTOC) may struggle to evaluate the implications of various regulations as mandated by Decision XX/5 Additionally, MBTOC has suggested commercially viable alternatives and highlighted potential research and regulatory challenges to assist Parties in phasing out MB.

In Decision XVI/4, Annex 1, paragraph 20, Parties requested that when a nomination is based on the economic criteria outlined in Decision IX/6, the MBTOC report must clearly articulate the fundamental economic rationale supporting the Parties' argument concerning CUNs.

2.3 Consideration of stocks - Decision Ex.1/4 (9f)

Under decision Ex.I/4(9f), Parties nominating critical use exemptions must provide an accounting framework detailing stock information As stock consideration is a key negotiation point for the Parties, MBTOC has not adjusted the final assessment of nominations based on stock holdings, instead relying on the Parties to make the necessary adjustments.

In accordance with Decision XVIII/13(7), a summary of the data on stocks was reported in the May TEAP 2011 report (Tables 2.1 – 2.4) No further information from Parties was required for this report

Table 2-1 Quantities of MB (metric tonnes) ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2005, as first reported by Parties in 2006/2007 under Decision XVI/6

Critical use exemptions authorized by MOP for

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes)

Amount on hand at start of 2005

Quantity acquired for CUEs in 2005 (production +imports)

Amount available for use in 2005

Quantity used for CUEs in 2005

Amount on hand at the end of 2005

(a) Additional information on stocks was reported on US EPA website, September 2006: MB inventory held by USA companies: 2004 = 12,994 tonnes; 2005 = 9,974 tonnes.

Table 2-2 Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2008, as reported by Parties in 2009 under Decision XVI/6

Party Critical use exemptions authorized by MOP for

Amount onhand at start of 2008

269(c)(a) Amount of pre-2005 stocks; (b) Includes the pre-2005 stocks; (c) Amount of unused allocation for CUEs which will be reduced from following years production

Party Critical use exemption authorized by MOP for

(c).Amount of unused allocation for CUEs which will be reduced from following years production (d) Stocks used for CUE uses in 2009

Party Critical use exemption authorized by MOP for

(a) Amount of pre-2005 stocks available at the start of 2010

(b) Amount of pre-2005 stocks available at the end of 2010.

(d) Stocks used for CUE uses in 2010

In 2006, the US predicted that pre 2005 stocks for preplant soil uses would be exhausted by

In 2011, stocks from before 2005 were still accessible, despite being noted in 2009 The United States reported approximately 1,800 tonnes of stocks, which is about three times the amount it nominated for 2013 (around 604 tonnes) This discrepancy suggests that Parties should consider reviewing this information in light of Decision IX/6 1(b)(ii), which allows for production only when methyl bromide is insufficient in quantity and quality from existing stocks.

In the United States, stocks are privately held, with market forces dictating their usage and pricing Additionally, the U.S has established provisions for utilizing these stocks as essential allowances for Critical Use Nominations (CUNs) related to the licensing of methyl bromide It is recommended that Parties seek clarification on the allocation of the remaining stocks.

2.3.1 Reporting of MB consumption for critical use - Decision XVII/9

Decision XVII/9(10) of the 17 th MOP requests TEAP and its MBTOC to “report for

2005 and annually thereafter, for each agreed critical use category, the amount of methyl bromide nominated by a Party, the amount of the agreed critical use and either:

(a) The amount licensed, permitted or authorised; or

Since the initiation of CUN reviews in 2003, MBTOC has documented the nominated and approved amounts of methyl bromide for critical uses (Annexes III and IV) Notably, Australia, Canada, Japan, and the United States, which submitted nominations for 2012 and/or 2013, failed to provide data under Form 2 of the accounting framework due to its rejection by the Parties (see p 65 of the Handbook on Critical Use Nominations, version 6, December 2007) Consequently, the data presented for sections (a) and (b) is incomplete, as some Parties have recorded portions of this information according to their local reporting standards.

2.4 Trends in methyl bromide use for CUEs since 2005

Table 2.5 and Figures 2.1 and 2.2 illustrate the nominated amounts and the observable reduction rates in methyl bromide (MB) or the adoption of alternatives by various Parties It is important to highlight that for countries with pre-2005 stocks of MB that are being depleted, the year-to-year reductions in critical use exemptions (CUEs) should not be interpreted as direct evidence of alternative adoption.

In 2005, stocks were likely utilized across similar sectors, as evidenced by Tables 3.1 and 3.2, which detail the amounts proposed by Parties for preplant soil applications and those designated for 'Critical Use' in 2013.

Decision XVII/9 mandates the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) to present trends in the phase-out of critical uses of methyl bromide (MB) by the Parties Since 2005, all Parties have demonstrated a gradual reduction in MB usage for critical agricultural needs, particularly in preplant soil applications and post-harvest processes, albeit at varying rates Figures 2.1 and 2.2 illustrate the trends in the amounts approved or nominated by Parties for 'Critical Use' from 2005 to 2013 for several key applications Comprehensive phase-out trends of MB by country, reflected in changes in Critical Use Exemptions (CUE), are detailed in Annexes III and IV.

From 2005 to 2012, the amounts of methyl bromide (MB) exempted for Critical Use Exemptions (CUE) in various preplant soil industries are illustrated in Figure 2-1 The solid lines depict the trends in CUE methyl bromide approved by the Parties, while the dashed lines represent the quantities of MB nominated by the Parties in 2013 For precise figures regarding the 2013 nominations, refer to Table 3.3.

From 2005 to 2013, the strawberry nursery sector saw varying amounts of methyl bromide (MB) exempted for Critical Use Exemptions (CUE) The solid lines in Figure 2-2 illustrate the trends in CUE methyl bromide approved by the Parties, while the dashed lines represent the quantity of MB nominated by the Party in 2013.

• Additional amounts of MB (Estimated 460 t) are exempted under QPS regulations in the USA (TEAP 2010).

From 2008 to 2012, the amounts of methyl bromide (MB) exempted for critical use exemptions (CUE) in mills and food processing facilities were tracked, as illustrated in Figure 2-3 The solid lines in the chart represent the trend of CUE methyl bromide usage, while the dashed lines indicate the quantity recommended by the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) for 2013 The data is presented using a Log 10 scale for clarity.

Note that a number of countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Israel, Italy, UK) have phased out MB for use in mills and food processing as of 2008

Methyl bromide is scheduled to be completely phased out in A5 Parties by January 1, 2015, which is ten years after its full phaseout in non-A5 Parties Exemptions from this phaseout apply for feedstock uses and QPS, as outlined in Article 2H Additionally, there are provisions for exemptions for uses classified as 'critical' in accordance with Article 2H and Decision IX/6.

C RITICAL U SE N OMINATIONS SUBMITTED 3.2 CUN ASSESSMENT FOR PREPLANT SOIL USES 3.3 I SSUES RELATED TO CUN ASSESSMENT FOR PREPLANT SOIL USE 3 Registration of alternatives for preplant uses - Decision Ex I/4 (9i) and (9j) 3.3.2 Update on rates of adoption of alternatives for preplant uses - Dec.XIX/9 3.3.3 Sustainable alternatives for preplant uses 3.3.4 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities 3.3.5 Adjustments for standard dosage rates using MB/Pic formulations 3.3.6 Use/Emission reduction technologies - Low permeability barrier films and

Australia and Canada reported similar preplant soil CUNs as in previous years, indicating challenges in phasing out methyl bromide (MB) for the strawberry nursery sector In contrast, the USA showed significant progress in phasing out MB across most sectors, although California's restrictions on alternative substances hindered advancements, particularly impacting the strawberry fruit sector.

In the 2011 nominations, 13 CUNs were submitted for preplant soil uses, 1 for 2012 and 12 for

In 2013, the number of nominations decreased compared to the 27 submitted in 2010, as Japan and Israel ceased their submissions of CUNs in 2011 The USA did not submit nominations for forest nurseries and sweet potato slips, which were previously submitted, but introduced a new nomination for research uses in 2012 and 2013, although these have since been withdrawn.

There were substantial reductions in the quantity of methyl bromide nominated by USA for

2013 As stated in previous reports, Israel and Japan plan to phase out MB in 2011 and 2012 respectively

Following the 31st OEWG in Montreal, the MBTOC Soils was tasked with reevaluating multiple nominations, including those for US strawberry fruit, ornamentals, vegetables, and research Additionally, the MBTOC SC was asked to review two nominations related to cured pork and three components of the research nomination.

Following discussions with members and thorough evaluation of the intricate issues at hand, which rendered email communication challenging and nearly unfeasible, the co-chairs of the soils MBTOC opted to convene a face-to-face meeting.

In accordance with the TEAP instructions from the May 2011 meeting, all MBTOC members who expressed interest in evaluating Soils CUN during the August survey were invited to participate This involved reviewing all relevant background materials and information related to the nominations Clarifying questions were sent to the Party, and their responses were shared with members As a result, the US Party withdrew three nominations in the vegetable and nursery stock sectors, along with all nominations for research uses.

MBTOC met from 10-11 October 2011 in Leusden, The Netherlands, to finalise the Soils CUNs, discuss procedural issues related to CUN assessments and prepare the final report On

On October 12, a field visit was conducted to explore strawberry runner production and the equipment utilized for runner disinfestation The event was attended by the four MBTOC Co-Chairs, eight members of the soils subcommittee, two members of the QPS subcommittee, and one MBTOC economist.

The meeting was conducted according to the scheduled timeline for re-assessing nominations labeled as "unable to assess" and those with additional information submitted by the Parties, as outlined in Annex I of Decision XVI/4 Consensus decisions were reached in plenary sessions, with all member comments incorporated into the final recommendations A communication system was implemented to enable participation from members who were not present but wished to engage in the discussions During the meeting, one MBTOC member communicated with the chairs, and daily minutes summarizing the conclusions were recorded and shared with all members, including those absent Additionally, a bilateral consultation with the US Party took place via teleconference on the afternoon of Tuesday, October 11.

3.2 CUN assessment for preplant soil uses

In May 2011, the MBTOC conducted an interim assessment and made recommendations on all preplant soil nominations, except for the research nominations for 2012 and 2013, which could not be evaluated and were later withdrawn by the Party During the 31 OEWG in Montreal, MBTOC engaged in bilateral discussions with representatives from Canada, the USA, and the Californian Strawberry Commission The US Party committed to providing additional information to facilitate a review of the strawberry fruit, vegetable, and research nominations by July 15, 2011, with ongoing information exchange continuing beyond that date.

During the final meeting in the Netherlands, MBTOC held a bilateral teleconference with the

A US delegation recently toured The Netherlands to observe the country's methods for producing strawberries and nursery plants without the use of methyl bromide, while also assessing related challenges in other regions In March 2013, the total nominated amount for preplant soil use across all countries was 661.677 tons, which was later revised down to 645.695 tons due to adjustments in vegetable CUNs and the withdrawal of research CUNs by the US Ultimately, the final recommendation for 2013 was set at 567.442 tons, representing 86% of the initial nomination Additionally, a nomination for 6.111 tons for research trials on preplant soil uses by the USA for 2012 was also withdrawn.

In 2013, MBTOC recommended lower quantities of MB than those initially nominated, with detailed justifications provided in Tables 3-7 and 4-2 The adjustments for preplant soil use are partly based on certain assumptions, as outlined in Tables 3-4 and 3-5.

Table 3-1 Changes occurring to nominated and recommended amounts of MB (metric tonnes) for preplant soil uses after the May 2011 interim report

Party CUN Initial nomination by the Party

Revised nomination by the Party after the

* Further substantiation from the Party was received on July 14th, 2011

Table 3-.2 Summary of MBTOC S final recommendations for 2013 by country for CUNs received in 2011 for preplant soil* use of MB (tonnes)

* Figures do not include research nominations from the USA as they were withdrawn

Table 3-3 Summary of the final recommendations by MBTOC-S (in square brackets) for CUE’s for preplant uses of MB (tonnes) submitted in 2011 for 2012 and 2013

The Party revised (rev.) the nominated amounts for some sectors as shown in the table

Country and Sector Final Nomination by the

3.3 Issues related to CUN assessment for preplant soil use

Key issues which influenced assessment and the need for MB for preplant use of MB in the

In 2010, the adoption of methyl iodide (MI) surged in the USA, particularly in states that previously utilized methyl bromide (MB), resulting in significant commercial use and a marked reduction in MB nominations, especially in the Southeast and Florida A three-way fumigant strategy, combining 1,3-dichloropropene, metham sodium, and Pic, gained traction for effectively controlling nutsedge and pathogens Regulatory changes impacted key alternatives, with township caps and buffer zones imposed on 1,3-D, metham sodium, and Pic A new formulation, 'Pichlor 60,' was introduced, expanding treatment areas in regions with township restrictions However, California faced limitations on high Pic application rates, and there remains a gap in data and acceptance for alternatives in specific sectors like orchard replanting in heavy soils and nursery industries.

In 2011, the United States announced it would no longer pursue nominations for the forest nursery and sweet potato sectors, leaving the reasons ambiguous—possibly due to the adoption of alternatives or a reclassification to Quarantine and Pre-shipment (QPS) Additionally, Israel and Japan ceased requesting methyl bromide for critical preplant soil use, adhering to their phase-out commitments communicated to the Parties in 2010.

In the 2011 assessment, MBTOC utilized regional adoption data of alternatives, including the Californian Department of Pesticide Regulation's Pesticide Use Report, to evaluate historical methyl bromide (MB) usage, particularly focusing on the significant strawberry fruit nomination.

MBTOC continues to urge Parties to consider review of regulations covering the registration, use and adoption of alternatives, particularly review of barrier films to reduce dosage rates of

Parties continue to struggle with adopting alternatives to methyl bromide (MB) for propagation materials like strawberry runners and nurseries, primarily due to insufficient research demonstrating their effectiveness This lack of research has led the MBTOC to determine that several critical use nominations (CUNs) do not meet the requirements of Decision IX/6, prompting a call for further investigation in these areas Additionally, the assessment of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in California may significantly influence the future use of MB and its alternatives.

MBTOC highlights that a significant portion of methyl bromide (MB) applications is subject to regulations that hinder dosage reductions Many uses mandate high MB dosages for treating certified propagation material, and regulations restrict the use of barrier films that could lower dosage rates Additionally, regulatory barriers impede the adoption of alternative solutions for many critical uses in preplant soil applications For example, California's dose rate limitations on methyl iodide prevent its acceptance as a viable alternative by both the Party and MBTOC Therefore, MBTOC calls for the alignment of local policies and regulations with internationally recognized methodologies to facilitate the use of MB alternatives.

3.3.1 Registration of alternatives for preplant uses - Decision Ex I/4

N EW PROCESS USED BY MBTOC SC TO CONDUCT CUN RE - REVIEWS 1 Resourcing issues in 2011 and in coming years 4.2 D ETAILS OF EVALUATIONS 4.3 M INORITY REPORT USA NOMINATION FOR THE CRITICAL USE OF MB FOR CURED PORK

In August, MBTOC Co-Chairs conducted a poll among all members, seeking input on which Critical Use Nominations (CUNs) to review, emphasizing the commitment required for thorough discussion and participation in the review process Consequently, an additional member from the MBTOC QPS expressed interest in joining the review of postharvest CUNs, complementing the existing involvement of four other MBTOC QPS members currently engaged with the MBTOC Steering Committee.

In its October 2010 TEAP report, the MBTOC SC highlighted funding challenges affecting its members, leading to the decision to hold only one meeting in 2011, a point reiterated in the May 2011 report Due to ongoing inadequate funding for travel and the absence of a second meeting, the MBTOC SC opted to conduct re-reviews via email.

Accordingly, in August, after review and discussion amongst MBTOC members, the following process and timelines were agreed:

1 Prepare a situation analysis of the CUN re-reviews required in autumn 2011 (Aug 24).

2 Members to volunteer as CUN Review Team Leaders for each CUN That person will update the B form if required with the new information from the Party

Prepare and distribute a comprehensive list of available CUN documents to all members, including the CUN, B forms, situation analysis, and relevant correspondence with MBTOC Members are encouraged to contribute any additional pertinent documents.

4 Send the documents to any member who wishes to receive them (Aug 29)

5 Ask members to send comments and propose recommendations on the CUNs

Technical and economic considerations should remain focused and not extend into policy issues beyond the direct guidance of TEAP and the Parties All correspondence will be shared with MBTOC members who have expressed interest in participating in the SC CUNs, which are scheduled from August 29 to September 13.

6 Ask Review Team leader to propose the recommendation and the text box (by

7 Circulate to all members and ask for sign off (Sept 20)

All members must provide written feedback regarding their agreement or proposed changes to the text box They were informed that a lack of written response could result in the Co-Chair reaching out to them directly at home Consensus will be established as either full agreement or an agreement not to obstruct consensus, with a deadline set for September 30.

In cases where there is substantial agreement among members but some do not consent, the MBTOC SC Co-Chair will seek to reach a compromise or invite the dissenting member to draft a minority report by October 5.

After the MBTOC SC approved the process and timelines, the details were forwarded to the Ozone Secretariat and the USG, as only their CUNs were subject to re-evaluation The USG acknowledged that the approach was both reasonable and transparent.

Two MBTOC members took the initiative to lead the review team, ensuring timely distribution of Party documents and situation analyses Extensive discussions among members led to the preparation and circulation of draft recommendations and text boxes to the MBTOC Steering Committee on August 17 During the review period, three members proposed text enhancements, which were accepted by the other members and the review team leader.

On August 29, 13 out of 15 members expressed their agreement with the circulated text boxes, while two members had yet to respond but remained within the designated deadlines for feedback.

On September 29, during the comment period, one member provided extensive feedback and posed a question, while another member raised a similar inquiry that necessitated an official regulatory interpretation from the US Consequently, a letter was dispatched to the US to seek clarification on the matter.

On October 3, updates were made to the text boxes, with all except one pending regulatory feedback from the US being redistributed for member input on their agreement status Responses began to come in, but one member of the MBTOC SC, who had initially planned to review the CUNs, notified the group that a recent illness and required treatment would prevent him from participating, leading to his exclusion from the count.

On October 5 th the US government informed MBTOC that it now withdrew all its research CUN nominations.

Subsequently, MBTOC SC circulated the one remaining re-reviewed CUN and asked members to indicate whether they agreed, did not agree or agreed to withhold consensus By October 7,

Out of the 15 members, 14 expressed their written agreement to the proposed text, while one member withheld consensus and was requested to prepare a minority report This situation highlights ongoing resourcing challenges faced in 2011 and anticipated in the coming years.

Under Decision XV I/4 Annex 1, the MBTOC is required to convene biannually to gather comprehensive information for CUN recommendations, allowing Parties seeking CUEs to submit additional details after the initial review This twice-yearly meeting schedule was deemed essential for MBTOC to perform re-reviews or finalize assessments of CUNs Parties have the option to request a re-review if they contest MBTOC's initial recommendations by presenting further supporting information for their CUN.

MBTOC has occasionally convened only once a year due to the absence of an Assessment report and limited re-reviews by Parties Additionally, the ongoing lack of funding for members' travel and subsistence further restricts MBTOC's ability to meet For instance, in 2011, the MBTOC SC met only once and conducted its re-review via email, primarily due to funding constraints and the minimal number of CUNs requiring re-review.

MBTOC highlights the need for clarification regarding the requirement for biannual meetings as stated in Decision XVI/4 Annex 16, considering the reductions in CUNs, funding shortages among members, and the feasibility of conducting meetings electronically seven years after MOP 16.

M EMBERSHIP AND PROCEDURAL ISSUES 5.2 A CTIVITY REPORT FOR 2011 5.3 W ORK PLAN AND INDICATIVE BUDGET FOR 2012 5REFERENCES

In line with the directives outlined in the TEAP May 2011 Progress Report (Chapter 11), MBTOC organized its second meeting to facilitate comprehensive member participation in discussions on essential topics, ensuring informed decision-making in the evaluation of Critical Use Exemptions (CUEs).

• Initial summarization of the CUNs (initial sorting and recording carried out by the

• Preparation of questions for Parties Assessment of responses received from Parties.

• First meeting of MBTOC sub committees in March 2011 on the assessment of the

CUNs: MBTOC met in full (all three sub-committees) in Antalya, Turkey Bilateral meetings were held by MBTOC-S and MBTOC SC with USA.

• Interim recommendations and preparation of the CUN Interim and Progress reports for consideration by the 31 st OEWG

MBTOC-S conducted a field trip to Antalya to explore alternative practices employed by local vegetable and flower growers The visit included Taris, a major Turkish exporter of dried fruits, which utilizes alternatives to methyl bromide (MB) for post-harvest processes, as well as a tour of the quarantine division of the Ministry.

• 31 st OEWG (Geneva, 1-6 August, 2011) Bilateral meetings with USA and the

California Strawberry Commission (USA) and Canada

• MBTOC SC conducted its re-reviews by an agreed email process.

• MBTOC met October 10 – 12, 2011 in Leusden, The Netherlands to assess soils

CUNs from the USA and for which new or revised information was submitted A bilateral was held via teleconference with the USG

• MBTOC-S and MBTOC-SC prepared the final report on the CUNs for consideration by the Parties at their 22nd Meeting.

The "Working procedures of MBTOC for evaluating nominations for critical uses of methyl bromide," outlined in Annex 1 of the 16th Meeting of the Parties, detail the necessary "Actions" and "Indicative Completion Dates." Each year, MBTOC, with support from the Ozone Secretariat and in consultation with TEAP, is responsible for preparing an annual work plan to be submitted to the Meeting of the Parties.

5.3 Work plan and indicative budget for 2012

Table 5-1 MBTOC work plan and indicative budget: 2012

Tasks and actions Indicative budget needs where applicable

Indicative completion date Dates of meetings

1 Parties submit their nominations for critical-use exemptions to the Secretariat

2 The nominations are forwarded to

MBTOC co-chairs for distribution to the subgroups of appointed members

3 Nominations in full are assessed by the subgroups of appointed members

The initial findings of the subgroups, and any requests for additional information are forwarded to the MBTOC co-chairs for clearance

The co-chairs of the MBTOC present the approved advice regarding initial findings and may seek further information from the relevant nominating Party, while also engaging in consultations about any potential assumptions involved.

5 Nominating Party develops and submits its response to the MBTOC co- chairs

• Meets as usual to assess nominations, including any additional information provided by the nominating Party prior to the

The MBTOC meeting, conducted under action 5, will include any supplementary information submitted by the nominating Party via pre-arranged teleconferences or meetings with national experts, as outlined in paragraph 3.4 of the TEAP terms of reference.

Annex I of MOP16, Dec XVI/4)

• To discuss and finalise the CUN evaluation process proposed by the cochairs and commented by the

• To discussed any new or standard presumptions that MBTOC seeks to apply in its future assessment of critical-use nominations, for approval by the Meeting of the

• Any administrative changes to improve the operations of the

Committee, within the scope of

Decisions that have been agreed by the Parties

Funds for travel of 1 non-A5 members:

March 2012 China, first half of

8 MBTOC provides its draft recommendations on the CUNs to TEAP April, 2012

Tasks and actions Indicative budget needs where applicable

9- TEAP Meeting: To assess the MBTOC report on critical-use nominations and submits the finalised interim report on recommendations and findings to the

10 The Secretariat posts the finalised report on its web site and circulates it to the Parties

Nominating Party has the opportunity to consult with MBTOC on a bilateral basis in conjunction with the Open-ended

12 The nominating Party submits further clarification for the critical-use nomination requested by MBTOC or if requested to do so by the Open-ended

Working Group, and provides additional information should it wish to appeal against a critical-use nomination recommendation by MBTOC/TEAP

Late June 2012 depending on OEWG date

The meeting focuses on reevaluating critical-use nominations that fall into the "unable to assess" category, specifically those for which additional information has been provided by the nominating party, as well as any critical-use nominations for which the Open-ended Working Group has requested further details.

Working Group (see Annex I of

• finalise the report, including notice of any proposed new standard presumptions to be applied by

• conduct any bilateral consultations requested by Parties

• draft work plan and budget for

Funds for travel of 1 non-A5 members:

14 MBTOC draft final report considered by TEAP, finalised and made available to Parties through the

15 22 nd Meeting of the Parties November 2012

US$ 6,000 (Travel of Non Article 5 member) Meeting Costs

* Travel funds for non A5 members have been requested in the past but not granted

Bowley, C R and Bell, C H (1981) The toxicity of twelve fumigants to three species of mites infesting grain J stored Prod Res 17, 83-87.

Browne, G B Lampinen, D Doll, B Holtz, S Upadhyaya, L Schmidt, D Wang, S.

Fennimore, B Hanson, S Gao, K Klonsky, and S Johnson.2010 Integrated Pre-plant Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for Almonds and Other Stone Fruits Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives Pp 28:1-4.

Daugovish; Steve Koike; Husein Ajwa; Doug Shaw; Kirk Larson; Plant collapse caused by Fusarium oxysporum; available in http://ceventura.ucdavis.edu/files/121665.pdf

Elmore, C.L., J.D MacDonald, H Ferris, A Chase, H Ajwa, K Robb, C Wilen, I Zasada, S.

Fennimore and Tjosvold (2007) discuss the impact of soil pests on floricultural crops in California and explore alternatives to Methyl Bromide for pest control Additionally, Fennimore, Spataru, and Leslie (2008) present findings on the effectiveness of steam and heat treatments for soil disinfestation at the 2008 Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions in Orlando, Florida.

Fennimore, S, H Ajwa, S Shem-Tov, K Subbarao, F Martin, G Browne, S Klose

In 2007, a study focused on promoting alternatives to methyl bromide for use in California strawberries was presented at the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions in San Diego, CA, USA This research aimed to facilitate the transition towards safer and more sustainable agricultural practices in strawberry cultivation.

Fennimore S and R Goodhue (2009) Estimated costs to disinfest soil with steam.

In the Proceedings of the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, held in San Diego, CA, PG Fields (2007) evaluates various alternatives to methyl bromide for structural applications, highlighting the importance of finding effective and environmentally friendly solutions to reduce emissions.

Fumigation of Canadian Pasta Manufacturing Facilities 2007/2008. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the Canadian National Millers Association.

Gerik, J.S., Greene, I.D., Beckman, P., Elmore, C.L 2006 Pre-plant drip applied fumigation for calla lily rhizome nursery HortTechnology Vol 16, pgs 297-300.

The article by Gerik et al (2009) discusses alternatives to methyl bromide for gladiolus production within the framework of the Pacific area-wide program It emphasizes the need for sustainable practices in agriculture while addressing the challenges posed by the phase-out of methyl bromide The findings presented at the Annual International Research Conference highlight effective strategies for emissions reductions and the promotion of environmentally friendly methods in floriculture.

Gerik, J., S Klose, H Ajwa, and I Greene 2010 Calla lily production without methyl bromide - Pacific area-wide program for Methyl Bromide Alternatives MBAO 2010, Orlando, Florida, USA

Gilbert, C., S Fennimore, K Subbarao, B Hanson, C Rainbolt, R Goodhue, J B.

Weber and J Samtani (2009) presented research on heat-based soil disinfestation methods aimed at enhancing strawberry and flower production Their findings were shared at the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions held in San Diego, California, from November 10 to 13, 2009.

Hamill, J E., Dickson, D W., T-Ou, L., Allen, L H., Burelle, N K and Mendes, M L.

In 2004, a study presented at the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions in Orlando, Florida, highlighted the effectiveness of low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and virtually impermeable films (VIF) in reducing the rates of methyl bromide (MBR) and C35 for the control of soil pests and pathogens.

In their 2006 study, Hanson, Gerik, and Schneider evaluated the effectiveness of reduced rates of Methyl Bromide and explored alternative fumigants for use in field-grown perennial crop nurseries Additionally, Kabir et al (2005) investigated viable alternatives to Methyl Bromide specifically for the production of strawberry runner plants.

Klose, S H Ajwa, S Fennimore, K Subbarao3, J MacDonald4, and H Ferris.

(2007a) Alternative Management Strategies for Weed and Disease Control in California-Grown Calla Lilies (Zantedeschia aethiopica) 2007 International Meetings ASA-CSSA-SSSA November 4 – 8, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 2007

Klose, S., H.A Ajwa, S ShemTov1, S.A Fennimore1, K V Subbarao, J D Mac

Donald, H Ferris, F Martin, J Gerik, M.A Mellano and Ian Greene (2007b) Shank and Drip Applied Soil Fumigants as Potential Alternative to Methyl Bromide in California-Grown Cut Flowers

Klose, S., J Gerik H Ajwa and C Wilen (2008a) Efficacy of reduced rates of fumigants in floricultural crops ACS Annual meeting 2008 5-9 October

2008, Houston, Texas, USA www.acsmeetings.org

Klose et al (2008) presented research on effective pest control methods for field-grown Ranunculus that do not rely on methyl bromide, highlighting sustainable alternatives at the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions in Orlando, Florida This study contributes to the ongoing efforts to reduce emissions and find viable pest management strategies in agriculture.

Fumigant and strawberry variety evaluations in Macrophomina and

Fusarium fields In: 10th Annual Strawberry Production Meeting in

Koike, S., O Daugovish, T Gordon, H Ajwa, M Bolda and D Legard (2011b).

Macrophomina and Fusarium related plant collapse: FIELD STUDIES -VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA In: 10 th Annual Strawberry Production Meeting; Ventura County; September 2011

Koike, S., O Daugovish, T Gordon, H Ajwa, M Bolda and D Legard (2011c) Non-

Fumigant Alternatives for Managing Macrophomina phaseolina and

Fusarium oxysporum in California Strawberry In: The 2011 ASHS Annual

Kokalis-Burelle, N.; Rosskopf, E N.; Albamo, J P.; Holzinger, J (2010) Effects of

Midas on nematodes in commercial floriculture production in Florida, Journal of Nematology 42(1):17–21.

MBTOC (2011) Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee., 2010 Assessment

McSorley, R., Wang, K.H., and Kokallis-Burelle, N (2006) explored the effectiveness of solarization as a viable alternative to methyl bromide in the floriculture industry in Florida Their findings were presented at the Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, held from November 6-9, 2006, in Orlando, Florida.

McSorley, R., K-H Wang and S.K Saha, (2006b) Can solarization match methyl bromide fumigation in sites colonized by fungi? Phytopathology 96(6), suppl., p S187.

DECISION IX/6

1 To apply the following criteria and procedure in assessing a critical methyl bromide use for the purposes of control measures in Article 2 of the Protocol:

(a) That a use of methyl bromide should qualify as “critical” only if the nominating Party determines that:

(i) The specific use is critical because the lack of availability of methyl bromide for that use would result in a significant market disruption; and

Currently, there are no viable technical or economic alternatives that meet environmental and health standards while being appropriate for the specific crops and conditions of the nomination.

(b) That production and consumption, if any, of methyl bromide for critical uses should be permitted only if:

(i) All technically and economically feasible steps have been taken to minimise the critical use and any associated emission of methyl bromide;

Methyl bromide is currently insufficient in both quantity and quality from existing stocks, including banked or recycled sources, particularly considering the needs of developing countries for this chemical.

Efforts are being made to evaluate, commercialize, and secure national regulatory approval for alternatives and substitutes, considering the unique circumstances of Article 5 Parties, which face challenges such as limited financial resources, lack of expertise, and institutional capacity Non-Article 5 Parties are required to establish research programs aimed at developing and deploying these alternatives Article 5 Parties must show that they will adopt feasible alternatives as soon as they are confirmed suitable for their specific conditions or that they have sought assistance from the Multilateral Fund or other sources to identify, evaluate, adapt, and demonstrate such options.

2 To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to review nominations and make recommendations based on the criteria established in paragraphs 1 (a) (ii) and 1 (b) of the present decision;

3 That the present decision will apply to Parties operating under Article 5 and Parties not so operating only after the phase-out date applicable to those Parties

Para 2 of Decision IX/6 does not assign TEAP the responsibility for determining the existence of “significant market disruption” specified in paragraph 1(a)(i).

TEAP tasked its Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) with evaluating the availability of technically and economically viable alternatives to methyl bromide The committee's assessment focuses on alternatives that are environmentally and health-wise acceptable, as well as appropriate for the specific crops and situations outlined in the nomination This evaluation addresses the criteria established in the relevant Decision.

DECISION XVI/4

Review of the working procedures and terms of reference of the Methyl Bromide

Report of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol (Annex I), Prague, 22–26 November 2004), paragraph 15

A Working procedures of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee relating to the evaluation of nominations for critical uses of methyl bromide

15 An annual work plan will enhance the transparency of, and insight in, the operations of MBTOC Such a plan should indicate, among other things:

(a) Key events for a given year;

(b) Envisaged meeting dates of MBTOC, including the stage in the nomination and evaluation process to which the respective meetings relate;

(c) Tasks to be accomplished at each meeting, including appropriate delegation of such tasks;

(d) Timing of interim and final reports;

(e) Clear references to the timelines relating to nominations;

(f) Information related to financial needs, while noting that financial considerations would still be reviewed solely in the context of the review of the Secretariat’s budget;

The article discusses the changes in the composition of the MBTOC based on established selection criteria, along with a summary report detailing MBTOC's activities from the past year This report highlights unfinished matters, the reasons for their incompletion, and outlines plans to address these outstanding issues moving forward.

(i) Matrix with existing and needed skills and expertise; and

(j) Any new or revised standards or presumptions that MBTOC seeks to apply in its future assessment of critical-use nominations, for approval by the Meeting of the Parties.

PART A: HISTORICAL TREND IN MB PREPLANT SOIL

List of nominated (2005 – 2012 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2011 in part) amounts of MB granted by Parties under the CUE process for each crop or commodity

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE Quantities

Australia Cut flowers, bulbs – protected Vic 7.000 7.000 6.170 6.150 7.000 7.000 3.598 3.500

Belgium Endive (sep from lettuce) 1.650 1.650

France Pepper Incl in.tomato cun

France Tomato (and eggplant for 2005 only) 150(all solanaceou s)

Israel Cut flowers – open field 77.000 67.000 80.755 53.345 42.777 42.554 23.292 77.000 67.000 74.540 44.750 34.698 28.554

Israel Strawberry runners and fruit Ghaza 87.875 67.500 67.500 34.000 47.250

Japan Peppers (green and hot) 189.900 200.700 169.400 162.300 134.400 81.100 68.260 61.101 187.200 200.700 156.700 121.725 81.149 72.990 65.691

USA Nursery stock - fruit trees, raspberries, roses

PART B: HISTORICAL TREND IN MB STRUCTURAL AND

List of nominated (2005 – 2012 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2011 in part) amounts of MB granted by Parties under the CUE process for each crop or commodity

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities

Belgium Churches, monuments and ships' quarters

Belgium Flour mill see mills below 0.125 0.072 See mills below

Belgium Food storage (dry) structure 0.120 0.120 0.120 0.000

Belgium Old buildings and objects 0.450 0.282 0.000 0.282

France Seeds sold by PLAN-SPG company

Netherlands Strawberry runners post harvest 0.120 0.120 0.120 0 0.120

Poland Medicinal herbs & dried mushrooms as dry commodities

UK Dried commodities (rice, fruits and nuts) Whitworths

UK Mills and Processors (biscuits) 2.525 1.787 0.479 2.525 1.787

Tiêu đề	Montreal Protocol On Substances That Deplete The Ozone Layer
Tác giả	Ian Porter, Mohamed Besri, Michelle Marcotte, Marta Pizano
Trường học	United Nations Environment Programme
Chuyên ngành	Environmental Science
Thể loại	Report
Năm xuất bản	2011
Thành phố	Nairobi

Định dạng
Số trang	84
Dung lượng	1,24 MB