Decision
Ex.
I/
4.
Conditions
for
granting
and
reporting
critical­
use
exemptions
for
methyl
Bromide
Mindful
of
the
principles
set
forth
in
the
report4
by
the
chair
of
the
informal
consultation
on
methyl
bromide
held
in
Buenos
Aires
on
4
and
5
March
2004,
namely,
fairness,
certainty
and
confidence,
practicality
and
flexibility,
and
transparency,

Recognizing
that
technically
and
economically
feasible
alternatives
exist
for
most
uses
of
methyl
bromide,

Noting
that
those
alternatives
are
not
always
technically
and
economically
feasible
in
the
circumstances
of
nominations,

Noting
that
Article
5
and
non­
Article
5
Parties
have
made
substantial
progress
in
the
adoption
of
effective
alternatives,

Mindful
that
exemptions
must
comply
fully
with
decision
IX/
6
and
are
intended
to
be
limited,
temporary
derogations
from
the
phase­
out
of
methyl
bromide,

Recognizing
the
desirability
of
a
transparent
presentation
of
data
on
alternatives
to
methyl
bromide
to
assist
the
Parties
to
understand
better
the
critical­
use
volumes
and
to
gauge
progress
on
and
impediments
to
the
transition
from
methyl
bromide,

Resolved
that
each
Party
should
aim
at
significantly
and
progressively
decreasing
its
production
and
consumption
of
methyl
bromide
for
critical
uses
with
the
intention
of
completely
phasing
out
methyl
bromide
as
soon
as
technically
and
economically
feasible
alternatives
are
available,

Recognizing
that
Parties
should
revert
to
methyl
bromide
only
as
a
last
resort,
in
the
event
that
a
technically
and
economically
feasible
alternative
to
methyl
bromide
which
is
in
use
ceases
to
be
available
as
a
result
of
de­
registration
or
for
other
reasons,

1.
That
each
Party
which
has
an
agreed
critical
use
under
the
present
decision
should
submit
available
information
to
the
Ozone
Secretariat
before
1
February
2005
on
the
alternatives
available,
listed
according
to
their
pre­
harvest
or
post­
harvest
uses
and
the
possible
date
of
registration,
if
required,
for
each
alternative;
and
on
the
alternatives
which
the
Parties
can
disclose
to
be
under
development,
listed
according
to
their
pre­
harvest
or
post­
harvest
uses
and
the
likely
date
of
registration,
if
required
and
known,
for
those
alternatives,
and
that
the
Ozone
Secretariat
shall
be
requested
to
provide
a
template
for
that
information
and
to
post
the
said
information
in
a
database
entitled
"
Methyl
Bromide
Alternatives"
on
its
web
site;

2.
That
each
Party
which
submits
a
nomination
for
the
production
and
consumption
of
methyl
bromide
for
years
after
2005
should
also
submit
information
listed
in
paragraph
1
to
the
Ozone
Secretariat
to
include
in
its
Methyl
Bromide
Alternatives
database
and
that
any
other
Party
which
no
longer
consumes
methyl
bromide
should
also
submit
information
on
alternatives
to
the
Secretariat
for
inclusion
in
that
database;

3.
To
request
each
Party
which
makes
a
critical­
use
nomination
after
2005
to
submit
a
national
management
strategy
for
phase­
out
of
critical
uses
of
methyl
bromide
to
the
Ozone
Secretariat
before
1
February
2006.
The
management
strategy
should
aim,
among
other
things:
(
a)
To
avoid
any
increase
in
methyl
bromide
consumption
except
for
unforeseen
circumstances;
(
b)
To
encourage
the
use
of
alternatives
through
the
use
of
expedited
procedures,
where
possible,
to
develop,
register
and
deploy
technically
and
economically
feasible
alternatives;
(
c)
To
provide
information,
for
each
current
pre­
harvest
and
post­
harvest
use
for
which
a
nomination
is
planned,
on
the
potential
market
penetration
of
newly
deployed
alternatives
and
alternatives
which
may
be
used
in
the
near
future,
to
bring
forward
the
time
when
it
is
estimated
that
methyl
bromide
consumption
for
such
uses
can
be
reduced
and/
or
ultimately
eliminated;
(
d)
To
promote
the
implementation
of
measures
which
ensure
that
any
emissions
of
methyl
bromide
are
minimized;
(
e)
To
show
how
the
management
strategy
will
be
implemented
to
promote
the
phase­
out
of
uses
of
methyl
bromide
as
soon
as
technically
and
economically
feasible
alternatives
are
available,
in
particular
describing
the
steps
which
the
Party
is
taking
in
regard
to
subparagraph
(
b)
(
iii)
of
paragraph
1
of
decision
IX/
6
in
respect
of
research
programmes
in
non­
Article
5
Parties
and
the
adoption
of
alternatives
by
Article
5
Parties;

4.
To
request
the
Meeting
of
the
Parties
to
take
into
account
information
submitted
pursuant
to
paragraphs
1
and
3
of
the
present
decision
when
it
considers
permitting
a
Party
to
produce
or
consume
methyl
bromide
for
critical
uses
after
2006;

5.
To
request
a
Party
that
has
submitted
a
request
for
a
critical
use
exemption
to
consider
and
implement,
if
feasible,
Technology
and
Economic
Assessment
Panel
and
Methyl
Bromide
Technical
Options
Committee
recommendations
on
actions
which
a
Party
may
take
to
reduce
critical
uses
of
methyl
bromide;

6.
To
request
any
Party
submitting
a
critical­
use
nomination
after
2004
to
describe
in
its
nomination
the
methodology
used
to
determine
economic
feasibility
in
the
event
that
economic
feasibility
is
used
as
a
criterion
to
justify
the
requirement
for
the
critical
use
of
methyl
bromide,
using
as
a
guide
the
economic
criteria
contained
in
section
4
of
annex
I
to
the
present
report;

7.
To
request
each
Party
from
1
January
2005
to
provide
to
the
Ozone
Secretariat
a
summary
of
each
crop
or
post­
harvest
nomination
containing
the
following
information:
(
a)
Name
of
the
nominating
Party;
(
b)
Descriptive
title
of
the
nomination;
(
c)
Crop
name
(
open
field
or
protected)
or
post­
harvest
use;
(
d)
Quantity
of
methyl
bromide
requested
in
each
year;
(
e)
Reason
or
reasons
why
alternatives
to
methyl
bromide
are
not
technically
and
economically
feasible;

8.
To
request
the
Ozone
Secretariat
to
post
the
information
submitted
pursuant
to
paragraph
7
above,
categorized
according
to
the
year
in
which
it
was
received,
on
its
web
site
within
10
days
of
receiving
the
nomination;

9.
To
request
the
Technology
and
Economic
Assessment
Panel:
(
a)
To
identify
options
which
Parties
may
consider
for
preventing
potential
harmful
trade
of
methyl
bromide
stocks
to
Article
5
Parties
as
consumption
is
reduced
in
non­
Article
5
Parties
and
to
publish
its
evaluation
in
2005
to
enable
the
Seventeenth
Meeting
of
the
Parties
to
decide
if
suitable
mitigating
steps
are
necessary;
(
b)
To
identify
factors
which
Article
5
Parties
may
wish
to
take
into
account
in
evaluating
whether
they
should
either
undertake
new
accelerated
phase­
out
commitments
through
the
Multilateral
Fund
for
the
Implementation
of
the
Montreal
Protocol
or
seek
changes
to
already
agreed
accelerated
phase­
outs
of
methyl
bromide
under
the
Multilateral
Fund;
(
c)
To
assess
economic
infeasibility,
based
on
the
methodology
submitted
by
the
nominating
Party
under
paragraph
6
above,
in
making
its
recommendations
on
each
critical­
use
nomination.
The
report
by
the
Technology
and
Economic
Assessment
Panel
should
be
made
with
a
view
to
encouraging
nominating
Parties
to
adopt
a
common
approach
in
assessing
the
economic
feasibility
of
alternatives;
(
d)
To
submit
a
report
to
the
Open­
ended
Working
Group
at
its
twenty­
sixth
session
on
the
possible
need
for
methyl
bromide
critical
uses
over
the
next
few
years,
based
on
a
review
of
the
management
strategies
submitted
by
Parties
pursuant
to
paragraph
3
of
the
present
decision;
(
e)
To
review
critical­
use
nominations
on
an
annual
basis
and
apply
the
criteria
set
forth
in
decision
IX/
6
and
of
other
relevant
criteria
agreed
by
the
Parties;
(
f)
To
recommend
an
accounting
framework
for
adoption
by
the
Sixteenth
Meeting
of
the
Parties
which
can
be
used
for
reporting
quantities
of
methyl
bromide
produced,
imported
and
exported
by
Parties
under
the
terms
of
critical­
use
exemptions,
and
after
the
end
of
2005
to
request
each
Party
which
has
been
granted
a
critical­
use
exemption
to
submit
information
together
with
its
nomination
using
the
agreed
format;
(
g)
To
provide,
in
consultation
with
interested
Parties,
a
format
for
a
critical­
use
exemption
report,
based
on
the
content
of
annex
I
to
the
present
report,
for
adoption
by
the
Sixteenth
Meeting
of
the
Parties,
and
to
request
each
Party
which
reapplies
for
a
methyl
bromide
critical­
use
exemption
after
the
end
of
2005
to
submit
a
critical­
use
exemption
report
in
the
agreed
format;
(
h)
To
assess,
annually
where
appropriate,
any
critical­
use
nomination
made
after
the
end
of
2006
in
the
light
of
the
Methyl
Bromide
Alternatives
database
information
submitted
pursuant
to
paragraph
1
of
the
present
decision,
and
to
compare,
annually
where
appropriate,
the
quantity,
in
the
nomination,
of
methyl
bromide
requested
and
recommended
for
each
pre­
harvest
and
post­
harvest
use
with
the
management
strategy
submitted
by
the
Party
pursuant
to
paragraph
3
of
the
present
decision;
(
i)
To
report
annually
on
the
status
of
re­
registration
and
review
of
methyl
bromide
uses
for
the
applications
reflected
in
the
critical­
use
exemptions,
including
any
information
on
health
effects
and
environmental
acceptability;
(
j)
To
report
annually
on
the
status
of
registration
of
alternatives
and
substitutes
for
methyl
bromide,
with
particular
emphasis
on
possible
regulatory
actions
that
will
increase
or
decrease
dependence
on
methyl
bromide;
(
k)
To
modify
the
handbook
on
critical­
use
nominations
for
methyl
bromide
to
take
the
present
decision
and
other
relevant
information
into
account,
for
submission
to
the
Sixteenth
Meeting
of
the
Parties.
