UNEP/OzL.Pro.22/9 

31

5. To request the Secretariat to post on its website details of the potentially available 

stocks referred to in the preceding paragraph; 

6. That the parties listed in the annex to the present decision shall have full flexibility in 

sourcing the quantity of pharmaceutical-grade chlorofluorocarbons to the extent required for 

manufacturing metered-dose inhalers, as authorized in paragraph 1 above, from imports, from 

domestic producers or from existing stockpiles; 

7. To approve the authorization given to the Dominican Republic by the Secretariat, in 

consultation with the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, of the emergency essential use of 

1.832 metric tonnes of CFC-113 as a diluter for silicon grease during the manufacture of medical 

devices, to cover the period 2010–2011; 

Annex to decision XXII/4 

Essential-use authorizations for 2011 of chlorofluorocarbons for metered-dose inhalers (in 

metric tonnes)

Party 2011 

Argentina 107.2 

Bangladesh 57.0 

China 741.15 

Pakistan 39.6 

Russian Federation 212.0 

XXII/5: Essential-use exemption for chlorofluorocarbon 113 for 

aerospace applications in the Russian Federation

Noting the evaluation and recommendation of the Technology and Economic Assessment 

Panel and its Chemicals Technical Options Committee in respect of the essential-use nomination for 

chlorofluorocarbon 113 (CFC-113) for aerospace applications in the Russian Federation, 

Noting also that the Russian Federation has continued to explore the possibility of importing 

CFC-113 to meet its aerospace industry needs from available global stocks, 

Noting further that the Russian Federation has been successful in reducing its use and 

emissions of CFC-113 in line with a timetable of technical transformation developed in collaboration 

with the Chemicals Technical Options Committee, 

Noting, however, that the Chemicals Technical Options Committee has recommended greater 

efforts to introduce appropriate alternatives, 

1. To authorize an essential-use exemption for the production and consumption in 2011 

of 100 metric tonnes of CFC-113 in the Russian Federation for chlorofluorocarbon applications in its 

aerospace industry; 

2. To request the Russian Federation to continue to explore further the possibility of 

importing CFC-113 for its aerospace industry needs from available global stocks; 

3. To urge the Russian Federation to continue its efforts on the introduction of alternative 

solvents and the adoption of newly designed equipment to complete the phase-out of CFC-113 

according to an accelerated time schedule; 

XXII/6: Critical-use exemptions for methyl bromide for 2011 

and 2012 

Noting with appreciation the work by the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel and its 

Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee, 

Recognizing the significant reductions made in critical-use nominations for methyl bromide in 

many parties, 

Recalling paragraph 10 of decision XVII/9, 

Recalling also that all parties that have nominated critical-use exemptions are to report data on 

stocks using the accounting framework agreed on by the Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties, 
UNEP/OzL.Pro.22/9 

32

Recognizing that the production and consumption of methyl bromide for critical uses should be 

permitted only if methyl bromide is not available in sufficient quantity and quality from existing 

stocks of banked or recycled methyl bromide, 

Recognizing also that parties operating under a critical-use exemption should take into account 

the extent to which methyl bromide is available in sufficient quantity and quality from existing stocks 

of banked or recycled methyl bromide in licensing, permitting or authorizing the production and 

consumption of methyl bromide for critical uses,

Stressing that parties should reduce their stocks of methyl bromide retained for employment in 

critical-use exemptions to a minimum in as short a time period as possible, 

1. To permit, for the agreed critical-use categories for 2011 set forth in table A of the 

annex to the present decision for each party, subject to the conditions set forth in the present decision 

and decision Ex.I/4 to the extent that those conditions are applicable, the levels of production and 

consumption for 2011 set forth in table B of the annex to the present decision which are necessary to 

satisfy critical uses, in addition to the amounts permitted in decision XXI/11; 

2. To permit, for the agreed critical-use categories for 2012 set forth in table C of the 

annex to the present decision for each party, subject to the conditions set forth in the present decision 

and in decision Ex.I/4 to the extent that those conditions are applicable, the levels of production and 

consumption for 2012 set forth in table D of the annex to the present decision which are necessary to 

satisfy critical uses, with the understanding that additional levels of production and consumption and 

categories of uses may be approved by the Meeting of the Parties in accordance with decision IX/6; 

3. That parties shall endeavour to license, permit, authorize or allocate quantities of 

methyl bromide for critical uses as listed in tables A and C of the annex to the present decision; 

4. To recognize the continued contribution of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options 

Committee’s expertise and to agree that, in accordance with section 4.1 of the terms of reference of the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, the Committee should ensure that it develops its 

recommendations in a consensus process that includes full discussion among all available Committee 

members and should ensure that members with relevant expertise are involved in developing its 

recommendations; 

5. That each party that has an agreed critical-use exemption shall renew its commitment 

to ensuring that the criteria in paragraph 1 of decision IX/6, in particular the criterion laid down in 

paragraph 1 (b) (ii) of decision IX/6, are applied in licensing, permitting or authorizing critical uses of 

methyl bromide, with each party requested to report on the implementation of the present provision to 

the Ozone Secretariat by 1 February for the years to which the present decision applies; 

6. To urge parties operating under a critical-use exemption to put in place an effective 

system to discourage the accumulation of methyl bromide produced under the exemption;

Annex to decision XXII/6 

Table A 

Agreed critical-use categories for 2011 (metric tonnes) 

Australia Strawberry runners (5.950) 

Canada Pasta (2.084) 

Israel 

Broomrape – protected (12.500), cucumbers (12.500), cut flowers and bulbs – 

protected (52.330), cut flowers – open field (23.292), melons – protected and 

open field (35.000), strawberry fruit – Sharon and Gaza (41.875), strawberry 

runners – Sharon and Gaza (27.000), sweet potatoes (20.000) 

Table B 

Permitted levels of production and consumption for 2011 (metric tonnes) 

Australia 5.950 

Canada 2.084 

Israel 224.497 
UNEP/OzL.Pro.22/9 

33

Table C 

Agreed critical-use categories for 2012 (metric tonnes) 

Australia Strawberry runners (29.760), rice (3.653) 

Canada Mills (11.020), strawberry runners (Prince Edward Island) (5.261) 

Japan Chestnuts (3.489), cucumbers (26.162), ginger – field (42.235), ginger – 

protected (6.558), melons (67.936), peppers – green and hot (61.154), 

watermelons (12.075) 

United States of 

America 

Commodities (2.419), National Pest Management Association food-processing 

structures (0.200), mills and processors (74.510), dried cured pork (3.730), 

cucurbits (59.500), eggplant – field (6.904), forest nursery seedlings (34.230), 

nursery stock – fruit, nuts, flowers (1.591), orchard replants (18.324), 

ornamentals (48.164), peppers – field (28.366), strawberry – field (678.004), 

strawberry runners (3.752), tomatoes – field (54.423), sweet potato slips (8.709) 

Table D 

Permitted levels of production and consumption for 2012 (metric tonnes) 

Australia 33.413 

Canada 16.281 

Japan 219.609 

United States of 

America 

922.826*

[* Minus available stocks.] 

XXII/7: Global laboratory and analytical use exemption 

 Recalling paragraph 7 of decision XXI/6, which allows parties operating under paragraph 1 of 

Article 5 until 31 December 2010 to deviate from the existing laboratory and analytical use bans in 

individual cases, where a party considers that this is justified, and asks parties to revisit the issue at the 

Twenty-Second Meeting of the Parties,

Considering that the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel did not 

provide all information requested by decision XXI/6 in time for the Twenty-Second Meeting of the 

Parties and that the parties were therefore unable to evaluate the situation in respect of laboratory and 

analytical uses by parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Protocol,

 Noting that some parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 continue to have difficulty 

adopting alternatives for those laboratory and analytical uses already banned under the global 

exemption and need more time for information collection and related policy framework development,

1. To allow parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 until 31 December 2011 to 

deviate from the existing laboratory and analytical use bans in individual cases, where a party 

considers that this is justified, and to ask parties to revisit the issue at the Twenty-Third Meeting of the 

Parties;

2. To request parties to continue to investigate domestically the possibility of replacing 

ozone-depleting substances in those laboratory and analytical uses listed in the reports of the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel prepared in accordance with decisions XVII/10 and 

XIX/18 and to report progress to the Ozone Secretariat by 30 April 2011; 

XXII/8: Uses of controlled substances as process agents 

Noting with appreciation the 2009 and 2010 progress reports of the Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel on process agents, 

Noting that table A in decision X/14 on process-agent uses has been updated by 

decisions XV/6, XVII/7 and XIX/15, 

Noting also that the Panel’s 2010 progress report indicates that several parties not operating 

under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Montreal Protocol included in table B of decision X/14 have