# Fifteenth Meeting of the Parties (Nairobi, 10 – 14 November 2003) Decision XV/3: Obligations of Parties to the Beijing Amendment under Article 4 of the Montreal Protocol with respect to hydrochlorofluorocarbons

The Fifteenth Meeting of the Parties decided in Dec. XV/3 : Affirming that it is operating by consensus, Reaffirming the obligation to control consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons by the Parties to the amendment adopted by the Fourth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol at Copenhagen on 25 November 1992 (the “Copenhagen Amendment”), Reaffirming the obligation to control production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons by the Parties to the amendment adopted by the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol at Beijing on 3 December 1999 (the “Beijing Amendment”), Strongly urging all States not yet party to the Copenhagen or Beijing Amendments to ratify, accede to or accept them as soon as possible, Recalling that, as of 1 January 2004, the Parties to the Beijing Amendment have accepted obligations under Article 4, paragraph 1 quin., and paragraph 2 quin., of the Protocol to ban the import and export of the controlled substances in group 1 of Annex C (hydrochlorofluorocarbons) from any “State not party to this Protocol”, Noting that Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Protocol provides that “for the purposes of this Article, the term ‘State not party to this Protocol’ shall include, with respect to a particular controlled substance, a State or regional economic integration organization that has not agreed to be bound by the control measures in effect for that substance”, Noting also that Article 4, paragraph 8 of the Protocol permits Parties to the Beijing Amendment to import and export hydrochlorofluorocarbons from “any State not party to this Protocol, if that State is determined, by a Meeting of the Parties, to be in full compliance with Article 2, Articles 2A-2I and this Article, and have submitted data to that effect as specified in Article 7”, Acknowledging that the meaning of the term “State not party to this Protocol” may be subject to differing interpretations with respect to hydrochlorofluorocarbons by Parties to the Beijing Amendment, given that control measures for the consumption of hydrochlorofluorocarbons were introduced in the Copenhagen Amendment while control measures for the production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons were introduced in the Beijing Amendment, Acknowledging also that, for those Parties operating under Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol no control measures for the consumption or production of hydrochlorofluorocarbons will be in effect under either the Copenhagen or Beijing Amendments until 2016, Desiring to decide in that context on a practice in the application of Article 4, paragraph 9 of the Protocol by establishing by consensus a single interpretation of the term “State not party to this Protocol”, to be applied by Parties to the Beijing Amendment for the purpose of trade in hydrochlorofluorocarbons under Article 4 of the Protocol, Expecting Parties to the Beijing Amendment to import or export hydrochlorofluorocarbons in ways that do not result in the importation or exportation of hydrochlorofluorocarbons to any “State not party to this Protocol” as that term is interpreted herein, recognizing the need to assess the fulfilment of that expectation, That the Parties to the Beijing Amendment will determine their obligations to ban the import and export of controlled substances in group I of Annex C (hydrochlorofluorocarbons) with respect to States and regional economic organizations that are not parties to the Beijing Amendment by January 1 2004 in accordance with the following: 1.

The term “State not party to this Protocol” in Article 4, paragraph 9 does not apply to those States operating under Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol until January 1, 2016 when, in accordance with the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments, hydrochlorofluorocarbon production and consumption control measures will be in effect for States that operate under Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Protocol; a.

The term “State not party to this Protocol” includes all other States and regional economic

integration organizations that have not agreed to be bound by the Copenhagen and Beijing Amendments; b.

Recognizing, however, the practical difficulties imposed by the timing associated with the

adoption of the foregoing interpretation of the term “State not party to this Protocol,” paragraph 1 (b) shall apply unless such a State has by 31 March 2004: c.

Notified the Secretariat that it intends to ratify, accede or accept the Beijing Amendment as soon as possible; i.
Certified that it is in full compliance with Articles 2, 2A to 2G and Article 4 of the Protocol,

as amended by the Copenhagen Amendment; ii.
Submitted data on (i) and (ii) above to the Secretariat, to be updated on 31 March 2005, iii. in which case that State shall fall outside the definition of “State not party to this Protocol” until the conclusion of the Seventeenth Meeting of the Parties; That the Secretariat shall transmit data received under paragraph 1 ( c ) above to the Implementation Committee and the Parties; 2.
That the Parties shall consider the implementation and operation of the foregoing decision at the

Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties, in particular taking into account any comments on the data submitted by States by 31 March 2004 under paragraph 1 ( c ) above that the Implementation Committee may make. 3. 

# Page 1 of 2 Decision XV/3: Obligations of Parties to the Beijing Amendment under Article 4 of the

...

12/18/2013 http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/Treaties/treaties_decisions

- hb.php?nav_id=451

# Page 2 of 2 Decision XV/3: Obligations of Parties to the Beijing Amendment under Article 4 of the

...

12/18/2013 http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/Treaties/treaties_decisions

- hb.php?nav_id=451