MONTREAL PROTOCOL 

ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE 

THE OZONE LAYER 

UNEP

REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL

AUGUST 2007 

EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL 

BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS

FINAL REPORT

August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report iii

Montreal Protocol 

On Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer 

Report of the 

UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

August 2007 

EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR 

METHYL BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS

The text of this report is composed in Times New Roman. 

Co-ordination: Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee 

Composition of the report: MBTOC QSC: Michelle Marcotte, Jonathan Banks 

 MBTOC Soils: Ian Porter, Marta Pizano, Mohamed Besri 

Layout of the report: Ozone Secretariat, UNEP 

Reproduction: UNON Nairobi 

Date: August 2007 

Under certain conditions, printed copies of this report are available from: 

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME 

Ozone Secretariat, P.O. Box 30552, Nairobi, Kenya 

Normally from SMI Distribution Service Ltd., Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK, 

fax: + 44 1438 748844 

This document is also available in portable document format from

http://www.unep.org/ozone/teap/Reports/TEAP_Reports/

No copyright involved. This publication may be freely copied, abstracted and cited, 

with acknowledgement of the source of the material.

ISBN: ********** 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report iv

Disclaimer 

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel (TEAP) Co-Chairs and members, and the Methyl Bromide Technical 

Options Committee (MBTOC) Co-Chairs and members, and the companies and organisations 

that employ them do not endorse the performance, worker safety, or environmental 

acceptability of any of the technical options discussed. Every industrial operation requires 

consideration of worker safety and proper disposal of contaminants and waste products. 

Moreover, as work continues - including additional toxicity evaluation - more information on 

health, environmental and safety effects of alternatives and replacements will become 

available for use in selecting among the options discussed in this document. 

UNEP, TEAP Co-Chairs and members, and the MBTOC Co-Chairs and members, in 

furnishing or distributing this information, do not make any warranty or representation, either 

express or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or utility; nor do they assume 

any liability of any kind whatsoever resulting from the use or reliance upon any information, 

material, or procedure contained herein, including but not limited to any claims regarding 

health, safety, environmental effect or fate, efficacy, or performance, made by the source of 

information. 

Mention of any company, association, or product in this document is for information purposes 

only and does not constitute a recommendation of any such company, association, or product, 

either express or implied by UNEP, TEAP Co-Chairs and members, and the MBTOC CoChairs and members or the companies or organisations that employ them.

Acknowledgement 

The Technology and Economic Assessment Panel and its Methyl Bromide Technical Options 

Committee acknowledge with thanks the outstanding contributions from all of the individuals 

and organisations who provided support to Panel and Committee Co-Chairs and members. 

Particular appreciation goes to Meg Seki, UNEP Senior Science Officer, for her technical and 

scientific support and her contribution to the report. The opinions expressed are those of the 

Panel and the Committee and do not reflect the reviews of any sponsoring or supporting 

organisation. 

Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee: 

MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and Commodities (QSC) Co-Chair: Michelle Marcotte 

(Canada) and Quarantine Task Force Co-Chair: Jonathan Banks (Australia). Members of 

MBTOC QSC and Quarantine Task Force: Fred Bergwerff (Netherlands); Chris Bell (UK); 

Kathy Dalip (Belize); Ricardo Deang (Philippines); Patrick Ducom (France); Alfredo 

Gonzalez (Philippines); Ken Glassey (New Zealand); Darka Hamel (Croatia); Takashi 

Misumi (Japan); David Okioga (Kenya); Christoph Reichmuth (Germany); Jordi Riudavets 

(Spain); John Sansone (USA); Robert Taylor (UK); Ken Vick (USA); Chris Watson (UK); 

Eduardo Willink (Argentina). 

MBTOC Soils Co-Chairs: Mohamed Besri (Morocco); Marta Pizano (Colombia); Ian Porter 

(Australia). Members of MBTOC Soils: Marten Barel (Netherlands); Antonio Bello (Spain); 

Aocheng Cao (China); Peter Caulkins (USA); Fabio Chaverri (Costa Rica); Abraham Gamliel 

(Israel); Saad Hafez (USA); George Lazarovits (Canada); Nahum Marban Mendoza 

(Mexico); Melanie Miller (Belgium); Andrea Minuto (Italy); Kazufumi Nishi (Japan); Ariane 

Saade (Lebanon); James Schaub (USA); Sally Schneider (USA); JL (Stappies) Staphorst 

(South Africa); Akio Tateya (Japan); Alejandro Valeiro (Argentina); Nick Vink (South 

Africa); Jim Wells (USA)
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report v

AUGUST 2007 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR 

METHYL BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS

FINAL REPORT
vi August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

UNEP 

AUGUST 2007 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL 

BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS

FINAL REPORT – AUGUST 2007 

Glossary of Acronyms 

1,3-D 1,3-dichloropropene 

A5 Article 5 Party 

CEIT Countries with Economies in Transition 

CUE Critical Use Exemption 

CUN Critical Use Nomination 

EC European Commission 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

IPM Integrated Pest Management 

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention 

ISPM International Standard Phytosanitary Measure 

LPBF Low Permeability Barrier Film 

MB Methyl bromide 

MBTOC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee 

MBTOC QSC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee Quarantine, Structures 

and Commodities Subcommittee 

MBTOC S Methyl Bromide Technical Options Soils Subcommittee 

MOP Meeting of the Parties 

MRL Maximum Residue Level 

MS Metham sodium 

NPMA National Pest Management Association 

OEWG Open Ended Working Group 

Pic Chloropicrin 

PMRA Pest Management Regulatory Agency (of Canada) 

QPS Quarantine and Pre-shipment 

SF Sulfuryl fluoride 

TEAP Technology and Economics Assessment Panel 

VIF Virtually Impermeable Film 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. SCOPE OF THIS REPORT 1 

2. CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE 3 

2.1 MANDATE............................................................................................................. 3 

2.2 FULFILMENT OF DECISION IX/6 ............................................................................ 3 

2.3 CONSIDERATION OF STOCKS ................................................................................. 4 

2.4 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST..................................................................................... 5 

3. EVALUATIONS OF CUNS – 2007 ROUND FOR 2008 AND 2009 

EXEMPTIONS 7 

3.1 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS REVIEW.................................................................. 8 

3.1.1 Consideration of alternatives...................................................................... 8

3.2 RATE OF ADOPTION OF ALTERNATIVES.................................................................. 9 

3.3 SUSTAINABLE ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................ 10 

3.4 FREQUENCY OF ALLOWED MB USE..................................................................... 11 

3.5 USE OF DISPOSABLE CANISTERS OF MB .............................................................. 11 

3.6 TRENDS IN METHYL BROMIDE USE FOR CUES SINCE 2005 ................................ 11 

4. MBTOC QSC: EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE 

NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE: JULY 2007 15 

4.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 15 

4.2 ISPM DRAFT METHYL BROMIDE STRATEGY...................................................... 15 

4.3 QUARANTINE ISSUES........................................................................................... 15 

4.4 REGULATORY UPDATE ........................................................................................ 15 

4.5 STANDARD PRESUMPTIONS USED IN ASSESSMENT OF NOMINATED QUANTITIES... 16 

4.6 DETAILS OF EVALUATIONS.................................................................................. 16 

5. MBTOC SOILS: EVALUATIONS OF 2007 CRITICAL USE 

NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE: JULY 2007 25 

5.1 SUMMARY OF OUTCOMES.................................................................................... 25 

5.2 ISSUES RELATED TO CUN ASSESSMENT FOR PREPLANT SOIL USE...................... 25 

5.3 STANDARD PRESUMPTIONS USED IN ASSESSMENT OF NOMINATED QUANTITIES... 26 

5.4 USE/EMISSION REDUCTION TECHNOLOGIES - LOW PERMEABILITY BARRIER 

FILMS AND DOSAGE REDUCTION.......................................................................... 29 

5.5 ADJUSTMENTS FOR STANDARD DOSAGE RATES USING MB/PIC FORMULATIONS . 30 

6. MBTOC WORK PLAN FOR 2008 57 

6.1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 57 

6.2 MBTOC WORKPLAN FOR 2008 - DETAILS ......................................................... 57 

7. SUMMARY REPORT OF THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY 

MBTOC IN 2007 61 

8. MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL ISSUES 63 

9. PROPOSED CHANGES TO STANDARD PRESUMPTIONS FOR 

PREPLANT SOIL USE OF MB 65 

10. REFERENCES 66 
viii August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

ANNEX I: DECISION IX/6 74 

ANNEX II: ANNEX I REFERRED TO BY DECISION XVI/4 75 

ANNEX III RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF MB/PIC FORMULATIONS 

APPLIED IN COMBINATION WITH LPBF 76 

ANNEX IV: RELATIVE YIELD OF CROPS GROWN UNDER BARRIER 

FILMS WITH DIFFERENT MB/PIC FORMULATIONS COMPARED 

TO THE STANDARD POLYETHYLENE FROM TRIALS 1998 - 2004. 78 

ANNEX V: DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST 79 

ANNEX VI: LIST OF NOMINATED AND EXEMPTED AMOUNTS OF MB 

GRANTED BY PARTIES UNDER THE CUE PROCESS. 98 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 1

1. Scope of this Report 

This 2007 final report provides final evaluations of MBTOC/TEAP on CUNs 

submitted for methyl bromide use by Parties in 2007, in accordance with Decision 

IX/6 (refer Annex 1 of this report). CUNs were submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by 

the Parties in January 2007 and have been assessed following the timetable set out in 

the Annex 1 referred to by Decision XVI/4 (Annex II). The condensed timetable for 

preparation of this report was necessary in order to meet the revised schedule this year 

for the 20th anniversary meeting of the Montreal Protocol. 

During the past year, MBTOC has provided an interim CUN Report, Progress Report 

(TEAP, 2007) and an Assessment Report (MBTOC, 2007) which report on MB 

production and consumption figures, case studies on alternatives, an update of new 

information on the performance of alternatives and an estimate of the trends in global 

emissions of methyl bromide. 

This progress report provides the Parties with recommendations of Critical Use 

Nominations submitted by Parties in 2007 for use of methyl bromide in either 2008 or 

2009. The report also provides tables and figures of trend lines in critical use 

exemptions and the criteria by which CUNs are assessed. A revision of the standard 

presumptions for some preplant uses of MB is included for consideration at the 19th

MOP. This information is submitted in order to meet the requirements to review 

management strategies submitted by Parties pursuant to Decision Ex.I/4(9d) and to 

report on the amount of methyl bromide nominated for critical use by the Parties as 

per Decision XVII/9(10). 

In late 2006, TEAP Co-Chairs announced a reorganization of MBTOC, separating it 

formally into two independent sub-committees, recognizing the differing expertise 

required for the two main groupings of CUNs, those relating to postharvest and 

structural uses and those involved with soil fumigation. MBTOC Quarantine, 

Structures and Commodities (MBTOC QSC) has responsibility for issues concerning 

methyl bromide uses and alternatives for quarantine, pre-shipment, structural and 

commodities. Additionally, MBTOC QSC has absorbed the membership of the former 

Quarantine Task Force. MBTOC Soils has responsibility for the pre-plant uses and 

alternatives of methyl bromide. Evaluations of CUNs for the two categories are 

reported separately below. 

August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 3

2. Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 

2.1 Mandate 

Under Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol the production and consumption (defined 

as production plus imports minus exports) of methyl bromide is to be phased out in 

Parties not operating under Article 5(1) of the Protocol, by 1 January 2005. However, 

the Parties agreed to a provision enabling exemptions for those uses of methyl 

bromide that qualify as critical. Parties established criteria, under Decision IX/6 of 

the Protocol, which all such uses need to meet in order to be granted an exemption. 

MBTOC provides guidance to the Parties’ decisions on critical use exemptions in 

accordance with Decisions IX/6 and Annex I of Decision XVI/4. Refer to Annexes I 

and II of this report for copies of these Decisions. 

2.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 

Decision XVI/2 directed MBTOC to indicate whether all CUNs fully met the 

requirements of Decision IX/6. When the requirements of Decision IX/6 were met, 

MBTOC recommended the full amount of the nomination. Where some of the 

conditions were not fully met, MBTOC recommended a decreased amount, or was 

unable to assess, depending on its technical and economic evaluation. MBTOC 

reduced a nomination when a technical alternative was considered effective or, in a 

few cases, when the Party failed to show that it was not effective. In this round of 

CUNs, as in previous rounds, MBTOC considered all information provided by the 

Parties, including to answers to questions requested by MBTOC, up to the date of the 

final assessment. . 

In the past two years, with accumulation of experience, MBTOC has become firmer 

in judging merits of CUNs in the light of the requirements of Decision IX/6. 

Applicants and Parties are expected to conduct research and/or evaluate the research 

conducted by others in the circumstances of their nomination, to document that effort 

and submit the documents to MBTOC. Documents should take the form of reports of 

field trials and commercial scale up trials, directly pertinent to the circumstances of 

that particular nomination. MBTOC has encountered difficulty in assessment when 

yield losses presented in some nominations differ markedly from those reported in a 

large number of studies in similar circumstances and are not substantiated by 

references. In post-harvest where research based economics data is less often 

available, we are asking Parties to substantiate costs estimates. 

Now that alternatives have been identified for most applications, regulations on the 

use of these alternatives and comparative information on the economic 

feasibility/infeasibility of their use compared to MB are critical to the outcomes of 

present and future CUNs. Without this information, further CUNs may not be 

assessable. In some cases, MBTOC has proposed potential research and regulatory 

issues to Parties that could assist the phase out of MB. In paragraph 20 of Annex 1 

referred to in Decision XVI/4, Parties, inter alia, specifically requested that, in cases 

where a nomination relies on the economic criteria of Decision IX/6, MBTOC’s 

report should explicitly state the central basis for the Party’s economic argument 
4 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

relating to CUNs. Tables 4 and 8 provide this information for each CUN that relied 

on economic criteria. 

2.3 Consideration of Stocks 

One criterion for granting a critical use under Decision IX/6 is that methyl bromide 

for the use “is not available in sufficient quantity and quality from existing stocks of 

banked or recycled methyl bromide” (para. 1 (b) (ii)). Parties nominating critical use 

exemptions are requested under decision Ex.I/4(9f) to submit an accounting 

framework to the information on stocks. Since the consideration of stocks is an active 

area of negotiation for the Parties, and given that the information received from the 

Parties is incomplete, MBTOC has not made an adjustment to a nomination to 

account for stocks held and has relied on Parties to make this adjustment. 

In accordance with Decision XVIII/13(7), a summary of the data on stocks reported 

by the Parties in 2007 for 2006 has been summarized in Table 2 below. Parties may 

wish to consider this information in the light of Decision IX/6 1(b)(ii). Tables 1 and 2 

show the stock data that have been reported by the Parties in 2006 and 2007. 

Table 1. Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2005, as reported 

by Parties in 2006 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2005 

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 

Australia 146.600 0 114.912 114.912 114.912 0 

Canada 61.792 0 48.858 48.858 45.146 3.712 

EC 4,392.812 216.198 2,435.319 2,651.517 2,530.099 121.023 

Israel 1,089.306 16.358 1,072.350 1,088.708 1,088.708 0 

Japan 748.000 0 546.861 546.861 546.861 0 

New 

Zealand 

50.000 6.900 40.500 47.400 44.580 2.810 

USA(a) 9,552.879 7,613.000 not reported 7,170.000 443.000 

(a) Additional information on stocks was reported on US EPA website, September 2006: Methyl bromide inventory held by US 

companies: 2004 = 12,994 tonnes; 2005 = 9,974 tonnes. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 5

Table 2. Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2006, as reported 

by Parties in 2007 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2006 

Amount on 

hand at start 

of 2006 

Quantity 

acquired for 

CUEs in 2006 

(production + 

imports)

Amount 

available for 

use in 2006 

Quantity used 

for CUEs in 

2006 

Amount at 

the end of 

2006 

Australia 75.100 0 55.308 55.308 0 

Canada 53.897 3.7 41.967 54.667 Not yet 

available 

Not yet 

available 

EC 3,527.030 114.953 1,472.781 1,587.734 [1,519.184](a) [68.550](a) 

Israel 880.295 - - - - - 

Japan 741.400 70.735 488.810 559.545 540.207 19.338 

USA 8,081.753 9,974.000(b) 

443.000(c) 

6,924.000 16,898.000(d) 

443.000 (c) 

7,168.000(e) 8,210.000(f) 

443.000 (c) 

(a) Preliminary data subject to update. 

(b) Amount of pre-2005 stock on hand. 

(c) Amount of stocks at the end of 2005 from production/imports specifically made for CUEs (acquired in 2005). 

(d) The sum of 9,974 of pre-2005 stocks + 6,924 tonnes produced/imported in 2006 for CUEs. 

(e) The sum of 6,384 tonnes of production/imports for CUEs plus 784 tonnes used from stocks. 

(f) The sum of 539 tonnes of stocks produced/imported in 2006 specifically for CUEs, plus 7,671 tonnes stocks acquired 

pre-2005. 

2.4 Disclosure of Interest 

All MBTOC members have prepared disclosure of interest forms relating specifically 

to their level of national, regional or enterprise involvement for the 2007 CUN 

process, according to a standardised format developed by TEAP. This was required to 

ensure that those with a high level of involvement and interest in developing a 

particular nomination did not bias the process of evaluation through participation in 

the detailed review. The Disclosure of Interest declarations are found in Annex V. As 

in previous rounds, some members withdrew from a particular CUN assessment or 

only provided technical advice on request for those nominations where a potential 

conflict of interest was declared. 

August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 7

3. Evaluations of CUNs – 2007 Round for 2008 and 2009 Exemptions 

Each MBTOC sub-committee held two meetings in 2007 to assess the CUNs. The 

first meeting of each sub-committee was held concurrently in Alassio, Italy March 

19 – 23 to prepare the interim recommendations. Following further clarification from 

the Parties of issues arising from the initial assessment of the CUNs, each 

subcommittee required a second meeting to finalise assessments. MBTOC QSC met 

in College Park, Maryland, June 30 – July 3 and MBTOC Soils in San Jose Costa 

Rica from July 10-13. These meetings were held earlier than usual in order to meet 

the report schedule required for the 19 MOP in Canada in September of 2007. 

In total, 5 Parties (7 countries - Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, Poland, Spain and 

USA), who had previously received CUEs for specific MB uses, submitted 58 

nominations in this round, compared to 60 submitted in the previous round in 2006. 

Nominations were no longer submitted from New Zealand or the EC for the following 

countries - France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands and United Kingdom. 

CUNs in this report relate to CUEs sought for 2008 and 2009. Nominations from 

Spain, Poland were for 2008, Australia, Canada, Japan and USA for 2009 and Israel 

for both 2008 and 2009. No nominations in this particular round were submitted for 

longer periods. 

For post-harvest uses of MB, Parties submitted 15 CUNs for the use of MB in 

structures and commodities in 2007. Of the 2007 nominations, 7 were for 2008 for a 

total of 11.535 tonnes. Of nominations for 2008, MBTOC QSC recommended 9.179 

tonnes. This figure does not include a recommendation for Australia rice 2008. The 

Australia rice evaluation for 2008, and the Meeting report of the 27 OWEG, para 128, 

explain the declaration of the Government of Australia on this matter. MBTOC did 

not recommend one CUN. 

Of the 2007 post-harvest nominations 8 were for 2009 for a total of 478.719 tonnes. 

TEAP report of April 2007 report noted this figure as 529.721tonnes. However, since 

that report, the USA has withdrawn the cocoa segment of the NPMA CUN (51.002 

tonnes). Of the nominations for 2009, MBTOC QSC recommended a total of 451.178 

tonnes. 

For soil uses, Parties submitted 43 CUNs in total, 15 nominations for 2008 and 28 

nominations for 2009. These totalled 1123.146 and 5575.242 metric tonnes 

respectively. Nominations from Spain and Poland were for 2008, Australia, Canada, 

Japan and the US for 2009 and Israel for both 2008 and 2009. No nominations in this 

particular round were submitted for longer periods. A use previously nominated by 

USA (sweet potato production, including production of nursery stock) was presented 

for the first time by Israel. The nomination was explained as arising from 

unprecedented expansion in the sector and is envisaged for 2 years only, whilst a 

feasible alternative becomes registered. 

 

The US delegation made arrangements to meet with MBTOC Soils during the Alassio 

and San Jose meetings for discussions with regard to their CUNs, in accordance with 

paragraph 8 of Annex 1 referred to in Decision XVI/4. 
8 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

For the 2007 round, MBTOC Soils has recommended a total of 5291.867 tonnes, 

being 1102.706 tonnes for 2008 and 4189.161 tonnes for 2009. An amount of 91.69 

tonnes was not recommended for 2008, and 536.286 tonnes not recommended for 

2009. An amount of 848.795 tonnes for 2009 of the Israeli CUNs remained unable to 

assess pending further information (Table 5). 

3.1 Critical Use Nominations Review 

A soil subcommittee in MBTOC considered the nominations relating to the use of 

MB for soil fumigation, while MBTOC QSC considered the nominations relating to 

the use of MB for fumigation of commodities, structures and objects. This report and 

decisions of the committee were by consensus, recognizing that different perspectives 

exist within the committee on certain aspects. 

In general, the most recent CUE approved by the Parties for a particular application 

was used as a benchmark for consideration of continuing nominations. In some 

instances, this benchmark differed from that used by the nominating Party. 

In considering the CUNs submitted in 2007, both MBTOC sub-committees applied 

the standards contained in Annex I of 16MOP, and, where relevant the standard 

presumptions given at the start of each sub committee report (Sections 4 and 5). In 

particular, MBTOC sought to provide consistent treatment of CUNs within and 

between Parties while at the same time taking local circumstances into consideration 

for specific crops and situations, and to provide transparency in its processes and 

conclusions. 

3.1.1 Consideration of Alternatives 

As in previous years, MBTOC used the guidance given in the Annex I referred to in 

Decision XVI/4 where ‘alternatives’ were defined as any practice or treatment that 

can be used in place of methyl bromide. ‘Existing alternatives’ are those alternatives 

in present or past use in some regions; and ‘potential alternatives’ are those 

alternatives in the process of investigation or development. 

MBTOC also used information on the suitability of alternatives for a nomination by 

considering the commercial adoption of alternatives in regions nominated for CUNs. 

Also, adoption in regions with similar climatic zone and cropping practices was used 

as an indication of the feasibility (technical and economic) of an alternative in a 

similar region. For example for preplant soil uses of MB, 1,3-

dichloropropene/chloropicrin (1,3-D/Pic), metham sodium alone or in combination 

with Pic, dazomet, substrates and the use of resistant varieties and grafted plants (for 

solanaceous crops, melons and other cucurbits) have been adopted to replace MB for 

a range of crops in industries applying for CUNs and in many regions where MB was 

once used. 

MBTOC evaluation of CUNs relating to production of strawberries, tomatoes and 

some other crops was assisted by information provided by a large number of 

published studies on MB alternatives and by a meta-analysis (TEAP 2006). The 

published studies provided additional transparency to MBTOC evaluations, as 

requested by the Parties in Decision XV/4. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 9

Rate of change in commercial adoption, partly as a result of rapidly changing 

regulation, challenges MBTOC’s ability to make diligent recommendations in the use 

of alternatives for post-harvest applications, especially when recommendations are 

considered for one or two years in the future. In post-harvest applications, where 

research is minimal, but commercial adoption trials are more common, MBTOC 

needs Parties and the affected industries to release the results of commercial trials, 

using group reporting methods when data is judged to be proprietary. 

For commodity and structural applications, it was assumed that technically and 

economically feasible alternatives would provide disinfestation to a level that met the 

objectives of a MB treatment, e.g. meeting infestation standards in finished product 

from a mill, while ensuring the costs were economically feasible in the context of that 

nomination, to the extent that could be determined. 

Technically feasible alternatives do not necessarily provide superior pest control 

results than are achieved in practice by MB; economically feasible alternatives do not 

necessarily cost the same as MB. 

MBTOC has to be knowledgeable about regulatory advances, but in post-harvest 

applications domestic, import and export regulations all play a role that complicates 

adoption of alternatives. Several post-harvest CUNs indicate that if importing Parties 

were to set maximum residue levels for fluoride in foods, then the use of alternatives, 

for both food and structural applications by exporting countries, would improve. This 

year, as MBTOC was making its final recommendations, some Parties published 

maximum residue levels for fluoride in several foods, or only in imported foods as in 

the case of Canada. Given the newness of these announcements, the impact of these 

publications on actual MB use for 2007 and 2008 was difficult to predict. 

3.2 Rate of Adoption of Alternatives 

MBTOC recognizes that time is needed to effect phase-in of alternatives and accepts 

this as a reasonable technical argument for lack of availability to the user sensu

Decision IX/6. 

Some CUNs in the 2007 round argued that time was required to allow the relevant 

industry to transition to available effective alternatives. Most CUNs showed a 

reduction in nominated quantity requested from that of the preceding year, reflecting 

progressive adoption of alternatives; while others had the same or similar quantities of 

MB nominated to the preceding CUNs. Some CUNs showed comparatively slow rates 

of adoption, and also indicated that the Party expected that only part of the sector 

might be able to transition. As a result, MBTOC informs Parties that without change, 

some CUNs may be submitted for the next 5-8 years. 

In some cases, alternatives at varying stages of readiness for adoption, were identified 

by the Party in the CUN and, in others, they were identified by MBTOC. MBTOC 

reviewed the technical information on alternatives and the commercial adoption of 

alternatives by Parties previously using MB in similar sectors to those where CUNs 

had been sought, i.e. the ability and rate of phase out MB (see Figures 1 and 2) in 

order to make an assessment. In some cases, MBTOC made adjustments for adoption 
10 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

rates of alternatives based on the specific circumstances of the nomination. In most 

instances the adoption rates varied from no adoption up to 25% adoption. 

For many CUNs in the soils sector, several industries which have been heavily 

dependent on MB, e.g. strawberries, tomatoes and other vegetable crops (e.g. Italy, 

Spain, Belgium, Portugal and other countries of the EC, Australia, New Zealand) have 

completely adopted alternative technologies (especially those requiring similar 

application technologies) within a 3 to 4 year period. MBTOC took account of this 

during assessments. 

There is limited guidance from the Parties and data available on what is a reasonable 

rate of transition to existing and available alternatives, though para. 35 of Annex I 

referred to in Decision XVI/4 states that “in situations where MBTOC recommends a 

nomination on grounds that it is necessary to have a period for adoption of 

alternatives, the basis for calculating the time period” is required to be “fully in the 

TEAP report. It is also necessary to take fully into account the information provided 

by the nominating Party, the supplier, the distributor or the manufacturer. For this 

reason it is important that the Party provide this information as required in para. 35 of 

Annex 1 on relevant factors for such a calculation including; the number of 

enterprises that need to transition, e.g., the number of fumigation and pest control 

companies, estimated training time assuming full effort, opportunities for importing 

alternative equipment and expertise if not available locally, and costs involved.” 

As most Parties did not provide all the information required under Annex 1 of 

Decision XIV/4, MBTOC used information on effectiveness of alternatives compared 

to MB from trials and commercial transition rates for other Parties to assist 

determination of suitable adoption rates in order to provide specific recommendations 

in this report. 

3.3 Sustainable Alternatives 

In a large proportion of CUNs, the most currently appropriate alternatives are 

chemical fumigant alternatives, which themselves, like MB, have issues related to 

their long term suitability for use. In both the EC and US, MB and most other 

fumigants are involved in rigorous reviews that could affect future regulations over 

their use for preplant soil fumigation. MBTOC has been informed that the US 

government has received a petition to stay (i.e. remove regulatory approval) the 

pesticide tolerances for SF. Sulfuryl fluoride is a recently approved, important, 

methyl bromide alternative for several post-harvest applications. A stay or other 

action that removes the pesticide tolerance for SF would increase significantly 

pressure to revert to MB in structural and commodity fumigation. For preplant soil 

uses of MB, the regulatory restrictions on 1,3-dichloropropene and chloropicrin are 

preventing further adoption of these products and putting pressure on industries to 

retain MB. 

MBTOC urges Parties to consider the long term sustainability of treatments adopted 

as alternatives to MB, to continue to adopt environmentally sustainable and safe 

chemical and non-chemical alternatives for the short to medium term and to develop 

sustainable IPM or non-chemical approaches for the longer term. Decision IX/6 

1(a)(ii) refers to alternatives that are ‘acceptable from the standpoint of environment 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 11

and health’. MBTOC has consistently interpreted this to mean alternatives that are 

registered or allowed by the relevant regulatory authorities in individual CUN regions. 

3.4 Frequency of Allowed MB Use 

In the CUN round for 2007, reductions in MB for both preplant soil and post harvest 

uses could be achieved in some nominations, where effective alternatives were 

identified, by reducing the frequency of MB fumigations. In some countries, present 

regulations already restrict the frequency of use of MB (e.g. to every second year) on 

similar crops and circumstances to those nominated by other Parties. MBTOC 

suggests that in these, and other instances, MB may only be required every 2, 3 or 4 

years and suggests that Parties further consider reductions where appropriate. 

Alternation of pest control measures may also help provide or extend user confidence 

and experience in alternatives. New pest control measures may also be good 

agricultural practice, reducing risk of development of resistance and providing control 

of a wider spectrum of pests. 

3.5 Use of Disposable Canisters of MB 

One Party still used small disposable canisters (i.e. 500 to 750g canisters) for 

application of MB for preplant soil use under plastic films. This practice is not 

considered as effective for pathogen control as use of MB/Pic mixtures and also leads 

to high emissions of methyl bromide. Use of small canisters has been eliminated in 

most non-Article 5 countries as it is considered a dangerous practice. According to the 

Party, canisters are used because they provide small-scale farmers with an easy 

application method and the ability to apply targeted amounts of MB to small areas 

where injection machinery may be difficult to use. 

3.6 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005 

Since 2005, there has been a progressive trend by all Parties to reduce their 

consumption and CUN nominations for preplant soil use, although this has occurred 

at very different rates. In this round, the phase out of MB for several major uses has 

slowed. Figs 1 and 2 show the trends in the reduction in amounts approved/nominated 

by Parties for ‘Critical Use’ from 2005 to 2009 for some key uses in 2008 and 2009. 

The trends in phase out of MB by country are shown in Table 3. 
12 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Figure 1. Amounts of MB exempted for CUE uses in preplant soil industries 

from 2005 to 2009. Solid lines indicate trend in CUE methyl bromide. 

Dashed lines indicate quantity of methyl bromide nominated by the 

party in either 2008 or 2009. 

Cucurbits and Melons

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

metric tonnes

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Japan

USA

Cutflowers

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

metric tonnes

Australia

Belgium

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Portugal

Spain

USA

Orchard Replant

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

metric tonnes

France

USA

Peppers and Eggplant

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Years

metric tonnes

Belgium

France

Italy

Japan

Spain

USA

Strawberry Fruit

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

metric tonnes

Australia

France

Israel

Italy

New Zealand

Spain

UK

USA

Tomatoes

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Greece

Italy

USA
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 13

Figure 2. Amounts of MB exempted for CUE uses in mills and food processing 

facilities from 2005 to 2009. Solid lines indicate trend in CUE methyl 

bromide. Dashed lines indicate quantity of methyl bromide nominated by 

the Party in either 2007 or 2008. 

All Food Processing and Milling

(Not Commodities)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2005 2006 2007 2008

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Canada

France

Germany

Greece

Israel

Italy

UK

USA
14 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Table 3. Summary of Critical Use Nomination (2005 – 2009 in part) and Exemption (2005 – 2008 in part) 

Parties under the CUN/CUE Process. (Note: A breakdown of CUN and CUE amounts by sector i

PARTY QUANTITIES NOMINATED QUANTITIES AP

Total 

Nominatio

n 

For 2005 

Total 

Nomination 

For 2006 

Total 

nominations 

for 2007 

Nomination 

for 2008 

Nomination 

for 2009

2005 

(1ExMOP 

and 

16MOP) 

2006 

(16MOP+ 

2ExMOP+ 

17MOP) 

Australia 206.950 81.250 52.145 52.900 38.990 146.600 75.100 Canada 61.992 53.897 46.745 42.241 34.375 61.792 53.897 European Community1 5754.361 4213.47 1239.873 245.00 * 4392.812 3536.755 Israel 1117.156 1081.506 1236.517 952.845 851.395 1089.306 880.295 Japan 748.000 738.700 651.700 589.600 508.90 748.000 741.400 New Zealand 53.085 53.085 32.573 0 0 50.000 42.000 Switzerland 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 8.700 7.000 USA 10753.997 9386.229 7417.999 6415.153 4942.227 9552.879 8081.753 TOTALS 18704.24 15615.135 10677.55 8297.739 6375.955 16050.089 13418.200 

* Not yet available.: 1 Members of the European Community having CUNs/CUEs include: 

2005 – Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. 

2006 – Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. 2007 – France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom 2008 – Poland, Spain 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 15

4. MBTOC QSC: Evaluations of 2007 Critical Use Nominations for 

Methyl Bromide: July 2007 

4.1 Introduction 

MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and Commodities met in June 2007 in College Park, 

Maryland, USA to re-review CUNs as requested by Australia and Canada. The CUNs 

re-reviewed were: Australia rice 2009; Canada pasta manufacturing 2008 and Canada 

rodenticides and molluscicides 2008. The Parties supplied additional information 

about the nominations following the publication of the TEAP May 2007 Progress 

Report, and during bilateral meetings with MBTOC during the Open Ended Working 

Group meeting in Nairobi, Kenya. 

The USA informed MBTOC that research, commercial trials and an economic 

assessment of the use of sulfuryl fluoride for cocoa beans, resulted in regulatory 

change that will allow this sector to fully transition away from methyl bromide by 

2009. Consequently, the USA has withdrawn the cocoa bean sector of the nomination 

by the National Pest Management Association. 

With the assistance of the USA, MBTOC conducted a field trip to visit processors of 

Southern dry cure ham (the subject of a critical use nomination), and meet with North 

Carolina State University Extension and other research scientists who are part of a 

multi-state research team trying to solve the pest control problem with this 

commodity. 

4.2 ISPM Draft Methyl Bromide Strategy 

MBTOC noted the availability of a draft standard for comment by Parties to the IPPC. 

The standard provides guidance to National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPOs) 

and Regional Plant Protection Organizations (RPPOs) in the development of a 

strategy to reduce or replace the use of methyl bromide as a phytosanitary measure, in 

order to reduce emissions of methyl bromide. 

4.3 Quarantine Issues 

MBTOC draws the Parties’ attention to the potential for economic impact, particularly 

in Article 5 countries, which may develop when imports of commodities and 

associated packaging materials are rejected following treatment against quarantine 

pests with methyl bromide. Methyl bromide quarantine use may be increasing, in part 

in response to concerns about the consequences of importing quarantine pests. Parties 

may wish to charge TEAP with further investigation of these matters. 

4.4 Regulatory Update 

In Australia, the review of the registration application for sulfuryl fluoride for 

structural, quarantine and commodity use is ongoing. 
16 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

In Canada, the website of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) has 

published an interim re-evaluation for aluminium phosphide, and requested more 

information from registrants. 1,3-D is still under re-evaluation; more information has 

been requested from registrants. Health Canada has approved import MRLs for 

sulfuryl fluoride on imported foods. PMRA is also reviewing new sulfuryl fluoride 

submissions, and submissions for the use of CO2, heat and phosphine as a 

combination process. PMRA has determined that there are no regulatory barriers to 

the use of irradiation on rodenticides and molluscicides; however, ethylene oxide is 

not registered for this use. 

The TEAP 2007 May Progress Report (MBTOC chapter) reviews registration issues 

in the EU. 

In Japan, registration review of methyl iodide for both post-harvest and pre-plant uses 

is continuing and reviewers on the Food Safety Committee have requested additional 

information from manufacturers. 

The USA has confirmed that the legal challenge to the use of sulfuryl fluoride is 

ongoing and that there may be future implications for use of SF as an alternative 

treatment. There is a new USA registrant of SF, which has resulted in two suppliers of 

the alternative for post-harvest uses. The re-registration review of methyl bromide and 

several other fumigants used for post-harvest and pre-plant is in public comment 

period. Decisions on buffer zones based on risk mitigation measures have not yet been 

made. 

4.5 Standard Presumptions Used in Assessment of Nominated Quantities. 

These have not changed since presentation to the Parties at 17 MOP. 

4.6 Details of Evaluations 

Parties submitted 15 CUNs for the use of MB in structures and commodities in 2007. 

Of the 2007 nominations, 7 were for 2008 for a total of 11.535 tonnes. Of 

nominations for 2008, MBTOC QSC recommended 9.179 tonnes. This figure does 

not include a recommendation for Australia rice for 2008. The text associated with 

Australia rice for 2008 (Table 4), and the Meeting report of the 27 OWEG, para 128, 

explain the declaration of Australia on this matter. MBTOC did not recommend one 

CUN. 

Of the 2007 nominations 8 were for 2009 for a total of 478.719 tonnes. TEAP April 

2007 progress Report noted this figure as 529.721 tonnes. However, since that report, 

the USA has withdrawn the cocoa segment of the NPMA CUN (51.002 tonnes). Of 

the nominations for 2009, MBTOC QSC recommended a total of 451.178 tonnes. 

Table 4 below provides the MBTOC QSC final recommendations for the CUNs 

submitted in 2007.
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Table 4. Final evaluations for QSC CUNs submitted in 2007 for 2008 or 2009 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Rice 6.150 6.150 9.205 7.400 1.800 MBTOC comments: On 2008 CUN: MBTOC’s interim report recommended an additional 0.84 tonnes to the 7.4 tonn

rice treatment in 2008. The recommendation was based on the Party’s documents indicating it would have a paddy hatonnes and fumigated at 20g/m3 giving a total MB usage of 8.24 tonnes. (Parties had already approved 7.4 tonnes for 

Meeting of the OEWG, Australia indicated that the “amount of rice to be treated was 261,300 tonnes and that the full am

Parties at the 18th MOP would be required. MBTOC confirmed it had received this clarification.” (27th OEWG Meeting 

On 2009 CUN: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 7.82 tonnes for this nomination in 2009. This represents a 15

the Party, to encourage the beginning of adoption of alternatives, as required by Decision IX/6. The Party has indicated years of consecutive high harvests, but harvests have been low. MBTOC, however, finds it reasonable to expect some 

economic times. The applicant has invested in recapture equipment on its largest treatment site with quoted savings of 

several technically effective and available alternatives in use worldwide for packaged rice. MBTOC’s previous CUN eva

alternatives at length. The Party has indicated a preference for phosphine as an alternative, but indicates quite high co

discussions with the Party have indicated that the pest of concern is Sitophilus spp., particularly S. oryzae. This specie

phosphine although it is a species of high natural tolerance. However, the Party has based its economic analysis on an 

weeks, which would only apply at temperatures below 15 oC. The unnecessarily long treatment time increases the num

to the very high economic impact cited by the Party. Research papers submitted by the Party and from other sources, i

phosphine published by the European Plant Protection Organisation (EPPO Bulletin 23, 212-214 (1993), shows effectiv

be achieved within 12 days at temperatures above 20oC and 4 days above 30oC, under well-sealed conditions at a dos

Australia 

MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN states: drought has made it impossible to undertake investment in pho

silos would be Aus $40 million. CUN states it would involve three years of transition, potentially complete in 2012. How

this capital expenditure. Even if borrowing or raising external capital is not feasible, the calculations of the annual cost 

over the economic life of the investment. CUN Tables 3, 4, and 5 compare costs of phosphine and MB treatment on an 

phosphine would costs $19.02 per ton for each of the first 10 years. For a 1-kilo retail package this amounts to $0.019demand and with any branding value, some of this could be is passed on to consumers. Further, per capita domestic u

beer, pet food, seed and residual) is about 9 kg per person. This suggests an annual cost to consumers if higher fumig

cents per year per person. Some distributional issues remain as certain ethnic groups have much higher than average 
18 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Mills 47 (included 

mills and pasta)

34.774 30.167 

(included mills only)

28.650 

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 26.913 tonnes for flour mill fumigation in 2009 with the understanding that 

research program and complete reports in 2007. Industry-government commercial scale trials of heat treatment, sulfury

dioxide combination, are ongoing. Sulfuryl fluoride is only allowed under conditional registration and can only be used i

levels for fluoride resulting from SF fumigations have been established in Canada. Furthermore, it is unknown if any us

fluoride by Provincial governments. The nomination for 2009 represents a decrease of about 5% relative to 2008 levelsdecrease in any further nomination if the trials currently being conducted show economic feasibility and technical effica

notes that a growing body of research and practical experience indicates that best results in SF fumigations are obtaine30 ̊C are achieved. MBTOC awaits the results of Canadian testing to determine if this result is also observed in Canad

Canada

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: It appears that heat remains very costly and has not provided comp

of alternatives unlikely. Technical feasibility issues and lack of registration still exist. This nomination does not rely on 

Pasta (see Canada 

mills)

10.457 6.757 6.067 6.067

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 6.067 tonnes for Canada pasta in 2008, with the understanding that comm

season will be conducted. MBTOC will not be able to recommend any further exemption for this sector without reports 

pasta facilities, detailing effects on pest control and facilities in the Canadian circumstances. The Party may consider a successful. 

Canada 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: that heat treatment remains a very costly alternative. In general, the 

cost to carry out the heat treatment at twice the cost of doing a methyl bromide treatment. The cost of a heat treatmen

methyl bromide when the costs of monitoring to ensure comparable results to a methyl bromide fumigation are included
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Commodities 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.068 NRMBTOC comments: MBTOC does not recommend a CUE for this specific nomination in 2008. The critical need for m

There are no data indicating that mould would develop in bait for rodents or molluscs if manufacturing methods were im

practices were used. The applicant states that product may become mouldy while held in the open at room temperatur

without any effort made to cool or aerate the product. If the product was dried during processing to less than 75% equisaid to be of concern, should not proliferate. Similarly, if the product was stored using standard grain handling techniqu

conditioning in the storage room, mould would also not grow. The applicant has indicated a MB use of approximately 2

indicated 17 – 20 pallets per truck. However, the Party indicates an annual production of 1150 pallets (approx 430 – 54

The MB dosage rate (6.8 kg/100m3) is unlikely to control mould growth. Furthermore, most fumigation occurs in winter 

reduce effectiveness, or result in an unnecessarily high requirement for methyl bromide. Irradiation is a technically effe

treatment costs plus shipping were estimated at considerably higher cost than MB treatment. Costs supplied by the Patreatment costs, suggesting that lower costs could be obtained by ensuring the irradiation dosage rate has been prope

economies of scale might lower shipping costs. MBTOC is not aware of any other Party using MB for this purpose. 

Canada 

MBTOC comments on economics: The cost of post-manufacture sterilization of the rodenticides and molluscicides b

approximately $280 CDN to $380 CDN per pallet of product (shipping included). Trucking costs were suggested to be 

of material and the cost of goods to be treated was $120 to $200 (depending on the strength (interpret as ‘dose’) requi

also included $10 per pallet for their extra handling. The current cost for the post-manufacture sterilization of the produ

pallet. 

Dates 3.444 2.755 2.200 1.800 1.8MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 1.8 tonnes for dates in 2008. Israel’s research programme combined with 

has allowed the successful adoption of heat treatment by packers of Medjool dates, the main variety. The Party has co

However, heat treatment has not been successful, thus far, for other date varieties. Work continues on this prospective 

may provide a technically effective alternative. A heat and carbon dioxide combination treatment has been found to be 

‘cocoon’ method of vacuum in flexible container has worked for some varieties but requires packing houses to invest aleast one date variety is harmed by this method, but the applicant is encouraged to make the investments and shift in t

technically feasible and where product quality is not harmed. Phosphine is not feasible from the viewpoint of product qu

although they have proven successful in the treatment of other dried fruit, are not registered. 

Israel 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: Alternative 3 (Cold) is not technically suitable, alternative 1 (Heat ) i

while alternative 2 (CO2), 4 (vacuum) and 5 ( Heat + CO2) require further studies to reveal whether they are economic

no economic data. 
20 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Flour mills 2.140 1.490 1.040 0.800 0.312MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 0.312 tonnes for Israel flour mills in 2008, a 61% reduction in the nominaterigorous IPM program combined with heat treatment seems a likely avenue for success in the circumstances of this no

applicant to complete transition to alternatives. The applicant indicates spot treatment with MB is used in the case of in

treatment by heat seems quite possible, especially given the generally high ambient temperature. Although the applica

sulfuryl fluoride, it seems unlikely to resolve their infestation problems in the short or middle term since there has not evsubmitted yet. The applicant indicates it uses 35 g m-3 of MB based on the poor penetration of MB through flour residue

before fumigation as a standard sanitation practice and a normal part of IPM. The MBTOC standard dosage rate is 20g 

treatments and would be more than sufficient for spot treatment. The amount of MB recommended was based on the f

reported to need to fumigate mills and equipment totalling 15,600m3. When MBTOC standard dosage rate of 20g m-3 i

needed.

Israel 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: that heat treatment is not economically feasible. Suitable equipmen

CUN provides no economic analysis.

Chestnuts 7.100 6.800 6.500 6.300 MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 5.8 tonnes for Japan chestnuts in 2009. The Party has decreased the requ

requiring growers and packing houses to amalgamate fumigation loads. The Party is encouraged to continue these impincreasing fumigation time. The Party has a rigorous research program that, in preliminary results, has identified some 

the alternatives tested are either ineffective disinfestants or harms this fresh product. More encouraging research resul

not yet registered in Japan. 

Japan 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN provides no economic analysis
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Coffee & Cocoa Beans

See Medicinal Herbs

2.160 1.420 0.500 0.500

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 0.5 tonnes for this use in 2008, a reduction of 64.3% for this sector over la

has significantly reduced its requirement for MB by the reuse of recaptured MB. Additionally, the Party is adopting phos

generated forms of phosphine is anticipated this year and will increase the rate of transition. If there are delays or ineffe

treatment, another avenue is the use of heat and low oxygen as a combination controlled atmosphere treatment. This t

would control the mite infestation in an approximate treatment time of 5 days. 

Poland 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: that phosphine (which is not registered, inter alia because of the ex

largely as a result of additional costs associated with fumigation time of 12 days; high cost of speed boxes and phosph

the fumigation treatments with phosphine more expensive by 50 Euro per tonne. CUN states that irradiation is expensiv

the facility. 

Medicinal herbs and mushrooms

4.100 3.560 1.800 0.500 0.500

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 0.5 tonnes for this use in 2008, a reduction of 81.5% for this sector over la

significantly reduced MB use in this sector by moving commodities to alternatives as technologies and treatments beca

the last remaining uses which are moving to use of carbon dioxide/high pressure. 

Poland 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: that phosphine (which is not registered, inter alia because of the exp

largely as a result of additional costs associated with fumigation time of 12 days; high cost of speed boxes and phosph

the fumigation treatments with phosphine more expensive. CUN states that irradiation is expensive because of the high 
22 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Commodities 89.166 87.719 78.983 58.921 inc. 

0.021 for research

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 45.623 tonnes for US commodities in 2009. This amount includes 20 kilog

58.921 tonnes for 2009, which included 21 kilograms for research purposes, but which included no transition to alterna

for 2008. MBTOC’s recommendation represents a 20% decrease in the nomination for walnuts, dried fruit and dates to 

of dried beans, we did not recommend a 20% reduction this year but reduced the dosage rate from 44g m-3 to 20g m-3. 

recommended are: walnuts (28.088); dried fruit (13.928); beans (1.980); dates (1.607). There are several alternatives a

widespread use, but its slower action sometimes makes it logistically impractical for meeting holiday market windows. P

in California, but is not registered if the beans are stated to be infested with cowpea weevils. Trials using phosphine an

dates. Sulfuryl fluoride is technically effective and available; MRLs have recently been established in Germany, one of 

importing countries, however, have not yet established MRLs for fluoride residues, which limits its use in some cases. C

effective and the technology is available on a lease basis. 

United States 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN provides economic data on alternatives for walnuts and dried fruit other tha

costs are higher because it takes longer to accomplish so sellers don’t reach December holiday export market window

it corrodes equipment. CUN states walnuts and dried fruit all experience substantial additional downtime and subsequ

revenues for alternatives are negative. CUN states that profit margin decreases from 13.3% to –7.5% for Walnuts and 

economic analysis was not done for dates and dried beans. 

Cocoa beans -NPMA subset

61.519 55.367 64.082 53.188 

MBTOC comments: The United States has informed MBTOC that research, commercial trials and an economic analy

supplier of sulfuryl fluoride, followed by regulatory change, will allow this applicant to fully transition to alternatives by 2

withdrawn the cocoa bean segment of the critical use nomination by the National Pest Management Association. 

United States 

MBTOC comments on economics: 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

NPMA food processing structures (cocoa beans removed)

83.344 69.118 82.771 69.208 

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 54.606 tonnes for processed food facilities in 2009. Cocoa beans had bee

nomination for this sector was later withdrawn by USA, as reported elsewhere. The Party has requested 66.777 tonnes 

indicates it can achieve a five-year transition at 17% per year of 84% of its facilities in this sector. The constant reductio

total of this CUN is 13.871 tonnes (cocoa and cheese not included). 2009 will be the second year of this transition plan

cheese stores because no alternatives have been registered, but the Party has reduced its MB nomination in this secto

tonnage recommended is composed of the following sectoral amounts: processed foods (49.103); herbs and spice faci

requested to ensure the recommendation for herb and spice facilities is used only for the facilities and not the commod

are alternatives for herb and spice commodity in widespread commercial use in the US, and QPS uses cannot be inclu

United States 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states: For commodities listed in the NPMA CUN, an economic analysis wa

have an alternative registered. The comment about alternative registration is incorrect.. For food-processing facilities l

such alternatives was not assessed due to the lack of revenue information which is necessary to quantify the economic 

Mills and processors

483.000 461.758 401.889 348.237 

MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 291.418 tonnes for US mills and structures in 2009. Overall this is a 16.3% 

is distributed over each sector as follows: rice mills 26.7%, bakeries 41.8%, pet food 17.7% and flour millers 11.9%. Th

this use in 2008. The overall decrease in MB use is also similar to transition estimates by suppliers of alternative produ

MB recommended can be broken down into sectors as follows: rice mills (48.804); bakeries (8.308); pet food (21.955); making the fastest transition to alternatives and seem to have resolved earlier facility design problems that resulted in d

should continue to be improved and numerous techniques are available to do so. MB should not be used in facilities th

situations are especially prevalent in rice and flour mills. Transition to adoption of heat treatments should be encourage

United States 

MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN states: that heat will cost 1.5 times and sulfuryl fluoride costs 1.3 times 

reported to result in lost operating days and thus lower throughput and gross revenues. Where sulfuryl fluoride is techn

of 57% (rice millers), but only 4% (bakeries) and 2% (pet food manufacturers and North American Millers Association). 

assessment.
24 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16)

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP16+ ExMOP2+ MOP17)

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18)

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new)

MBTOC recommation fo(additionew)

Cured pork 67.907 40.854 18.998 19.669 MBTOC comments: MBTOC recommends 18.998 tonnes for 2009. This amount was also granted by the Parties for tfrom the amount granted by the Parties in 2008 of 19.669 tonnes and renominated for 2009. There are no registered a

mites on pork hanging in curing houses. Reliable historical use volumes for the largest group of producers in this secto

of small units. Therefore there is no justification for increase in use in this sector. A multi-state research project has beg

research will identify potential for improvements in IPM, facility gastightness, processing methods and efficacy of alternand eventual transition to alternatives. The Party is encouraged to investigate efficacy of non-chemical alternatives for 

faster transition away from MB in this sector. Controlled atmosphere at increased temperature may be effective. An ad

in hot oil as is done in European countries for similar pork products. (Schillings W. 2006. Methyl Bromide use to comba

production. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 

United States 

MBTOC comments on economics: No economic data given. The CUN states this is a minor use and there is little ec

* This figure does not include a recommendation for Australia rice 2008. The Australia rice evaluation for 2008, and the Meeting report of the 27th OW

Government of Australia on this matter. ** TEAP/MBTOC April 2007 report noted this figure as 529.721, however since that report, Government of the United States has withdrawn the coco
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 25

5. MBTOC Soils: Evaluations of 2007 Critical Use Nominations 

for Methyl Bromide: July 2007

5.1 Summary of Outcomes 

Of the 43 CUNs submitted for soil uses, recommendations were made on all 2008 and 

2009 recommendations, except for 10 nominations from Israel for 2009 which 

remained unable to assess. MBTOC considered that changes to registration of a key 

alternative 1,3-D, a review of buffer zone regulations on alternatives and new 

economic information on substrate use were required before these nominations could 

be fully assessed. 

After the two rounds of the 2007 assessment, MBTOC Soils has recommended a total 

of 5294.204 tonnes, being 1102.706 tonnes for 2008 and 4191.498 tonnes for 2009. 

An amount of 91.69 tonnes was not recommended for 2008, and 536.286 tonnes not 

recommended for 2009. An amount of 858.96 tonnes for 2009 of the Israeli CUNs 

remained unable to assess pending further information (Table 5). 

Table 5. Summary of MBTOC Soils recommendations for 2008 and 2009 by 

country for CUNs received in 2007 for preplant soil use of methyl 

bromide (tonnes) 

MBTOC-S 

Recommendation 

Country CUE 

Granted at 

MOP 18 

Additional

2008 CUN

Request 

2009 CUN 

Request 

2008 2009 

Australia 35.75 29.790 29.790 

Canada 14.124 7.462 7.462 

EC 

(Poland, Spain) 

689.142 244.151 244.146 - 

Israel 933.315 950.245 813.045 858.96 Unable{a} 

Japan 443.775 502.600 299.580 

USA 4806.723 4472.563 3854.666 

Total 6922.829 1194.396 5825.460 1102.706 4191.498 

(a) Unable to assess 848.795 tonnes for 2009 of the Israeli CUNs pending further information. 

5.2 Issues Related to CUN Assessment for Preplant Soil Use 

Technical alternatives exist for almost all uses requesting CUNs, but uptake of 

alternatives varies between countries, crops and the pest pressure. In general, CUNs 

for preplant soil use of MB resulted mainly from the following issues: regulatory 

restrictions on one or two specific alternatives, adoption times to implement 

alternatives, and economic infeasibility of some key technical alternatives, such as the 

use of methods which avoid the need for MB such as the use of grafted plants. 
26 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Two key issues which affect the need for CUNs in the 2007 round were i) regulations 

on key alternatives, particularly 1,3-D/Pic and, chloropicrin used alone or in mixtures 

at rates greater than 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2

), ii) lack of controls for nutsedge, and iii) lack 

of studies in specific sectors i.e. orchard replant, and nursery industries. 

Unusually large buffer zone restrictions on fumigant alternatives, particularly limit 

their adoption, especially in Israel. MBTOC urges Parties to consider review of these 

regulations in view of the ability of barrier films to reduce dose rates of MB and 

alternatives and associated emissions. As in the previous round, Parties have found 

alternatives for propagation materials such as strawberry runners and nurseries more 

difficult to adopt, however the lack or research studies provided with CUNs has also 

led to difficulties in assessment as these CUNs do not fully satisfy the requirements of 

Decision IX/6. The impact of current reviews of VOC emissions in California may 

also have a major impact on MB use and the use of alternatives in California in future 

nominations. Registration of key alternatives such as 1,3-D/Pic and fludioxonil in 

Israel and the recent permits for methyl iodide use in Australia and USA are expected 

to impact on the number of future nominations, and the basis of several CUNs is 

expected to become economic rather than technical. 

MBTOC also notes that a large proportion of MB has been nominated for uses where 

regulations or legislation prevent reductions of MB dose e.g. the mandatory use of 

MB at a specified dose for certified propagation material or bans are imposed on the 

use of barrier films which can reduce MB dose. Also regulations on alternatives are 

preventing their uptake for a substantial proportion of the remaining CUNs for 

preplant soil use. MBTOC urges the Parties to align their local policies and 

regulations with internationally accepted methodologies and MB alternatives that lie 

within the Montreal Protocol’s goals. 

In this round, MBTOC has sometimes suggested quantities of MB for 2008 or 2009 

different from those nominated. Grounds used for these changes are given in detail 

after the relevant CUNs in Table 8. The adjustments follow the standard 

presumptions given in Tables 6 and 7 below, unless indicated otherwise. 

 

A number of recommendations by MBTOC Soils on CUNs in the 2006 round were 

not accepted by the 18th MOP, and this led to the full or partial restoration of the 

original CUN amount requested. As MBTOC in most cases uses the technical 

information from the previous years CUE as the basis for its calculations of future 

nominations, it was difficult in this round for MBTOC to make accurate assessment of 

the US nominations this year as the Party did not provide the technical calculations 

for adjustments made at the 18th MOP. 

5.3 Standard Presumptions Used in Assessment of Nominated Quantities. 

The tables below (Tables 6 and 7) provide the standard presumptions applied by 

MBTOC Soils for this round of CUNs. These standard presumptions were first 

proposed in the MBTOC report of October 2005 and were presented to the Parties at 

17th MOP. The rates and practices adopted by MBTOC as standard presumptions are 

based on maximum rates considered acceptable by published literature and actual 

commercial practice. A copy of the actual dosage rate of MB in MB/Pic formulations 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 27

is shown in Table 7 below. A revision to these presumptions is proposed for 

consideration at the 19th MOP (Section 9) to more accurately reflect effective 

maximum feasible doses with methyl bromide/chloropicrin combinations. 

As in the evaluations in previous years, MBTOC considered reductions to quantities 

of MB in particular nominations to a standard rate per treated area where technical 

evidence supported its use (See Annex III and IV). MBTOC considered the 

maximum MB application rate for 98% MB to be either 250 or 350 kg/ha (25 to 35 

g/m2

), in conjunction with low barrier permeability films (e.g., VIF or equivalent), 

combined with extended exposure periods. Several Parties indicated that 250 kg/ha 

(25g/m2

) of 98:2 were effectively used in standard commercial application. In cases 

where use of high chloropicrin-containing mixtures (approximately MB: Pic 67:33 or 

50:50 or lower) is considered feasible, maximum dosage rates of 175 kg MB/ha (17.5 

g/m2

) where nutgrass is the key pest and 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2) for pathogens were used 

as the maximum standard presumptions unless there was a regulatory or technical 

reason indicated otherwise by the Party. 

As a special case, MBTOC accepted a maximum rate of 200 kg/ ha (20 g/m2

) for 

certified strawberry runner production in the absence of data that showed certification 

standards could be met in the circumstances of particular nominations. However, 

several Parties indicated that rates of 200 kg/ha (20g/m2

) or less (Annex III) of MB: 

Pic 50:50 were effective with barrier films for production of ‘certified’ nursery 

material. 

The indicative rates used by MBTOC were maximum guideline rates, for the purpose 

of calculation only. MBTOC recognises that the actual rate appropriate for a specific 

use may vary with local circumstances, soil conditions and the target pest situation. 

Some nominations were based on rates lower than these indicative rates. 

Lower effective dose rates of MB in MB/Pic formulations of 125 kg MB/ha (12.5 

g/m2) for pathogens and 150 kg MB/ha (15.0 g/m2) are proposed for specific crops 

(eg. strawberry fruit and vegetables) and 200 kg MB/ha (20.0 g/m2) for nursery crops 

unless otherwise specified by the Party. 
28 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Table 6. Standard presumptions used in assessment of CUNs for the 2007 

round – soil treatments. 

Comment CUN adjustment Exceptions 

1. Dosage rates Maximum guideline rates for 

MB:Pic 98:2 25 to 35 g/m2 with 

barrier films (VIF or equivalent); 

for MB/Pic 67:33 - 15g or 17.5g 

MB/m2

 for pathogens and nutsedge 

respectively, under barrier films. 

All rates on a ‘per treated hectare’ 

basis. 

Amount adjusted to maximum 

guideline rates. Maximum rates 

set dependent on formulation 

and soil type and film 

availability. 

Higher rates accepted if 

specified under national 

legislation or where the Party 

had justified otherwise. 

2. Barrier films All treatments to be carried out 

under low permeability barrier film 

(e.g. VIF) 

Nomination reduced 

proportionately to conform to 

barrier film use. 

Where barrier film 

prohibited or restricted by 

legislative or regulatory 

reasons 

3. MB/Pic 

Formulation: 

Pathogen control 

Unless otherwise specified, MB/Pic 

50:50 (or similar) was considered 

to be the standard effective 

formulation for pathogen control, 

as a transitional strategy to replace 

MB/Pic 98:2. 

Nominated amount adjusted for 

use with MB/Pic 50:50 (or 

similar). 

Where MB/Pic 50:50 is not 

registered, or chloropicrin 

(Pic) is not registered 

4. MB/Pic 

Formulation: 

Weeds/nutgrass 

control 

Unless otherwise specified, MB/Pic 

67:33 (or similar) was used as the 

standard effective formulation for 

control of resistant (tolerant) 

weeds, as a transitional strategy to 

replace MB/Pic 98:2. 

Nominated amount adjusted for 

use with MB/Pic 67:33 (or 

similar). 

Where chloropicrin or 

chloropicrin-containing 

mixtures are not registered 

5. Strip vs. 

Broadacre 

Fumigation with MB and mixtures 

to be carried out under strip 

Where rates were shown in 

broadacre hectares, the CUN 

was adjusted to the MB rate 

relative to strip treatment (i.e. 

treated area). If not specified, 

the area under strip treatment 

was considered to represent 67% 

of the total area. 

Where strip treatment 

was not feasible e.g. 

some protected 

cultivation or open 

field production of 

high health 

propagative material 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 29

Table 7. Actual dosage rates applied during preplant fumigation when different 

rates and formulations of methyl bromide/chloropicrin mixtures are 

applied with and without barrier films. Rates of application reflect 

standard commercial applications rates. 

MB/Pic formulation (dose of MB in g/m2 Commercial ) 

application rates 

of formulation 

98:2 67:33 50:50 30:70 

A. With Standard Polyethylene Films 

400 39.2 26.8 20.0 12.0 

350 34.3 23.5 17.5 10.5 

300 29.4 20.1 15.0 9.0 

B. With Low Permeability Barrier Films (LPBF) 

250 24.5 16.8 12.5 7.5 

200 19.6 13.4 10.0* 6.0 

175 17.2 11.8 8.8 5.3 

* Note: Trials from 1996 to 2007 (Annex III) show that a dosage of 10g/m2 (e.g. MB/Pic 

50:50 at 200kg/ha with LP Barrier Films) is technically feasible for many situations and 

equivalent to the standard dosage of >20g/m2 using standard films 

5.4 Use/Emission Reduction Technologies - Low Permeability Barrier Films 

and Dosage Reduction 

Decision IX/6 states in part that critical uses should be permitted only if ‘all 

technically and economically feasible steps have been taken to minimise the critical 

use and any associated emission of methyl bromide’. Decision Ex.II/1 also mentions 

emission minimization techniques, requesting Parties “...to ensure, wherever methyl 

bromide is authorized for critical-use exemptions, the use of emission minimization 

techniques such as virtually impermeable films, barrier film technologies, deep shank 

injection and/or other techniques that promote environmental protection, whenever 

technically and economically feasible.” 

As in past rounds, MBTOC assessed CUNs where possible for reductions in MB 

application rates and deployment of MB emission reduction technologies, such as use 

of LPBF, including VIF, or other appropriate sealing and emission control techniques 

including deep injection of MB, use of formulations with a lower proportion of MB 

and/ or reduced frequency of application (Annex III). 

The use of low permeability barrier films (VIF or equivalent) is compulsory in the 25 

member countries of the European Union (EC Regulation 2037/2000). In other 

regions LPBF films are considered technically feasible and large adoption has 

occurred, e.g. Israel and SE USA. In Florida the reported use of barrier films in 

vegetable crops has expanded from 3000 acres 2005/06 to 30,000 acres in 06/07 

(Allen, pers. comm.). The exception to the use of barrier films is the State of 

California in the US where a regulation currently prevents use of VIF with MB 

(California Code of Regulations Title 3 Section 6450(e) but not the alternatives. This 

regulation has been set over concerns of possible worker exposure to MB when the 

film is removed or when seedlings are planted due to altered flux rates of MB. 
30 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

5.5 Adjustments for Standard Dosage Rates Using MB/Pic Formulations 

One key transitional strategy to reduce MB dosage has been the adoption of MB: Pic 

formulations with lower concentrations of methyl bromide (e.g. MB:Pic 50:50 or 

less). These formulations are considered to be equally as effective in controlling 

soilborne pathogens as formulations containing higher quantities of methyl bromide 

(e.g. 98:2, 67:33) (e. g. Porter et al., 1997;Melgarejo et al., 2000; Lopez-Aranda et 

al., 2003; Santos et al., 2007). Formulations containing high proportions of 

chloropicrin in mixtures with methyl bromide have been adopted widely by nonArticle 5 countries to meet Montreal Protocol restrictions where such formulations are 

registered or otherwise permitted. Their use can be achieved with similar application 

machinery which allows co-injection of methyl bromide and chloropicrin or by use of 

premixed formulations. Consistent performance has been demonstrated with both 

barrier (Annex III and IV) and non barrier films. Parties are urged to consider lower 

dosage rates, i.e. as low as 75 kg/ha of 30:70 or 100 kg/ha of 50:50 MB/Pic in 

conjunction with barrier films as these have shown similar effectiveness to rates of 

335 to 800 kg/ha of MB 98% using standard polyethylene (Annex IV). 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Table 8. Final evaluations of CUNs for preplant soil use submitted in 2007 for 2008 or 2009 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Australia Strawberry 

runners 

35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 None none 

MBTOC recommends 29.79 tonnes for this use in 2009. The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungVerticillium) and weeds (S. arvensis, Agrostis tenuis, Raphanus spp, Poa annua, Cyperus spp). The CUN states that Mrequired to meet certification standards. The Party’s request exceeds MBTOC’s standard presumption of 20 g/m2 but tParty is currently examining the efficacy of a rate of 125 kg/ha (12.5 g/m2) of MB using LDPE films. The Party states thD/Pic, is reported to have been phytotoxic due to the heavy and wet soil in cold climate growing conditions. The CUN pwhich indicated phytotoxicity in runners that resulted in a doubling of the time required before planting compared to MBinconsistent results [up to a 30% decrease in runner yields]. Other alternatives tested included MS, dazomet, PIC, stereported that plug plants are possibly a technically feasible alternative, but that the costs associated with this technologyields than bare-rooted runners. Barrier film (VIF) initially reduced emissions 10-fold when compared with standard LDtarps after 4 days posed a potential risk to workers and bystanders. The Party notes that two currently unregistered aland cyanogen, and that methyl iodide has been granted a commercial scale up permit for 2007 to 2009. MBTOC encothe MB/Pic 50:50 formulation at 25 g/m2 with barrier films and (2) to expedite the registration of the two alternatives as MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements assertion of lack of technically feasible alternatives in circumstances in Australia. 
32 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Canada Strawberry 

runners (PEI) 

6.840 6.840 7.995 7.462 

MBTOC recommends 7.462 tonnes for this use in 2009. The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are weethat MB/Pic 67:33 at a dose of 500 kg/ha (50 g/m2) is required to meet the certification standards for strawberry runnekg/ha (20 g/m2) with low permeability barrier films (LPBF) for propagative materials. The Party’s request exceeds MBTthat conform to MBTOC’s standard presumption are not currently registered and therefore cannot be used commercialthat in order to register the MBTOC recommended rate of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) with LPBF, the Pest Management Regucooperation of the registrant and testing to demonstrate that the rate would be effective. The Party has attempted to rebanned in January 2003 due to groundwater contamination. Chloropicrin has recently been provisionally registered in Cfrom Prince Edward Island. The sector applying for the nomination has not yet trialled this alternative. Nor has the sec(LPBF). MBTOC encourages the Party (1) to finalize the permits necessary for use of chloropicrin and dazomet, (2) imcurrently used worldwide and (3) in the absence of an effective alternative becoming available, conduct the necessary MB to conform with MBTOC’s standard presumption. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements provides no economic data. CUN is based on technical feasibility reasons.

Israel Broomrape None none 250.000 250.000 250

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 250 tonnes for this use in 2008 and is unable to assess the nomination for 2009. Mgranted by the Party was not used or produced for this use in 2007 because of exceptional circumstances and that required. The use is for broomrape eradication and land rehabilitation of 1000 ha in the Upper Galilee and the Golan infested with this parasitic plant making it impossible to produce tomatoes in these regions. The recommended CUE iMB:Pic 98:2 using LPBF. MB will be used only once in each region and the treatment is expected to bring the pathoallowing for adoption of other alternatives. The Party has identified some alternatives for controlling low infestations of but they are considered not adequate for controlling severe infestations of O. aegyptiaca. Additionally, the Party expeapplication of 1,3-D and metham sodium) to be registered and/or available in 2007or 2008 and these could impact on that a registration for chloropicrin is being considered in Israel and that this would possibly allow for lower dosagabsence of other effective alternatives. 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the efficacy of alternatives, esfumigants and herbicides may alter the suitability of alternatives for this use. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements broomrape infestation is aggravated by the phase out of MB, as registered alternatives do not prevent area-wide infesttrue for agro technical means, long-term fallow cropping and biological control, which in practice and in economic termbroomrape seeds and their gradual germination mechanism. CUN also states that prospects for the registration of Imahaving doubts about the cost-effectiveness of its registration, might refrain from its further development. Further, soil sovegetable crops, is too expensive for extensive outdoor crops.

Israel Cucumber – 

protected 

None none 25.000 18.750 18

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 18.750 tonnes for this use in 2008. Cucumbers are grown in open ended polyhouseproximity of the residential houses of cooperative family and private family farms. A large proportion, 70%, of the critica(Achituv), where the growers specialized for years in the cultivation of indoor cucumbers for the domestic market. For tsolutions were found despite the monoculture production pattern, which reflects the specialization of the growers but nsoil-borne pathogens. Additional reasons for this nomination are the appearance of a new race of a fungus, F. oxysporzone limitations on the use of the MS+1,3-D mixtures. The pathogen is highly virulent and the infestation level particuladevastate entire greenhouses in a short period of time. MBTOC requested whether this was a contingency use for this received by the Party. MBTOC encourages the Party to consider the technical and economical feasibility of non-chemicrop rotation) already in use in many parts of the world for this crop. The nominated amount is based on a dosage of 2conjunction with use/ emission reduction technologies. MBTOC further encourages the Party to revise buffer zone reguuse of VIF films. The Party is requested to conduct a thorough review of the technically feasible use and economic cosnominations. 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements the costs of grafted seedlings are a limiting factor because the technology in cucumbers is in its infancy in Israel. Furthnot economically feasible due to its high prices and its low efficacy in the winter in Israel when prevailing soil temperatu
34 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Israel Cut flowers - 

bulbs - protected 

303.000 240.000 220.185 163.400 114

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 114.45 tonnes for this use in 2008. The nomination is for a variety of cut flowers proaffected by weeds (Cyperus in particular) and nematodes (root-knot but also ectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fuof 1.8 tonnes for fumigating substrates used in rose production as alternatives such as steam are efficient for this use. requested for carnations grown in Ghaza to conform to the standard presumptions of 350 kg/ha (35 g/m2) of MB/Pic 98key pest affecting carnations in the Ghaza region. Lack of registration of key alternatives and chloropicrin mixtures conadoption of alternatives, which have been identified as technically feasible. MBTOC considers that adoption of substralilies, gerberas and carnations outside the Ghaza area. A 25% transition rate has been applied for adoption of this altecrops. Steam is a technically feasible alternative for other flower types but the Party states that it is economically unfehowever insufficient). 1,3-D and metham sodium are also available and a further 25% reduction was applied for phasesuited for substrate production. MBTOC encourages the Party to seek registration of alternatives that have been identi1,3-D/Pic and to explore different steam application methods and equipment which have proven to be economically feathe Party to submit a new nomination for 2009 as the envisaged registration of key alternatives could impact this nomin2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements partial budgets for MB and the next best alternatives. The net revenue for the next best alternatives is negative in all caand solarisation is not cost effective. Some net revenue analysis was reported in 2006 round of CUNs. 

Israel Cut flowers - 

open field 

77.000 67.000 74.540 53.345 44

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 44.75 tonnes for this nomination in 2008. The dose of MB prop98:2 formulation) conforms to MBTOC's standard presumptions. The nomination is for open field production of cut flow(Cyperus in particular) and nematodes (root-knot but also ectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fungi. Lack of registr1,3-D+Pic, dazomet and metham sodium, continue to be the major constraints affecting substitution of MB at this time. content are also not registered. However MBTOC estimates that, solarisation, plate steaming, substrates and the few c25% reduction in the amount nominated. This reduction is not applied to the 18.95 t requested for nurseries of geophytto be produced, although no certification issues are involved. MBTOC encourages the Party to seek registration of alteresearch. MBTOC requests the Party to submit a new nomination for 2009 as possible registration of alternatives could 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate the suitability of alternatives for this use. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements steaming and solarization are not cost effective while the economic assessment refers the reader to the indoor flowers the CUN 2006 for indoor flowers is insufficient.

Israel Melon - 

protected and field 

125.650 99.400 105.000 87.500 87

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 87.5 tonnes for this use for 2008 and is unable to assess the nomination for 200pathogen in the Arava Valley. Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. melonis and root-knot nematodes, mainly M. javanica, also crate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of 98:2 MB under barrier films (LDPF) complies with MBTOC's standard presumptions. used for 100% of the fall melons grown in the Arava valley and including metham sodium, dazomet, solarization, Formthe southern Arava). The CUN is solely for the winter crop as the alternatives do not control the key pathogens nominated amount has been reduced by 12% by the Party, with respect to the 2007 amount approved. MBTOC grafting and the use of formalin + metham to be effective alternatives and notes recent studies which may assist tr2004). MBTOC notes that Pic and MB/Pic mixtures are effectively used for Monosporascus in other countries und2003; Martyn, 2002). The Party is requested to conduct a thorough review of the technically feasible use and econofuture nominations. Information received by MBTOC after the recommendation indicates that a fungicide, with the effective for suppression of vine decline in cantaloupes (the soil-borne fungus Monosporascus cannonballus) and aCanada, Australia, Japan, EU). In 2007 it is being tested for the first year of the two necessary for registration in Israeand is classified by the US EPA as a “reduced risk pesticide” due to its good toxicological profile. MBTOC expects commercially available for Israeli growers for control of M. cannonballus. The Party is requested to submit information 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate alter the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements partial budgets for the next best alternatives. The net revenue for the next best alternatives is negative. 
36 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Israel Potato 239.000 165.000 137.500 93.750 93

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 93.75 tonnes of MB for this use in 2008. Potatoes are produced in a small cultivable where intensive cropping of groundnuts and potato occur in the same year and infestation with fungal and bacterial paperennial weeds take place, some of them common to the two predominant crops: Rhizoctonia solani, Verticillium dahMeloidogyne javanica, common scab (Streptomyces scabies), deep scab- (Streptomyces spp.), powdery scab (Spongnutsedge. Volunteer potato plants in the succeeding crop may carry PVY type viruses. The Party has made a 31.8% reapproved by the MOP for 2007. The dosage rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of MB 98:2 conforms to MBTOC's standard pboth seed potatoes subjected to high health standards and regular crop production which is normally achieved without pest complexes exist. The applicant identified that 550 of 15,000 ha are located in highly populated areas where winteand regulatory constraints are in place for feasible alternatives such as 1,3 D + Pic (61:35) which as a result of buffer zthat effective control alternatives are in development for the pest complexes and that they are transitioning to these. Tallowing increased use of alternatives such as metham sodium and formaldehyde. MBTOC notes that there are effectiby buffer zones, which are larger than in other countries (for 1,3-D stated as 250m compared to 31m in USA for exampreview of these buffers in the light of use with barrier films. The continuing reduction of requested amounts of methyl bsuccessful. 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements economic analysis

Israel Strawberry 

fruit – protected(Sharon and Ghaza) 

196.000 196.000 93.000 none 64.125

+ 71.250 

for Ghaza 

57 + 48.96 foGhaza 

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 57 tonnes for Sharon and 48.96 tonnes for Ghaza, totalling 105the nomination to the Sharon nomination for 20% adoption of 1,3-D/Pic and the Ghaza nomination to conform to rates this part of the nomination for adoption of alternatives in 2008. The Party states that buffer zones restrict the ualternative, 1,3-D/Pic. MBTOC, however, considers low cost substrates to be a potential alternative and urges the Psubstrate systems for future nominations. Detailed economic information on the suitability of such systems is reqregistration of other alternatives to MB as well as other formulations of MB/Pic (e.g. 67:33 and 50:50) to assist furtheParty has not provided information, as required under Decision IX/6,1(b)(iii), to demonstrate that an appropriacommercialise alternatives, and that research programmes are in place to develop and deploy alternatives. The CUN 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

done on alternatives since about 2004, and 1,3-D/Pic is the only alternative fumigant that has been registered to datnot present relevant plans to develop and deploy alternatives in strawberry fruit. MBTOC requests the Party to providalternatives, including plans for alternative chemicals, low-cost substrates, combinations of resistant cultivars, regipractices or other relevant techniques. The key pests affecting strawberry fruit in Israel are fungi (Rhizoctonia solaphaseolina, Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium spp.), nematodes (Meloidogyne hapla), and weeds (Cyperus rotundus, pD/Pic is effective and used on part of the crop but further adoption is limited to 20% of the Sharon area and 0% in estimated impact of buffer zones has not been substantiated by any quantitative data to date for Sharon, despite being systems are a possible, technically-feasible alternative (López-Medina et al., 2004; Lieten, 2004; Savvas and Passambeen used on a small area in this CUN, but the Party states that further uptake is limited by cost. MBTOC is requestinsubstrate systems and current MB prices. MBTOC encourages the applicant to consider evaluation and adoption of losimilar circumstances in other regions, including warm climates (Mutitu et al. 2006; Vos and Bridge, 2006; MBTOSubstrates have been adopted at the rate of up to 80 ha/year for protected strawberry in Mediterranean climates in senot adjusted this nomination for 2008 for adoption of substrates due to economic uncertainty associated with low cothe feasibility of open field substrate systems for future nominations. MBTOC has reduced the MB dose on the presumptions for 100% adoption of VIF and the Sharon nomination for 20% adoption of 1,3-D/Pic. MBTOC recommeto MB as well as other formulations of MB/PIC (e.g. 67:33 and 50:50). 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate alter the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements net revenue using MB is lower than for the alternatives. Dazomet and 1,3 D/pic provided net revenues that were 70% aCUN states that the registered chemical alternatives carry environmental costs [although this also applies to MB]. CUN possibility, but not before 2010 due to the high costs of the capital-intensive versions considered in the CUN 
38 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Israel Strawberry 

runners (Sharon and Ghaza)

None none 0.000 36.625 31

CUN 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 31.9 tonnes for 2008 (11.9 t for Ghaza Strip and 20 t for Sharon, runner production are fungi (Rhizotonia solani, Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium, Phytophthora, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Mnematodes and purple nutsedge. The Party stated that MB 98:2 at a rate of 500 kg/ha (50 g/m2) with PE and 250 kg/hto meet certification standards. The requested amount for the Ghaza region has been adjusted to MBTOC’s standard pParty stated that 1,3-D + PIC mixture has been the leading alternative; however, adoption of this alternative is limited bsignificantly limits its use in the Sharon strawberry nursery growing area which is heavily populated. Hot gas applicatiogrowing area because the plots are small, adjacent to houses and there are no injection tools or qualified applicators in Ghaza strip will be tested with barrier films with a reduced application rate. MBTOC encourages faster adoption of LParea in Sharon uses barrier films (VIF). 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate alter the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements regulatory restrictions and lack of technically feasible alternatives.

Israel Sweet 

Potatoes 

None none None 111.5 1

2008 CUN: MBTOC recommends 111.5 tonnes of MB for 2008. This is a new nomination comprising both seed potato production. The key pests affecting sweet potatoes are root-knot nematodes, sweet potato scab (Streptomyces ipomoidentified that MB is the only registered chemical for use for sweet potato production in Israel. The rates to be used in tstandard presumptions under VIF. The party indicates that the only effective control alternative to MB is 1,3-D/Pic (Teloregistered for sweet potato. It is expected to receive registration by 2008. The applicant indicates that a 50% transition MBTOC recognizes that this is an effective rate of uptake of an alternative. MBTOC notes there are numerous nematoavailable and these are widely used in countries where nematodes are the primary pest problem (Bello A., pers. commthese varieties in Israel be investigated. 2009 CUN: The nomination for 2009 remains unable to assess as key information about the cost of cheaper substrate alter the suitability of alternatives for this use. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements there may be economically feasible alternatives but these need to be verified.
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 51.450 none none 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 34.30 tonnes for 2009. The recommended quantity represents a 33% reduapproved at the 18th MOP. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on the need to control particular visuch viruses are not considered as soilborne pathogens but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem An integrated program including cultural practices e.g. sanitation, rotation with a non-host, removal and destruction of cgreenhouse and the surrounded area, and pathogen free seeds has proven very effective in similar situations around trotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to reduce virus incidence (Matstrategy, MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. Sinchas become registered, however, farmers fear possible phytotoxicity. MBTOC thus urges the Party to conduct trials on cucumber production. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for cucumber in Japan which has been in pcountries cucumber production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most warray of soilborne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of the world. (Leoni & Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). substrate production, which implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; BatcheloStudies conducted in Japan support soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzukwhen growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free trantrained to use substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). Research Centre (2005) identified the effectiveness of KGMMV control by methyl iodide in pot tests. MBTOC encouragregistration of methyl iodide for soil uses (methyl iodide was registered for imported timber in Japan in 2004, under JMMBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements provided shows a reduction in net revenue of more than 90% in capital-intensive soilless systems. As a result capital-ineconomically feasible.
40 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Japan Ginger 

(field) 

119.400 119.400 109.701 84.075 

MBTOC recommends 63.056 tonnes for this use in 2009. The recommended amount has been reduced 25% from the MOP in 2008 as alternatives are considered available. The nomination is for control of Pythium spp. (Pythium ultimum ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. This nomination has been submitted several times with no chanminimize disease. MBTOC conducted a field visit to Japanese open field ginger production sites in August 2006 and rein adopting some alternatives, however dazomet is considered an effective alternative which is economically feasible. wet and cold weather, which sometimes cause phytotoxicity, unacceptable plant back times and reduced crop yields. CParty states that the plant back time for chloropicrin is 40 days which could disrupt crop scheduling and result in delays MB treatment. MBTOC urges the Party to encourage adoption of LPBF films and MB formulations with a higher proporrates of MB. Further, metham sodium and dazomet can be used more efficiently if drip irrigation is adopted. The Party dazomet is highly effective for managing Pythium diseases but does not refer to cultural practices such as soil drainaget al 1988) or fungicides specific to Oomycetes, such as phosphonates. MBTOC kindly requests that updated informatdetailed prospect for relevant fumigant\pesticide registration during 2007-2009 are submitted with any future nominatioMBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements net revenue for the next best alternative (dazomet) is negative, because of a 58% decline in yield. As a result dazomet 

Japan Ginger 

(protected) 

22.900 22.900 14.471 11.100 

MBTOC recommends 9.675 tonnes for this use in 2009. The recommended amount has been reduced 25% from the CMOP as alternatives are considered available. The nomination is for control of Pythium spp. (Pythium ultimum var. ultimusing MB (98:2) applied from small cans. This nomination has been submitted several times with no change in productdisease. MBTOC conducted a field visit to Japanese open field ginger production sites in August 2006 and recognized adopting some alternatives, however dazomet is considered an effective alternative which is economically feasible. Undifficulties arising with dazomet during wet, cold conditions can be overcome as moisture and temperature can be contwould make plant back times more reasonable. MBTOC therefore considers that protected ginger can implement the uChloropicrin is registered in Japan but the Party states that the plant back time for chloropicrin is 40 days which could din planting and lower yields compared to MB treatment. MBTOC urges the Party to encourage adoption of LPBF films proportion of Pic that allow for reduced rates of MB. The CUN states that metalaxyl does not control Pythium efficiently been reported. The Party indicates that metalaxyl combined with dazomet is highly effective for managing Pythium disepractices such as soil drainage, sowing date, organic amendments (Smith et al 1988) or fungicides specific to Oomycerequests that updated information relating to trials with alternatives and a detailed prospect for relevant fumigant\pesticsubmitted with future nominations. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2007: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statemthat the net revenue for the next best alternative (Hot water treatment) is positive but 75% less then the net revenue fonot economically feasible. 

Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 136.650 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 91.1 tonnes for 2009. The recommended quantity represents a 33% reduc2008 at the 18th MOP as alternatives are considered available. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is basemelon, since 2005. Globally, such viruses are not considered as soilborne pathogens but can survive in crop debris for from continuous monoculture. An integrated program including cultural practices e.g. sanitation, rotation with a non-hocleaning and sanitation of the greenhouse and the surrounded area, and pathogen free seeds has proven very effectivParty has indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to red1993). MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. Since has become registered, however, farmers fear possible phytotoxicity. MBTOC thus urges the Party to conduct demonsmixture in melon production. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for melon in Japan which has been countries some melon production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the moswide array of soilborne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kinaround the world. (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindenimplemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Pasupport soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes howethere is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Large numbers of gsystems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements provided states that resistant varieties (used alone) result in a 70% decrease in net revenue. The yield of the soilless cthe product is lower because of problems of appearance and uniformity of the fruit. As a result the gross income for thiaddition costs of capital-intensive soilless culture are higher hence net income is lower. As a result resistant varieties aeconomically feasible.
42 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Japan Pepper 

(green & hot) 

187.200 190.700 156.700 121.723 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 81.149 tonnes for 2009. The recommended quantity represents a 33% red2008 at the 18th MOP as alternatives are considered available. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is basepeppers, since 2005. Globally, such viruses are not considered as soilborne pathogens but can survive in crop debris farises from continuous monoculture. An integrated program including cultural practices e.g. sanitation, rotation with a ndebris, cleaning and sanitation of the greenhouse and the surrounded area, and pathogen free seeds has proven very world. The Party has indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective Suga, 1993). MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. mixture has become registered, however, farmers fear possible phytotoxicity. MBTOC thus urges the Party to conduct this mixture in pepper production. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for peppers in Japan which has many countries some pepper production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become teliminating a wide array of soilborne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are availawidely used in around the world. (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 2production, when implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 20conducted in Japan support soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplanttrained to use substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004) MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements provided shows that the higher cost of soilless culture is largely due to the higher cost of seeds, fertilizers, depreciation offset by lower costs of pesticides and insurance in capital-intensive systems. Given these data, the net revenue for caand hence is not economically feasible.
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Japan Watermelon 129.000 98.900 94.200 32.475 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 21.65 tonnes for 2009. The nomination has been reduced over the CUE aMBTOC acknowledges that the Party has made a substantial reduction since the previous nomination and this reflects nomination is based on the need to control particular viruses of watermelon, since 2005. Globally, such viruses are not survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated prograsanitation, rotation with a non-host, removal and destruction of crop debris, cleaning and sanitation of the greenhouse free seeds has proven very effective in similar situations around the world. The Party has indicated that rotation to nonstrawberries is an effective way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). MBTOC urges the Party to increareducing MB doses by up to 50%. Since the last nomination the 1,3-D/pic mixture has become registered, however, fathus urges the Party to conduct trials on the correct use of this mixture in watermelon production. MBTOC recognises tcucumber in Japan which has been in place for many years. However, in many countries watermelon production has aconditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soilborne plant pathogens. bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widely used in around the world. (Leoni & Ledda, 2004; BudAkkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrate production, when implemented correctly can produce higher yielBatchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soilless culture as a feasible oand Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degrfree transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trained to use substrates systems in a short period of time as expe(UNEP/TEAP, 2004) MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. The economic evidence of more than 50%. As a result soilless culture is not economically feasible.
44 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Poland Strawberry 

runners 

40.000 40.000 24.500 12.000 11

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 11.995 tonnes for this nomination in 2008. The key pests affecting strawbdahliae, Phytophthora cactorum, P. fragariae, Fusarium oxysporum), and nematodes (Globodera rostochiensis).The nof 400 kg/ha with barrier films are needed to meet the certification standards for strawberry runners. The Party’s CUN recommended for 2007 (24.5 t). The requested amount has been adjusted to account for the Party’s inclusion of the ennomination instead of the MB portion only (392 kg/ha (39.2 g/m2)). The Party’s request exceeds MBTOC’s standard pmaterials, however formulations enabling the use of these rates are currently not registered. The Party tested a reduceVIF], but results indicated that plant vigour, productivity and weed control were too low in the low soil temperatures prePotentially effective alternatives such as 1,3-D & Pic and Pic alone are not currently registered. While dazomet and mdecomposition and long plant back time in the early spring has precluded expanded use due to production timing using Poland has recently acquired (July 2006) improved application equipment such as rotary spader machines which enhadazomet (Runia and Molendijk, 2006; Runia et al. 2007). MBTOC encourages the Party to expedite the adoption of thiencourage the registration of Pic and other fumigants if needed. MBTOC comments on economics 2007: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statemAnalysis (page 17-18) shows 11 percent yield loss with dazomet and 80 percent loss with metham sodium when applieanalysis shows net revenue decrease of 54% in year 1, then 10% loss in year 2, and an increase of 7 % over MB in yeto adverse weather conditions in the first year, and is expected that Dazomet will be economically feasible in 3 years.
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Spain Cut flowers 

(Andalucia and Catalonia) 

53 + 20 42 + 15 43.490 17.000 17

MBTOC recommends 17 tonnes for this use in 2008 (12t for Andalusia and 5t for Catalonia). This request represents a for 2007. The key pests are weeds, particularly Cyperus spp., nematodes such as Meloidogyne spp. and in the case oproportion of the nomination, Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. dianthi. The Party states that in spite of longer plantback times other difficulties encountered when using alternatives (e.g. higher costs and technical requirements when using substrby the end of 2008. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements presents economic disadvantages because of the longer waiting period, longer application period and changes requirecorrosion , while 1,3-D + Chloropicrin leads to a loss of yield and steam has economic disadvantages. CUN argues thaeconomically feasible because of the cost. CUN states that substrates require high investment and increases the costs process of farm modernization, and is expensive. CUN cites data that show that an investment of 270,455 € is necessaenterprise is unprofitable for the first five years. CUN also states that the transformation cost for the industry in Catalonthey adopted capital-intensive soilless systems.

Spain Strawberry 

runners 

230.000 230.000 230.000 215.000 215

MBTOC recommends 215 tonnes for this use in 2008. The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungi (and weeds (Chenopodium, Portulacca oleracea, Senecio, Solanum, Cynodon dactylon). The Party states that MB (MBis required to meet the EU Nursery Plant Certification and Control Regulations. The cold climate growing conditions of substantially limit the feasibility of alternatives (1,3-D/PIC, dazomet, MS, DMDS) to control target pests in order to meethat there is no technically feasible alternative available at this time. The Party’s strategy to minimize MB use is to impMBTOC encourages the Party to expedite the next steps in their application rate reduction program using lower MB/Piformulation in conjunction with LPBF and continue to pursue the registration of additional alternatives. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements on the costs and net revenue of alternatives to MB, but not that of MB itself. CUN states that yields of alternatives are 
46 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Spain Strawberry 

and Pepper 

None none 0.080 0.080 0.151 0

MBTOC recommends 0.151 tonnes for research purposes in 2008. The CUN states that MB is needed as the referencProject. In particular, studies on the environmental effects of some fumigants applied to soils are being conducted in SMB for pepper and strawberry fruit production in 2008. The 29.6 kg are specifically requested for strawberry research tand 50 kg will be used in studying the environmental effects of chemical soil fumigants in soil (strawberry cultivation). Tproject to optimise use and adoption of alternatives to MB in strawberries and pepper that was approved by the party laMBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements economic information, as it does not apply to the particular nature of the nomination.

United States 

Cucurbits 1187.800 747.839 592.891 486.757 MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 407.091 tonnes for this use in 2009. This comprises 22.5 tonnes for MicMaryland and Delaware, 239.8 tonnes for the South East cucurbits, 28.6 tonnes for Georgia squash, 21.9 tonnes fGeorgia melons and 0.941 t for research. MBTOC does not recommend 4.55 tonnes of MB for watermelons in Maryexist (e.g. grafting and resistant varieties). This request is 75 tonnes less than the amount nominated for 2008 and indthis industry. The nominated amounts conform to the standard presumptions for dosage rate of MB/Pic formulations pathogens with adoption of LPBF and formulation changes of MB/Pic to achieve the reductions. The Party was reqmajor types of cucurbits comprised (i.e. melons, watermelons), submitting specific information for each. MBTOC notes information and understands that “not every state/cucurbit type variety could be disaggregated, because there is However, for MBTOC it is really difficult to understand and assess the specific circumstances that prevent the use of provided. Some of the cucurbits which are included in the nomination, e.g. Cucurbita maxima, have recognized altereven in the US. The Party is urged to further adopt grafting for commercial use in melon and watermelon. If future CUto disaggregate the various cucurbits with reference to their key pest and limitation to the adoption of MB alternatives. In Michigan, the key pests are Phytophthora capsici and Fusarium. MBTOC recognizes the Party’s statement that 1,3-growers will miss the optimal market window due to longer plant back times. According to the Party, this treatment canbad climatic conditions. In addition, a fall application of fumigant alternatives is not feasible because, over the fall and wdamage the plastic and irrigation tape. In SE and Georgia, the key pest is nutsedge. Karst topography limits affects thwhich are the best alternatives for these pests. The Party states that metham sodium or metham potassium are also pconsistent control under the circumstances of the nomination and require further trialing. In addition, the Party states thMB/Pic formulations such as 50:50 as there are no regulatory restrictions to the use of these formulations. Since the kein future nominations the Party is requested to provide up to date from recent trials of fumigants and herbicides trialled included in the nomination to indicate that an effort is being made to uptake and commercialise alternatives as required 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: Part of the nomination for Michigan, Maryland and Delaware were based on ecoprovided in CUN: The CUN states next best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losDelaware and 29 percent in Southeastern States and Georgia. CUN states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technnoted that for Michigan in addition to the yield loss, delayed planting and harvest with the alternatives results in lower awindows and negative net revenue. In remaining regions yield losses significantly reduce net revenues. In Maryland anconsidered technically feasible but use is constrained by water table concerns, land low soil temperatures leading to reCUN notes other regions may also experience lower prices because of missed market windows. 

United States 

Eggplant (field) 

76.712 81.162 85.363 66.018 

MBTOC recommends 48.691tonnes for this use in Georgia, Florida and Michigan in 2009 which includes 0.433 tonnes based its nomination on MBTOCs standard maximum dosage rates of MB/Pic formulations of 175 kg/ha (17.5 g/m2) fopathogens with adoption of LPBF and also made an adjustment for strip fumigation based on 0.58 of the area treated. alternative (eg. methyl iodide) is pending. In Michigan, the key pests are Phytophthora capsici and fusarium. Accordinthe irrigation water in Michigan and occurred after soil treatment with Telone C35 and metham sodium, however MBTOany fumigants, including methyl bromide. MBTOC recognizes the Party’s statement that 1,3-D/chloropicrin may be an the optimal market window due to longer plant back times with this alternative. According to the Party, this treatment cclimatic conditions. In addition, a fall application of methyl bromide is not feasible because over the fall and winter monplastic and irrigation tape. MBTOC considers that their are alternatives in other countries that should be considered for resistant varieties and modifications to the application of 1,3-D/Pic with and without metham sodium may reduce plant yellow and purple nutsedge, Phytophthora, nematodes, Pythium and Sclerotinia. In Georgia the key pests are yellow anematodes, southern blight and Pythium and sclerotinia. Karst topography limits the use of alternatives which include 1alternatives for these pests on 40% of the growing acreage in Florida and 8% of the acreage in Georgia. The Party clapeppers could be adopted for eggplant. The Party proposed a 7% transition in 2009 for Florida and Georgia and no tramore than 7 years to transition the full amount. MBTOC, however, considers that alternatives are available for both karGeorgia (1,3-D/Pic, Pic alone, metham with or without herbicides (napropamide, trifluralin) (Noling et al 2006; Chellemof moderate pest pressure at least. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination for these regions by 25%, which is in line with in 2006. MBTOC requests that the Party provide further information to substantiate the lack of feasibility of some key acountries, such as grafted plants and the key chemical alternatives. MBTOC notes that uptake of alternatives for this coccurred within 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia. (Leoni and Leda, 2004; Spotti, 2004; TostThanassoulopoulos, 2006). MBTOC also notes that Ristaino and Johnson (1999), Babadost and Islam (2002), JohnstHausbeck and Lamour (2004) and others have reported many efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora crop rotation with non susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa , cultural control (water mamendments, protective mulch and raised beds) and use of registered fungicides in Michigan (Mefonoxan, Dimethomo
48 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Copper hydroxide+Acrobat). Seed treatment with Mephenoxan or metalaxyl control Phytophthora during seed germinaon a key pest, nutsedge, 1,3-D/pic 65:35 with and without VIF and MNa/Pic provided similar yields as MB/Pic 67:33 in spring of 2004 (Santos, et al, 2005) even with moderate to severe nutsedge infestations. Recent studies continue to cmetalized films) as a means to reduce emissions and dose rate of MB (Ou et al 2006). MBTOC considers that further rwith changes to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic or less (e.g. to 30:70) used in combination with barrier films. MBTOC comments on economics: Part of the nomination for Michigan was based on economic arguments. EconomCUN states next best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losses of 6 percent in MichCUN states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible in Michigan. However, CUN noted that for Michigplanting and harvest with the alternatives results lower average price received from missed market windows and negatyield losses significantly reduce net revenues. CUN notes Florida and Georgia producers may also experience lower p

United States 

Forest nursery 

192.515 157.694 122.032 131.208 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 122.06 tonnes for this nomination in 2009. The nominated amount has beeof 26 g/m2 for nutsedge control and 20g/m2 for pathogen to conform to the standard presumption for dosage rate of Mnotes that key pests are nutsedge, nematodes and fungi and that propagative material requires a very high level of patwidespread distribution from the nursery to the production fields. Nutsedge however, has no effect on certification but 3-5%. MBTOC requests that further nominations clearly show the trend in yield loss caused by nutsedge, nematodes oseasons following fumigation with MB and alternatives and a breakdown of the economic comparisons to methyl bromConservation Nursery, only 40% is for nutsedge control and 60% of the nomination was adjusted to conform to standaMichigan Seedlings only 50% is for nutsedge control, so 50% of the nomination was adjusted to 20 g/m2. This nomina2% of the total forest nursery cropping area. The CUN is based on economic infeasibility of use of substrates and the lnutsedge and a range of fungal pathogens and nematodes in this remaining 2 %. It covers certified seedling productioalternatives are 1,3-D/Pic, 1,3-D/Pic/metham sodium and metham sodium +Pic. The Party acknowledged that Pic and LPBF, may provide an effective technical alternative and avoid crop injury. MBTOC recognizes that the Party stated in technical problems still exist when gluing LPBF for broadcast applications. MBTOC also considers glyphosate can be ufrom nutsedge. However, this herbicide has been shown to cause phytotoxicity under nursery conditions. MBTOC consthat time for transition may be required. MBTOC acknowledges the initiation of large- scale demonstration trials for this production of these crops is economical for small niche markets. Frequency of fumigation is once in two to four years, crops are not fumigated. Research is on-going to reduce rates from 98:2 MB/Pic commonly used where nutsedge popof 67:33 MB/Pic. This transition has already been made in 70 % of the forest nurseries in the South where nutsedge pbeen adopted on a broadacre basis in Europe for many years and technology should be available to the USA. LPBF wtechnologies are locally, commercially available. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements provided for major alternatives in six regions: 1,3-D/Pic, dazomet, and metham sodium with Pic. The CUN reports yieloperating costs. Reported net revenue declines with these alternatives ranged from 8% to 53%. The CUN cites an anproduction that demonstrates large scale containerized production is not economically feasible. 

United States 

Nurseries stock (fruit, nut, flower) 

45.800 64.528 28.275 28.275 

MBTOC recommends a total of 25.326 tonnes for this use in 2009. This comprises 8.615 tonnes for raspberries, 1.579 and nut trees, and 1.506 tonnes for research. The Party changed the nominated amount for raspberry from 28.571 to amount nominated for raspberry nurseries in 2009 is to be used on 47ha for 4 nurseries in Washington only and not panomination is for propagation materials that need to be certified as free of pests and diseases, even if certification is vorates of 24.4 g/m2 for rose nursery, 31.9 g/m2 for fruit and nut tree nursery and 20 g/m2 for raspberry nursery. MBTOC requires a very high level of soilborne pest and pathogen control in order to avoid their wide spread distribution and noroots to a 1.5 m depth. MBTOC acknowledges that MB/Pic formulations 67:33 and 50:50 were used in other countries alternatives as a transition strategy. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements peconomic analysis was not done because the alternatives are not technically feasible, particularly for certification needCUN also reports large scale use of substrates is not economically feasible. 
50 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

United States 

Orchard replant 

706.176 527.600 405.400 393.720 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 292.756 tonnes for this use in 2009. This includes 205.265 tonnes for stonfor raisins, 35.147 tonnes for walnuts, 18.256 tonnes for almond, a reduced amount of 22.438 tonnes for grapes, and 1orchard/vineyard replant disorder of unknown aetiology; heavy soils or soils which cannot be treated to a sufficient dep1,3-D now allowed in California. Regulatory constraints (maximum labelled rate) prevent the use of 1,3-D at the rates nassociated pathogens in deeper soil layers for heavier (fine-textured) soils. Three alternatives, 1,3-D alone and 1,3-D csodium, are available technical alternatives according to the CUN for treatment in light soils. Although a two year falloMediterranean conditions by Bello, et al, 2004, Schneider, et al, 2004 found that a four year fallow did not sufficiently enotes the large disparity between the application rates of MB used for California Stone fruit (204 kg/ha or 20.4 g/m2), Rgrapes (350 kg/ha or 35 g/m2), Walnut (140 kg/ha or 14 g/m2) and Almonds (123 kg/ha or 12.3 g/m2). The Party has iapplication over the acreage treated by strip/broad acre fumigation and ‘by the hole’ spot treatments. The Party confirmCalifornia Stone fruit, Raisin grapes and Wine grapes but MB/Pic 98:2 for Almond and Walnut. Commercial adoption olower amounts of MB (eg 50:50) were used predominantly for orchard replant treatment in other countries before switcreduced amount is based on the use of MB/Pic 67:33 formulation for California Table, Raisin and Wine grapes at 204kwhich is considered effective by the Party for Almond, Walnut and Stone fruit. This represents a reduction of 21.251 toMBTOC recognizes that regulatory restraints prevent the use of LPBF barrier films with methyl bromide in California butheir use to improve the performance of alternatives. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements was not done for this sector because most of the losses cannot be quantified. Factors that contribute to losses include herbicides, tree loss, replant costs to replace tree losses, loss of trees replanted, yield loss of fruit or nuts, delayed achof productivity of whole orchard. McKenry 1999 suggests that in some cases tree losses are likely to be greater than 2
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

United States 

Ornamentals 154.000 148.483 137.835 138.538 MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 107.136 tonnes for this use in 2009. This includes 64.404 tonnes for Califoamount of 36.133 tonnes for Florida, and 4.060 tonnes for research. The nomination is for a large number of species, mmain species using MB are gladioli, lilies and snapdragon. Additional species using MB in California include calla lily, dhelianthus, hypericum, iris, larkspur, liatris, matthiola, and ranunculus. In Michigan, flower crops needing methyl bromidseed or root divisions. MB is needed to control diseases (e.g., Fusarium spp., Pythium spp., Phytophthora spp., and R(e.g., root knot, root lesion, stunt and dagger), weeds (e.g. Cyperus spp. and others), and previous crop propagules. Mnomination to standard dosage rates from 211 kg/ha (21.1 g/m2) to 200kg/ha (20 g/m2) with standard polyethylene filmof 35g/m2 MB (350 kg/ha) in Florida on the basis of the nominated area being largely composed of muck soils. Howevassumption was not correct and that nutsedge pressure is not high in flower production areas in this state. The nominadosage rate of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2). MBTOC considers that technical alternatives are available for several flower speclilies are grown successfully in substrates in many countries around the world. Also, soils grown with comparatively shasnapdragons, larkspur and delphinium can be successfully treated with solarization, sometimes combined with reduceexcellent results. Research conducted by the Party confirms this (McSorley et al., a,b). Although the Party has provideinclude specific actions to transition to alternatives. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements show decreases in yield in California of 20% to 25% result in negative net revenues. In Florida net revenues decrease alternatives. In Michigan herbaceous perennials, yield losses of 25% lead to net revenue declines of 37%.

United States 

Peppers (field) 

1094.782 1243.542 1106.753 756.339 

MBTOC recommends 548.984 t for this use in SE, Georgia, Florida and Michigan in 2009 but does not recommend usrecommended includes 2.844 t for research. MBTOC has reduced the amounts in SE, Georgia, Florida by 25% from thadoption of alternatives and further rate reduction by adoption of formulations of MB/Pic with lower ratios of MB in conjavailable information, MBTOC has determined that the amounts for each region are 47.754 t for the SE, 84.072 t for GMichigan. The Party has stated that it based its nomination on MBTOCs standard maximum dosage rates of MB/Pic fonutsedge and 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2) for pathogens with adoption of LPBF and also made an adjustment for strip fumigatadjustment was also made for dosage rate for Michigan suitable for pathogens of 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2). MBTOC noted increased by approx 10% compared to 2008. In California, methyl bromide is requested for the control of crown and ro
52 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Rhizoctonia, Verticillium, and Pythium, root knot (Meloidogyne spp). According to the Party, metham sodium is used obeen considered a viable alternative for hillsides and in areas affected by township caps, however is possibly becomindegradation, but this is not supported by studies within the region. The Party also did not provide evidence to support metham sodium and chloropicrin and Telone. Telone/Pic is also considered an effective alternative. The key pest of peppers in Michigan is Phytophthora capsici and in the Southeastern United States, including Florida aMichigan, P. capsici has been found in the irrigation water in Michigan and occurred after soil treatment with Telone C3considers reinfestation can occur with any fumigants, including methyl bromide. 1,3-D/chloropicrin may be an effective miss the optimal market window. According to the Party, this treatment cannot be applied in autumn because of climatopography limits the use of alternatives which include 1,3-dichloropropene, which are considered the best alternatives acreage in Florida and 8% of the acreage in Georgia. The Party in the past has stated that metham sodium or metham further data has been provided on their performance. MBTOC, however, considers that alternatives are available for boand Georgia (Noling et al 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Gilreath and Santos 2004a; Gilreath et al 2003a, 2005a; Gilreath 2004; Chellemi 2006) and can be adopted on areas of moderate pest pressure at least, and has adjusted the nominatiwith the 26 % transition suggested by the Party in 2006. The Party indicated that 42% transition to alternatives was poperiod. MBTOC considered a 25% reduction possible in this year by further rate reductions of MB using formulations oconjunction with barrier films, and adoption of alternatives. It has based this reduction on the amount approved at the 18% transition over the Parties suggested 7% transition for 2009). The Party showed references which supported use (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effective alternatives are available (Ristaino and Johnson (1999), BabadDriver and Lows (2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with chloropicrin + herbicides (Trifluralin, napropaconsidered as the best alternative strategy in Florida. No future indication for the use of this combination was given by and others have reported many efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora on pepper, including crop rotabeans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa , cultural control (water management, plant density, soil amendments, proof registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph (Acrobat), Zoxamide + Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+Acrobat). Smetalaxyl control Phytophthora during seed germination. MBTOC notes that uptake of alternatives for this crop in regioyears or less in many countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia. (Leoni and Leda, 2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik et al 2005indicated that 42% transition to alternatives was possible in these regions over a seven year period. The Party showed alternatives in combination with LDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effective alternatives are available and Islam (2002), Johnston et al (2002), Driver and Lows (2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with chlometalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Florida. No future indication for the use of this combinatioLamour (2004) and others have reported many efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora on pepper, inchosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa , cultural control (water management, plant density, soil amand use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph (Acrobat), Zoxamide + Mancozebe, Copper hydroxide+Aor metalaxyl control Phytophthora during seed germination.. MBTOC notes that uptake of alternatives for this crop in rewithin 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia. (Leoni and Leda, 2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik econsiders that further reductions in MB amount is possible with changes to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic or less (e.g. to films. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: Part of the nomination for Michigan was based on economic arguments. EconomCUN states next best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losses of 6 percent in Michregions. CUN states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible Michigan. In Michigan delayed planting alower average price (7.5%) received from missed market windows, and negative net revenue. In remaining regions yie

United States 

Strawberry (field) 

2052.846 1730.778 1476.019 1349.575 

MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 1,269.321 tonnes for this use in 2009. This comprises 1,064.556 tonnes for C132.300 tonnes for Florida and 2.377 tonnes for research. For California the Party nominated 1,064.556 tonnes for 200nomination is based on the grounds that township caps and county restrictions limit further adoption of 1,3-D and Pic. Aconfirmed the regulatory restrictions of the township caps (1,3-D) and county commissioners restrictions on the use of California is for 5,452 hectares. Based on the generalised data available, MBTOC estimated that the area needing MB could range from approximately 6,532 hectares assuming a 1x cap in all townships, to approximately 3,981 hectares aanticipated crop growth of 4% per year. Further clarification of the restrictions on the use of alternatives is required in fwith MB in California, but these films can be used with alternatives and can reduce the dosage rates required for effectencourages the Party to continue research on the use of LPBF and other techniques that result in improved efficacy at emissions that would result in more use of alternatives under township cap and county commissioner constraints. For tonnes (534 ha @ 175 kg/ha (17.5 g/m2)). The nomination is based on moderate to severe pest pressure (Meloidogyne cactorum, Cyperus escultentus, C. rotundus, Lolium spp.) affecting 33% of the crop area, and small farm buffer zones 1,3-D formulations. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for part of the CUN area (on both buffer and non D, Pic, metham with herbicides and/or (Ferguson et al. 2001; Sydorovych et al. 2004; Driver et al. 2005; López-Aranda al. 2003c; studies cited in TEAP 2006). MBTOC accordingly reduced the nomination by 23.372 tonnes (about 25%) to dose adjustment to 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2) for the areas of low nutsedge pressure affected by buffer zones (allowing 175 pressure areas). However MBTOC notes that the Eastern states planned to implement MB/Pic mixtures with lower docombination with LPBF in the previous nomination (US CUN 06). For Florida the Party nominated 176.333 tonnes (10nomination is based on the grounds that currently available alternatives are not able to control moderate-severe nutsedkarst/seepage areas (56%), and economic issues. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for part of the CUby use of combinations of 1,3-D, pic, metham with herbicides and/or LPBF as studies provide evidence for yields that a2003bc; Norton et al. 2002; Ajwa et al. 2003, 2004, 2005; López-Aranda et al. 2005; studies in TEAP 2006). Accordingtonnes to allow for transition to alternatives and dose adjustments to 150 kg/ha on areas of low nutsedge pressure on high pest pressure areas). 
54 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements three next best alternatives for California, Florida, and Eastern United States. 1,3-D with chloropicrin is reported to redlower production leads to large losses of net revenue. Planting and harvesting delays with alternatives are reported to regions, but are only shown in the revenue analysis for California. 

United States 

Strawberry runners 

54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 7.944 tonnes for this use in 2009. This comprises 4.69 tonnes for CA, 2.8 tresearch. The key pests affecting strawberry runners are weeds (purple and yellow nutsedge), fungi (Rhizoctonia and nematodes (root-knot, sting in CA). The CUN states that MB at a dosage of 26.3 g/m2 in CA and 35.0 g/m2 in SE is refor strawberry runners. The Party's request exceeds MBTOC's standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) of MB wh'high health' strawberry runners using LPBF and other emission control technologies (TEAP October 2005); however, specify minimum amounts of MB that must be applied. Furthermore, California regulations prohibit the use of LPBF wconform to MBTOC presumptions. The Party indicates that key alternatives include 1,3-D + PIC followed by dazomet, that these have not been sufficiently tested on a commercial scale. Furthermore, MI is not currently registered. MBTOcommercial scale testing of these alternatives as well as the registration of MI. MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements with chloropicrin as the next best alternative with a 10-percent yield loss in California and the south eastern States. Opare marginally higher in the Southeast and marginally lower in California. In both regions the alternative is predicted to revenues. 

United States 

Sweet potato slips 

None 80.830 0.000 18.144 

MBTOC recommends 18.144 MB for this use in 2009. The key pests affecting production of sweet potato slips are nem(Streptomyces ipomea, Monilochaetes infuscans, Fusarium oxysporum, Ceratocystis fimbriata), weeds (Chenopodium beetles, Limonius spp). The Party identifies that Telone effectively controls the key pests of sweet potatoes in CaliforniJan as township caps are exceeded by November which is the fumigation window for slips. The party requests MB for produced. The rates stated in the CUN are consistent with MBTOC’s standard presumptions. However, MBTOC notes are widely available elsewhere in the world and may be useful in managing nematode pests. The nomination does statin California from 2001 to 2003 but no results are provided. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

MBTOC comments on economics: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements alternatives given. Factors that contribute to losses include delayed planting due to use of alternatives; fallow; additioninsects and diseases resulting in smaller, less attractive produce (quality loss). 

United States 

Tomatoes (field) 

2876.046 2476.364 2065.246 1406.484 

MBTOC recommends 1003.876 t for this use in SE, Georgia, Florida and Michigan in 2009. The amount recommendenew nominated amount has been requested for Maryland a region which the Party has stated previously used MB from Georgia, Florida by 25% from the amount approved for 2008 to allow for adoption of alternatives and to account for furformulations of MB/Pic with lower ratios of MB in conjunction with barrier films. According to the available information, for each region are 230.919 t for the SE, 55.747 t for Georgia, 685.789 t for Florida, 24.90 t for Michigan and 1.02 t for based its nomination on MBTOC’s standard maximum dosage rates of MB/Pic formulations of 175 kg/ha for nutsedge of LPBF and also made an adjustment for strip fumigation based on 0.58 of the area treated. An adjustment was also mfor pathogens of 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2.) No information was provided on the key pests in Maryland and an assumption wregions in the SE. MBTOC has assumed this region was not included in the “region SE and middle Atlantic, US”. If threquested to provide the appropriate information. The key pest of tomatoes in the south eastern United States, including Florida and Georgia are nutsedge, nematodes karst topography limits the use of alternatives which include 1,3-dichloropropene, which are considered the best alterngrowing acreage in Florida, 11% in Georgia and 6% of the acreage in Georgia. The Party in the past has stated that mpromising alternatives but no further data has been provided on their performance. MBTOC, however, considers that anon-karst areas in SE, Florida and Georgia (Noling et al. 2006; Santos et al. 2006; Noling and Gilreath 2004; Gilreath a2003, 2004, 2005bc, 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Chellemi and Browne, 2006; McMillan and Bryan 1998, 1999, 2002; adopted on areas of moderate pest pressure at least. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination for these regions by 25%, suggested by the Party in 2006. The Party indicated that 42% transition to alternatives was possible in these regions oconsidered a 25% reduction possible in this year by further rate reductions of MB using formulations of MB/Pic with lowfilms, and adoption of alternatives. It has based this reduction on the amount approved at the 18 MOP. (This amount rParties suggested 7% transition for 2009). The Party showed references which supported use of alternatives in combinstudies on possible effective alternatives are available (Ristaino and Johnson (1999), Babadost and Islam (2002), JohnA combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with chloropicrin + herbicides (Trifluralin, Devrinol, napropamide, halosulfuralternative strategy in Florida. No future indication for the use of this combination was given by the Party. Husbeck and many efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora on vegetables, including crop rotation with non susceptasparagus, soybeans, alfalfa , cultural control (water management, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch, rfungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph (Acrobat), Zoxamide + Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+Acrobat). Seed treatmen
56 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Country Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+MOP18)

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18) 

Quantity nominated for 2008 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendafor 2008 (additional onew) 

Phytophthora during seed germination. MBTOC notes that uptake of alternatives for this crop in regions with similar pemany countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia. (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik et al 2005;Minuto et al, 2MBTOC considers that further reductions in MB amount is possible withchanges to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic or lesbarrier films. The Party states that registration of a key alternative (eg. methyl iodide) is pending. MBTOC comments on economics: Part of the nomination for Michigan was based on economic arguments. EconomCUN reports yield losses for 1,3-D with chloropicrin as the next best alternative ranging from 1.75% to 6%. Net revenuin pest control costs are less than 4 percent of total variable costs so have little impact on economic measures. Missed reason. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 57

6. MBTOC Work plan for 2008 

6.1 Introduction 

The Parties, at their Sixteenth Meeting, decided to adopt the elements related to 

procedures and terms of reference of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options 

Committee (MBTOC) related to the evaluation of nominations for critical uses of 

methyl bromide as set out in Annex I to the report of the Sixteenth Meeting of the 

Parties (16MOP) (decision XVI/4). 

Paragraph 15 of Annex I to the report of 16MOP states that annual work plan should 

be drawn up by MBTOC (supported by the Ozone Secretariat) in consultation with 

TEAP and that MBTOC should submit it to the Meeting of the Parties each year. 

In accordance with paragraph 15 of Annex I to the report of 16MOP, MBTOC has 

prepared its 2008 work plan in consultation with TEAP and with support of the Ozone 

Secretariat. The timelines for the work plan are contained below for consideration by 

the Parties at their Nineteenth Meeting. 

Paragraph 15 of Annex I to the report of 16MOP also specifies that a summary report 

of MBTOC activities over the previous year (paragraph 15(h)) should also be 

indicated in the MBTOC plan. In accordance with this requirement, this summary 

report is provided. 

6.2 MBTOC Workplan for 2008 - Details 

Paragraph 1 of Annex I to the report of 16 MOP provides the schedule for the 

MBTOC assessment of critical-use exemptions. In accordance with the schedule, 

MBTOC envisages its activities in 2008 as set out in Table 9 below. The elements of 

the work plan as specified under paragraph 15 of Annex I to the report of 16MOP 

have been incorporated. The schedule of the work to be carried out by MBTOC on 

the MBTOC composition is also included. The list of current membership of 

MBTOC is contained in Annex I. 

The work plan also includes an indicative budget for the activities in 2008 which are 

related to evaluation of CUNs. Parties had indicated in the 2006 approved budget that 

2006 is the last year for providing supplemental funding to MBTOC and for 2007, no 

supplemental funding was provided for MBTOC. MBTOC would like to bring to the 

attention of the Parties that such financial assistance is needed to ensure the effective 

operation of MBTOC in continuing to carry out the evaluation of CUNs. In 

particular, provision of some funding for non-Article 5 MBTOC members and cochairs is strongly recommended. Some non- Article 5 members do not have funding to 

attend meetings; some members are funded by their Parties, although funding is not 

always consistently in place. Some non- Article 5 members presently use personal 

funds or funds from research programs to attend MBTOC meetings. As mentioned in 

the previous workplan of MBTOC as well as in the Progress Reports of TEAP, the 

financial burden on individual members and/or their research institutions has become 

increasingly unsustainable. 
58 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Although decreasing work load for the second meeting of the year as a result of 

reduced numbers of CUNs and experience with the remaining ones, may lead to 

reevaluating the necessity for two 'face-to-face' meetings a year, additional workload 

and costs include: (i) the requirement for MBTOC reports to more clearly and 

completely reference the reasons for decision making, thus additional costs of 

obtaining reference documents; (ii) field trips to understand the circumstances of 

particular nominations; (iii) time necessary to prepare reports that summarize 

particularly complex issues. 

As a result of lack of funding only local site visits were conducted in those places 

where MBTOC meetings took place.. Further, it was necessary to conduct a number 

of important tasks off line, including the finalisation of the MBTOC 2006 Assessment 

Report and the revision of Handbook for Critical Use Nominations. This represented 

extra effort and difficulties and often required MBTOC members to work extensively 

outside regular office hours. 

Table 9. MBTOC work plan and indicative budget for 2008 

Tasks and actions Indicative 

supplemental budget 

needs where applicable 

Indicative 

completion date 

Dates of 

meetings 

Assessment of the CUNs 

1. Parties submit their nominations for criticaluse exemptions to the Secretariat - 24 January 2008 

2. The nominations are forwarded to MBTOC 

co-chairs for distribution to the subgroups of 

appointed members 

- 7 February 2008 

3. Initial summarization of the nominations - 

4. 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 

- 28 February 2008 

5. MBTOC co-chairs forward the cleared 

advice on initial findings and may request 

additional information on to the nominating Party 

concerned and consult with the Party on the 

possible presumption therein 

- 7 March 2008 

6. Nominating Party develops and submits its 

response to the MBTOC co-chairs 

- 25 March 2008 

7. MBTOC Meeting No.1 to assess 

nominations, including any additional information 

provided by the nominating Party prior to the 

MBTOC meeting under action 5 and any 

additional information provided by nominating 

Party through pre-arranged teleconference, or 

through meetings with national experts, in 

accordance with paragraph 3.4 of the terms of 

reference of TEAP 

Funds for a specialist in 

nutsedge control to 

attend MBTOC S 

meeting to assist analysis 

of CUNs1

: $7250

Funds for travel of one 

non A5 Co chair and two 

non A5 members: US$ 

14,2503

: 

Meeting costs US$4,000 

($2000 for each subcommittee)** 

 Tentative 

MBTOC-S April 

7-11, Rehovot, 

Israel 

MBTOC- QSC 

Tentative: The 

Philippines 

8. Field missions by MBTOC members to some 

key sites where methyl bromide is used as per 

nominations. 

Funds for travel to field 

sites to observe and 

discuss important issues 

In conjunction 

with MBTOC 

mtg No.1 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 59

Tasks and actions Indicative 

supplemental budget 

needs where applicable 

Indicative 

completion date 

Dates of 

meetings 

related to CUNs: US$ 

6,0004

9. TEAP Meeting: To assess the MBTOC report 

on critical-use nominations and submits the 

finalised interim report on recommendations and 

findings to the Secretariat. 

Funds for travel of 1nonA5 co-chair: US$ 47502

 

 April 14 – 18, 

Morocco 

10. The Secretariat posts the finalised report on 

its web site and circulates it to the Parties 

- Mid May 

11. OEWG Bilateral Discussions: Nominating 

Party has the opportunity to consult with MBTOC 

on a bilateral basis in conjunction with the Openended Working Group meetings 

Funds for travel of 1nonA5 co-chair: US$ 47502

Early July 

12. The nominating Party submits further 

clarification for the critical-use nomination in the 

“unable to assess” category 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 

- Mid August 2008 

13. MBTOC Meeting No 2: 

• reassess only those critical-use nominations 

in the “unable to assess” category, those where 

additional information has been submitted by the 

nominating Party and any critical-use nominations 

for which additional information has been 

requested by the Open-ended Working Group 

• finalise the report, including notice of any 

proposed new standard presumptions to be 

applied by MBTOC 

• conduct any bilateral consultations requested 

by Parties 

• draft work plan and budget for MBTOC for 

2007 

Funds for travel of one 

non-A5 co-chair and 2 

non-A5 members: 

US$14,2502,3: 

Meeting costs: $US 4000 

($2000 for each subcommittee) **. 

 Early September, 

2008 

14. MBTOC draft final report considered by 

TEAP, finalised and made available to Parties 

through the Secretariat 

- September 2008 

15. Twentieth Meeting of the Parties Funds for travel of 1 

non-A5 co-chair: US$ 

47502

Early October 

2008 

Nov/Dec 2008 

Total budget sought: US$56,000 

. 

* Cost calculated on basis of one round trip airfare in discount economy plus taxes and 1 week accommodation. 

 ** Meeting costs covered separately by the Ozone Secretariat and not considered in total. 

Composition of MBTOC 

16. At the MBTOC meeting on the assessment of 

nominations, MBTOC will also update the list of 

members and their expertise and decide on 

missing expertise. The list and missing expertise 

to be submitted to the Secretariat. 

 In conjunction 

with MBTOC 

meeting No.1 and 

2 

17. The Secretariat will update on its website the 

list of members and their expertise as well as the 

information on ‘experts required for TEAP and its 

TOCs’. 

 In conjunction 

with MBTOC 

meetings No.1 

and 2 as 

necessary 

Explanation of the budget: Funds are requested to support: 

1. Funds are requested to support a resource specialist on nutsedge control, to the first meeting in 

2008. Purple and yellow nutsedge are a key target pest for over 50% of the remaining CUNs and 

further information is critical to ensure MBTOC provides accurate assessment of Critical Use 
60 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Nominations for preplant soil use. The budget of $7250 is requested for a discount economy airfare 

and expenses to cover costs for one person for 4 days (including days of travel). 

2. Five trips (@4750/trip) for a non A5 Co-chair or Task Force Chair to attend MBTOC meetings x2, 

TEAP meetings, the OEWG and the MOP. 

3. Two trips in the year (@ $4750/trip) are requested to support the attendance of one non A5 

member of each sub committee to ensure relevant expertise is present at meetings to be able to 

assess nominations effectively. The request is only for members who rely on their own personal 

funds to attend MBTOC meetings. These members are long standing members of MBTOC, have 

specialist expertise and are critical to the assessment of the CUNs. Over the past 2 years, between 

10 and 15% of MBTOC-S members have been unable to attend the MBTOC meetings due to lack 

of funding. 

4. Two field trips (@3,000/trip) are being planned in 2008 to review the situation with alternatives 

and methyl bromide use for industries that are applying for CUNs. These visits are an essential 

part of gaining information to accurately assess CUN nominations. 

 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 61

7. Summary Report of the Activities Carried out by MBTOC in 

2007 

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

the Secretariat). 

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

• Finalisation of the MBTOC 2006 Assessment Report which was published in 

March 2007 

• First meeting of MBTOC on the assessment of the CUNs – Alassio, 19-23 

March 2007. Interim recommendations and report prepared for the Parties. 

MBTOC QSC welcomed new members from Argentina, Belize, The 

Netherlands, New Zealand, and The Philippines. Some were members of the 

former QPS taskforce which was incorporated into this subcommittee. 

Departure of one MBTOC-S member from Brazil. Bilateral meetings were 

held with USA. 

• Site visits: MBTOC-S conducted a field trip to observe alternatives adopted by 

basil and flower growers including substrate production, steam and alternative 

fumigants. MBTOC-QSC conducted a site visit to a speciality flour mill in 

Southern France at the request of the milling company. 

• TEAP meeting – Rome, 26-30 March 2007. 

• Issuance of the interim report for consideration by the 27 OEWG as part of 

2007 TEAP Progress Report of April 2007. 

• 27 OEWG (Nairobi, 4 – 7 June 2007). Bilateral meetings with Australia, 

Canada, and USA. 

• Preparation of second round of questions to the Parties. 

In accordance with TEAP reorganisation of MBTOC, the two subcommittees met 

separately for the second round of deliberations: 

• Second meeting of MBTOC-Soils, San Jose, Costa Rica, 10-13 July 2007. A 

bilateral discussion was held with the USA. A site visit was conducted to 

observe alternatives adopted by flower growers participating in the UNDP 

project to phase-out MB. Resignation of one MBTOC-S member from Japan. 

• Revision of the Handbook on Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 

• Revision of the standard presumptions used by MBTOC-S when evaluating 

CUNs 

• Second Meeting of MBTOC-QSC, Washington DC, USA, June 30 - July 3 

2007 Bilateral meeting with USA. 

• Site visit: MBTOC QSC conducted a field trip to processors of Southern cure 

ham and to North Carolina State University the coordination site for a multistate research project on this MB use. 

• Preparation of the final report on the CUNs for consideration by the Parties at 

their 19th Meeting. 

August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 63

8. Management and Personnel Issues 

Annex V lists MBTOC members, country, work affiliation and expertise. MBTOC 

members represent an impressive scope and depth of experience and ability; MBTOC 

has members from 25 countries. MBTOC needs to have its members funded to attend 

meetings, and able to commit to contributing to the work of MBTOC outside of the 

meetings. Most members have been appointed by Parties, yet it is a constant struggle 

for many members to obtain sufficient funding to attend all MBTOC meetings, and 

even more so to be funded to spend the time necessary to accomplish the heavy 

workload. 

Most importantly, improvements in funding by Parties for MBTOC members who are 

citizens of the Party, and secondly, the response of the Parties to MBTOC’s indicative 

budget will, more than anything, clarify MBTOC’s membership needs. Without 

funding to attend meetings, many current non-Article 5 MBTOC members will be 

unable to attend. In the past year, 23% of members in the soil committee have had 

funding problems and missed at least one meeting. If there is to be no change in the 

funding situation, MBTOC may lose specialist expertise and this would threaten both 

the outcome of CUN decisions and the ability to provide complete progress reports. 

MBTOC continues to search for well-qualified members, particularly from Article 5 

countries and countries with economies in transition (CEIT), with expertise in: 

- Weeds, specifically Cyperus spp (nutsedge) 

- Replant problems 

As stated above, nutsedge is a target pest for over 50% of the remaining CUNs and 

MBTOC presently requires specialist expertise to address effective controls for 

specific regions, such as the south eastern USA and Israel. 

Additionally, if Parties expand MBTOC’s workload in the area of quarantine uses of 

methyl bromide, additional members with quarantine regulation expertise may be 

required. 

August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 65

9. Proposed Changes to Standard Presumptions for Preplant Soil 

Use of MB 

Standard presumptions used in the current round of CUN are shown in Section 5.3. 

These have included a maximum dosage rate of 15 g/m2

 (150 kg MB/ha) for pathogen 

control and 17.5 g/m2

 (175 kg MB/ha) where nutgrass must be controlled, both under 

LPBF films (e.g. VIF or equivalent). Unless otherwise specified, 50:50 MB/Pic or 

nearest equivalent formulation is considered effective for pathogen control and 67:33 

for nutsedge control and should be used to lower MB dose. For strawberry runner 

crops and other nursery crops, MBTOC also considered a maximum of 20.0 g/m2

 (200 

kg MB/ha) applicable to meet certification standards for pathogens in the absence of 

data from the Party which stated that a different rate was necessary. 

It is proposed that commencing with the CUN of 2008, that maximum dosage rates be 

revised to 12.5 kg/ha for pathogens and 15.0 kg/ha for specific preplant soil uses 

where trials and commercial adoption has proven that lower rates are effective. 

Supporting data for the methyl bromide component and dosage is given in Appendix 

V. 

Table 10. Proposed changes to maximum dosage rates for preplant soil use of MB. 

Maximum MB Dosage Rate (g/m2) in MB/Pic mixtures considered 

effective for: Film Type

Strawberries and Vegetables Nurseries* Orchard 

Replant 

Ornamentals 

Barrier films - 

Pathogens 

12.5 15 15 15 

Barrier films - 

Nutsedge 

15.0 17.5 17.5 17.5 

No Barrier films - 

Pathogens 

20 20 20 20 

No Barrier films - 

Nut sedge 

26 26 26 26 

* Maximum rate unless certification specifies otherwise 
66 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

10. References 

Ajwa H.A., Fennimore, S., Kabin, Z., Martin, F., Duniway, J., Browne, G., Trout, T., Kahn, A. and 

Daugovish, O. (2004). Strawberry yield with chloropicrin and inline in combination with 

metam sodium and VIF. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 3-6 November 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Ajwa, H.A. S. Fennimore, Z. Kabir, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, T. Trout, R. Goodhue, and L. 

Guerrero. (2003). Strawberry yield under reduced application rates of chloropicrin and InLine 

in combination with metam sodium and VIF. In: Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-6 November 2003, San Diego, 

California, USA. 

Ajwa, HA, Fennimore, S, Browne, G, Martin, F, Trout, T, Duniway, J, Shem-Tov, S and Daugovish, 

O. (2005). Strawberry yield with various rates of chloropicrin and Inline applied under VIF. 

Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions. 

Akkaya, F., Ozturk, A., Deviren, A., Ozcelik, A. and Ozkan, B. (2004). An economic analysis of 

alternatives to use of Methyl Bromide for greenhouse vegetables (Tomatoes, Cucumbers) and 

cut flowers (Carnation). Acta Horticulturae 638, 479-485. 

Allen, M. (2007). Personal communication, Victoria, Australia 

Babadost M and Islam S.Z., (2002). Bell peppers resistant to Phytophthora blight . Phytopathology, 

(Abstr), 92, 55 

Bartual, R., Cebolla, V., Bustos, J., Giner, A., Lopez-Aranda, J. M. (2002). The Spanish project on 

alternatives to methyl bromide. (2): The case of strawberry in the area of Valencia. Acta Hort. 

567: 431-434. 

Batchelor, T.A. (2002). International and European Community controls on methyl bromide and the 

status of methyl bromide use and alternatives in the European Community. In: 

Proc.International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 5-8 March 2002, Sevilla. 

Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg. pp. 35-39. 

Batchelor, T.A. (ed.) (2000). Case Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. Technologies with Low 

Environmental Impact. UNEP. Paris. 77pp. 

Bello A., (2007). Pers. comm., MBTOC member, Madrid, Spain 

Bello, A., Arias, M., Lopez-Perez, J., A., Garcia-Alvarez, A., Fresno, J., Escuer, M., Arcos, S. C., 

Lacasa, A., Sanz, R., Gomez, P., Diez-Rojo, M. A., Buena, A. P., Goitia, C., De la Horra, J. 

L.and Martinez, C. (2004). Biofumigation, fallow, and nematode management in vineyard 

replant. Nematropica, Puerto Rico, 2004, 34 (1) 53-64.

Budai, C. (2002) Case Study 1. Substrates for greenhouse tomatoes in peppers. In: Batchelor, T. (ed). 

Case Studies on alternatives to methyl bromide – Vol. 2. UNEP, Paris 

Cebolla, V., Bartual, R., Giner, A and. Bustos, J. (1999). Two years effect on some alternatives to 

Methyl Bromide on strawberry crops. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 1999. 1-4 November, 1999, San 

Diego, California, USA. 

CDPR. Pesticide Use Report (PUR Data). California Department of Pesticide Regulation. Summary of 

Pesticide Use Report Data (2005), Use by chemical; 2006. www.cdpr.ca.gov 

Chellemi, D.O. 2006. Effect of urban plant debris and soil management practices on plant parasitic 

nematodes, Phytophthora blight and Pythium root rot of bell pepper. Crop Protection 25, 

1109-1116. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 67

Chellemi, D.O and Browne, GT. 2006. Area wide pest management project for methyl bromide 

alternatives. South Atlantic component. Proceedings of Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. Powerpoint 

presentation. 

Chellemi, D.O, Mirusso, J, and Nance, J. 2004. Evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives on 

commercial vegetable farms. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Chellemi, DO, Rosskopf, EN and Kokalis-Burelle, N. 2006. TeloneTM 

C-35 demonstration trial in 

eggplant. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Culpepper, A.S., Grey, T.L., Webster, T.M. 2006. Purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) response to 

methyl bromide alternatives applied under four types of mulch [abstract]. In: Proceedings of 

the Southern Weed Science Society Annual Meeting, January 22-25, 2006. 

De Cal, A., Martínez-Terceno, A., López-Aranda, J.M. and Melgarejo P. (2004). Alternatives to 

methyl bromide in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Plant Disease 88(2): 210-214. De Miguel, A. 

2004. Use of grafted cucurbits in the Mediterranean region as an alternative to Methyl 

Bromide. Fifth International Conference On Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 26-30 

September, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal Sept 2004. 

Driver J.G. and Lows , (2003). Management of Phytophthora crown and root rot in peppers (Abstr), 

Phytopathology, 93, S22 

Driver, JG, Brannen, P, Seitz, M, Schiemann, C, Welker, RM and Louws, FJ. (2005). On-farm 

fumigant trials for strawberries in the southeast. Proceedings of Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Duniway, J. M., Xiao, C. L. and Gubler, W. D. (1998) Response of strawberry to soil fumigation: 

Microbial mechanisms and some alternatives to Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 1998. 7-9 

December, 1998, Orlando, Florida, USA pp. 6-1. 

EC, European Community, (2006). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of 

the critical uses of Methyl Bromide. May 2006. European Community, Brussels. 

Engindeniz, S. (2004). The economic analysis of growing greenhouse cucumber with soilless culture 

system: the case of Turkey. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 23, 5-19. 

Fennimore, S, Kabir, Z, Ajwa, H, Daugovish, O, Roth, K and Valdez, J. (2003). Chloropicrin and 

Inline dose-response under VIF and HDPE film: weed control results. Proc. Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions. pp.2/1-2/4 

Ferguson, L.M., Fernandez, G.E., Brannen, P.M., Louws, F.J., Poling, E.B., Sydorovych, O.B., Safley, 

C.D., Monks, D.W., Pesic-Van Esbroeck, Z., Sanders, D.C. and Smith, J.P. (2001). 

Alternative soil treatments for strawberry in the southeastern United States. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. 

Fery, R.L. and Dukes, P. (1996). The inheritance of resistance to the southern root knot nematode in 

"Carolina Hot" cayenne pepper. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 

121, 1024-1027. 

Fraedrich S.W, L.D. Dwinell, and M.M. Cram, (2003). Broadcast Applications of Glyphosate Control 

Nutsedge at a South Georgia Forest Tree Nursery. Southern Journal of Applied Forestry 27(3): 

176-179 

Fraser, P, Coram, S., Dunse, B. Macfarling-Meure and Derek, N. (2006). Methyl bromide emissions 

through barrier films. CSIRO Report to Department of Primary Industries Victoria, August, 

2006 
68 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Fritsch, J. (1998). Strawberries crops in France: different methods to apply methyl bromide and metam 

sodium in open fields. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 1998. 7-9 December, 1998, Orlando, Florida 

Fritsch, J. (2002). The current status of alternatives to methyl bromide in vegetable crops in France. 

International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. March 5-8 2002. Seville, 193-

195. 

Fukuda, N. and Anami, Y. (2002) Substrate and nutrient level: effects on the growth and yield of 

melon `Cucumis melo' in soilless culture. Acta Horticulturae 588: 111-117 

Gilreath, J. 1999. Living without methyl bromide. Adapt now; thrive in 2005. Florida Farmer. 

September 1999. 

Gilreath J.P., BM.Santos, P.R.Gilreath, J.D. Busacca, J.E. Eger and J.M.Mirusso, (2006). Validation of 

a methyl Bromide alternative program for fresh market tomato, 2006, Journal of Agronomy,

5(2) 332-335 

Gilreath J.P., BM.Santos, P.R.Gilreath, J.P. Jones and J.W.Noling (2005). Efficacy of 1,3 D + 

Cloropicrin application methods in combination with pebulate and napromide in Tomato. 

Crop Protection 23:1187-1191 

Gilreath J.P., J.M. Mirusso, J.W.Noling, J.P.Jones and P.R.Gilreath, (2002a). Effectiveness of 

broadcast application of Telone C35 and Tilam+Devrinol in Tomato. Proceedings of the 

FloridaHorticultural Society., 115,276-280 

Gilreath, J.P., Mirusso, J.M., Jones, J.P., Rosskopf, E.N., Noling, J.W. and Gilreath, P.R. (2002b). 

Efficacy of broadcast Telone C-35 in tomato. Proceedings of Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Gilreath, J.P., Santos, B.M., Motis, T.N., Noling, J.W. and Mirusso, J.M. (2005a). Methyl bromide 

alternatives for nematode and Cyperus control in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Crop 

Protection. 24, 903-908. 

Gilreath, J.P., Motis, T.N., Santos, B.M., Mirusso, J.M., Gilreath, P.R., Noling, J.W. and Jones, J.P. 

(2005b). Influence of supplementary in-bed chloropicrin application on soilborne pest control 

in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Crop Protection. 24, 779-784. 

Gilreath, J.P., Santos, B.M., Siham, M. and Noling, J.W. 2005c. Effect of VIF on nutsedge control with 

metam, chloropicrin and 1,3-D, alone and in combination. Proceedings of Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions. Powerpoint presentation.

Gilreath J.P.,and B.M. Santos (2005d). Efficacy of 1,3 D plus cloropicrin and herbicides on purple 

nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control in tomato. Weed Tecnol.,19-101-104’ 

Gilreath J.P.and B.M. Santos (2004a) Efficacy of 1,3 D plus chloropicrine in combination with 

hebicides on purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) control in tomato. Weed Technol., 19, 137-

140. 

Gilreath, JP and Santos, BM. 2004b. Herbicide dose and incorporation depth in combination with 1,3-

dichloropropene plus chloropicrin for Cyperus rotundus control in tomato and pepper. Crop 

Protection. 23, 205-210. 

Gilreath, JP and Santos, BM. 2004c. Manejo de Cyperus rotundus (coquillo) con alternativas al 

bromuro de metilo, en tomate de mesa. Manejo Integrade de Plagas y Agroecología. 71, 54-

58. 

Gilreath, J.P., Motis, T. N., Santos, B. M. and Noling, J.W. (2003b). Retention of 1,3-dichloropropene 

and nutsedge control with Virtually Impermeable Film. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Nov 3-6, 2003, San 

Diego, California USA. 

Gilreath, J.P., Santos, B.M., Motis, T.N., Noling, J.W., Mirusso, J.M. (2005b). Methyl bromide 

alternatives for nematode and Cyperus control in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Crop 

Protection 24: 903-908. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 69

Gilreath, JP, Noling, JW, Motis, TN, Rosskopf, E and Santos, BM. 2003a. Long term effect of 

fumigant and herbicide combinations in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Proceedings of 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions. 

Gilreath, JP, Motis, TN, Norton, J and Noling. JW. (2003b). Results of the IR-4 strawberry methyl 

bromide alternatives program in Florida during 2002. Proceedings of Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Gilreath, JP, Motis, T, Noling, J and Mertly, J. 2003c. Results of the IR-4 strawberry methyl bromide 

alternatives program in Florida in 2002. Powerpoint presentation. University of Florida. 

Glireath, JP, Noling, JW, Jones, JP, Overman, AJ and Santos, BM. 2003d. Experiencias iniciales con 

alternativas al bromuro de metilo en tomate. Manejo Integrade de Plagas y Agroecología. 69, 

81-84. 

Haar, M., Fennimore, S. and Ajwa, H. (2001). Weed control efficacy of drip irrigation applied 

chloropicrin, metam sodium and 1,3-D. Proc. 2001 Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California. Paper 90. 

Hamill, J. E., Dickson, D. W., T-Ou, L., Allen, L. H., Burelle, N. K. and Mendes, M. L. (2004). 

Reduced rates of MBR and C35 under LDPE and VIF for control of soil pests and pathogens. 

In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 31 October - 3 November, 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA, pp. 2-1. 

Hausbeck M.K and Lamour K.H., (2004). Phytophthora capsici on vegetable crops: Research progress 

and management. Plant Disease 88(12):1992-1303 

Horner, I.J. (1999). Alternative soil fumigant trials in New Zealand strawberry production. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, 

San Diego, California, USA 

Johnston S.A., Kleinn W.L. ,Fogg M.L., and Zimmerman M.D, (2002). Varietal resistance evaluation 

for control of Phytophthora blight of pepper (Abstr). Phytopathology, 92, S40 

Kah, E.M. (2005).Effect of grafting on growth, performance and yield of aubergine (Solanum 

melongea L.) in the field and greenhouse. Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment

3(3&4): 92-94 

Lampinen, B., Browne, G., Schneider, S., Shrestha, A., Holtz, B. and Simon, L. (2006). Alternative 

pre-plant soil fumigation treatments for deciduous tree crops. Pp 39-1 – 39-5 In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, November 3-6 Orlando, Florida, USA paper 39 

Leoni, S and Ledda, L. (2004). Influenza delle limitazioni nell'uso del bromuro di metilo sull'ortcoltura 

in serra della Sardegna. Workshop Internazionale: La Produzione in Serra dopo l'era del 

Bromuro di Metile. April 1-3, 2004, Comiso, 253-263. 

Lieten, 2004. F. (2004). Substrates as an alternative to methyl bromide for strawberry fruit production 

in Northern Europe in both protected and field production. In: Proceedings of International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004, Lisbon, Portugal. 

López-Aranda, J. M., Romero, F., Montes, F., Medina, J. J., Miranda, L., De Los Santos, B., Vega, J. 

M., Paez, J. I., Dominguez, F., Lopez-Medina, J., and Flores, F. (2001a). Chemical and NonChemical Alternativesto MB Fumigation of Soil for Strawberry. 2000-2001 Results. In: 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 2001. 5-9 November, 2001,San Diego, California, USA, pp. 40-1. 

López-Aranda, J. M., Medina, J. J., Miranda, L., De Los Santos, B., Dominguez, F., Sanchez-Vidal, M. 

D., Lopez-Medina, J., Flores, F. (2001b). Agronomic Behaviour of Strawberry Coming From 

Different Types of Soil Fumigation in Nurseries. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 2001. 5-9 November, 

2001, San Diego, California, USA, pp. 38-1. 
70 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

López-Aranda, J. M., Miranda, L., Romero, F., De Los Santos, B., Montes, F., Vega, J. M., Paez, J. I., 

Bascon, J., Medina, J. J. (2003). Alternatives to MB for Strawberry Production in Huelva 

(Spain). 2003 Results. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 2003. November, 2003, San Diego, California, pp. 

33-1. 

López-Aranda, JM, Santos, BM, Gilreath, JP, Miranda, L, Soria, C and Medina J.J. (2005). Evaluation 

of methyl bromide alternatives for strawberry in Florida and Spain. Proceedings of Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. 

López-Medina, J., Peralbo, A. and Flores, F. (2004). Closed soil-less growing system: A sustainable 

solution for strawberry crop in Huelva, (Spain). Acta Horticulturae. 649:213-216 

Loumakis, N. (2004). Protected vegetable production in Mediterranean regions without the use of 

Methyl Bromide. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 

27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Mann, R.C., S.W. Mattner, R.K. Gounder, R.W. Brett and I.J. Porter (2005). Evaluating novel soil 

fumigants for Australian horticulture. Pp 34-1 – 34-4 In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, Oct 31 -Nov. 3, San 

Diego, California. 

Martyn, R.D. (2002). Monosporascus root rot and vine decline of melons. Plant Disease Lessons. The 

Plant Health Instructor. DOI: 10.1094/PHI-I-2002 0612-01. American Phytopathological 

Society. 

 Matsuo K. and Suga Y. (1993) Control effect of soil disinfectant and crop rotation on necrotic spot 

disease of melon. Proceedings of the Association of Plant Protection Kyushu 39:43-47 

MBTOC (1998). 1998 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. 

UNEP, Nairobi. 

MBTOC. (2002). 2002 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. 

UNEP, Nairobi. 468pp. 

MBTOC, (2007). 2006 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. 

UNEP, Nairobi 482 pp. 

McMillan, R.T. and Bryan, H.H. (1998). Vapam as an alternative to methyl bromide for south Florida 

tomato growers. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

McMillan, R.T. and Bryan, H.H. (1999). Effect of metam sodium and methyl bromide on root-knot, 

weeds and yield in Florida tomato. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

McMillan, R.T. and Bryan, H.H. (2002). Efficacy of Vapam and Kpam fumigation for Florida 

tomatoes. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

McSorley, R., K.H. Wang and N. Kokallis-Burelle. (2006a). Solarization as an alternative to Methyl 

Bromide in Florida floriculture. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, November 6-9, 2006 Orlando, Florida, 

USA-337. 2004. 

McSorley, R., Wang, K-H., and Saha, S.K. (2006b). Can solarization match methyl bromide 

fumigation in sites colonized by fungi? Phytopathology 96(6), suppl., p. S187 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 71

Melgarejo, P., De Cal, A., Salto, T., Martinez-Beringola, M. L., Martinez-Treceno, A., Bardon, E., 

Palacios, J., Becerril, M., Medina, J. J., Galvez, J., Lopez-Aranda, J. M. (2001). Three Years 

of Results on Chemical Alternatives To Methyl Bromide For Strawberry Nurseries in Spain. 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reduction 2001. 5-9 November, 2001, San Diego, California, pp. 93-1. 

Minuto, A., Garibaldi, A. and Gullino, M.L. (2003). Chemical alternatives to Methyl Bromide in Italy: 

an update. Pp. 22-1 – 22-4 In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emission Reductions, November 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. 

Mutitu, E, Waswa, R, Musembi, N, Chepsoi, J, Mutero, J and Barel, M. (2006). Use of methyl bromide 

alternatives in small scale vegetable sector in Kenya. Methyl Bromide Alternatives Project – 

Kenya. GOK-GTZ-UNDP project. Nairobi. 

Noling, J. W. and Gilreath, J. P. (2004a). Use of virtually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida 

strawberry. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions, November 3-6, 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. pp. 1-1. 

Noling, JW and Gilreath, JP. (2004b). Evaluations of chemical alternatives to methyl bromide for 

nematode control and tomato yield in field microplots. Proceedings of Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Noling, J.W., Gilreath, J.P. and Botts, D.A.(2006). Chapter 23. Alternatives to methyl bromide soil 

fumigation for Florida vegetable production. In: Olson, SM. et al. 2006. Vegetable Production 

Handbook for Florida. University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences 

(IFAS) Extension. 

Noling, J. W., Gilreath, J. P. and Rosskopf, E. R. (2001). Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Field 

Research Efforts For Nematode Control in Florida. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions , 5-9 November, 

2001, San Diego, California, USA. pp. 14-1. 

Norton, J, Gilreath, J, Nelson, M. (2002). 2000-2001 IR-4 MBA strawberry trial. Chancey Farm, Dover 

/ Plant City, FL. USDA IR-4 Methyl Bromide Alternatives Program for Minor Crops. 

Ou, L.T., Thomas, J.E., Allen, L.J., Vu, J.C. and Dickson, D.W. (2007). Emissions and distribution of 

methyl bromide in field beds applied at two rates and covered with two types of plastic 

mulches. Environmental Science 42(1): 15 – 20. 

Pivonia, S., Cohen, R., Kigel, J. and Katan, J. (2002). Effect of soil temperature on disease 

development in melon plants infected by Monosporascus cannonballus. Plant Pathology 51 

(4), 472–479. 

Pivonia, S., Cohen, S. Cohen, S., Kigel, J., Levita, R and Katan, J. (2004). Effect of irrigation regimes 

on disease expression in melon plants infected with Monosporascus cannonballus. European 

Journal of Plant Pathology 110(2): 

Porter I.J, Mattner, S., Gounder, R., Mann, R., Banks, J. and Fraser, P. (2004). Strawberry fruit 

production: summaries of alternatives to methyl bromide fumigation and trials in different 

geographic regions. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl 

Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Porter, I., Brett, R., Wiseman, B., and Rae, J. (1997). Methyl bromide for preplant soil disinfestation in 

temperate horticultural crops in Australia in perspective. Annual International Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-5 November, San Diego, 

California USA. 

Porter, I.J., L. Trinder and D. Partington. (2006). Special Report Validating the Yield Performance of 

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for Preplant fumigation. TEAP/MBTOC Special Report, 

UNEP Nairobi, May 2006 97pp. 

Rich, J.R. and Olson, S.M. (2003). Fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide in North Florida U.S.A 

tomato production. Nematropica. 33, 157-163. 
72 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Rosskopf, E.N., Chellemi, D.O., Kokalis-Burelle, N. and Church, G.T. (2005). Alternatives to methyl 

bromide: A Florida perspective. APSnet Feature, June 2005. 

Ristaino J.B. and Johnston S.A . (1999). Ecologically based approaches to management of 

Phytophthora blight on bell pepper. Plant Disease, 83, 1080-1089 

Runia, W.T. and Molendijk, L.P.G. (2006). Improved efficacy of metam sodium by rotary spading 

injection. Wageningen University and Research Center, Lelystad. 16pp. 

Runia, W.T., Molendijk, L.P.G. and Evenhuis, B. (2007). Desk study on efficacy of alternatives to 

methyl bromide against soliborne fungi and plant parasitic nematodes in strawberry runners. 

Applied Plant Research, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 47 pp. 

Sakuma, H. and Suzuki, K. (1995) Development of energy-saving hydroponics systems without 

requiring electricity. JIRCAS J. 4: 73-77.Gerik, J.S. (2005c). Drip-applied soil fumigation for 

freesia production. HortTechnology, 15 (4): 820-824 

Santos, B.M., J.P. Gilreath and T.N. Motis (2005). Managing nutsedge and stunt nematode in pepper 

with reduced methyl bromide plus chloropicrin rates under virtually impermeable films. 

HortTechnology 15(3): 596-599. 

Santos, BM, Gilreath, JP, Motis, TN, Noling, JW, Jones, JP and Norton, JA. (2006). Comparing methyl 

bromide alternatives for soilborne disease, nematode and weed management in fresh market 

tomato. Crop Protection. 25, 690-695. 

Savvas D and Passam H (eds) (2002). Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Embryo 

Publications, Athens. 

Schneider, S., Trout, T., Browne, G. and Ajwa, H. (2004). Vineyard replant - performance of methyl 

bromide alternatives over time. Pp 8-1 - 8-5 In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 3-6 November 2004, Orlando, 

Florida, USA. 

 Simonne, EH, Stall, WM, Pernezny, KL, Webb, SE, Taylor, TG. and Smith, SA. 2006. Chapter 28. 

Eggplant Production in Florida. In: Olsen et al. Handbook of Vegetable Production in Florida. 

IFAS Extension, University of Florida. 

Smith, I.W., J. Dunez, R.A. Lelliot, D.H. Phillips and S.A. Archer (1988). Pp 200 – 202 In: European 

Handbook of Plant Diseases. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, UK.South, D.B. 2007. 

Chloropicrin as a Soil Fumigation Treatment in Southern Pine Nurseries. Southern Journal of 

Applied Forestry 31(1): 47 - 51 

Sonneveld, (2002). Composition of nutritional solution. In: Savvas D and Passam H (eds) (2002). 

Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Embryo Publications, Athens pp 179 

- 210. 

Spotti, C. (2004). The use of fumigants and grafted plants as alternatives to Methyl Bromide for the 

production of tomatoes and vegetables in Italy. Proceedings of International Conference on 

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Stanghellini, M.E., D. M. Ferrin, D. H. Kim, M. M. Waugh, K. C. Radewald, J. J. Sims, and H. D. Ohr 

(2003). Application of preplant fumigants via drip irrigation systems for the management of 

root rot of melons caused by Monosporascus cannonballus Plant Disease 87(10): 1176 - 1178 

Sydorovych, O., Safley, C.D., Poling, E.B., Ferguson, L.M., Fernandez, G.E., Brannen, P.M. and 

Louws, F.J. (2004). Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for strawberry 

production. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

TEAP (2004). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2004. Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 73

TEAP (2005). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2005. Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP (2006) Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2005. Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP (2007) Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, April 2007. Progress 

ReportMontreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations 

Environment Programme, Nairobi. 

Thanassoulopoulos, C.C., Bletsos, F.A., Moustafa, A.M. (2006) Development of an empirical model to 

predict losses in eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) production caused by Verticillium wilt. 

Crop Protection 

Tognoni F., Incorcci L., and.Pardossi, A. (2004). Use of substrates for intensive production of 

vegetables in Europe and Mediterranean regions. Proceedings of fifth International conference 

on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, Lisbon, 27-30 September, 2004, 177-181. 

Tostovrsnik, N.S., A.L. Shanks, I.J. Porter, S.W, Mattner and R.W. Brett (2005). Facilitating the 

adoption of alternatives to methyl bromide in Australian horticulture. Pp 13-1 – 13/4 In: 

Trout, T. and Damodaran, N. (2004). Adoption of methyl bromide alternatives by California strawberry 

growers. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions.

Vos, J and Bridge, J. (ed.) 2006. Cases of methyl bromide alternatives used in commercial practice. 

CAB International. 

Wang D., Yates S.R., Ernst F.F., Gan J. and Jury W.A. (1997). Reducing methyl bromide emission 

with a high barrier plastic film and reduced dosage. Environmental Science and Technology

31, 3686-3691. 

Wang, D. (2005). Emission and soil distribution of fumigants in forest tree nurseries. Pp 42-1 – 42-4 

In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission 

Reductions, Oct 31 - Nov. 3, San Diego, California 

Wang, D., S. W. Fraedrich, J. Juzwik, K. Spokas, Y. Zhang, W.C. Koskinen, (2006). Fumigant 

distribution in forest nursery soils under water seal and plastic film after application of 

dazomet, metam-sodium and chloropicrin. Crop Science. 

Yates, S.R. (2005). Reducing bystander exposure by emission reduction. Annual International Research 

Conference on MB Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. Oct 31 - Nov 3, 2005. San Diego, 

California, USA 
74 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

ANNEX I: 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 

(ii) There are no technically and economically feasible alternatives 

or substitutes available to the user that are acceptable from the 

standpoint of environment and health and are suitable to the 

crops and circumstances 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; 

(ii) Methyl bromide is not available in sufficient quantity and 

quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled methyl 

bromide, also bearing in mind the developing countries’ need 

for methyl bromide; 

(iii) It is demonstrated that an appropriate effort is being made to 

evaluate, commercialise and secure national regulatory 

approval of alternatives and substitutes, taking into 

consideration the circumstances of the particular nomination 

and the special needs of Article 5 Parties, including lack of 

financial and expert resources, institutional capacity, and 

information. Non-Article 5 Parties must demonstrate that 

research programmes are in place to develop and deploy 

alternatives and substitutes. Article 5 Parties must demonstrate 

that feasible alternatives shall be adopted as soon as they are 

confirmed as suitable to the Party’s specific conditions and/or 

that they have applied to the Multilateral Fund or other sources 

for assistance in identifying, evaluating, adapting and 

demonstrating 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. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 75

ANNEX II: ANNEX I Referred to by Decision XVI/4 

All reviews of CUNs made in 2007 are to be in accordance with the ‘Annex I’ referred to 

in Decision XVI/4. This annex also sets out the procedure and timetable for the annual 

review of critical use nominations. In addition to the criteria for the evaluation provided in 

Decision IX/6, the Parties have given further guidance for the review of CUNs in Annex 1 

of 16 MOP meeting report. Inter alia, this requires that TEAP and MBTOC provide a clear 

description of why any part of a nomination is not recommended, including references to 

the relevant studies used as the basis for such a decision. Para. 32 emphasises that 

exemptions must fully comply with Decision IX/6 and other relevant decisions, and are 

intended to be limited to the levels needed for critical use exemptions. These are 

considered as temporary derogations from the phaseout of methyl bromide in that they are 

to apply only until there are technically and economically feasible alternatives that 

otherwise meet the criteria in Decision IX/6. The assessment by MBTOC should take a 

precise and transparent approach to the application of the criteria, having regard, especially, 

to paragraphs 4 and 20 of Annex I. 

Paragraphs 4 and 20 read: 

4. Although the burden of proof remains with the Party to justify a request for a 

critical-use exemption, MBTOC will provide in its report a clear explanation of its 

operation with respect to the process of making determinations for its 

recommendations, and clearly state the approach, assumptions and reasoning used in 

the evaluation of the critical-use nominations. When cuts or denials are proposed, the 

description should include citations and also indicate where alternatives are 

technically and economically feasible in circumstances similar to those in the 

nomination, as described in decision Ex.1/5, paragraph 8. 

20. In line with paragraph 4 above, in any case in which a Party makes a 

nomination which relies on the economic criteria of decision IX/6, MBTOC 

should, in its report, explicitly state the central basis for the Party’s economic 

argument and explicitly explain how it addressed that factor, and, in cases in 

which MBTOC recommends a cut; MBTOC should also provide an 

explanation of its economic feasibility. 
76 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

ANNEX III: Relative Effectiveness of MB/Pic Formulations Applied in CombinatioTable 11. Relative effectiveness of MB/Pic formulations applied in combination with low permeability bar

commercial standard MB/Pic formulation applied under standard low density polyethylene film

A large number of studies under field conditions in a number of regions, together with the large scale adoptio

these films as a means to reduce MB dosage rates. Research and development on low permeability barrier fil

1998, 2002 and 2006 MBTOC Assessment Reports and previous CUN reports. Typically, equivalent effectiv

lower methyl bromide dosage applied under LPBF compared with normal polyethylene containment films (S

advancements in the cost and technical performance of barrier films, especially metallised polyethylene films 

their suitability for use with methyl bromide and also some of the alternatives. 

 Untreated Methyl Bromide/Chloropicrin Mixtures (Product rate per treated area) 

Std film Barrier Film - Relative yield compared to standard polyethylene 

Yield 

MB/Pic 

Formuln.

Product 

Rate 

Not 

Spec 98:2 98:2 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 50:50 33:67

Country Region Commodity Brand or Type of 

Barrier Film 

 kg/ha 300 400 300 98 196 200 294 336 392 200 200 

Notes 

MB Dosage rate (g/m2) 392 294 66 131 134 197 225 263 100 66 

Spain Vinderos Strawb. Runner VIF - NotSpec 74 50:50 400 93 

Navalmanzano 78 50:50 400 80 

Fusarium, PhytopPythium, RhizoctoVerticillium 

Spain Vinderos Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 68 50:50 400 114 102 

Navalmanzano 34 50:50 400 76 75 

Fusarium, CladosRhizoctonia 

Spain Avitorejo Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 50:50 400 97 2003 results 

 Malvinas 50:50 400 99 

1998 Fusarium 

Spain Valencia Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 59 Not Spec 600 94 At 10cm & 30cm 

53 Not Spec 600 93 1999 results 

Spain Avitorejo Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 80 67:33 400 112 

Tariquejo 54 67:33 400 106 

Meloidogyne and (unspec.) 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Spain Moguer/Cartaya Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 50:50 392 99 Inoculum not specSpain Cabeza, Nav. Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 74 67:33 400 105, 92 1998 Two sites 

Arevalo, Nav. 84 50:50 400 104, 104 1999 results, nurs

Vinaderos, Nav. 49 50:50 400 95, 123 2000 results, nurs

Spain Huelva Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 82 67:33 400 101 1997-1998 Inoc.u

72 67:33 400 102 1998-1999 Inoc. U68 67:33 400 109 1999-2000 Inoc. U

Spain Moncada Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 60 98:2 600 95 

54 98:2 600 91 

1998 No major paFusarium buried 1

France Douville Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 65 Not Spec 800 99 Inoculum not spec

NZ Havelock North Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 83 67:33 500 98 Phytophthora pres

USA Florida Pepper VIF Plastopil 69 67:33 392 78 Nutgrass 

VIF Plastopil 69 67:33 392 99 Present 

VIF Vikase 69 67:33 392 83 VIF Vikase 69 67:33 392 86 

USA Florida 

Strawb Fruit, 

Cantaloupe 

Barrier - Pliant, 

Metallised 

98:2 

67:33 

 Trials on 18 Commercial Farms between 2000-2004; no increase in disease or weeds when rates reduced up to 50% under VIF wrt. polyethylene Nutgrass and path

USA California 72 67:33 336 108 Inoculum not spec

Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 

80 67:33 392 96 

USA Florida Tomato VIF - Not Spec 31 67:33 392 111 93 114 

Nutgrass and rootnematodes 

USA California Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 75 67:33 392 106 

83 67:33 392 111 65 67:33 392 102 

Watsonville, high pressure 

USA Florida Tomato VIF - Not Spec 67:33 392 "No significant reduction in yield" USA California Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 45 67:33 364 116 

 USA Florida VIF – not spec 392/ 196 

 Unweighted averages (relative % yield) 66 94 99 93 93 102 103 108 104 91 
78 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

ANNEX IV: Relative Yield of Crops Grown Under Barrier Films With 

Different MB/Pic Formulations Compared to the Standard 

Polyethylene from Trials Between 1998 and 2004.

Figure 3. Relative yield of crops (strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, cantaloupes) grown 

under barrier films with different MB/Pic formulations compared to the 

standard commercial treatment using standard polyethylene from trials 

between 1998 and 2004. 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

MB dosage rate (kg/ha) under barrier film

Relative Yield 

(▲MB/Pic 98:2; ● MB/Pic 67:33; ♦ MB/Pic 50:50; ■ MB/Pic 33:67). Data from ANNEX III. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 79

ANNEX V: Disclosure of Interest

MBTOC QSC SUBCOMMITTEE 

Co-Chairs 

1. Michelle Marcotte F Consultant Consultant, particularly food 

processing, regulations, structural and 

commodity treatments and irradiation 

A Canada 

Non-A5 

Members 

2. Jonathan Banks 

(Co-Chair Quarantine 

Task Force) 

M Consultant Consultant, postharvest, particularly 

non-chemical and gas technologies 

(fumigants, CA) and QPS uses of MB. 

Entomologist (PhD) 

A Australia 

Non-A5 

 3. Chris Bell M Consultant, formerly 

Central Science 

Laboratory (Government 

research) 

Postharvest technologies, particularly 

fumigants, phosphine; sulfuryl 

fluoride, controlled atmospheres and 

heat' (PhD) 

A UK 

Non-A5 

4. Fred Bergwerff M Eco2, Netherlands Fumigator, specialist in non-MB 

systems, including heat. 

D Netherlands 

Non-A5 

5. Kathy Dalip F CABI Quarantine entomologist (Ph D) D Jamaica 

A5 

6. Ricardo Deang M Consultant Regulatory and registration. 

Entomologist (PhD) 

A Philippines 

A5 

7. Patrick Ducom M Ministère de 

l’Agriculture 

(Government research) 

Postharvest and structural alternatives A France 

Non-A5 

8. Ken Glassey M MAFF, New Zealand Forester, government advisor on MB 

alternatives in forest products 

D New Zealand 

Non-A5 

9. Alfredo Gonzalez M Fumigator Phosphine, QPS and non-QPS 

treatments. Structures, commodities. 

D Philippines 

A5 

10. Darka Hamel F Institute for Plant 

Protection in Agriculture 

and Forestry 

(Government) 

Postharvest and structural treatments, 

regulations 

D Croatia 

CEIT 

11. Takashi Misumi M MAFF (Government 

research) 

QPS expert D Japan 

Non-A5 

12. David Okioga M Ministry of Environment 

and Natural Resources 

(Government regulatory) 

Postharvest and QPS MB alternatives 

(PhD) 

A Kenya 

A5 

13. Christoph 

Reichmuth 

M BBAGermany 

(Government research) 

Researcher, MB alternatives in 

postharvest/structures (PhD) 

B Germany 

A5 

14. Jordi Riudavets M IRTA-Department of 

Plant Protection. 

(Government Research) 

IPM for stored products and 

horticultural crops (PhD) 

D Spain 

Non-A5 

15. John Sansone M SCC Products 

(Fumigator) 

Fumigator, particular expertise in 

structures 

A US 

Non-A5 

16. Robert Taylor M Consultant Postharvest technology, specifically 

A5 uses 

A UK 

Non-A5 

17. Ken Vick M United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

(Government research) 

Research in MB alternatives, incl. 

QPS. Entomologist (PhD) 

A US 

Non-A5 

18. Chris Watson M IGROX Ltd (Fumigator) Practical use of MB and alternatives 

including the use of phosphine, 

Sulfuryl Fluoride,CO2 and Heat 

Treatments for commodities(inc 

timber) and structures 

A UK 

Non-A5 

19. Eduardo Willink M Ministry of Agriculture Quarantine entomologist (Ph 

D) 

D Argentina 

A5 

Totals M = 16 

F =3 

 A = 8 

B = 3 

C = 0 

D = 8 

 CEIT & A5=7 

Non-A5=12 

A - >10 years; B – 5-10; C – 2-5; D - <2 year 
80 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Co-chair 

Ms Michelle Marcotte 

Marcotte Consulting Inc. 

(Marcotte Consulting Inc is a Canadian corporation; its President, Michelle Marcotte, is 

located at: 

10104 East Franklin Ave. 

Maryland USA 20769 

Ms Michelle Marcotte was a member of the 1992 Methyl Bromide Assessment and subsequently a 

member of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee between 1992 and 2005; she was 

confirmed as Co-Chair in 2005. Until 1993 she worked for MDS Nordion, a supplier of radiation 

processing equipment which is an alternative to the use of methyl bromide in some commodity and 

quarantine situations. Since then, Ms Marcotte, through Marcotte Consulting, has provided consulting 

services to governments and agri-food companies in eight countries on agri-environmental issues, 

food technology, regulatory affairs and radiation processing. Marcotte Consulting has an interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of its long time market development work in food 

irradiation, an alternative to some methyl bromide uses, and because of its interest in food processing, 

food safety and trade. In the field of methyl bromide alternatives, Ms Marcotte has published case 

studies for pest control in food processing, for stored commodities, for alternatives for quarantine and 

for greenhouse use. She is a member of the Canada Industry-Government Methyl Bromide Working 

Group and the Canada-US Methyl Bromide Working Group; both organizations work to achieve 

phase out of methyl bromide in the agri-food sector. Marcotte has consulted to companies, industry 

associations, the International Atomic Energy Agency and US AID on irradiation as a methyl bromide 

alternative in food processing, quarantine and trade. She has also prepared consulting reports 

summarizing research in methyl bromide alternatives and case studies on food processing for US 

Environmental Protection Agency. Ms Marcotte has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs. Ms Marcotte’s spouse works for United States Department of Agriculture managing research 

in methyl bromide alternatives and is a member of MBTOC. He does not have proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Marcotte receives a consulting contract from Government of 

Canada, Environment Canada, a Party to the Montreal Protocol that is committed to the phase out of 

methyl bromide. Ms Marcotte pays for travel to TEAP, MBTOC and Montreal Protocol meetings out 

of consultancy funds provided by the Canadian government, Environment Canada, to support her 

work on MBTOC. 

Members 

Dr Jonathan Banks, Co-Chair Quarantine Task Force 

10 Beltana Road 

Pialligo 

Canberra ACT 

AUSTRALIA 

Dr. Jonathan Banks, Chair of TEAP’s QPS Task Force, is a private consultant. He was a member of 

the 1992 Methyl Bromide Assessment and from 1993 to 1998 and 2001 to 2005 co-chaired the 

Methyl Bromide TOC. He worked as a Research Scientist with the Australian Commonwealth 

Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) from1972 to 1999 on grain storage 

technologies, including use of improved use of fumigants. He is coinventor of carbonyl sulfide, an 

alternative fumigant to methyl bromide in some applications. Patent rights have been assigned to his 

employer, CSIRO. Dr Banks has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does 

not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. He has stock in 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 81

Brambles Ltd, a company that inter alia leases wooden pallets for freight. The pallets may or may not 

be treated with methyl bromide or alternatives. His spouse is co-owner of their commercial organic 

apple orchard. She has no financial interests relating to ozone-depleting substances. He has served on 

some national committees concerned with ODS and their control, and within the last 4 years has 

received contracts from UNEP, and other institutions and public companies related to methyl bromide 

alternatives and grain storage technology--including training in fumigation (methyl bromide and 

alternatives) and fumigation technology and recapture systems for methyl bromide. In 2005 and 

2006 he received some support from UNEP for TEAP and MBTOC activities. Other funding for his 

MBTOC activities has been through grants or contracts from the Department of Environment and 

Heritage, Australia or from personal contributions.

Dr Chris Bell 

Consultant, Formerly Central Science Library 

Sand Hutton 

York Y041 ILZ 

UNITED KINGDOM 

Dr. Christopher Hugh Bell, is a Fellow at the Central Science Laboratory (CSL), Department of 

Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, at York, UK, where he led research into fumigation technology, 

including studies on methyl bromide and potential alternatives which were sponsored by UK 

government agencies and private companies, until his retirement in 2004. He is also a Regional Editor 

for the Journal of Stored Products Research for Europe and Africa, an Elsevier journal publishing 

original research addressing problems encountered in the storage of durable commodities. Dr. Bell has 

no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does not represent organizations seeking to 

phase out ODSs. He works occasionally as a consultant to governments and companies on matters 

related to methyl bromide use or replacement, or the Montreal Protocol. Travel and subsistence to attend 

MBTOC meetings has been paid by the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 

(DEFRA), or by UNEP. 

Fred Bergweff 

CEO 

EcO2 BV 

James Wattstraat 6, 

3281 NK 

Numansdorp, The Netherlands 

Mr Fred Bergwerff is the General Manager for ECO2 B.V., a company that provides disinfestation 

services through controlled atmospheres technology and equipment, and related consulting services. 

He is employed in a full time capacity with responsibilities for joint-venture partnerships, technical 

assistance, training and promotion of good practices in the structural, commodity, quarantine and port 

disinfestation industries, particularly specialising in QPS and ISPM-15 treatments. ECO2 does not 

have a commercial relationship with any fumigant or pesticide manufacturers/registrants. ECO2 has 

been involved in research trials on MB alternatives and has assisted companies to adopt MB 

alternatives for structures, stored commodities and pre-shipment and quarantine treatments. ECO2 has 

an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of its expertise in disinfestation and pest 

control, particularly non-chemical treatments. Other than controlled atmospheres and the company 

ECO2 BV, Mr Bergwerff and his business partners in ECO2 have no proprietary interest in ODS or 

other alternatives to ODS, and do not own stock in companies that manufacture ODS or other 

alternatives to ODS. He carries out consulting work for organizations and companies that are seeking 

to phaseout ODS. Mr Bergwerff’s wife owns shares in ECO2, has no proprietary interest in ODS or 

other alternatives to ODS, and does not own stock in companies manufacturing ODS or other 
82 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

alternatives to ODS. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by ECO2, which receives no contribution for 

this travel from any other company or organisation. 

Dr Kathy M. Dalip Article 5 member 

Entomologist 

CARDI Belize 

Central Farm, Western Highway 

Cayo District 

Belize, Central America 

Mailing address: P.O. Box 2. Belmopan City 

Belize 

Dr. Kathy M Dalip is an Entomologist at the Caribbean Agriculture Research and Development 

Institute (CARDI), which has headquarters in Trinidad and offices in twelve member countries. 

Kathy works full-time at the CARDI Belize Unit, Central Farm, Western Highway, Cayo District, 

Belize, Central America. Between 2000 and 2005, Kathy was stationed at the CARDI Jamaica Unit 

where she was a member of the Jamaica Methyl Bromide Working Group. Her work at CARDI is 

focused in the areas of integrated pest management (IPM) and organic agriculture. Hence, her 

emphasis is on finding non-chemical pest control options to improve production and economic 

feasibility for farmers. Kathy has no proprietary interest alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not 

own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and has not done 

consulting for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by for by 

the Ozone Secretariat of UNEP. 

Dr Ricardo T Deang Article 5 member

4 Istanbul Street 

Merville Park 

Parañaque, Metro Manila 

THE PHILIPPINES 

Dr Ricardo Deang is a retired Deputy Administrator for Pesticides of the Fertilizer and Pesticide 

Authority (FPA) – a government regulatory office for fertilizers and pesticides – since April 1996. He 

was responsible for registration, restriction, and banning of pesticides when imminent hazards are 

posed; and certification of pesticide applicators and fumigators. FPA has an interest in the topics of 

the Montreal Protocol because the Philippines is a signatory to the Montreal Protocol and the office 

restricts/monitors methyl bromide importation and use. Prior to this position Mr. Deang worked as a 

research entomologist on biological control. Currently Mr Deang is Chairman of the Board of a 

consultancy firm, Management and Executive Network, Inc. He has no proprietary interest on 

alternatives or substitute to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODSs or alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs and does not engage in consulting for organizations seeking to phase out 

ODSs. His wife and their children have no proprietary interest on alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, 

do not own stock in companies producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and do not 

engage in consulting for organizations seeking to phase out ODSs. They have no interest in the topics 

of the Montreal Protocol. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by UNEP. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 83

Dr. Patrick Ducom 

Ministère de l’Agriculture 

LNDS - QUALIS 

71, avenue Edouard Bourleau - BP 71 

33883 VILLENAVE D'ORNON CEDEX 

Jacques François Patrick Ducom, Agronomy Engineer, is a long standing MBTOC member and head 

of the Laboratoire National Denrées Stockées (LNDS), Plant Protection Service, Ministry of 

Agriculture, France. Dr Ducom is a full time researcher in fumigation LNDS. He works occasionally 

as a consultant for Implementing Agencies of the Multilateral Fund on matters related to the Montreal 

Protocol. Dr Ducom has no proprietary interest on alternatives or substitute to ODSs, does not own 

stock in companies producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not engage in 

consulting for organizations seeking to phase out ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid from the 

LNDS budget 

Mr Kenneth Glassey 

Senior Advisor Operational Standards Biosecurity New Zealand 

Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 

Pastoral House, 24 the Terrace 

P.O. Box 2526 

Wellington, NEW ZEALAND 

Mr Kenneth Logan Glassey is a Senior Biosecurity Adviser at the Ministry of Agriculture and 

Forestry (MAF). Ken Glassey is a full time adviser on Phytosanitary Treatments and Treatment 

Operators at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Head Office, Wellington, New Zealand. MAF 

has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because quarantine and preshipment treatments 

uses a significant amount of methyl bromide (218 tonnes in 2004). Current responsibilities cover 

researching, developing and reviewing New Zealand’s import standards including operational 

standards such as treatments for imported commodities. This also involves monitoring quality and 

adequacy, initiating remedial action as necessary, and the provision of advice on the practical 

application and implications of such standards. Mr Glassey has been involved in QPS inspection and 

treatments for 20 years with particular expertise with forest produce, and worked in forest 

management for 11 years prior to that. Mr Glassey has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He does not work as a 

consultant to implementing agencies on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. Mr Glassey’s 

partner living in same home does not work for or consults for any organization which has an interest 

in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. She has no proprietary interest alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and 

does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to TEAP/TOC/TSB meetings is 

paid by MAF. 

Mr Alfredo T. Gonzalez Article 5 Member 

President 

Pestcon Pest Management and General Services 

33 Evening News, West Triangle 

Quezon City 

THE PHILIPPINES 

Mr Gonzalez is president of Pestcon Pest Management and General Services, a company with an 

interest in the Montreal Protocol because it uses methyl bromide in the for Quarantine and preshipment treatments as well as ISPM 15 treatments for wood packaging materials. Mr Gonzalez, has 

no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does not own stock in companies 
84 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Presently he is the general consultant for the

implementation of the Methyl Bromide Phase-out program in the Philippines for the Government of 

his country, under the Department of Natural Resources- Philippine Ozone Desk (DENR-POD) in 

cooperation with the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), which is directly related to the 

Montreal Protocol. Neither Mr Gonzalez’s wife or their children have any proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes in ODSs. Expenses related to Mr Gonzalez’s attendance to MBTOC 

meetings are paid by UNEP. 

Dr Darka Hamel Article 5 member 

Institute for Plant Protection in Agriculture and Forestry of Republic Croatia 

Rim 98, 10000 Zagreb 

CROATIA 

Dr. Darka Hamel is an entomologist responsible the protection of stored products. Dr Hamel is a full 

time executive manager at the Institute for Plant Protection in Agriculture and Forestry of the 

Republic Croatia (PPI). The PPI has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because 

companies using methyl bromide for treatment in accordance with ISPM 15 are authorized to do so in 

accordance with the PPI recommendation. Dr. Hamel has no proprietary interest alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and does not consulting for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Dr. Hamel works 

occasionally as a consultant to the Croatian Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Water Management 

or the Ministry for Environmental Protection and Physical Planning regarding legislation on matters 

related to the Montreal Protocol. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by UNEP.

Mr Takashi Misumi

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries MAFF, Japan 

1-16-10 Shin-yamashita, maka-ku 

Yokohama, 231-0801 

JAPAN 

Mr. Takashi Misumi, member of MBTOC since 2005 is a senior researcher at the Yokohama Plant 

Protection Station (YPPS). Mr. Misumi is a full time Researcher at the Quarantine Disinfestation 

Technology Section, Research Division of YPPS. He has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Neither his spouse nor their 

children work for organizations with has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. Expenses 

related to the attendance of MBTOC meetings are paid by International department of MAFF. 

Dr David M Okioga Article 5 member

Coordinator, Kenya Ozone Office, National Environment Management Office 

Ministry of the Environment and National Resources 

PO Box 67839 

Nairobi 

KENYA 

Dr. David Okioga is a founding member of MBTOC, joining in 1992. He was MBTOC co-chair 

between 1997 and 2002. Dr Okioga was the Director, National Plant Quarantine Services of Kenya 

for sixteen years. He also served as the Coordinator in Agricultural Botany under the Kenya 

Agricultural Research Institute, Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture on Plant Breeder's Rights, 

Member of the National Agricultural Research Centre, National Horticultural Research Centre, 

National Potato Research Centre, and the National Committee for the National Genebank. Dr. Okioga 

has undertaken a number of contracts from the African Unity (then Organization of the African 

Unity), FAO and UNEP. Some of these consultancies were related to crop protection, where methyl 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 85

bromide was considered as the chemical of choice for soil fumigation, whereas others were on 

strengthening the Montreal Protocol policies on ODS phase out in the African region (including 

methyl bromide). In 1995, Dr. Okioga was appointed Coordinator, of the National Ozone Unit 

(NOU) of Kenya by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Kenya, in consultation with 

UNDP, a post that he still holds at present. Dr. Okioga's main responsibility is strengthening the 

government of Kenya in meeting the requirements of the Montreal Protocol and in phasing out of 

ODS in the country.Dr. Okioga has no proprietary interests in alternatives for ODS and does not 

consult for companies seeking to phase out ODS. Travel and expenses related to his attendance to 

MBTOC meetings are paid by UNEP. 

Dr. Jordi Ruidavets 

IRTACrop Protection 

Carretera a Cabrils Km. 2 

E-08348 Cabrils (Barcelona) 

SPAIN 

Dr. Jordi Riudavets is a Researcher at the Institute for Agrifood Research and Technology (IRTA) of 

Spain. He is a full time entomologist at the Crop Protection Division, with experience in the 

development and transfer of integrated pest management (IPM) programs for stored products and 

horticultural crops. The IRTA has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because is a stateowned company of the Catalan Government, and its activities are concerned with scientific research 

and technology transfer in the areas of agriculture, aquaculture and the agrifood industry. Dr. 

Riudavets has no proprietary interest alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in 

companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult for 

organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He occasionally works as a consultant to the Spanish 

Government, food companies, pest control companies and private companies with interest in matters 

related to the Montreal Protocol. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by the Spanish Ministry of the 

Environment. 

Prof. Dr. Christoph Reichmuth 

Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry 

Institute for Stored product Protection 

Koenigin-Luise-St.19 

D-14195 Berlin 

GERMANY 

Prof. Dr. Christoph Reichmuth is chemist and responsible for stored product protection. Dr 

Reichmuth is a full time director of the Institute for Stored Product Protection of the Federal 

Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry in Berlin, Germany, of the German Ministry 

for Nutrition, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, Germany. 

The Federal Ministry for Nutrition, Agriculture and Consumer Protection together with the Federal 

Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety has a pronounced interest to 

replace methyl bromide as quickly as possible, due to the strongly expressed political interest and 

public opinion in Germany. Dr Reichmuth has no proprietary interest, patent for production of 

phosphine from magnesium phosphide in a generator with the company Degesch Detia, Germany, 

patent for the treatment of stored products and organic materials (wood) with inert atmospheres with 

the company Buse, Germany, patent for pheromone traps for Lepidopteran pests with the MaxPlanck-Society, Germany, at present there are no royalties paid from the patents to Dr Reichmuth. He 

gave and gives advice to private companies in Germany to obtain critical use exemptions for methyl 

bromide in helping to understand the English forms of UNEP/TEAP, he works occasionally as a 

consultant to UNIDO, supporting projects or parties to replace methyl bromide. Travel to MBTOC 

meetings or related meetings concerning the phaseout of methyl bromide are paid by the German 
86 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Ministry for Nutrition, Agriculture and Consumer Protection or by the German Ministry for the 

Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. 

Mr John Sansone 

SCC Products 

2641 W. Woodland 

Anaheim, CA 92801 

UNITED STATES 

Mr John Sansone is the President and General Manager for SCC Products. He is employed in a full 

time capacity with responsibilities for sales, training, stewardship and as a consultant for end users in 

the residential, commodity, quarantine and port fumigation industries. SCC Products has a 

commercial relationship with several fumigant/pesticide manufacturers/registrants, some of which 

offer products which are considered alternatives to MB. SCC Products has been involved in research 

trials in the food processing and stored commodities sectors. The firm was instrumental in the 

transition to alternatives for the residential fumigation marketplace and currently is transitioning 

alternatives into the commodity fumigation market. It is also involved in the implementation of 

recapture equipment for commodity fumigation companies in California. SCC Products has an interest 

in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of its relationship and expertise in many fumigation 

areas. Mr Sansone has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own 

stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult for 

organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He does not work as a consultant to the UN, UNEP, MLF, 

Implementing Agencies, Governments, companies, etc. on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. 

Mr Sansone has no relatives or business partners that work for or consult for any organization with an 

interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol nor does he have relatives or business partner having a 

proprietary interests in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, or who own stock in companies producing 

ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs or consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. 

Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by SCC Products, which receives no contribution for this travel 

from anyone. 

Mr. Robert Taylor 

Consultant 

27 Lancet Lane 

Loose, Maidstone, Kent ME15 9SA 

UNITED KINGDOM 

Mr Robert Taylor retired from the Natural Resources Institute (NRI) of the United Kingdom in 2001. 

The NRI was a government establishment involved in biological/agricultural research, development 

and training, primarily in relation to developing countries. In recent years the NRI has become part of 

the University of Greenwich. Crop protection in both the pre- and post-harvest stages has always 

been a major feature of NRI’s research and development programmes. Pest management, including 

the use of fumigants, has always features strongly in such programmes. Mr Taylor has no proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to methyl bromide and does not own stock in companies 

consulting for organizations seeking to phase out the chemical. He works occasionally as a consultant 

to UN agencies including UNIDO and UNEP on matters relating to the Montreal Protocol. Mr Taylor 

has no relatives or business partners who work or consult for organizations which have an interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol, nor does he have relatives or business partners having proprietary 

interests in alternatives or substitutes to methyl bromide, or who own stock in companies producing 

alternatives or substitutes to methyl bromide, or who consult for companies seeking to phase out 

methyl bromide. Travel and subsistence for MBTOC meetings is paid for by the UK government and 

most recently by the Department for the Environment Farming and Rural Affairs and UNEP. 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 87

Dr Ken Vick 

Department of Agriculture 

Agricultural Research Service/ National Program Staff 

5601 Sunnyside Ave 

Beltsville MD 20705 – 5139 

UNITED STATES 

Dr Kenneth W. Vick is a Senior National Program Leader for methyl bromide alternatives research at 

the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). As 

National Program Leader he helps lead the almost $20 million ARS research program to develop 

alternatives to the use of methyl bromide for soil and post-harvest applications. ARS has an interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it was assigned lead responsibility for developing 

alternatives as the primary research arm of the USDA and because it was deemed to be of high 

priority by the United States Government. Dr Vick has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and does not consult for any organization. His spouse, a MBTOC co-chair, consults for 

governments, NGOs and companies that have an interest in the phase out of methyl bromide because 

they are Parties to the Protocol or because they are investigating or developing food irradiation a 

methyl bromide alternative for some commodities and in some quarantine situation. She has no 

proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing 

ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does consult for organizations seeking to phaseout 

ODSs. Dr Vick's travel to MBTOC and Montreal Protocol meetings is paid by the USDA Agriculture 

Research Service. 

Mr Chris Watson 

IGROX Ltd 

White Hall, Worlingworth 

Woolbridge, Suffolk, IP13 7HW 

UNITED KINGDOM 

Mr.Christopher Russell Watson is a MBTOC member since 1992. He works for Igrox Ltd in the UK 

as Chairman a part-time position since he is presently semi-retired. Mr Watson has been involved in 

the fumigation industry using both methyl bromide and other fumigants for 40 years. Together with 

his wife he formed Igrox Ltd in 1976, which is now one of the largest fumigation and pest control 

servicing companies in the UK. For the past 20 years he has been involved in working closely with 

government agencies in the UK to develop safe and efficient fumigation practices and procedures. 

Igrox Ltd has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it supplies services and 

products that are alternatives to methyl bromide, as well as continuing to provide services using 

methyl bromide in situations where it is still necessary. Mr Watson owns stock in Igrox Ltd, and 

occasionally carries out consultancy work for agencies seeking to phase out ODS's which have 

included the UK government agencies as well as private companies. His spouse doesn’t not own 

stocks in Igrox Ltd and has no proprietary interests in alternatives or substitutes for ODS's and does 

not consult for companies seeking to phase out ODS's. Travel to MBTOC meetings was subsidised by 

Igrox Ltd and the British Pest Control Association until 2005. Presently, Mr Watson covers travel 

expenses from his own personal funds with some assistance from the UK Government(DEFRA) 
88 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Mr Eduardo Willink Article 5 member 

Estación Experimental Agroindustrial Obispo Colombrés 

William Cross 3150, Las Talitas, 

4101 Tucumán 

ARGENTINA 

Mr Eduardo Willink is Director of Special Disciplines and Head of the Agricultural Zoology 

Department of the Estación Experimental Agroindustrial Obispo Colombrés Tucumán, Argentina. He 

is a full time researcher in entomology who leads a team of researchers working on quarantine 

treatments, systems approach and pest host status, and is a member of the Technical Panel on 

Phytosanitary Treatments within IPPC, FAO. The organization has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol because its mission is to resolve regional agro industrial problems with the least 

impact on the environment. Mr Willink has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and 

does not consulting for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Neither his spouse or dependant 

children work for or consult for organizations with an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol, 

nor do they have any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, own stock in 

companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes or consult for organizations seeking to 

phaseout ODSs. Travel to TOC is paid by UNEP. 

MBTOC – SOILS SUBCOMMITTEE

Names Gender Affiliation Expertise Length 

of 

service 

Country Article 5 

status 

Co-Chairs 

1. Mohamed 

Besri 

M Institut Agronomique 

et Vétérinaire Hassan 

II (Academia) 

Professor, researcher, particularly 

MB alts for vegetables. 

Pathologist (PhD) 

B Morocco A5 

2. Marta 

Pizano 

F Consultant Consultant, MB alts, particularly 

cut flower production and IPM. 

Pathologist (MSc) 

B Colombia A5 

3. Ian Porter M Consultant Researcher, specialist in soil 

disinfestation, chemical and non 

chemical alternatives, 

solarisation, biocontrol and IPM. 

Pathologist (PhD) 

B Australia Non-A5 

Members 

4. Marten 

Barel 

M Consultant Consultant, , specialist on soil 

fumigation, Substrates, 

Hydroponics, Steaming, Biofumigation and Solarization 

D Netherland

s 

Non-A5 

5. Antonio 

Bello 

M Centro de Ciencias 

Medioambientales 

(Government research) 

Professor, non-chemical 

alternatives. Pathologist. (PhD, 

Prof.) 

A Spain Non-A5 

 6. Aocheng 

Cao 

M Chinese Academy of 

Agricultural Sciences 

(Government research) 

Researcher, soil alternatives, 

particularly in China (A5) 

context. Pathologist. (PhD) 

C China A5 

7. Peter 

Caulkins 

M Associate Director, 

Special Review & Reregistration Division 

US EPA 

Registration of alternatives, 

regulatory issues (PhD) 

D US Non A-5 

8. Ariane 

Elmas 

F Totken Lebanon – 

consulting 

Economics and trade D Lebanon A5 

9. Fabio 

Chaverri 

M IRET-Universidad 

Nacional (Academia) 

Researcher, soil alternatives, 

including solarisation. 

Microbiologist. 

C Costa Rica A5 

10. Abraham 

Gamliel 

M Agricultural Research 

Organization, 

The Volcani Center, 

(Government 

Research) 

Alternatives for soils, 

horticulture. Pathologist (PhD) 

D Israel Non-A5 

11. Saad Hafez M University of Idaho 

(Academia) 

Soils alternatives, nematologist 

(PhD, Prof.) 

C US Non-A5 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 89

12. George 

Lazarovits 

M Agriculture & Agrifood Canada 

(Government research) 

Researcher, non chemical control 

of soilborne pathogens (PhD) 

C Canada Non-A5 

13. Nahum 

Marbán 

Mendoza 

M Universidad Autonoma 

de Chapingo 

(Academia) 

Researcher, soils alternatives, 

particularly nematode problems 

(PhD, Prof.) 

C Mexico A5 

14. Melanie 

Miller 

F Consultant Consultant in MB alternatives 

use and policy (PhD) 

A Belgium Non-A5 

15. Andrea 

Minuto 

M Agroinnova Universita 

Torino (Academia) 

Researcher, MB and alternatives 

in soils. Pathologist (PhD) 

D Italy Non-A5 

16. Kazufumi 

Nishi 

M Nat Institute of 

Vegetables and Tea 

Science (Government 

research) 

Nonchemical alts, particularly 

heat systems for soils (PhD) 

D Japan Non-A5 

17. James D. 

Schaub 

M United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

(Government 

regulatory) 

Agricultural economist (PhD) C US Non-A5 

18. Sally 

Schneider 

F United States 

Department of 

Agriculture 

(Government research) 

Researcher in soils alts, 

particularly replant problems and 

propagative nursery material . 

Nematologist. PhD) 

C US Non-A5 

19. JL 

Staphorst 

M Plant Protection 

Research Institute 

(Parastatal research) 

 Soil Microbiologist (DSc) B South 

Africa 

A5 

20. Akio 

Tateya 

M Syngenta Japan K.K. Application of MB and alts, 

particularly in Japan 

A Japan Non-A5 

21. Alejandro 

Baleiro 

M Instituto Nacional de 

Tecnología 

Agropecuaria 

(Government research) 

Introduction/use of soils alts, 

including tobacco. Agronomist 

(MSc). 

C Argentina A5 

22. Nick Vink M University of 

Stellenbosch 

(Academia) 

Agricultural economics (PhD, 

Prof.) 

C South 

Africa 

A5 

23. Jim Wells M Environmental 

Solutions Group, LLC 

(Consultant) 

Registration and regulatory - MB 

and alternatives, soil uses 

A US Non-A5 

TOTALS 19 M 

4 F 

 4A 

4B 

9C 

6D 

 14 non-A5 

9 A5 

A - >10 years; B – 5-10; C – 2-5; D - <2 year 

Co-chairs 

Professor Mohamed Besri Article 5 co-chair 

Department of Plant Pathology 

Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II 

Rabat 

MOROCCO 

Prof. Mohamed Besri, is a full time Professor of Plant Pathology and Integrated Disease Management 

at the Hassan II Institute of Agronomy and Veterinary Medicine, Rabat, Morocco (HII IAVM). The 

HII IAVM has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it houses specialists in Soilborne Plant Pathogens and MLF projects (strawberries, bananas, cut flowers). It advises the Ministry 

of Agriculture on all aspects of alternatives to Methyl Bromide. Dr Besri has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs . Dr Besri works occasionally as a consultant to UNEP on matters related to 

the Montreal Protocol. Neither Dr Besri’s spouse, business partner or dependant children living at 

same home work for or consults for any organization which has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol, nor do any of them have any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs, nor do any of them own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs or consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Costs associated to travel, 
90 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

communication, and others related to participation in the TEAP, MBTOC, and relevant Montreal 

Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 

Ms Marta Pizano Article 5 co-chair 

Consultant 

Bogotá 

COLOMBIA 

Ms Marta Pizano is a consultant on methyl bromide alternatives, particularly for cut flower 

production, and has actively promoted methyl bromide alternatives among growers in many countries. 

She is a regular consultant for the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund (MLF) and its implementing 

agencies. In this capacity, she has contributed to the methyl bromide phase-out programs in nearly 

twenty Article 5 countries around the world, assisting growers with the adoption of sustainable 

alternatives and the implementation of IPM programs. She is a frequent speaker at national and 

international methyl bromide conferences and has authored numerous articles and publications on 

alternatives to this fumigant. She has been a member of MBTOC since 1998 and a co-chair since 

2005. Neither Ms Pizano nor her husband or their children own stock or have proprietary interest in 

companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes. Costs associated to travel, 

communication, and others related to participation in the TEAP, MBTOC, and relevant Montreal 

Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 

Dr Ian Porter 

Principle Researcher, Plant Pathology 

Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 

AUSTRALIA 

Dr Ian Porter is the Principle Researcher in Plant Pathology with the Victorian Department of Primary 

Industries (DPI). DPI has an interest in developing sustainable control measures for plant pathogens 

and biosecurity. He is a member of a number of National Committees regulating ODS, has led the 

Australian research program on methyl bromide alternatives for soils and has 27 years experience in 

researching sustainable methods for soil disinfestation of plant pathogens with over 200 research 

publications. He has been a member of MBTOC since 1997, Soils sub committee chair since 2001 

and MBTOC Co-chair since 2005. Neither, Dr Ian Porter, wife or children have any proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Dr Porter is presently assisting National research agencies in 

Australia develop national priorities for IPM and soil health. He has acted occasionally as a key 

consultant for UNEP and UNIDO in developing programmes to assist China, Mexico and CEIT 

countries to replace methyl bromide. The Victorian DPI has in the past made in-kind contributions to 

attend MBTOC and UNEP meetings, but provides no present support. The Australian Federal 

Government Research Funds and funds obtained through the Ozone Secretariat have provided funds 

to support travel and expenses for MBTOC activities. 

Members of Record 

Mr Marten Barel 

Consultant 

THE NETHERLANDS 

Marten Barel, a member of MBTOC since 2002, is a consultant. He has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Since 1999 he has worked as a consultant and trainer in MLF 

methyl bromide projects for GTZ, UNDP and UNIDO. For more than 30 years he has provided 

growers, fumigators and companies with specialist technical advice and training in methods of 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 91

controlling soilborne pests and soil pasteurisation/ disinfestation techniques in nurseries and 

horticultural crop production. For 40 years (until 1999) he owned a fumigation / soil disinfestation 

company that used methyl bromide until it was phased-out in the early 1980s, and then developed 

alternatives to methyl bromide e.g. negative pressure steaming techniques. His social partner and 

children do not work for organisations which have an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol, 

and have no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and do not own stock in 

companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is 

currently funded by the Ministry of VROM in the Netherlands. 

Prof. Antonio Bello 

Centro de Ciencias Medioambientales/ CSIC 

Madrid 

SPAIN 

Dr Antonio Bello Pérez is a full time Research Professor at the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones 

Cientificas, Madrid, Spain. The institute has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because 

of the environmental impact of methyl bromide. Dr Bello Pérez has no proprietary interest alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes 

to ODSs and does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He works occasionally as 

a consultant for UNEP, Implementing Agencies and Governments, on matters related to the Montreal 

Protocol. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by his institution, which in turn receives contributions 

for this travel from national projects. 

Prof. Cao Aocheng Article 5 Member 

Institute of Plant Protection 

Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences 

Beijing 

CHINA 

Dr. Aocheng Cao is a Research Professor at the Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of 

Agricultural Sciences focusing on research in pesticide sciences. The Chinese Academy of 

Agricultural Sciences, a non-profit organization, is interested in the topics of the Montreal Protocol 

because soil pathogens and nematodes are important pests in China and alternatives to methyl 

bromide are urgently needed. Dr Cao has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, 

does not own stock in companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes and does not 

consult for organizations seeking to phase-out ODSs. His spouse also works for the Chinese 

Academy of Agricultural Sciences, which has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol as it 

conducts research on pest control, but has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs, nor does she own stock in companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes or 

perform consultancy for organizations seeking to phase out ODSs. Expenses related to Dr Cao’s 

attendance to MBTOC meetings are paid by UNEP. 

Dr. Peter Caulkins 

Associate Director, Special Review & Reregistration Division EPA 

Washington D. C. 

UNITED STATES 

Dr Peter Caulkins is the Associate Director in the Special Review and Reregistration Division in the 

Office of Pesticide Programs in the U.S.EPA. The U.S. EPA has sole authority for the regulation of 

all pesticide use in the U.S. and therefore has a strong interest in the Montreal Protocol’s phase-out of 

methyl bromide. Neither Dr Caulkins nor his wife or their son have any proprietary interests in ODSs 

or their alternatives, own no stock in either ODS companies or companies providing alternatives and 

do not do any consulting for organizations seeking to phase-out ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is 

paid for by EPA. 
92 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Prof. Fabio Chaverri Article 5 member

Instituto Regional de Estudios en Sustancias Tóxicas 

Universidad Nacional 

Heredia 

COSTA RICA 

Mr Fabio Chaverri is a professor at the Universidad Nacional de Costa Rica where he works 

as a full time researcher on pesticide alternatives at the IRET (Central American Research 

Centre on Toxic Substances). The IRET has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol 

since its main objective is to implement alternatives for toxic substances with a strong 

environmental or human health impact, such as ODSs. Mr Chaverri has no proprietary 

interest on alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing 

ODS or their alternatives or substitutes and does not consult for organizations seeking to 

phaseout ODSs. He occasionally works as a consultant for UNDP and UNEP, governments 

and companies on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. His spouse does not work for or 

consult for any organization with has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol and 

has no proprietary interest on alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor does she own stock in 

companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes or consult for organizations 

seeking to phaseout ODSs . Mr Chaverri’s travel expenses to cover attendance to MBTOC 

meetings is paid by UNEP. 

Ms Ariane Elmas Article 5 member

Tokten Lebanon 

LEBANON 

Ms Ariane Elmas was formerly the project manager of a “Trade and Environment” project funded by 

UNEP, managed by UNDP and implemented by the Ministry of Environment in Lebanon. This 

project published a report on the effects of trade liberalization in Lebanon with special focus on 

products where methyl bromide is used and includes an annual profitability analysis and a cost benefit 

analysis comparing the Methyl Bromide alternatives used for each crop. Ms Elmas, is an economist 

and is currently the Project Manager at the UNDP in Lebanon. The UNDP has an interest in the 

topics of the Montreal Protocol because it is one of its implementing agencies and as such manages 

the MB phase out project implemented in Lebanon under the coordination of the Ministry of the 

Environment. Neither Ms Elmas, nor her spouse or their dependant children have any proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, own stock in companies producing ODS or their 

alternatives or substitutes or consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Expenses related to 

Ms Elmas’ attendance to MBTOC meetings is paid by UNEP. 

Dr. Abraham Gamliel 

Agricultural Research Organization, 

The Volcani Center, 

Bet Dagan 

ISRAEL 

Dr Abraham Gamliel is a full time senior researcher on methods and technologies for pest control and 

pesticide application at the Ministry of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Organization, Volcani 

Center, Bet Dagan, Israel .He is also an adjunct professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 

Faculty of Agriculture, Rehovot, Israel. ARO Volcani Center has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol because it is the research and development institute for solving the farmer’s 

problem and for developing environmentally safe crop production. Dr Gamliel has no proprietary 

interest alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 93

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. 

He works occasionally as a consultant for the Government, on matters related to the Montreal 

Protocol. Neither his spouse nor their children work for or consult for organizations having an interest 

in the topics of the Montreal Protocol nor do they have a proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODS, own stock in companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes. Dr 

Gamliel’s travel expenses to attend MBTOC meetings are paid by the Ministry of Agriculture of 

Israel. 

Prof Saad Hafez 

Plant, Soil and Entomological Sciences 

Univ. of Idaho 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

Dr. Saad L. Hafez is a full Professor of Nematology at the University of Idaho, working at the Parma 

Research and Extension Center. The University of Idaho has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol as it conducts research on methyl bromide alternatives for nematode control. Dr Hafez has 

no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes and does not consult for organizations seeking to 

phaseout ODSs. Dr. Hafez occasionally works as a consultant for UNDP, UNEP, and UNIDO, 

Governments, companies and others on projects relating to Methyl Bromide alternatives. Dr. Hafez’s 

spouse children do not work for or consult for any organization with an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol. His spouse and their dependant children have no proprietary interest in alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs, do not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and do not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Costs of travel to enable Dr 

Hafez to attend MBTOC meetings are paid by the University of Idaho. 

Dr George Lazarovits 

Agriculture & Agri-food Canada, 

London, Ontario 

CANADA 

Dr George Lazarovits is a research scientist at the Southern Crop Protection and Food Research 

Center of Agriculture and Agrifood Canada (AAFC). He is employed as a fulltime research scientist 

to investigate aspects of plant pathology involved with management of soilborne plant pathogens. 

AAFC has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because Canada has a vested interest in 

eliminating ozone- depleting substances such as methyl bromide, which are still being used by 

Canadian growers and Industries. AAFC, in collaboration with Environment Canada, is charged with 

overseeing the phase-out of ozone depleting products. Dr Lazarovits has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or those 

manufacturing alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not act as consultant for organizations 

seeking to phase-out ODSs, other than non profit government agencies charged with enforcing the 

regulations of the Montreal Protocol. He is involved in advising as a consultant to Environment 

Canada (EC) on matters related to the Montreal Protocol, including evaluation of critical use 

nominations submitted to them by Canadian growers or Industries seeking exemptions for use of MB 

under CUE. Such nominations, if approved by EC, are eventually adjudicated by members of 

MBTOC. Dr Lazarovits’ spouse has no involvement whatsoever with any issues or has any interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol or any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. 

She does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does 

not consult for organizations seeking to phase-out ODSs. They have no dependent children living with 

them and their children have no involvement in any businesses dealing with issues that are in any way 

related to the Montreal Protocol. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid for by AACF, and occasionally 

Environment Canada, from A Base budgets. 
94 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Dr Nahum Marbán-Mendoza Article 5 member 

Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo 

MEXICO 

Dr Nahum Marbán-Mendoza is a full-time professor of Integrated Pest Management and Plant 

Nematology at the Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo in the graduate programme of crop 

protection. He has over 25 years experience in the research and development of non-chemical 

alternatives to control plant parasitic nematodes associated with different crops in Central America 

and Mexico. Dr Marbán-Mendoza was MBTOC co-chair from 2002 to 2005. He has also assisted 

implementing agencies of the Montreal Protocol (UNEP, UNIDO) with methyl bromide phase-out 

programs in Mexico and Guatemala; occasionally he receives funds for wages and travel. Neither Dr 

Marbán nor his spouse or their daughter have ever had proprietary interest or owned stocks in a 

company producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes, nor have they ever consulted for 

organizations seeking to phase out ODSs Costs related to Dr Marbán’s participation in MBTOC 

activities are paid by UNEP.

Dr Melanie K Miller 

Consultant 

La Hulpe 

BELGIUM 

Dr Melanie Miller, a member of MBTOC since 1993, is a consultant on methyl bromide and 

alternative technologies. She has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and 

does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives. She has authored a large number of 

papers and publications about methyl bromide alternatives for UNEP and other government bodies. 

She is a reviewer of project proposals for MLF and GEF methyl bromide projects, and has provided 

technical assistance to many methyl bromide projects in Article 5 countries. She was a sector expert 

in the World Bank’s Ozone Operations Review Group (OORG) from 1999, member/adviser of the 

TEAP Economic Options Committee (EOC) Task Force on Methyl Bromide in 1996-1998, and 

analysed data for the TEAP Task Force reports on MLF replenishment in 2002 and 2005. Her spouse 

is an international expert on technical and legal aspects of the Montreal Protocol and currently works 

as a consultant. Her spouse has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does 

not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives. The cost of travel to MBTOC meetings 

is paid from her own personal funds and sometimes by UNEP, at least in part. 

Dr. Andrea Minuto 

Ass. Prof. University of Torino 

ITALY 

Dr Andrea Minuto is a full time assistant professor at the University of Torino (c/o Agroinnova) in 

Italy. Agroinnova has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of the research 

conducted on soilborne pest and disease management. Dr Minuto has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or their 

alternatives or substitutes. He does consulting (as Agroinnova) for organizations seeking to phaseout 

ODSs and also works occasionally as a consultant for Implementing Agencies and Governments on 

matters related to the Montreal Protocol. His spouse does not work or consul for organizations which 

have an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol or organizations seeking phase-out of ODS, nor 

does she have any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, or own stock in 

companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by 

Agroinnova, which receives contributions from the Italian Ministry of Environment, Territory and 

Sea.
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 95

Dr Kazufumi Nishi 

National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO) 

JAPAN 

Dr Kazufumi Nishi is a Chief Researcher at the National Institute of Vegetable and Tea Science of 

Japan (NIVTS). He conducts research on plant disease control techniques, particularly physical 

control methods. Dr. Nishi has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not 

own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult 

for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by the International 

Department at MAFF. 

Dr. James D. Schaub 

Office of the Chief Economist 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Washington 

UNITED STATES 

Dr. James D. Schaub is an economist and Director of the Office of Risk Assessment and Cost-benefit 

Analysis, Office of the Chief Economist, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Dr. 

Schaub is employed full time within the Office of the Chief Economist, USDA in Washington D.C. 

The USDA has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of its interest in 

environmentally sound agricultural production systems and the protection stored commodities. 

Further, USDA is responsible for protection of animal and plant health from quarantine pests. Dr. 

Schaub has no proprietary interests in alternatives or substitute ODSs, does not own stock in 

companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult for 

organizations seeking to phase out ODSs. He does not work as a consultant to any organization on 

matters related to the Montreal Protocol. Neither his spouse nor dependant children living at same 

home work for or consult for any organization which has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol, nor do any of them have any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor 

do any of them own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs or 

consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by Office of 

the Chief Economist, USDA.

Dr. Sally Schneider 

National Program Leader – Horticulture, Pathogens & Germplasm 

USDA ARS 

Beltsville, MD 

UNITED STATES 

Dr Sally Schneider is a National Program Leader at the United States Department of 

Agriculture. Dr. Schneider is a full time National Program Leader for Horticulture, 

Pathogens, and Germplasm at the Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville, Maryland, 

U.S.A. The Agricultural Research Service has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol because they are the in-house research agency for the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture. Dr. Schneider has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, 

does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and 

does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Dr. Schneider does not work, 

occasionally or otherwise, as a consultant to UN, UNEP, MLF, Implementing Agencies, 

Governments, companies, etc. on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. Dr. Schneider 

does not have a spouse, business partner, social partner, or dependant children living in same 

home. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by United States Department of Agriculture.
96 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Dr. JL (Stappies) Staphorst Article 5 member

Senior Scientist 

Plant Protection Research Institute (PPRI) 

Agriculture Research Council (ARC) 

Pretoria 

SOUTH AFRICA 

Dr JL (Stappies) Staphorst is a soil microbiologist at the Plant Protection Research Institute of the 

Agricultural Research Council of South Africa. Dr Staphorst is a full time senior researcher, advisor 

and mentor in the Plant Pathology and Microbiology Division of the Institute in Pretoria, South 

Africa. The Plant Protection Research Institute has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol 

because it houses the specialist Soil-borne Plant Diseases Unit and forms part of the Public Support 

Services Division that advises the Department of Agriculture on all aspects of plant diseases, pests 

and pesticides. Dr Staphorst has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not 

own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does no consulting 

for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Dr Staphorst works occasionally as a consultant to 

UNEP on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. His spouse has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs and does no consulting for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to 

MBTOC meetings is paid by UNEP with logistical support from the Plant Protection Research 

Institute. 

Mr. Akio Tateya 

Technical Adviser 

Syngenta Japan K.K. 

Tokyo 

JAPAN 

Mr. Akio Tateya is a Technical Adviser at Syngenta Japan K.K. a pesticide producing company, 

which does not produce substitutes to methyl bromide. He also a technical adviser for the Japan 

Fumigation Technology Association, a non-profit body that is financially supported by the Japanese 

Government and companies producing methyl bromide and its substitutes. He conducts work for 

Syngenta Japan K.K. on a contract basis for a consultancy fee; he acts as a nominal member and 

adviser of the Japan Fumigation Technology Association, for which he is not paid. He is also a 

member of the Japanese delegation attending the Meeting of the Parties and Open-ended Working 

Groups, acting as technical adviser on matters related to the Protocol. He has been occasionally asked 

to attend panels or meetings at the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. He has no 

proprietary or any other kind of interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODS, nor does he own any 

stocks in companies producing either ODS or their alternatives or substitutes and does not work for 

any organization seeking to phase-out ODS. His spouse and children do not work for organizations 

with an interest in the Montreal Protocol. Travel expenses to enable attendance to MBTOC meetings 

and other meetings related to the Montreal Protocol are paid by the Japan Fumigation Technology 

Association. He receives no funding from the Japanese Government. 

Alejandro Valeiro Article 5 member 

National Project Coordinator 

National Institute for Agriculture and Technology 

Tucumán 

ARGENTINA 

Mr Alejandro Valeiro is the National Coordinator of the PROZONO Project (MLF/UNDP project 

ARG/02/G61) at the National Institute for Agricultural Technology (INTA) of Argentina, based at the 

Famaillá INTA ́s Experimental Station in Tucumán Province, Argentina. The INTA has an interest in 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 97

the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it is the national counterpart for implementing MLF 

methyl bromide phase-out projects, which are coordinated by the National Ozone Unit. Mr Valeiro 

has no proprietary interest on alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes and does not perform permanent consulting for 

organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He works occasionally as a consultant to the MLF, 

Implementing Agencies, on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. Mr Valeiro’s spouse consults for 

UNDP, which has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it implements MLF 

projects in Argentina. Neither Mr Valeiro, nor his spouse or dependant children have proprietary 

interest in ODS or their alternatives or substitutes, and do not own stock in companies producing ODS 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by UNEP. 

Prof Nick Vink Article 5 member

University of Stellenbosch 

Department of Agricultural Economics 

SOUTH AFRICA 

Dr Nick Vink is Chair of the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of Stellenbosch, 

South Africa. He is a full time Professor at the University of Stellenbosch. The University has no 

interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. Dr Vink has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs and does not consult for organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. He does not work as a 

consultant to any organisation on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. Neither his spouse or 

dependant children work for or consult for any organization which has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol, nor do they have any proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, or 

own stock in companies producing ODS or their alternatives or substitutes. Travel to MBTOC 

meetings is paid by UNEP. 

Mr James Wells 

President 

Environmental Solutions Group, LLC 

Sacramento, CA 

UNITED STATES 

James Wells is the President of Environmental Solutions Group, LLC (ESG), a regulatory consulting 

firm in Sacramento, California. He was invited to join MBTOC in 1993 primarily because of his 

experience in pesticide regulatory programs, especially with methyl bromide and methyl bromide 

alternatives. He worked for the State of California pesticide regulatory program for 27 years and was 

the Director of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation from 1991 to 1999. Dr. Wells has 

no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. He does not consult for organizations seeking 

to phaseout ODSs. However, ESG consults with several agricultural organizations seeking Critical 

Use Exemptions for the use of methyl bromide. These organizations are; the California Strawberry 

Commission (CSC), the California Strawberry Nursery Association (CSNA), the Garden Rose 

Council (GRC) and the California Association of Garden and Nursery Centers (CANGC). Together 

with his staff he prepares and submits CUEs for the CSNA, GRC and CANGC to the USEPA. His 

spouse works for the California Department of Justice, which has no interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol. She has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not 

own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult 

with organizations seeking to phaseout ODSs. Travel to MBTOC meetings is paid by ESG. 
98 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

ANNEX VI: List of nominated and exempted amounts of MB granted by Pprocess. 

Table 12. List of nominated (2005 – 2009 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2008 in part) amounts of methy

under the CUE process for each crop or commodity. 

.Part A: Preplant Soil Applications Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quan

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 

Australia Cut Flowers – field 40.000 22.350 18.375 22.35Australia Cut flowers – protected 20.000 10.425 Australia Cut flowers, bulbs – protected Vic 7.000 7.000 6.170 6.150 7.000 7.000 Australia Strawberry Fruit 90.000 67.000 Australia Strawberry runners 35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 35.750 37.50Belgium Asparagus 0.630 0.225 0.630 0.225 Belgium Chicory 0.600 0.180 0.180 0.180 Belgium Chrysanthemums 1.800 0.720 1.120 Belgium Cucumber 0.610 0.545 0.610 0.545 Belgium Cut flowers – other 6.110 1.956 4.000 1.956 Belgium Cut flowers – roses 1.640 Belgium Endive (sep from lettuce) 1.650 1.650 Belgium Leek & onion seeds 1.220 0.155 0.660 Belgium Lettuce(& endive) 42.250 22.425 25.190 Belgium Nursery Not Predictable 0.384 0.900 0.384 Belgium Orchard pome & berry 1.350 0.621 1.350 0.621 Belgium Ornamental plants 5.660 0.000 Belgium Pepper & egg plant 5.270 1.350 3.000 1.350 Belgium Strawberry runners 3.400 0.900 3.400 0.900 Belgium Tomato (protected) 17.170 4.500 5.700 4.500 Belgium Tree nursery 0.230 0.155 0.230 0.155 Canada Strawberry runners (PEI) 14.792 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.462 (a)14.792 6.840 Canada Strawberry runners (Quebec) 1.826 1.826 (a) 1.826 Canada Strawberry runners (Ontario) 6.129 France Carrots 10.000 8.000 5.000 8.000 8.000 France Cucumber 85 revised to 60 60.000 15.000 60.000 60.00France Cut-flowers 75.000 60.250 12.000 60.000 52.00France Forest tree nursery 10.000 10.000 1.500 10.000 10.00
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quan

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 

France Melon 10.000 10.000 7.500 6.000 France Nursery: orchard, raspberry 5.000 5.000 2.000 5.000 5.000 France Orchard replant 25.000 25.000 7.500 25.000 25.00France Pepper Incl in.tomato cun 27.500 6.000 27.50France Strawberry fruit 90.000 86.000 34.000 90.000 86.00France Strawberry runners 40.000 4.000 35.000 40.000 40.00France Tomato (and eggplant for 2005 only) 150(all 

solanaceous) 

60.500 33.250 125.000 48.40

France Eggplant 27.500 33.250 48.40Greece Cucurbits 30.000 19.200 30.000 19.20Greece Cut flowers 14.000 6.000 14.000 6.000 Greece Tomatoes 180.000 73.600 156.000 73.60Israel Broomrape 250.000 250.000 250.000 Israel Cucumber - protected new 2007 25.000 18.750 6.250 Israel Cut flowers – open field 77.000 67.000 80.755 53.345 53.345 77.000 67.00Israel Cut flowers – protected 303.000 303.000 321.330 163.400 155.200 303.000 240.0Israel Fruit tree nurseries 50.000 45.000 10.000 50.000 45.00Israel Melon – protected & field 148.000 142.000 140.000 87.500 87.500 125.650 99.40Israel Potato 239.000 231.000 137.500 93.750 93.750 239.000 165.0Israel Seed production 56.000 50.000 56.000 28.00Israel Strawberries – fruit 196.000 196.000 176.200 64.125 57.000 196.000 196.0Israel Strawberry runners 35.000 35.000 20 20 35.000 35.00Israel Strawberry runners and fruit Ghaza 87.875 83.250 Israel Tomatoes 90.000 Israel Sweet potato 111.500 61.250 Italy Cut flowers (protected) 250.000 250.000 30.000 250.000 187.0Italy Eggplant (protected) 280.000 200.000 15.000 194.000 156.0Italy Melon (protected) 180.000 135.000 10.000 131.000 131.0Italy Pepper (protected) 220.000 160.000 67.000 160.000 130.0Italy Strawberry Fruit (Protected) 510.000 400.000 35.000 407.000 320.0Italy Strawberry Runners 100.000 120.000 35.000 120.000 120.0Italy Tomato (protected) 1300.000 1030.000 418.000 871.000 697.0Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 68.600 61.400 88.300 88.80Japan Ginger – field 119.400 119.400 112.200 112.100 102.200 119.400 119.4Japan Ginger – protected 22.900 22.900 14.800 14.800 12.900 22.900 22.90Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 182.200 168.000 194.100 203.9Japan Peppers (green and hot) 189.900 200.700 169.400 162.300 134.400 187.200 200.7Japan Watermelon 126.300 96.200 94.200 43.300 23.700 129.000 98.90
100 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quan

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 

Malta Cucumber 0.096 0.127 Malta Eggplant 0.128 0.170 Malta Strawberry 0.160 0.212 Malta Tomatoes 0.475 0.594 New Zealand Nursery material 1.085 1.085 0.000 New Zealand Strawberry fruit 42.000 42.000 24.780 42.000 34.00New Zealand Strawberry runners 10.000 10.000 5.720 8.000 8.000 Poland Strawberry Runners 40.000 40.000 25.000 12.000 40.000 40.00Portugal Cut flowers 130.000 8.750 50.000 8.750 Spain Cut Flowers – Cadiz 53.000 53.000 35.000 53.000 42.00Spain Cut Flowers – Catalonia 20.000 18.600 12.840 17.000 

(+Andalucia) 

 20.000 15.00

Spain Pepper 200.000 155.000 45.000 200.000 155.0Spain Strawberry Fruit 556.000 499.290 80.000 556.000 499.2Spain Strawberry Runners 230.000 230.000 230.000 215.000 230.000 230.0Spain Peppers and Strawberries 0.151 UK Cut flowers 7.560 6.050 UK Ornamental tree nursery 12.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 UK Strawberry (& raspberry in 2005) 80.000 63.600 68.000 54.50UK Raspberry nursery 4.400 4.400 USA Chrys. Cuttings/roses 29.412 29.412 0.000 USA Cucurbits – field 1187.800 747.839 598.927 588.949 411.765 1187.800 747.8USA Eggplant – field 76.761 101.245 96.480 79.546 62.789 76.721 82.16USA Forest nursery seedlings 192.515 157.694 152.629 133.140 125.758 192.515 157.6USA Ginger 9.200 9.200 0.000 USA Orchard replant 706.176 827.994 405.415 405.666 314.007 706.176 527.6USA Ornamentals 210.949 162.817 149.965 138.538 137.776 154.000 148.4USA Nursery stock - fruit trees, 

raspberries, roses 

45.789 64.528 12.684 51.102 27.663 45.800 64.52

USA Peppers – field 1094.782 1498.530 1151.751 919.006 783.821 1094.782 1243.USA Strawberry fruit – field 2468.873 1918.400 1733.901 1604.669 1336.754 2052.846 1730.USA Strawberry runners 54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 8.837 54.988 56.29USA Tomato – field 2876.046 2844.985 2334.047 1840.100 1245.249 2876.046 2476.USA Turfgrass 352.194 131.600 78.040 52.189 0 206.827 131.6USA Sweet potato 224.528 18.144 18.144 
August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Table 12 (cont’). List of nominated (2005 – 2008 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2008 in part) amounts 

Parties under the CUE process for each crop or commodity 

Part B: Post-harvest Structural and Commodity Applications Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quan

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 

Australia Almonds 1.900 2.100 1.900 2.100 Australia Rice consumer packs 12.300 12.300 10.225 9.200 

+1.8 

9.200 6.150 6.150 

Belgium Artefacts and structures 0.600 0.307 0.590 0.307 Belgium Antique structure & furniture 0.750 0.199 0.319 0.199 Belgium Churches, monuments and ships' 

quarters 

0.150 0.059 0.150 0.059 

Belgium Electronic equipment 0.100 0.035 0.100 0.035 Belgium Empty silo 0.050 0.043 0.050 0.043 Belgium Flour mill see mills below 0.125 0.072 See mills 

below 

0.072 

Belgium Flour mills 10.000 4.170 9.515 4.170 Belgium Mills 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200 Belgium Food processing facilities 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300 Belgium Food Processing premises 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 Belgium Food storage (dry) structure 0.120 0.120 0.120 0.000 Belgium Old buildings 7.000 0 .306 1.150 0.306 Belgium Old buildings and objects 0.450 0.282 0.000 0.282 Belgium Woodworking premises 0.300 0.101 0.300 0.101 Canada Flour mills 47.200 34.774 30.167 28.650 26.913 (a)47 34.77Canada Pasta manufacturing facilities (a) 10.457 6.757 6.067 (a) 10.45Canada Commodities 0.068 France Seeds sold by PLAN-SPG company 0.135 0.135 0.100 0.135 0.135 France Mills 55.000 40.000 8.000 40.000 35.00France Rice consumer packs 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 France Chestnuts 2.000 2.000 1.800 2.000 2.000 Germany Artefacts 0.250 0.100 0.250 0.100 Germany Mills and Processors 45.000 19.350 45.000 19.35Greece Dried fruit 4.280 3.081 0.900 4.280 3.081 Greece Mills and Processors 23.000 16.000 1.340 23.000 15.44Greece Rice and legumes 2.355 2.355 Ireland Mills 0.888 0.611 0.888 Israel Artefacts 0.650 0.650 0.600 0.650 0.650 Israel Dates (post harvest) 3.444 3.444 2.200 1.800 3.444 2.755 
102 August 2007 TEAP Report on 2007 CUNs: Final Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quan

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005 2006 

Israel Flour mills (machinery & storage) 2.140 1.490 1.490 0.800 2.140 1.490 Israel Furniture– imported 1.422 1.422 2.042 1.422 0.000 Italy Artefacts 5.500 5.500 5.000 5.225 0.000 Italy Mills and Processors 160.000 130.000 25.000 160.000 65.00Japan Chestnuts 7.100 6.500 6.500 6.300 5.800 7.100 6.800 Latvia Grains 2.502 2.502 Netherlands Strawberry runners post harvest 0.120 0.120 0 Poland Medicinal herbs & dried mushrooms 

as dry commodities 

4.000 3.560 1.800 0.500 4.100 3.560 

Poland Coffee, cocoa beans (a) 2.160 2.000 0.500 2.160 Spain Rice 50.000 42.06Switzerland Mills & Processors 8.700 7.000 8.700 7.000 UK Aircraft 0.165 UK Mills and Processors 47.130 10.195 4.509 47.130 10.19UK Cereal processing plants 8.131 3.480 (a) 8.131 UK Cheese stores 1.640 1.248 1.248 1.640 1.248 UK Dried commodities (rice, fruits and 

nuts) Whitworths 

2.400 1.256 2.400 1.256 

UK Herbs and spices 0.035 0.037 0.030 0.035 0.037 UK Mills and Processors (biscuits) 2.525 1.787 0.479 2.525 1.787 UK Spices structural equip. 1.728 1.728 0.000 UK Spices stored 0.030 0.030 0.000 UK Structures buildings (herbs and 

spices) 

3.000 1.872 0.908 3.000 1.872 

UK Structures, processors and storage 

(Whitworths) 

1.100 0.880 0.257 1.100 0.880 

UK Tobacco equipment 0.523 0.050 UK Woven baskets 0.770 0.770 USA Dried fruit and nuts (walnuts, 

pistachios, dried fruit and dates and dried beans) 

89.166 87.719 91.299 67.699 58.912 89.166 87.71

USA Dry commodities/ structures (cocoa 

beans) 

61.519 61.519 64.028 52.256 51.002 61.519 55.36

USA Dry commodities/ structures 

(processed foods, herbs and spices, dried milk and cheese processing facilities) NPMA 

83.344 83.344 85.801 72.693 66.777 83.344 69.11

USA Smokehouse hams (Dry cure pork 

products) (building and product) 

136.304 135.742 40.854 19.669 19.699 67.907 81.70

USA Mills and Processors 536.328 505.982 401.889 362.952 291.418 483.000 461.7