                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                   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.

