MONTREAL PROTOCOL 

ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE 

THE OZONE LAYER 

UNEP 

REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL

MAY 2008 

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT

May 2008 TEAP Progress Report iii

UNEP 

MAY 2008 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report iv 

Montreal Protocol 

On Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer 

Report of the 

UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

May 2008 

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT

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

Co-ordination: Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

Composition of the report: Martha Mulumba, Meg Seki (UNEP) 

 Lambert Kuijpers (UNEP TEAP) 

Layout: UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat, Nairobi, 

 Lambert Kuijpers (UNEP TEAP) 

Reproduction: UNON Nairobi 

Date: May 2008 

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

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME 

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

This document is also available in portable document format from the UNEP Ozone 

Secretariat's website: 

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: 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report v

UNEP 

MAY 2008 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT
vi May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

DISCLAIMER 

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

Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) co-chairs and members, the Technical and 

Economic Options Committee, chairs, co-chairs and members, the TEAP Task 

Forces 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, the TEAP co-chairs and members, the Technical and Economic Options 

Committee, chairs, co-chairs and members, and the Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel Task Forces co-chairs and members, in furnishing or 

distributing the information that follows, 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. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

The UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel co-chairs and members 

wish to express thanks to all who contributed from governments, both Article 5 and 

non-Article 5, as well as to a large number of individuals involved in Protocol issues, 

without whose involvement the assessments and studies described in this progress 

report would not have been possible. 

The opinions expressed are those of the Panel and its TOCs and do not necessarily 

reflect the reviews of any sponsoring or supporting organisation. 

The TEAP thanks UNIDO in Vienna, Austria, for hosting the TEAP meeting, 21-25 

April 2008, where this report was discussed, adopted and finalised for a last review 

by email circulation to all members. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report vii

Foreword 

The May 2008 TEAP Report 

The May 2008 TEAP Report consists of three volumes: 

Volume 1: May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Volume 2: May 2008 TEAP Replenishment Task Force Report 

Volume 3: May 2008 TEAP CTC Emissions Report 

Volume 1 

Volume 1 contains the essential use report, progress reports, halon evaluations, the HCFC 

alternatives for high ambient temperature preliminary report, the MB CUN report, a 

consideration on the climate issue related to Decision XIX/6, TEAP organisation issues 

and TEAP member biographies (this report). 

Volume 2 

Volume 2 is the Assessment Report of the TEAP Replenishment Task Force of the 

Funding Requirement for the Replenishment of the Multilateral Fund during 2009-2011, 

in response to Decision XIX/10. 

Volume 3 

Volume 3 is the CTC Emissions Report by the TEAP CTC Task Force. 

The UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel: 

Stephen O. Andersen, co-chair USA Marta Pizano COL 

José Pons-Pons, co-chair VEN Ian Porter AUS 

Lambert Kuijpers, co-chair NL Miguel Quintero COL 

Radhey Agarwal IND Ian Rae AUS 

Paul Ashford UK K. Madhava Sarma IND 

Jonathan Banks AUS Helen Tope AUS 

Mohamed Besri MOR Dan Verdonik USA 

David Catchpole UK Ashley Woodcock UK 

Biao Jiang PRC Masaaki Yamabe J 

Michelle Marcotte CDN Shiqiu Zhang PRC 

Thomas Morehouse USA 

May 2008 TEAP Progress Report ix

MAY 2008 TEAP PROGRESS REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

1 ESSENTIAL USES.......................................................................................................... 1 

1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE INHALERS.... 1 

1.2 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE INHALERS ........................................ 2 

1.2.1 Criteria for Review of Essential Use Nominations for MDIs ............................................ 2 

1.2.2 Review of Nominations...................................................................................................... 2 

1.2.3 Summary of Parties’ Essential Use Nominations and Quantities for 2009 and 2010 (in 

tonnes) ............................................................................................................................... 3 

1.2.4 Observations...................................................................................................................... 3 

1.2.5 Committee Evaluation and Recommendations .................................................................. 5 

2 UPDATED RESPONSE TO DECISION XVIII/16: DIFFICULTIES FACED BY 

SOME ARTICLE 5 PARTIES MANUFACTURING METERED-DOSE 

INHALERS WHICH USE CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS....................................... 9 

2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... 9 

2.2 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................. 11 

2.3 PROGRESS AND CHALLENGES IN CFC MDI MANUFACTURING TRANSITION IN ARTICLE 5

PARTIES ........................................................................................................................... 13 

2.4 ELEMENTS NEEDED FOR SUCCESSFUL TRANSITION IN ARTICLE 5 PARTIES ....................... 16 

2.4.1 National CFC MDI transition strategies......................................................................... 16 

2.4.2 Global partnerships......................................................................................................... 17 

2.4.3 Adequate funding and capacity building......................................................................... 18 

2.5 ESTIMATED CFC REQUIREMENTS TO SUPPLY MDIS IN 2010 AND BEYOND ...................... 19 

2.6 PHARMACEUTICAL-GRADE CFC SUPPLY DURING TRANSITION......................................... 20 

2.6.1 Final campaign production considerations..................................................................... 21 

2.6.2 Production and stockpiling considerations for final campaign production .................... 23 

2.6.3 Volume justification and timing....................................................................................... 24 

2.6.4 CFC Specification ........................................................................................................... 25 

2.7 STORAGE AND HANDLING OF STOCKPILED PHARMACEUTICAL-GRADE CFCS ................... 25 

2.7.1 Physical-chemical properties and storage ...................................................................... 25 

2.7.2 Size of Storage................................................................................................................. 26 

2.7.3 Quality control and risks associated with storage .......................................................... 26 

2.7.4 Transfer of existing stockpiles of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs ...................................... 27 

2.7.5 Logistics .......................................................................................................................... 27 

2.7.6 Destruction of surplus or out-of-specification CFCs ...................................................... 28 

2.8 RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS TO THE ESSENTIAL USE PROCESS TO ACCOMMODATE 

ARTICLE 5 PARTIES AND FINAL CAMPAIGN PRODUCTION................................................. 28 

2.8.1 Information needed to define quantities for a final campaign production of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs........................................................................................... 33 

2.8.2 Suggested changes to Section 2.5 of the Handbook on information requirements.......... 34 

3 MEDICAL TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT ....... 37 

3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................... 37 

3.2 GLOBAL USE OF CFCS FOR MDIS.................................................................................... 37 

3.3 TRANSITION TO ALTERNATIVES TO CFC MDIS ................................................................ 39 

3.4 TRANSITION STRATEGIES ................................................................................................. 43 

3.4.1 Progress reports on transition strategies under Decision XII/2...................................... 44 

3.5 GLOBAL DATABASE IN RESPONSE TO DECISION XIV/5..................................................... 44 

4 CHEMICALS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT.. 47 

4.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................... 47 

4.2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 49 

4.3 PROCESS AGENTS............................................................................................................. 49 

4.3.1 Review of information from Israel, Netherlands and China............................................ 50 

4.3.2 Attempted review of Table B of Decision X/14................................................................ 51 

4.4 FEEDSTOCKS .................................................................................................................... 52 
x May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

4.4.1 Important feedstock applications .................................................................................... 52 

4.4.2 Estimated emissions of ODS............................................................................................ 54 

4.5 LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL USES............................................................................ 54 

4.5.1 Usage surveys.................................................................................................................. 55 

4.5.2 Standard analytical methods ........................................................................................... 56 

4.5.3 Infrared analyses of hydrocarbon residues ..................................................................... 56 

4.5.4 Iodometric titrations........................................................................................................ 58 

4.5.5 Bromine index determination .......................................................................................... 59 

4.5.6 Iodine number ................................................................................................................. 59 

4.5.7 Extraction of natural products ........................................................................................ 60 

4.5.8 Estimation of CTC contamination of pharmaceutical products ...................................... 60 

4.5.9 Simeticone ....................................................................................................................... 61 

4.5.10 Miscellaneous uses.......................................................................................................... 61 

4.5.11 Cement analysis............................................................................................................... 61 

4.5.12 Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 62 

4.6 SOLVENTS ........................................................................................................................ 62 

4.6.1 n-Propyl Bromide (n-PB) Update.................................................................................... 63 

4.7 RECONSIDERATION OF SOURCES OF CTC EMISSIONS........................................................ 64 

4.8 ESSENTIAL USE EXEMPTIONS OF CFC-113 FOR AEROSPACE APPLICATIONS IN THE 

RUSSIAN FEDERATION ..................................................................................................... 65 

4.9 RECOVERY, RECYCLING AND DESTRUCTION.................................................................... 65 

4.9.1 Recovery and recycling ................................................................................................... 65 

4.9.2 Destruction...................................................................................................................... 66 

5 HALONS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (HTOC) PROGRESS 

REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 69 

5.1 UPDATE ON DECISION XIX/16 ......................................................................................... 69 

5.1.1 Aviation ........................................................................................................................... 70 

5.1.2 Merchant Shipping .......................................................................................................... 71 

5.1.3 Asia.................................................................................................................................. 71 

5.1.4 Europe............................................................................................................................. 71 

5.1.5 Middle East, North & West Africa .................................................................................. 71 

5.1.6 South & Central Africa.................................................................................................... 71 

5.1.7 North America & Australia ............................................................................................. 72 

5.1.8 South America ................................................................................................................. 72 

5.1.9 Halon 2402...................................................................................................................... 72 

6 CRITICAL MILITARY AND SPACE USES OF HCFCS........................................ 73 

6.1 MILITARY-UNIQUE AND SPACE-UNIQUE USES OF HCFCS............................................... 74 

6.2 CONTINUING INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION ................................................................ 74 

6.3 SUMMARY........................................................................................................................ 75 

7 FOAMS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (FTOC) PROGRESS 

REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 77 

7.1 GENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 77 

7.2 TRANSITION STATUS - ARTICLE 5 PARTIES ...................................................................... 77 

7.3 TRANSITION STATUS - NON-ARTICLE 5 PARTIES ............................................................. 78 

7.4 OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES................................................................................................. 78 

7.5 TECHNOLOGY UPDATE..................................................................................................... 79 

7.6 METHYL FORMATE........................................................................................................... 81 

7.7 HFC USAGE...................................................................................................................... 81 

7.8 HYDROCARBONS FOR SMALL CONSUMERS ....................................................................... 82 

7.8.1 Implications on costs....................................................................................................... 83 

7.9 EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS ........................................................... 83 

7.9.1 Status of transition in non-Article 5 Parties.................................................................... 83 

7.9.2 Pace of growth of XPS board manufacture in China ...................................................... 83 

7.9.3 Technology options for alternative blowing agents in China.......................................... 84 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report xi

8 REFRIGERATION, AIR-CONDITIONING AND HEAT PUMPS TECHNICAL 

OPTIONS COMMITTEE (RTOC) PROGRESS REPORT ..................................... 85 

8.1 REFRIGERANT DATA ........................................................................................................ 85 

8.2 DOMESTIC REFRIGERATION ............................................................................................. 86 

8.3 COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION......................................................................................... 86 

8.4 LARGE SIZE REFRIGERATION (INDUSTRIAL, COLD STORAGE AND FOOD PROCESSING) ... 88 

8.5 TRANSPORT REFRIGERATION ........................................................................................... 88 

8.6 UNITARY AIR CONDITIONING .......................................................................................... 89 

8.7 CHILLER AIR CONDITIONING ........................................................................................... 89 

8.8 WATER-HEATING HEAT PUMPS ....................................................................................... 90 

8.9 VEHICLE AIR CONDITIONING ............................................................................................ 90 

8.10 CONSERVATION AND CONTAINMENT ............................................................................... 91 

9 METHYL BROMIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (MBTOC) 

PROGRESS REPORT.................................................................................................. 93 

9.1 MB PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION UPDATE................................................................. 93 

9.1.1 Production trends............................................................................................................ 93 

9.1.2 Production for QPS purposes.......................................................................................... 94 

9.2 GLOBAL CONSUMPTION.................................................................................................... 95 

9.2.1 Consumption trends in Non-Article 5 Parties ................................................................. 95 

9.2.2 Consumption trends in Article 5 and CEIT countries...................................................... 98 

9.3 ALTERNATIVES FOR SOIL TREATMENTS.......................................................................... 101 

9.3.1 Key alternatives............................................................................................................. 101 

9.3.2 Update on registration of alternatives........................................................................... 102 

9.3.3 Crop specific strategies................................................................................................. 102 

9.3.4 Economic aspects of methyl bromide alternatives......................................................... 110 

9.4 MBTOC QSC PROGRESS REPORT AND REPORT ON ARTICLE 5(1) ISSUES..................... 111 

9.4.1 Update on Registration of Alternatives ......................................................................... 111 

9.4.2 Adoption of alternatives for treatment of commodities and structures......................... 112 

9.4.3 Quarantine and Pre-Shipment MB Issues ..................................................................... 113 

9.4.4 Recapture of methyl bromide......................................................................................... 115 

9.4.5 MBTOC QSC Article 5 Issues ....................................................................................... 115 

9.5 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 117 

10 CURRENT STATUS OF TECHNICAL EFFICACY, COSTS AND ADOPTION 

OF METHYL BROMIDE ALTERNATIVES IN FLOUR MILLS...................... 125 

10.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 125 

10.2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................... 126 

10.3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY.................................................................................................... 127 

10.4 REGULATORY ISSUES AFFECTING ALTERNATIVE ADOPTION ......................................... 130 

10.5 COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES .............................................................................................. 131 

10.6 ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY ISSUES ........................................................... 132 

10.7 ADOPTION OF ALTERNATIVES........................................................................................ 132 

10.8 REFERENCE LIST AND SUMMARIES OF REFERENCES USED ............................................ 134 

10.9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................... 150 

11 EVALUATIONS OF 2008 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL 

BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS................................................................. 151 

11.1 SCOPE OF THE REPORT ................................................................................................... 151 

11.2 ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION BY PARTIES....................................................................... 151 

11.3 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE................................................... 152 

11.3.1 Mandate......................................................................................................................... 152 

11.3.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 ........................................................................................... 153 

11.3.3 Consideration of Stocks - Decision Ex.1/4 (9f) ............................................................. 153 

11.3.4 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use - Decision XVII/9............................... 155 

11.3.5 Update on Rates of Adoption of Alternatives (Decision XIX/9) .................................... 156 

11.3.6 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005.................................................... 157 

11.3.7 Evaluations of CUNs – 2008 round for 2009 and 2010 exemptions ............................. 161 

11.3.8 Critical Use Nominations Review.................................................................................. 162 

11.3.9 Disclosure of Interest .................................................................................................... 162 
xii May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

11.3.10 Consideration of alternatives ........................................................................................ 163 

11.3.11 Sustainable Alternatives ................................................................................................ 164 

11.3.12 Frequency of allowed MB use ....................................................................................... 164 

11.3.13 Use of disposable canisters of MB ................................................................................ 164 

11.4 INTERIM CUN REPORT – ISSUES SPECIFIC TO MBTOC QUARANTINE, STRUCTURES 

AND COMMODITIES........................................................................................................ 165 

11.4.1 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities ............................ 165 

11.4.2 Adjustments for standard dosage rates ......................................................................... 165 

11.5 INTERIM CUN 2008 EVALUATION REPORT – ISSUES SPECIFIC TO MBTOC SOILS......... 173 

11.5.1 Summary of outcomes.................................................................................................... 173 

11.5.2 Issues related to CUN Assessment for Preplant Soil Use.............................................. 173 

11.5.3 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities. ........................... 174 

11.5.4 Meta-analysis update .................................................................................................... 176 

11.5.5 Use/Emission reduction technologies - Low permeability barrier films and dosage 

reduction........................................................................................................................ 177 

11.5.6 Adjustments for standard dosage rates using MB/Pic formulations ............................. 178 

11.6 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 204 

APPENDIX I TO CHAPTER 11 ...................................................................................................... 210 

APPENDIX II TO CHAPTER 11..................................................................................................... 211 

APPENDIX III TO CHAPTER 11................................................................................................... 212 

APPENDIX IV TO CHAPTER 11 ................................................................................................... 213

APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11 – PART A: PREPLANT SOIL APPLICATIONS................. 216 

APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11– PART B: POST-HARVEST STRUCTURAL AND 

COMMODITY APPLICATIONS ............................................................................. 220 

12 DECISION XIX/8: SCOPING STUDY ON ALTERNATIVES TO HCFC 

REFRIGERANTS UNDER HIGH AMBIENT TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS223 

12.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 223 

12.2 FOCUS OF THE STUDY .................................................................................................... 224 

12.2.1 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Air Conditioning..................................... 224 

12.2.2 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Refrigeration .......................................... 224 

12.2.3 Refrigerants for Deep Mines ......................................................................................... 225

12.3 PROSPECTS FOR PROMOTION AND ACCEPTANCE OF ALTERNATIVES.............................. 226 

12.4 PRIORITIES AND TIME SCHEDULE................................................................................... 226 

13 CLIMATE ASPECTS OF OZONE LAYER PROTECTION................................. 227 

13.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................ 227 

13.2 NEW EMPHASIS ON CLIMATE IN THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL......................................... 227 

13.3 PAST CLIMATE PROTECTION CONTRIBUTIONS BY ACTIONS UNDER THE MONTREAL 

PROTOCOL ..................................................................................................................... 228 

13.4 FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL TO FURTHER PROTECT THE 

CLIMATE........................................................................................................................ 229 

13.5 TECHNICAL OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING CLIMATE PROTECTION ....................................... 233 

13.6 CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................. 234 

14 TEAP/TOC ORGANISATION ISSUES ................................................................... 235 

14.1 BUDGET ......................................................................................................................... 235 

14.2 METHYL BROMIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE................................................... 235 

14.3 LIKELY FUTURE CHANGES IN TEAP ORGANISATION..................................................... 235 

14.4 NOTICE OF POSITIONS AVAILABLE ON THE TEAP AND ITS TOCS.................................. 235 

14.5 CONFLICT OF INTEREST.................................................................................................. 236 

ANNEX I: TEAP MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES .............................................................................. 237 

ANNEX II: TEAP TOC MEMBERSHIP LIST STATUS APRIL 2008 ...................................... 249 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 1

1 Essential Uses 

1.1 Executive Summary Essential Use Nominations for Metered Dose Inhalers 

The following Table summarises the recommendations of the Technology and Economic Assessment 

Panel (TEAP) and its Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) on nominations for essential use 

production exemptions for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) for metered dose inhalers (MDIs). 

Table ES-1 Recommendations for essential use nominations 

 European Community Russian Federation United States 

2009 Unable to recommend 

exemption for CFCs for 

MDIs for 38 tonnes. 

Recommend exemption for 

CFCs for MDIs for 248 

tonnes (for single-moiety 

salbutamol to be sold within 

the Russian Federation). 

2010 Unable to recommend 

exemption for CFCs for 

MDIs for 182 tonnes. 

European Community: MTOC does not consider that 65 per cent (about 25 tonnes) of the nominated 

quantities, designated for export to Article 5 Parties, meet the requirements of Decision IV/25(b)(ii) 

(regarding the availability of sufficient quantity of controlled substances from existing stocks) since 

MTOC believes that these nominated quantities could be supplied from the existing CFC stockpiles in the 

European Community (about 340 tonnes). If the European Community is unable to supply the amounts 

for CFC MDI manufacture for export to Article 5 Parties from existing stockpiles to meet manufacturing 

requirements for uses, which are demonstrated to be essential, in 2009 it could make a request to the 

Secretariat to authorise an emergency essential use in accordance with Decision VIII/9(10), which can 

provide up to 20 tonnes of ODS. The remaining 35 per cent (about 13 tonnes) requested is for 

combination MDI products to be used within the European Community. As previously stated, MTOC 

does not consider these combination CFC MDI products to be an essential use under Decision IV/25(a) 

when the individual components, or equivalents, are available as CFC-free alternatives. 

Russian Federation: The Russian Federation states that 2009 will be the last year for which it will make 

an essential use nomination for CFCs for MDIs. Companies in the Russian Federation are in the process 

of developing new HFC MDIs containing salbutamol. However, the Russian Federation states that lack 

of financial resources and regulatory delays are impeding the large-scale conversion of their production 

facilities, which it anticipates should be completed in 2010. The Russian Federation also states “any 

financial assistance for MDI producers or technology transfer may provide some time-saving”. Therefore 

it is unclear whether the Russian Federation will require CFCs for MDI manufacture in 2010. MTOC 

recognises the immediate need of the nomination for 2009, and the quantity of CFC is justified based on 

consumption trends. Further clarification is needed on the final phase-out strategy for the Russian 

Federation, including stockpile management. 

United States: MTOC does not consider that the United States’ nomination meets the requirements of 

Decision IV/25(b)(ii), regarding the availability of sufficient quantity of controlled substances from 

existing stocks. MTOC considers that the anticipated United States’ stockpile in 2010, estimated to be 

about 1,000 tonnes, should be adequate to supply CFC requirements, especially with the flexibility 
2 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

afforded by the additional exempted quantity for 2009. MTOC does not consider that CFC MDIs for the 

drug moieties subject to the nomination are an essential use under Decision IV/25(a). According to the 

nomination, for the bronchodilators (pirbuterol and epinephrine CFC MDIs), there are four salbutamol 

HFC alternatives (MTOC considers salbutamol to be a suitable alternative bronchodilator in relation to 

this nomination). For the inhaled steroid triamcinolone CFC MDI, there are four suitable alternative 

moieties in a range of formulations (HFC MDIs and DPIs). 

General Comments: MTOC notes that the timelines for drug development and approval in non-Article 5 

Parties mean that any formulation that is going to be available by 2010 will already have to be a final 

commercial formulation, which has completed clinical studies and commenced regulatory assessment in 

2008 (assuming regulatory approval takes a minimum of 12 months). Parties may wish to consider not 

allocating CFCs to companies without a final CFC-free formulation in regulatory assessment by the end 

of 2008. 

For combination products for which the separate moieties are available as CFC-free alternatives, MTOC 

believes that these combination products continue to be used for patient convenience and commercial 

considerations. Patients will not come to any harm by using the drugs in separate CFC-free inhalers. The 

combination inhalers cannot therefore be considered to be essential under Decision IV/25. Parties may 

wish to consider a decision not to allocate CFCs for these combination products. 

Parties have a range of suitable CFC-free alternatives for domestic use. For those Parties that continue to 

export CFC MDIs to Article 5 Parties, one option would be for Parties to consider regulations to restrict 

CFC MDI export and import (and encourage a transition to export/import of HFC MDIs or DPIs) to 

countries where these products are no longer needed. Parties may also wish to consider establishing a 

date by which exports and imports of all CFC MDIs cease. 

MTOC believes that with the essential use exemption process for non-Article 5 Parties in its final phase 

and complete global transition a few years away, accurate and complete accounting frameworks of all 

CFC stockpiles, including pre-1996 stocks, should be provided by all Parties who hold them. Parties may 

wish to consider the advantages of requiring that plans for use or disposal of stockpiles be required with 

future accounting frameworks. Parties that have acquired CFCs under essential use exemptions are also 

reminded that accounting frameworks should continue to be submitted annually to account for destruction 

and depletion of stocks, including through transfers or use, even after nominations are no longer made and 

until no further stocks remain. 

1.2 Essential Use Nominations for Metered Dose Inhalers 

1.2.1 Criteria for Review of Essential Use Nominations for MDIs 

Decision IV/25 of the 4th Meeting and subsequent Decisions V/18, VII/28, VIII/9, VIII/10, XII/2, XIV/5, 

XV/5, XVI/12, and XVIII/16 have set the criteria and the process for the assessment of essential use 

nominations for MDIs for Parties not operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Protocol. Other 

essential use decisions relevant to these Parties are Decisions XIX/13, XVIII/7, and XVII/5. 

1.2.2 Review of Nominations 

The review of essential use nominations by the MTOC was conducted as follows. 

Three members of the MTOC independently reviewed each nomination, each preparing an assessment. 

The exception was for the assessment of the nomination from the Russian Federation this year, which was 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 3

reviewed by the entire committee. Further information was requested where necessary. The MTOC 

considered the assessments, made recommendation decisions and prepared a consensus report at its 

meeting in Tokushima, Japan, 1-4 April 2008. Where appropriate, members declared a potential conflict 

of interest ahead of the discussion. 

Nominations were assessed according to the guidelines for essential use contained within the Handbook 

on Essential Use Nominations (TEAP, 2005) and subsequent Decisions of the Parties. 

Concurrent with the evaluation undertaken by the MTOC, copies of all nominations are provided to the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). The TEAP and its TOCs can consult with other 

individuals or organisations to assist in the review and to prepare TEAP recommendations for the Parties. 

1.2.3 Summary of Parties’ Essential Use Nominations and Quantities for 2009 and 2010 (in tonnes) 

 European 

Community 

Russian 

Federation 

United States 

2009 38 248 - 

2010 - - 182 

1.2.4 Observations 

Three essential use nominations were received for consideration by the MTOC in 2008: the European 

Community for 2009, the Russian Federation for 2009, and the United States for 2010. The nomination 

from the Russian Federation was received on 27th March 2008, after the deadline of 31st January 

established by Parties. Supporting documentation, including the accounting framework, for the 

nomination from the United States was received on 2nd April 2008, after the deadline of 31st January 

established by Parties. 

Decision VIII/10 (1) states “That Parties not operating under Article 5 will request companies applying 

for MDI essential-use exemptions to demonstrate ongoing research and development of alternatives to 

CFC MDIs with all due diligence and/or collaborate with other companies in such efforts and, with each 

future request, to report in confidence to the nominating Party whether and to what extent resources are 

deployed to this end and progress is being made on such research and development, and what licence 

applications if any have been submitted to health authorities for non-CFC alternatives”. The 

nominations for the European Community and the United States state that they have requested 

information on on-going research and development from individual companies, which remains 

confidential and is not provided for review by MTOC. While MTOC is confident that nominating Parties 

received information regarding research and development activity towards reformulation, MTOC is 

unsure that some companies can complete research and development before 2010. 

MTOC notes that the timelines for drug development and approval in non-Article 5 Parties mean that any 

formulation that is going to be available by 2010 will already have to be a final commercial formulation, 

which has completed clinical studies and commenced regulatory assessment in 2008 (assuming regulatory 

approval takes a minimum of 12 months). This means that several of the drugs, which are included in 

CFC volumes requested in the current nominations, will not be commercially available in a CFC-free 

version within this timeline. Parties may wish to consider not allocating CFCs to companies without a 

final CFC-free formulation in regulatory assessment by the end of 2008. 
4 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

Last year, the EC stated “Companies targeting the export of generic type of CFC MDI to developing 

countries tend not to pursue very active R&D activities to develop alternative products. This is a 

remaining issue to be dealt with consistently with the phase-out of CFC MDI in Article 5 Parties.” Parties 

have a range of suitable CFC-free alternatives for domestic use. For those Parties that continue to export 

CFC MDIs to Article 5 Parties, one option would be for Parties to consider regulations to restrict CFC 

MDI export and import (and encourage a transition to export/import of HFC MDIs or DPIs) to countries 

where these products are no longer needed. Parties may also wish to consider establishing a date by 

which exports and imports of all CFC MDIs cease. 

In addition, in its 2008 submission to MTOC, the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium 

(IPAC)1

 member companies have committed to “not seek new production of essential use CFCs after 

2008 for use in MDIs intended for either Article 5 or non-Article 5 Parties, absent compelling evidence 

that existing stockpiles are unavailable – an exceptional and unlikely circumstance”. IPAC companies 

have also committed not to market CFC MDIs in markets in Article 5 Parties after 2009, except in very 

narrow circumstances. It is anticipated that CFCs for these MDIs would be sourced from existing 

stockpiles, rather than from new production. Rationalising small quantities of already-produced CFCs to 

meet patient needs in Article 5 (as well as non-Article 5) Parties, rather than simply destroying all 

remaining stockpiles, is a pragmatic approach. 

For combination products for which the separate moieties are available as CFC-free alternatives, MTOC 

believes that these combination products continue to be used for patient convenience and commercial 

considerations. Patients will not come to any harm by using the drugs in separate CFC-free inhalers. The 

combination inhalers cannot therefore be considered to be essential under Decision IV/25. Parties may 

wish to consider a decision not to allocate CFCs for these combination products. 

MTOC notes that both the European Community and the United States again report significant pre-1996 

stockpiles. There are a number of issues related to the management of existing stockpiles (e.g. 

environmental, commercial, regulatory etc.) that are critical for Parties to resolve. MTOC believes that 

failure to address these issues could adversely affect final phase-out. MTOC emphasises that pre-1996 

stocks should be used first; the management of stockpiles at this final stage of the phase-out will be 

extremely important to avoid unnecessary production of CFCs and the need for excessive destruction. 

Parties may wish to remind CFC MDI manufacturers that any CFCs approved under essential use 

exemptions must be used for this essential use (including through a transfer), transferred to an Article 5 

Party for basic domestic needs, or destroyed. For essential use applications in 2010 and beyond, use of 

surplus CFCs for basic domestic needs is not allowable under the Protocol. Parties may also wish to 

review domestic laws to facilitate transfers of stockpiles between companies and/or countries. 

MTOC believes that with the essential use exemption process for non-Article 5 Parties in its final phase 

and complete global transition a few years away, accurate and complete accounting frameworks of all 

CFC stockpiles, including pre-1996 stocks, should be provided by all Parties who hold them. Parties may 

wish to consider the advantages of requiring that plans for use or disposal of stockpiles be required with 

future accounting frameworks. Parties that have acquired CFCs under essential use exemptions are also 

reminded that accounting frameworks should continue to be submitted annually to account for destruction 

 1

 The International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium is a group of companies (Abbott, Astrazeneca, Boehringer 

Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxosmithkline, Inyx, Inc. and Sepracor, Inc.) that manufacture medicines for 

the treatment of respiratory illnesses, such as asthma and COPD. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 5

and depletion of stocks, including through transfers or use, even after nominations are no longer made and 

until no further stocks remain. 

1.2.5 Committee Evaluation and Recommendations 

Quantities are expressed in metric tonnes. 

European Community 

Year Quantity nominated 

2009 38 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the European Community nomination 

applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Chile 

Beclomethasone Colombia, Venezuela, Pakistan, Argentina, 

Mexico, Chile 

Budesonide Colombia, Venezuela, Chile 

Cromoglicic acid European Community, Venezuela 

Salbutamol+Ipratropium 

bromide (combination) 

European Community 

Salbutamol+Flunisolide 

(combination) 

European Community 

Salbutamol+Beclomethasone 

dipropionate (combination) 

European Community, Chile 

Isoproterenol HCl+Fenilefrina 

HCl (combination) 

European Community 

Recommendation: Unable to recommend. 

Comments 

MTOC notes that the transition within the European Community has continued to proceed 

well, with a significant reduction in the amount of CFCs nominated for 2009. MTOC also 

commends the European Community for making a commitment that there will be no 

nominations for 2010 and beyond. 
6 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

However MTOC does not consider that 65 percent (about 25 tonnes) of the nominated 

quantities, designated for export to Article 5 Parties, meet the requirements of Decision 

IV/25(b)(ii) (regarding the availability of sufficient quantity of controlled substances from 

existing stocks) since MTOC believes that these nominated quantities could be supplied from 

the existing CFC stockpiles in the European Community (about 340 tonnes). 

The remaining 35 percent (about 13 tonnes) requested is for combination MDI products to be 

used within the European Community. As previously stated, MTOC does not consider these 

combination CFC MDI products essential under Decision IV/25(a) when the individual 

components, or equivalents, are available as CFC-free alternatives. 

MTOC notes with concern that the European Community continues to supply CFCcontaining MDIs to some Article 5 Parties despite the availability of technically feasible 

alternatives in those countries. While supply to Article 5 Parties may be driven partly by 

economic, commercial and regulatory reasons, continuing supply may impede the speed of 

transition to CFC-free alternatives in Article 5 Parties. The European Community has not 

adequately demonstrated that continued supply of CFC MDIs to these export markets is 

essential. 

The European Community also reported a total stockpile of about 340 tonnes (including pre1996 stocks) at the end of 2007. This amount is higher than the total stockpile at the end of 

2006 (333 tonnes, including pre-1996 stocks), contrary to expectations that Parties should be 

reducing their stockpiles as the final phase of the transition is entered. It appears likely that 

surplus CFCs will exist at the end of 2009. The European Community states that it is not 

known at this point to what extent the pre-1996 material (213 tonnes) will be destroyed or 

transferred. It also states that the assumption that the entire amount will be transferred would 

not be valid, as the stock of pre-1996 material contains CFC-11, -12, and -114 in quantities 

that may not meet the potential demand. 

The European Community also states that some companies have indicated that they intend to 

destroy their stocks, while other companies may either transfer the rights to companies still 

holding a licensed quota or produce CFC MDIs for export to Article 5 Parties where the 

relevant CFCs “are deemed essential”. MTOC believes that best efforts should be made to 

facilitate the use of the stockpile for essential uses, and to avoid the production of new 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs for the European Community and the need for destruction of 

usable CFCs. 

Given the reasons outlined above, the MTOC is unable to recommend the quantity requested 

for CFC MDI manufacture for export to Article 5 Parties and is unable to recommend 

combination CFC MDIs as an essential use. However, if the European Community is unable 

to supply the amounts for CFC MDI manufacture for export to Article 5 Parties from existing 

stockpiles to meet manufacturing requirements for uses which are demonstrated to be 

essential, in 2009 it could make a request to the Secretariat to authorise an emergency 

essential use in accordance with Decision VIII/9(10), which can provide up to 20 tonnes of 

ODS. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 7

Russian Federation 

Year Quantity nominated 

2009 248 tonnes 

Specific Usage: MDIs for asthma and COPD, for active ingredient salbutamol for use solely 

within the Russian Federation. 

Recommendation: Exemption for CFCs for MDIs – 248 tonnes (for single-moiety salbutamol 

to be sold within the Russian Federation). 

Comments 

The MTOC reviewed a nomination for essential uses received from the Russian Federation 

on 27th March (after the 31st January deadline) for the production of CFCs for MDIs in the 

Russian Federation. The nomination is for 248 tonnes of CFCs to be used exclusively for the 

manufacture of salbutamol CFC MDIs for domestic use, by two local companies in 2009 

(MTOC has been unable to confirm information from other sources suggesting that there 

could be some limited export to countries such as Mongolia). 

The majority of salbutamol CFC MDIs used in the Russian Federation is locally made and 

substantially cheaper than imported MDIs (~ US$2 vs US$7). The remaining MDIs, which 

do not contain salbutamol, are largely imported. 

In its nomination for 2008, the Russian Federation stated that it would not submit any further 

essential use nominations, and expected to have completed its CFC MDI transition by the end 

of 2008. However, it now states that 2009 will be the last year for which it will make an 

application for an essential use exemption for CFCs for MDIs. Companies in the Russian 

Federation are in the process of developing new HFC MDIs containing salbutamol. 

However, the Russian Federation states that lack of financial resources and regulatory delays 

are impeding the large-scale conversion of their production facilities, which it anticipates 

should be completed in 2010. The Russian Federation also states “any financial assistance 

for MDI producers or technology transfer may provide some time-saving”. Therefore it is 

unclear whether the Russian Federation will require CFCs for MDI manufacture in 2010. 

MTOC recognises the immediate need of the nomination for 2009, and the quantity of CFC is 

justified based on consumption trends. Further clarification is needed on the final phase-out 

strategy for the Russian Federation, including stockpile management. MTOC notes that there 

were discrepancies in the stockpile accounting in the framework when compared with last 

year. 

United States 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 182 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD, for the following active ingredients for use solely 

within the United States: epinephrine, pirbuterol, triamcinolone. 

Recommendation: Unable to recommend. 
8 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

Comments 

The nomination from the United States is for 182 tonnes CFCs for use in 2010, for the 

manufacture of epinephrine, pirbuterol, and triamcinolone CFC MDIs for domestic use only. 

This is a reduction of 35 percent on the exemption for 2009 (282 tonnes). Parts of the 

nomination were received on time, but the accounting framework and other supporting 

documentation were received during the MTOC meeting on 2nd April, after the 31st January 

deadline established by Parties. 

MTOC does not consider that the nomination meets the requirements of Decision 

IV/25(b)(ii), regarding the availability of sufficient quantity of controlled substances from 

existing stocks. At the end of 2007, the United States’ stockpile was 1,489 tonnes of CFCs 

(including pre- and post-1996 stocks). In addition, the United States has an essential use 

exemption for 2009 of 282 tonnes. The Parties consider it reasonable to maintain a stock of 

one year’s operational supply (including Decisions XVI/12 and XVII/5). Taking these 

matters into account, MTOC considers that the anticipated United States’ stockpile in 2010 

should be adequate to supply CFC requirements, especially with the flexibility afforded by 

the additional exempted quantity for 2009. 

MTOC does not consider that CFC MDIs for these drug moieties are an essential use under 

Decision IV/25(a). According to the nomination, for the bronchodilators (pirbuterol and 

epinephrine CFC MDIs), there are four salbutamol HFC alternatives (MTOC considers 

salbutamol to be a suitable alternative bronchodilator in relation to this nomination). For the 

inhaled steroid triamcinolone, there are four suitable alternative moieties in a range of 

formulations (HFC MDIs and DPIs). 

The US FDA is undertaking a further series of rule-making processes. Under these, the 

essential use designation under US law for salbutamol will be removed after 31st December 

2008. Under two proposed rules to amend regulations, the essential use designation under 

US law of pirbuterol and triamcinolone CFC MDIs would be removed (and no longer for 

sale) after 31st December 2009, and epinephrine CFC MDI after 31st December 2010. The 

final rules are expected during 2008. 

Salbutamol HFC MDI sales have increased steeply and by April 2008 it is estimated that they 

constitute 70 percent of total salbutamol inhaler sales. Consequently MTOC calculates that 

CFCs required for salbutamol MDI manufacture in 2008 could be reduced to about 150 

tonnes in the United States. MTOC estimates that total CFC use for MDIs could be less than 

500 tonnes in 2008, and less than 300 tonnes in 2009. With this declining consumption 

combined with a domestic allocation of 27 tonnes in 2008 (proposed by the United States) 

and an exemption of 282 tonnes in 2009, the stockpile may be about 1,000 tonnes in 2010. 

One company (Armstrong) manufactures salbutamol CFC MDIs, and is also the only 

manufacturer of epinephrine CFC MDIs. Armstrong has indicated that a replacement 

epinephrine HFC MDI will not be available until 2011, raising the question of future essential 

use applications. MTOC believes that the company could instead consider using its existing 

CFC stock (originally designated for salbutamol) to produce epinephrine CFC MDIs in 2010. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 9

2 Updated Response to Decision XVIII/16: Difficulties faced by 

some Article 5 Parties manufacturing metered-dose inhalers 

which use chlorofluorocarbons 

2.1 Executive Summary 

Progress has been made towards transition in the use of CFC metered dose inhalers (MDIs) in 

Article 5 Parties for certain key moieties, with a range of technically feasible alternatives 

available. However, for many Article 5 Parties, the conversion of locally owned CFC MDI 

manufacturing is only just commencing. 

The mandated phase-out date under the Montreal Protocol for the global production of CFCs is 

only a little more than one year away. The Montreal Protocol’s Decision IV/25 allows for the 

production of CFCs for essential uses, if approved by Parties, after the mandated phase-out date. 

The pace of implementation of projects to convert CFC MDI manufacturing in Article 5 Parties 

will largely determine the quantities of CFCs that will be required for CFC MDI manufacturing 

after 2009. However, the economics of CFC production will make impractical the continued 

production of small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs after 2009. 

Given the uncertainties and risks associated with the long-term supply after 2009 of suitable 

quality CFCs, the Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) emphasises that the highest 

priority for continued supply of inhalers is to complete transition as quickly as possible and 

ensure the expeditious introduction of CFC-free alternatives. 

As an update to its response to Decision XVIII/16 in the April 2007 Progress Report of the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, the MTOC considered a number of options for the 

production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs after 2009 and recommends a preferred option that can 

best facilitate the final phase-out of CFCs MDIs in countries that are still manufacturing CFC 

MDIs. 

Open-ended annual CFC production after 2009 (under annual essential use exemptions) is not 

recommended. It does not provide a clear target or timetable for ending CFC production, 

predictability for CFC producers, or incentive for those companies currently manufacturing CFC 

MDIs to switch to CFC-free alternatives. At a certain point, the economics of CFC production 

would not be favourable, and would make impractical and too uncertain the continued production 

of relatively small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. At this point, continuity of affordable 

healthcare would be jeopardised. Overall destruction costs for out-of-specification CFCs would 

be relatively high with this option. 

In its 2007 report, MTOC proposed a final campaign in 2009, which is no longer recommended 

for 2009 for two reasons. In 2007 Parties did not adopt a decision on a final campaign, deferring 

consideration until a later date. To manage a final campaign in 2009, it will be necessary to make 

several decisions, for which lead times are needed. Also, the large-scale conversion of local CFC 

MDI manufacturing in Article 5 Parties is slower than anticipated, and so the quantity for a final 

campaign in 2009 is now larger, estimated be about 5,000 tonnes. The logistics of organising 

such a large production campaign no later than 2009, the short timeframe for the associated 

essential use nomination and approval process, and the large costs of inventory and storage make 

this option impractical. 
10 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

MTOC believes that with appropriate planning and co-ordination a final campaign production of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs could be feasible in 2011, providing for CFC MDI manufacturing 

countries that do not have domestic CFC production. This option assumes that project 

implementation is not delayed further, and presumes that China maintains domestic production of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and continues annual CFC production, if approved by Parties under 

the essential use process, until it completes its national CFC MDI phase-out. Anticipating a final 

campaign production at an agreed date provides a clear target for ending CFC production, 

predictability for CFC producers, and incentive for those companies currently manufacturing 

CFC MDIs to switch to CFC-free alternatives. 

It will be necessary to wait at least another year to assess the progress of phase-out projects and 

their impact on future requirements of CFCs before confirming the date of a final campaign 

production. Based on estimated CFC requirements, the economics of CFC production should be 

favourable, firstly in 2010 to allow annual production (of between 1,200-1,700 tonnes) in that 

year under an essential use, and then in 2011 for a final campaign production for multiple years. 

The quantity of the final campaign production, for all countries excluding China, would be 

between 1,000-2,000 tonnes (depending on whether India ceases CFC production and import for 

MDI production at the end of 2009 or not). Costs would be relatively lower than for open-ended 

annual CFC production (for destruction of out-of-specification CFCs) and the costs and logistics 

of organising a more modest campaign make a final campaign in 2011 more practical than in 

2009 or 2010. 

Article 5 Parties’ essential use nominations will need to be submitted by 31st January 2009 for 

Parties to consider essential use exemptions for CFC production in 2010. In order to anticipate a 

final campaign production, accurate forward projections will be needed of annual quantities of 

each CFC required for MDI manufacture for 2010 and for each year thereafter until each Party’s 

agreed phase-out date. These projections should accompany and justify each year’s nomination 

for 2010 and onwards, starting with the nominations submitted in 2009. This would allow an 

accurate global picture to be developed from 2009, and a recommendation by TEAP on the 

preferred date for a final campaign to be made. It is anticipated that in 2009, Parties would 

consider Decisions to approve the CFC volumes intended for manufacture in 2010 only. In the 

next year (2010), the remaining volumes to complete phase-out in each Party would be 

considered and, if appropriate, approved to allow a final campaign production to occur in 2011. 

A final campaign production risks exaggerated and non-essential use of CFCs produced for 

multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essential use production exemption to allow a final 

campaign production will need to work in parallel with an annual exemption process to approve 

annual quantities to be used from the stockpile produced under a final campaign, and to signal the 

need for destruction of any surplus CFCs. 

MTOC believes that a co-ordinated approach to the final phase of the CFC MDI transition is 

needed to overcome some of the technical challenges. The current pace of CFC MDI 

manufacturing phase-out in Article 5 Parties is slow because access to suitable CFC-free 

technology is difficult. The implementing agencies are being asked to undertake very challenging 

projects with very short timelines, and delays will inevitably occur – this is the nature of “new 

product development”. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 11

A co-ordinated approach could: 

• Maximise the chances of successful product development; 

• Allow equipment manufacturers transparent understanding of the timing of future 

equipment needs for HFC MDI production lines; and 

• Better estimate the need for final campaign production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs, 

and facilitate stockpile storage and destruction. 

Parties may wish to consider the appointment of a single entity to co-ordinate these urgent and 

complex issues and activities, while also recognising the need to continue to address country 

specific requirements and country/company-specific project implementation. 

Pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to supply CFC requirements for MDI production after 2009 could 

also be sourced from remaining surplus CFC stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties. Sourcing CFCs 

from existing stockpile of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs in preference to new CFC production is a 

requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b). A co-ordinated approach to identifying, locating and 

transferring surplus stockpiles would be an advantage for Article 5 Parties, and would avoid 

destruction of CFCs that could otherwise be diverted to an essential use. Parties may also wish to 

review domestic laws to facilitate transfers of stockpiles between companies and/or countries. 

MTOC has reviewed the Protocol’s current essential use decisions and supporting guidance in the 

Handbook on Essential Use Nominations (TEAP, 2005), to conclude whether the essential use 

process can accommodate the situation of Article 5 Parties, the last stages of global transition and 

final campaign production. As a result, MTOC has suggested options to refine and modify the 

essential use framework. Parties may wish to consider these options in making a set of new 

Decisions that build on the previous essential use Decisions and associated guidance on 

information requirements in the Handbook. Parties may wish to consider a suite of new 

Decisions because some of the existing Decisions are currently not applicable to Article 5 Parties 

but their intended effects are still relevant; other Decisions may need strengthening; and new 

Decisions may be needed to take account of issues not currently included. 

2.2 Background 

At their 17th Meeting, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol discussed the difficulties faced by 

some Article 5 Parties with respect to the phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) used in the 

manufacture of MDIs. In Decision XVII/14 the Parties expressed their concern that Article 5 

Parties that manufacture CFC MDIs might find it difficult to phase out these substances without 

incurring economic losses to their countries. There was the further risk that, for some Article 5 

Parties, consumption levels in 2007 of CFCs for MDIs might exceed the amounts allowed for all 

CFC uses under the Protocol. 
12 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

The Parties considered the issue again at their 18th Meeting and took Decision XVIII/16. 

Paragraph 12 of this Decision requested: 

“TEAP to assess and report on progress at the 27OEWG and to report to the MOP19 on 

the need for, feasibility of, optimal timing of, and recommended quantities for a limited 

campaign production of chlorofluorocarbons exclusively for metered-dose inhalers in both 

Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 and Parties not operating under 

paragraph 1 of Article 5.” 

The TEAP and its MTOC included its response to Decision XVIII/16 in the April 2007 Progress 

Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to the 27th Open-ended Working 

Group Meeting. The Open-ended Working Group discussed the possibility of maintaining the 

current system of “just-in-time production”. However, the Working Group did not achieve 

consensus, and accordingly agreed that interested Parties would consult informally on the text of 

a draft decision on the matter for consideration by the 19th Meeting of the Parties. In the ensuing 

discussion, one representative stated that her Government was currently engaged in consultations 

with pharmaceutical companies that manufactured CFCs for metered-dose inhalers and was not 

yet in a position to make a decision on the item. The Meeting of the Parties agreed to defer 

further consideration of the matter until a later meeting. 

In this updated response to Decision XVIII/16, MTOC has reviewed new information available 

from the Multilateral Fund Secretariat, implementing agencies, countries, and industry sources. 

This report considers not only those Parties manufacturing CFC MDIs but also issues surrounding 

CFC MDI transition in importing Article 5 Parties. 

MTOC also drew on the resources, information, and outcomes of the recent South Asia and 

Southeast Asia & Pacific Regional Thematic Workshop on Phasing-out CFC Metered Dose 

Inhaler (MDI) in Langkawi, Malaysia, during 13-15 March 2008, which was attended by 23 

countries and 6 industries in the region producing MDIs, and also a number of MTOC members. 

Some of the key outcomes were the Langkawi Declaration on Public-Private Partnership on 

Phasing Out CFC Metered Dose Inhalers and the conclusions and recommendations, which are 

referred to further in this report. The UNEP DTIE OzoneAction Programme wrote to TEAP on 

27th March 2008 conveying some of the important findings of the workshop and requesting TEAP 

to consider some aspects in its report, including: 

1. “Options for storage and handling of stockpile pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and their 

surrounding issues; 

2. Logistics and transfer to destruction facilities of “Out of Specification” CFCs; 

3. Safe specifications for pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and appropriate testing method to 

ensure that specifications are met; 

4. Procedures for a Multi-year Essential Use Nomination.” 

These and other issues are addressed below. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 13

2.3 Progress and challenges in CFC MDI manufacturing transition in Article 5 Parties 

Most Article 5 Parties have their inhalers provided by importation. As elaborated in section 2.3, 

progress has been made towards transition in the use of CFC MDIs in Article 5 Parties for certain 

key moieties, with a range of technically feasible alternatives available. However, for many 

Article 5 Parties the conversion of locally owned CFC MDI manufacturing is only just 

commencing. 

MDIs may be manufactured in at least 20 Article 5 Parties (Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, 

Brazil, China, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jordan, Mexico, Pakistan, 

South Africa, Syria, Tunisia, Uruguay, Venezuela), with an estimated consumption of about 

2,100 tonnes in 2007. Many have locally owned MDI manufacturing companies that are not 

affiliated with multi-national pharmaceutical companies. 

Some countries (e.g. Croatia and Tunisia) have successfully completed their manufacturing 

transition to CFC-free inhalers. A number of countries (e.g. Cuba, Uruguay, Egypt, and Iran) 

have requested financial assistance in recent years from the Multilateral Fund (MLF) to achieve 

the conversion of their industry to produce CFC-free alternatives, and a number are in the process 

of seeking assistance from the MLF (e.g. China and India). A number of countries (e.g. Algeria, 

Brazil, Jordan, Syria) are not eligible for funding by the MLF under the decisions of the 

Executive Committee. At its 54th Meeting, the Executive Committee of the MLF decided 

(Decision 54/35) that all requests for MDI investment projects be submitted for Executive 

Committee consideration no later than the 56th Meeting at the end of 2008, and that requests 

would not be considered eligible for funding after that meeting. 

Table 2-1 summarises MTOC’s current understanding of transition status for most Article 5 

Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing. Detailed country information is also available from 

Executive Committee documents, such as ExCom/51/391

. 

The implementing agencies of the MLF (UNDP and UNIDO) are responsible for implementing 

MLF-funded MDI investment projects and work with the companies and the respective 

governments to achieve the agreed timelines. This has proven to be a challenging task, and it 

appears likely that production of CFCs will be needed to supply MDI manufacture after 31 

December 2009 in a number of countries where manufacturing conversion will not have been 

completed. 

 

1

 UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/51/39, http://www.multilateralfund.org/files/51/5139.pdf 
14 May 2004 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 2-1 Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing

Algeria 

Argentina 

Bangladesh 

Brazil 

China 

Colombia 

Cuba 

Egypt 

India 

Indonesia 

Iran 

Jordan 

Mexico 

Approved investment projects with MLF funding

31 32 33 34 35 

Requesting MLF funding for MDI investment project or for project preparation of an MDI investment project 

37 38 39 310

311

1 MDI investment project approved (ExCom decision 52/32). Expected completion date 48 months after commencement (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom 2 MDI investment project approved. Expected completion date was March 2008 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/51/39), but is now October 2008. 3 MDI investment project approved. Expected completion date December 2009 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/51/39), but is now about 2010. 4 MDI investment project approved. Expected completion date is 28 to 30 months after the national transition strategy and the MDI phase-out inv

approved by ExCom (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom 52/36), which is now about 2010-2011. 5 MDI investment project approved (ExCom/53/67). Expected completion date February 2011 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/53/44). 6 MDI investment project approved. Expected completion date was July 2007 (ExCom/51/39), but is now at least the 2nd quarter of 2008. 7 Project preparation proposal approved. Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration during 2008. 8 Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration during 2008. 9 Project preparation proposal submitted for ExCom consideration in 2007, and again in 2008 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/54/Inf.5). Project preparat

Meeting of ExCom. 

10 Project preparation proposal approved under ExCom decision 52/25. MDI investment project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom co

Meeting in July 2008.

11 MTOC understands that there may be CFC consumption for medical aerosols in Indonesia, but not for MDIs. 12 Project preparation proposal expected to be submitted by UNDP for ExCom consideration during its 55th Meeting (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/54/13 Not eligible for funding under ExCom decision 35/57. Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 2-1: Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing (cont.) Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing

Algeria 

Argentina 

Bangladesh 

Brazil 

China 

Colombia 

Cuba 

Egypt 

India 

Indonesia 

Iran 

Jordan 

Mexico 

Not eligible for funding by the MLF 

314 315 316 

14 Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57). Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, No15 Not eligible for funding by the MLF. There are two producers in Brazil for which shareholder composition is fully from non-Article 5 Parties

without assistance from the Multilateral Fund on the conversion of their CFC MDIs to alternatives. 

16 Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57). Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, No

understands that there may be CFC consumption for medical aerosols in Jordan, but not for MDIs.

17 Not eligible for funding by the MLF. CFC consumption for MDIs is estimated to be about 71 tonnes, and there are 18 locally owned MDI ma18 Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57). Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, No
16 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

2.4 Elements needed for successful transition in Article 5 Parties 

Elements needed for successful transition in Article 5 Parties include: 

• National CFC MDI transition strategies: to facilitate the transition through national 

networks working towards shared goals, with a focus on patient health; 

• Global partnerships and co-operation: to share information, facilitate decision-making 

and global consistency, and respond quickly to resolve any potential barriers; and 

• Adequate funding, capacity building and support through the institutions of the Montreal 

Protocol: to facilitate timely CFC MDI manufacturing transition, and to ensure a 

framework suited to the circumstances of Article 5 Parties and the final stages of phaseout. 

Some of these elements are elaborated below. 

2.4.1 National CFC MDI transition strategies 

National transition strategies to non-CFC-MDI alternatives need to be developed on a country-bycountry basis with the participation of major stakeholders, such as the relevant environment, 

health and trade authorities, physician and patient groups, pharmaceutical companies, and 

CFC/HFC importers (where there is local MDI manufacture). All stakeholders must be involved, 

and the formation of private/public partnerships is essential. Transition strategies must have a 

clear, final date by which time the country expects no longer to need CFC MDIs. The details of a 

strategy vary according to the circumstances of the country, its health system and whether it 

imports or locally manufactures CFC MDIs. Transition strategies need to ensure adequate 

supplies of inhaled therapy throughout the transition period. Protection of patient health should 

be the key guiding principle in transition strategies. 

In preparing their national transition strategies, Parties may wish to consider successful strategies 

adopted by Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties. Several Article 5 Parties, including Fiji, 

Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines, have already successfully implemented their national 

transition strategies, and are on track to complete transition by 2010. The regional workshops 

currently being conducted (such as the Langkawi workshop for the South Asia and South East 

Asia Pacific region) will greatly assist Parties in the development and implementation of national 

strategies. 

The slow progress of some countries to develop national transition strategies is of concern. It is 

important that Article 5 Parties develop their own national transition strategy and provide them to 

the Secretariat, to be posted on its website, and then to report each year on progress in transition, 

both in accordance with Decision XII/2. Parties may also wish to consider making a national 

transition strategy a requirement for Article 5 Parties nominating for an essential use exemption 

to produce CFCs for MDIs, as has been the case for Parties not operating under Article 5. 

Issues and actions to be addressed in national transition strategies are: 

• Determination of a final phase-out date for CFC MDIs, setting a target and timetable; 

• Availability and affordability of CFC-free alternatives, through an investigation of CFC 

and CFC-free alternatives on the national market; 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 17

• Fast-track approval for CFC-free alternatives, and assuring seamless availability of 

inhaled therapy; 

• Serious consideration by relevant authorities of pricing policies favourable to CFC-free 

alternatives and removal of any associated tariffs and import taxes; 

• Timely withdrawal of CFC MDIs following a reasonable post-marketing period for CFCfree inhalers (absent compelling circumstances, MTOC recommends 12 months), and 

consideration of establishment of policies and regulations to ban parallel marketing and 

imports of CFC MDIs after a certain date; 

• Educational activities for patients, doctors and other healthcare providers on the reasons 

for phase-out, supported by pharmaceutical companies and health authorities; 

• CFC-free MDIs to be clearly labelled as such on the packaging, with consideration given 

to the development and promotion of an agreed CFC-free logo to be displayed on CFCfree MDIs; and 

• The anticipated timelines of any MDI investment projects funded by the MLF to assist 

technology transfer. 

Some Parties may also wish to consider application to the Asthma Drug Facility (ADF) of the 

International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease for the supply of low cost CFC-free 

MDIs (www.GlobalADF.org). The ADF provides access to affordable good quality essential 

asthma drugs, promotes the use of CFC-free inhalers and the monitoring of asthma management 

for quality care. Some countries have indicated that the necessary commitment to data collection 

could be challenging for them. The conclusions of the Langkawi Workshop suggested that Sri 

Lanka applies to the ADF as a pilot program. 

2.4.2 Global partnerships 

Partnerships between government, industry, and non-government organisations can facilitate 

successful transition in Article 5 Parties. 

Regional alliances of Article 5 Parties may facilitate transition through common strategies. The 

Langkawi MDI Workshop for the Asia-Pacific region held in March 2008, as well as other 

workshops scheduled later in the year for other regions, is a prime example of how such 

collaborative efforts can be of value in advancing common goals in this regard. Future MLFfunded regional meetings that are planned for other regions, include Africa, Eastern Europe and 

Central Asia, and Latin America. 

The Langkawi Workshop developed a Langkawi declaration as a public-private partnership 

between government and industry. This partnership model could be propagated to resolve 

common challenges facing Article 5 Parties that require a concerted effort by governments and 

industry. 

Some of the factors that may impact CFC phase-out in the Article 5 Parties that could be 

addressed through a partnership approach, include: 

• Timely withdrawal of CFC MDIs as alternatives become available. This can be 

addressed through co-operation between government and industry (and included in a 

national transition strategy), including through import bans; 
18 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

• Prompt government regulatory actions to approve CFC-free alternatives, through a 

commitment by governments to industry to facilitate regulatory approvals; 

• Pricing policies favourable to CFC-free alternatives, through a commitment by 

governments to review and remove tariffs and import taxes. 

2.4.3 Adequate funding and capacity building 

Capacity building through transfer of technology or expertise in accordance with Article 10A (of 

the Protocol) is necessary to help countries in which companies are still trying to develop CFCfree MDI formulations. 

Timely and effective management of projects by the implementing agencies (UNIDO and UNDP) 

will be critical to successful transition. At the present time there is no successfully completed 

project, and most approved projects are behind schedule. Projects need to be initiated and 

completed within realistic timelines that take account of the experience gained so far. 

Current approved projects are often for new product development by locally owned companies in 

Article 5 Parties. Projects may take in excess of five years to complete due to the requirement for 

new manufacturing processes, clinical testing, regulatory approval and commercialisation. Delay 

in project implementation will further prolong CFC MDI phase-out. In-licensing of established 

products may be faster than new product development, and should be considered as an option. 

Dry powder inhalers (DPI) are less commonly used in Article 5 Parties, because the more recently 

introduced DPI devices are technically sophisticated and more expensive than MDIs. However, 

single dose DPIs using simple devices (eg. Rotahaler ®) are widely used in India and elsewhere. 

The technology required to manufacture such devices and units may be easier to transfer and the 

cost of setting up a manufacturing facility should also be less. 

The principal supplier of manufacturing lines for HFC MDIs (Pamasol Willi Mäder AG, 

Switzerland) currently has a lead-time of 6-12 months to supply new plant. This means that 

planned scheduling of orders for new lines is essential, and needs a co-ordinated approach by the 

implementing agencies to minimise delays. 

MTOC believes that a co-ordinated approach to the final phase of the CFC MDI transition is 

needed to overcome some of the technical challenges. Regional level workshop(s) facilitated by 

the implementing agencies can assist transition efforts and this process is now underway. 

However, the current pace of CFC MDI manufacturing phase-out in Article 5 Parties is slow 

because access to suitable CFC-free technology is difficult. The implementing agencies are being 

asked to undertake very challenging projects with very short timelines, and delays will inevitably 

occur – this is the nature of “new product development”. 

A co-ordinated approach could: 

• Maximise the chances of successful product development; 

• Allow equipment manufacturers transparent understanding of the timing of future 

equipment needs for HFC MDI production lines; and 

• Better estimate the need for final campaign production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs, 

and facilitate their storage and destruction. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 19

Parties may wish to consider the appointment of a single entity to co-ordinate these urgent and 

complex issues and activities, while also recognising the need to continue to address country 

specific requirements and country/company-specific project implementation. 

2.5 Estimated CFC requirements to supply MDIs in 2010 and beyond 

Table 2-2 summarises MTOC’s analysis of CFC consumption for MDI manufacture in those 

Article 5 Parties with local production of CFC MDIs. This analysis estimates future requirements 

of CFCs up to the year 2013 and updates the data presented in the April 2007 Progress Report of 

the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel. 

MTOC’s updated analysis includes data provided by industry and government representatives at 

the Langkawi South Asia and SEAP Regional Workshop on Phasing-out CFC based Metered 

Dose Inhalers. New information regarding the situation of approved CFC MDI phase-out 

projects was available from a range of sources including the MLFS, the implementing agencies 

and MTOC members. Information available from the April 2008 54th Executive Committee 

Meeting was also taken into account. In particular, Decision 54/35 establishes a CFC production 

phase-out agreement for India by 1 August 2008, including limits on CFC production and 

consumption for MDIs for 2008 and 2009, and with no allowance for CFC imports after 2009. 

However, it is not clear whether this agreement will mean that India does not seek essential use 

consumption (production and import) of CFCs for MDIs after 2009. Table 3-2 includes 

previously unreported production in Venezuela. No data were available for Algeria, Jordan, or 

South Africa, where CFC MDI manufacture may also be occurring. 

The main constraint in the implementation of MDI investment projects has been access to suitable 

CFC-free inhaler technology. The implementing agencies are facing major challenges in securing 

technical assistance for what have become individual “new product development” projects for 

CFC-free alternatives. It now appears that the time required for new product development and 

the time to have a formulation available on the market were underestimated at the time of project 

preparation. In a few cases the projects have faced delays in the delivery of the MDI 

manufacturing equipment. The equipment for the manufacture of HFC MDIs is highly 

specialised and the principal supplier has a significant backlog of orders. 

Given the delays in the preparation, approval and implementation of projects, MTOC has made 

assumptions about the annual consumption data for a number of countries, combined with 

information provided by technical experts and from the Langkawi meeting. The table shows 

consumption up to and including 2013, although it is too early to know whether this would 

actually be the final year of CFC MDI production need or not. A few countries (including China 

and India) in Langkawi indicated that they might continue production of CFC MDIs up to 2014-

2015. 

The assumption that some Parties would still need CFCs in 2013 was used to estimate a global 

requirement for future production of CFC MDIs in Article 5 Parties. These estimates were then 

used to evaluate preferred strategic options for the final phase-out of CFC MDI production. Any 

CFC consumption after 2013 is difficult to estimate; if any, it is likely to be relatively small and 

unlikely to be a significant proportion of the overall projected quantity, but that would still need 

to be phased out. 
20 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 2-2 Estimated CFC demand for Article 5 Parties with local production of CFC MDIs*

*Data was not available for Algeria, or South Africa (estimated consumption in 2007 was 71 tonnes p.a.). Data was 

not available for Jordan, although MTOC understands CFC consumption is for medical aerosols, not MDIs. Data was 

included for Indonesia, although CFC consumption may be for medical aerosols, not MDIs. Multinational companies 

operating in Article 5 Parties are assumed to complete CFC MDI production in 2009.

CFCs are still used by multinational pharmaceutical companies operating in Article 5 Parties like 

Argentina, China, India and Pakistan. It is assumed that this use will decrease to zero in 2009. 

In Table 2-2 it can be onbserved that the projected annual total for all Article 5 Parties that 

manufacture CFC MDIs is between 1,200-2,000 tonnes per annum for the period 2008-2010. 

The two largest consumers of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs are China (up to 1,900 tonnes 

projected for the years 2010-2013) and India (up to 1,400 tonnes projected for the years 2010-

2013, according to data presented in Langkawi, or 0 tonnes, if Executive Committee Decision 

54/35 applies to the cessation of import after 2009 of any kind of CFCs, including essential use 

CFCs). The total requirements for the remaining Article 5 Parties between 2010 and 2013, 

excluding China and India, amount to less than 2,000 tonnes. It is not clear at this stage whether 

pharmaceutical-grade CFC production in non-Article 5 Parties, such as the Russian Federation, 

will be required during this period, but consumption, if any, is likely to be relatively small, and is 

not considered further here. 

2.6 Pharmaceutical-grade CFC supply during transition 

Pharmaceutical-grade CFCs for MDIs are manufactured in a few locations globally: USA 

(Honeywell); Spain (Arkema); India (Navine and possibly others); and China (Juzhou). The 

plants in India and China are currently scheduled to cease production in August 2008 and in 

2009, respectively, based on agreements with the Multilateral Fund. 

China stopped production of CFCs in 2007 with the exception of one plant with capacity to 

produce 550 tonnes of CFCs to cover its pharmaceutical-grade CFC requirements. The phase-out 

project for CFC MDIs in China has been under discussion during the last year and will be 

resubmitted at the 55th Executive Committee meeting. This project will cover a number of MDI 

products including those that deliver traditional Chinese medicine. It is unlikely that reductions 

Country 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Countries with an approved project for the complete phase-out of CFCs for MDIs 

Bangladesh 61.8 76.0 60.0 66.0 72.6 120.0 105.0 15.0 45.0 Cuba 109.0 114.5 120.2 126.2 35.0 Egypt 159.5 163.0 176.0 190.1 205.3 221.0 200.0 Iran 68.2 96.4 102.0 112.2 123.4 100.0 70.0 50.0 40.0 Mexico 47.5 52.3 57.5 63.2 69.5 76.5 50.0 Uruguay 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.6 12.2 12.8 5.0 Subtotal 456.0 512.6 526.7 569.3 518.1 530.3 430.0 65.0 85.0 Countries without an approved project for the complete phase-out of CFCs for MDIs as of March 2008

Argentina 187.7 180.0 180.0 200.0 220.0 150.0 165.0 80.0 Brazil 156.9 134.5 148.0 162.7 179.0 China 243.7 280.9 309.0 339.9 373.9 400.0 440.0 484.0 550.0 Colombia 2.1 2.3 10.0 11.0 12.1 3.4 3.0 India 748.3 773.7 780.0 412.5 412.5 400.0 350.0 265.0 345.0 Indonesia 30.1 33.1 36.4 40.1 44.1 48.5 40.0 Pakistan 85.8 80.0 80.0 80.0 80.0 36.0 36.0 20.0 Syria 20.0 22.0 38.0 41.8 46.0 50.6 33.0 33.0 Venezuela 22.9 29.6 32.5 20.0 Subtotal 1,474.6 1,506.6 1,604.2 1,317.6 1,400.1 1,108.4 1,067.0 882.0 895.0 Total 1,930.6 2,019.2 2,130.9 1,886.9 1,918.1 1,638.7 1,497.0 947.0 980.0 

2005
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 21

in CFC consumption for MDIs due to the implementation of this project would be noticeable 

before 2013. China has the production capacity to supply its own pharmaceutical-grade CFC 

requirements. 

India has local production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs for the manufacture of MDIs, and also 

currently imports some of its CFC requirements. Under Decision 54/35 of the 54th Executive 

Committee, India has agreed to cease CFC production in August 2008, and is allowed to sell up 

to 825 tonnes (690 tonnes to be produced before August 2008, and 135 tonnes from existing 

stockpile) of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs into MDI production in 2008 and 2009. The agreement 

also states, “India will not import any more CFCs of any kind”. However, it is not clear whether 

this agreement will mean that India does not seek essential use consumption (production and 

import) of CFCs for MDIs after 2009. 

There are several MDI producers in India, including at least one multinational, that intend to 

close CFC MDI production in 2009. Several of the local producers have also already developed 

alternative HFC-based products and DPIs. Despite this, it is not yet clear whether MDI 

manufacturers will seek essential use exemptions for 2010 onwards to import pharmaceuticalgrade CFCs. MTOC has assumed consumption of CFCs for MDIs according to the data received 

from Indian representatives of government and industry during the Langkawi workshop. 

However, it should also be noted that, in the case of India, there are widespread alternatives to 

CFC MDIs already available. 

All other Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacture rely on imported CFCs for MDI 

production. 

2.6.1 Final campaign production considerations 

Some Article 5 Parties have approved projects for the phase-out of their CFC MDI 

manufacturing, some of which may not be completed by the end of 2009. Under Decision 54/35, 

the Executive Committee agreed that Parties with requests for funding investment projects for 

CFC MDI manufacture must come forward for consideration by the Executive Committee by the 

56th Meeting, November 2008 “to provide ample time for project initiation before the 2010 

phase-out and to avoid, to the extent possible, the need for essential-use exemption requests”. 

After 2009, Article 5 Parties may be in potential non-compliance unless CFC production for 

MDIs is under an essential use exemption. 

There is no co-ordinated manufacture of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and competition/anti-trust 

legislation would forbid such an arrangement. There are no dedicated pharmaceutical-grade CFC 

plants left, except for one in China, and there are only a few multi-product plants that can make 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. 

Depending upon operational parameters, a bulk CFC production facility will produce a certain 

percentage of CFCs that do not meet the pharmaceutical-grade specifications required by MDI 

manufacturers. Although the expectations for purity may vary between Article 5 Parties, the 

percentage of production not fit for pharmaceutical use is projected to be no lower than 25 per 

cent and may be as high as 50 per cent of CFC production. Currently, CFCs that do not meet 

pharmaceutical specifications can be used for basic domestic consumption. This will not be 

possible after 2009 when these non-pharmaceutical-grade CFCs would need to be destroyed. 

Further, the larger the quantity of a single campaign production of CFCs, the lower the proportion 

of low quality, out-of-specification, CFCs will be produced. Conversely, the smaller the quantity 
22 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

is, the higher the proportion of low quality CFCs produced. For a single plant, a quantity of about 

200 tonnes may be the limit below which CFC production becomes impractical, both for the 

efficiency and cost of CFC production. 

These factors mean that the economics of CFC production will make impractical the continued 

production of small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs after 2009. These are important 

factors that need to be kept in mind when considering options for CFC production after 2009 and 

for final campaign production needs and timing. 

Given the uncertainties and risks associated with the long-term supply of suitable quality CFCs 

after 2009, MTOC emphasises that the best option for continued supply of inhalers is to complete 

transition as quickly as possible and ensure the expeditious introduction of CFC-free alternatives. 

This can be achieved in many countries by establishing a clear end date for ceasing the 

manufacture and/or import of CFC MDIs and planning phase-out activities with this deadline in 

mind. Parties are encouraged to consider policies and regulations that establish phase-out dates 

for the manufacture and/or import of CFC MDIs. For countries that manufacture CFC MDIs, 

much is dependent on the successful, timely completion of conversion projects. 

The MTOC considered three options for the production of CFCs to supply requirements for MDI 

manufacture after 2009. MTOC considered issues such as security of CFC supply, predicted 

volume requirements, relative costs for production, storage and destruction, and recommends a 

preferred option that can best facilitate the final phase-out of CFCs MDIs in countries that still 

currently manufacture CFC MDIs. These options are outlined below. 

1. Open-ended annual CFC production after 2009 

Open-ended annual CFC production after 2009 (under annual essential use exemptions) does 

not provide a clear target or timetable for ending CFC production, predictability for CFC 

producers, or incentive for those companies currently manufacturing CFC MDIs to switch to 

CFC-free alternatives. At a certain point, the economics of CFC production will not be 

favourable, and will make impractical and too uncertain the continued production of 

relatively small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. At this point, continuity of 

affordable healthcare would be jeopardised. Overall destruction costs for out-of-specification 

CFCs will be relatively high with this option. This option is not recommended. 

2. An Extensive Final Campaign Production in late 2009 

Although this option looks attractive from an environmental perspective and is consistent 

with the Protocol phase-out date, the logistics of organising such a large production campaign 

no later than 2009, in terms of the total multi-year quantity (estimated to be up to about 5,000 

tonnes) and the associated essential use nomination and approval process, make this option 

impractical. 

The costs of inventory and storage would also be large. Historically in the earlier years of the 

essential use process, non-Article 5 Parties made over-projections of CFC requirements 

because of uncertainty in the ‘ground-up’ development of alternatives at that time. For this 

option, a premature final campaign would almost certainly again lead to over-production. 

This would result in costly destruction of surplus CFC volumes or unnecessarily prolonged 

CFC MDI production. 

In its 2007 report, MTOC proposed a final campaign in 2009. This option is no longer 

recommended for 2009. There are two reasons that now make it necessary to postpone the 

date for a final campaign. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 23

• Procedural: In 2007 Parties did not adopt a decision on this subject, deferring 

consideration until a later date. To manage a final campaign and to produce CFCs 

after 2009 it will be necessary to make several decisions, for which lead times are 

needed. Parties may wish to consider the proposals made in section 3.8 concerning 

adjustments to the essential use process that takes into account the special 

circumstances of Article 5 Parties and final transition. 

• Technical: The large-scale conversion of local CFC MDI manufacturing in Article 5 

Parties is slower than anticipated. It will be necessary to wait at least another year to 

assess the progress of phase-out projects and their impact on future requirements of 

CFCs. 

3. Final Campaign Production in 2011 

MTOC believes that with appropriate planning and co-ordination a final campaign production 

of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs, for CFC MDI manufacturing countries that do not have 

domestic CFC production, could be feasible in 2011. This option assumes that project 

implementation is not delayed further. 

This option also presumes that China maintains domestic production of CFCs and continues 

annual CFC production, if approved by Parties under the essential use process, until it 

completes its national CFC MDI phase-out. China has consumption and CFC production 

capacity at a scale that enables self-sufficiency. 

Anticipating a final campaign production at an agreed date provides a clear target for ending 

CFC production, predictability for CFC producers, and incentive for those companies 

currently manufacturing CFC MDIs to switch to CFC-free alternatives. 

Based on estimated CFC requirements, the economics of CFC production should still be 

favourable, firstly in 2010 to allow annual production (of less than 1,700 tonnes) in that year 

under an essential use, and then in 2011 for a final campaign production. The quantity of the 

final campaign production, for all countries excluding China, depends on whether India 

ceases CFC MDI production at the end of 2009 (as implied by Executive Committee Decision 

54/35) or not. If India continues CFC MDI production after 2009, then the quantity of a final 

campaign would be about 2,000 tonnes, for all countries excluding China. If India ceases 

CFC MDI manufacture at the end of 2009, then the quantity of a final campaign would be 

about 1,000 tonnes, for all countries excluding China. With either of these outcomes with 

this option, overall destruction costs for out-of-specification CFCs would be relatively lower 

than for open-ended annual CFC production. 

The logistics of organising a more modest final production campaign in 2011 (in terms of a 

total multi-year quantity of about 1,000-2,000 tonnes and the associated timelines for 

essential use nomination and approval no later than 2010) make a final campaign in 2011 

more practical than in 2009. The costs of inventory and storage would also be relatively 

lower than for a final campaign in 2009 or 2010. 

Suggested adjustments to the essential use process to accommodate this option are outlined in 

section 2.8. 

2.6.2 Production and stockpiling considerations for final campaign production 

Production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs beyond 2009 will require firm contractual 

commitments (quantity, cost, timing) from MDI manufacturers to CFC manufacturers for 

producing, storing and distributing pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. Contractual arrangements 
24 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

should aim to avoid opportunistic pricing that takes advantage of the limited supply situation. 

CFC producers require that payment for any CFC production will be made upfront, with 

sufficient notice to run plants for pharmaceutical CFC production. Such payment will include 

costs for the destruction of off-specification material. Without the certainty of guaranteed orders, 

production plants may either take the commercial decision to shut down or dedicate production to 

other fluorocarbons. The liability for destruction of unused surplus CFCs will reside with the 

owner of the material. 

Pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to supply CFC requirements for MDI production after 2009 could 

also be sourced from remaining surplus CFC stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties. Sourcing CFCs 

from existing stockpile of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs in preference to new CFC production is a 

requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b). A co-ordinated approach to identifying, locating and 

transferring surplus stockpiles would be an advantage for Article 5 Parties, and would avoid 

destruction of CFCs that could otherwise be diverted to an essential use. 

Stockpiling of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs will be an important element of the efficient 

management of the pharmaceutical-grade CFC supply as part of a final campaign production. 

The critical steps to manage stockpiles include the following: 

1. Agree on the quantity and quality of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to be stored; 

2. Identify and source ISO tanks/cylinders/drums for storage and distribution; 

3. Identify general storage location; 

4. Agree all key quality protocols (specifications, testing, traceability); 

5. Resolve any repacking issues (CFC-11); 

6. Identify an entity to manage stockpile procurement, dispatch, maintenance, and 

destruction of final surplus. 

Storage and handling of stockpiled pharmaceutical-grade CFCs is considered further in section 

2.7. 

MDI manufacturing companies in CFC MDI producing countries must begin to engage in 

discussions with pharmaceutical CFC producers to ensure the appropriate cost, appropriate 

quantity and quality issues are agreed upon prior to any final production being commenced. 

2.6.3 Volume justification and timing 

For 2010 onwards, production of CFCs can only occur under an essential use exemption for 

Parties including Article 5 Parties. As concluded earlier, final campaign production is less 

advisable for 2010 but an essential use exemption will still be needed for that year for CFC 

production for MDIs. Article 5 Parties’ essential use nominations will need to be submitted by 

31st January 2009 for Parties to consider essential use exemptions for CFC production in 2010. 

In order to anticipate a final campaign production, accurate forward projections will be needed of 

annual quantities of each CFC required for MDI manufacture for 2010 and for each year 

thereafter until each Party’s agreed phase-out date. These projections should accompany and 

justify each year’s nomination for 2010 and onwards, starting with the nominations submitted in 

2009. This would allow an accurate global picture to be developed from 2009, and a 

recommendation by TEAP on the preferred date for a final campaign to be made. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 25

A final campaign production risks exaggerated and non-essential use of CFCs produced for 

multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essential use production exemption to cover a final 

campaign production will need to work in parallel with an annual exemption process to approve 

annual quantities to be used from the stockpile, and to signal the need for destruction of any 

surplus CFCs. 

National transition strategies will also be needed to justify the volume and timing of a final 

campaign production, along with a complete justification (for both domestic and export use) to 

demonstrate the use to be essential. 

Article 5 Parties will need to work closely with implementing agencies, industry, and other 

stakeholders to prepare essential use nominations for 2010, with all necessary multi-year data, by 

31st January 2009. 

It is anticipated that in 2009, Parties would consider Decisions to approve the CFC volumes 

intended for manufacture in 2010 only. In the next year (2010), the remaining volumes to 

complete phase-out in each Party would be considered and, if appropriate, approved to allow a 

final campaign production to occur in 2011. 

2.6.4 CFC Specification 

Specifications are agreed on a "case-by-case" basis between CFC suppliers and MDI 

manufacturers as part of the normal commercial negotiations. One important element of a final 

campaign would be an agreement on a suitable specification against which the CFC manufacturer 

would supply pharmaceutical-grade material. Parties may wish to highlight the need for national 

health authorities to work with CFC suppliers and MDI manufacturers to ensure that acceptable 

specification are in place. Independent actions could lead to a multiplicity of different 

specifications, which would complicate a final campaign, however, given the few CFC 

production facilities remaining, this situation is unlikely. 

Of the existing specifications, the British Pharmacopoeia (1988) has already been withdrawn and 

there is a possibility that the USP (1998) specification may follow. 

2.7 Storage and handling of stockpiled pharmaceutical-grade CFCs 

2.7.1 Physical-chemical properties and storage 

Three different CFCs are used in the manufacture of MDIs and their storage requirements change 

according to their pressures. CFC-12 accounts for roughly 60 per cent of total consumption for 

MDIs and at room temperature is a gas with a pressure of several atmospheres, which requires the 

use of expensive storage tanks. The value of a 30 tonne CFC 12 pressure tank is in the order of 

US$100,000. CFC-11 accounts for approximately 30 per cent of total consumption for MDIs and 

can be stored as a bulk liquid or in disposable drums. In the latter case the storage temperature 

should not raise above 30°C. CFC-114 is not used in all CFC MDIs and accounts roughly for the 

remaining 10 per cent of global consumption for MDIs; it has a much lower pressure than CFC12, but still needs to be stored in a pressurised tank. 

When an MDI manufacturer used a fixed ratio of different CFCs in its products, it was common 

practice that the CFC supplier shipped the pre-mixed blend to the MDI producer. If the CFCs 

were stockpiled as a pre-mixed blend, their use by another MDI manufacturer would require 
26 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

some adjustment of the composition unless both used the same CFC ratio in their formulations. 

However, it is not believed that the use of mixtures is common practice at present because CFC11 is generally used as solvent for suspending the active ingredient. 

CFC-12 and CFC-114 are very stable compounds that will not undergo chemical transformations, 

therefore they can be stored safely provided contamination is prevented and they are stored under 

proper conditions. However, CFC-11 can decompose in the presence of water, and it is therefore 

important that drums are stored in a warehouse that prevents their exposure to rain. Large 

temperature fluctuations should also be avoided as the drums are not designed to withstand the 

resultant pressure changes, and will deform and may eventually leak. 

2.7.2 Size of Storage 

Bulk pressurised tanks usually have a capacity of 20-100 tonnes; those in the upper size range are 

usually used at the CFC manufacturer site, while a 20 tonne tank will hold sufficient CFC to 

produce approximately 1,000,000 MDIs. 

ISO tanks are another bulk storage option that are built to fit a 20 ́ shipping container and can be 

easily transported. CFC manufacturers usually use ISO tanks to export CFCs, but because their 

availability is limited CFC manufacturers normally expect that their contents will be emptied at 

the MDI facility and the ISO tank returned promptly. ISO tanks can also be rented, but this is 

expensive at around US$40 per day1

. If several ISO tanks were used to store CFCs, a suitable 

area for proper storage would be needed. 

Small MDI manufacturers usually purchase their CFCs in one-tonne cylinders. These will 

provide sufficient CFC-12 propellant to produce close to 50,000 MDIs. Usually the smaller the 

container used to store the CFC, the larger the losses proportionately. Handling of these cylinders 

is costly and time-consuming; CFC manufacturers or suppliers usually demand that they are 

returned empty after a reasonable amount of time. 

Apart from large storage facilities at CFC manufacturing plants, there are some storage 

complexes that have been used by pharmaceutical companies in the European Community and 

the United States to hold their stocks during the phase-out of CFC MDIs. It is unlikely that 

similar storage complexes exist in Article 5 Parties. Use of this type of facilities will be needed 

when a campaign for the final production of CFCs is defined. 

2.7.3 Quality control and risks associated with storage 

Pharmaceutical regulations demand that stockpiled material is re-circulated and tested 

periodically. Usually sampling is conducted every six months. Discharging of material stored in 

a large vessel into a smaller container requires specialised equipment and personnel. Assurance 

that containers are clean and free of contaminants is crucial, particularly to avoid contamination 

of the material stored in the larger vessel. 

 

1 Taken from a presentation given by Dr Tim Noakes at the South Asia and Southeast Asia and Pacific Regional 

Thematic Workshop on Phasing-out CFC Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) in Langkawi, Malaysia, during 13-15 

March 2008.
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 27

The risks of catastrophic failure and venting also have to be considered. Tanks must be located in 

a secure area where only authorised personnel can enter. Tanks must also be in a site where there 

are no risks of fires that could cause undesired high temperatures and eventual rupture of a safety 

valve. 

2.7.4 Transfer of existing stockpiles of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs 

Transfer of existing stockpiles would be logistically possible through the use of dedicated ISO 

tanks, provided adequate planning could be established. Timing and costs would be dependent 

upon the distance of the transfer as well as testing requirements. Costs would also be determined 

by the need for storage of the "transferred" product. Should it be necessary to keep the product 

on-site in ISO tanks then, as described earlier, extra charges would apply. Quality would need to 

be ensured through testing procedures. 

Sourcing CFCs from existing stockpile of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs in preference to new CFC 

production is a requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b), but not one that has been strictly adhered to 

by non-Article 5 Parties. In the final stages of transition, Parties should be encouraged to 

facilitate the identification and transfer of suitable stocks. Parties should be encouraged to 

facilitate intra-company, international CFC transfers. Nominating Parties must confirm that 

nominated quantities cannot be sourced from existing global stockpile to meet the requirements 

of Decision IV/25(1)(b). Decisions VII/28(2)(c), IX/20 and XII/2(8) address the means and 

conditions for the transfer of essential use exemptions and authorisations by Parties. Parties may 

wish to clarify that with these Decisions, Parties can transfer CFCs already produced under an 

essential use exemption and ensure that the Decisions provide the flexibility and accountability 

needed to allow the transfer of stockpile. In addition, it is not clear whether a stockpile produced 

before the phase-out date (that is, not produced under an essential use exemption) can be 

transferred. Parties may wish to consider authorising through a Decision the transfer of any 

stockpile under the conditions of IX/20. 

The import/export of CFCs is subject to strict licensing requirements between Parties. These 

would have to be dealt with on a "case-by-case" basis with the assistance of national authorities. 

Parties may also wish to review domestic laws to facilitate transfers of stockpiles between 

companies and/or countries. 

2.7.5 Logistics 

The costs associated with stockpiling are substantial. The cost of the stock itself is of the order of 

$7/kg or $14,000,000 for a 2,000 tonne stockpile. Apart from the financial cost of carrying the 

inventory, storage costs per year could be in the order of $100/tonne2

. CFC producers and the 

operator of the storage facility will probably prefer to deal with a single entity that would assume 

ownership or stewardship of the stock and its costs. 

Parties may wish to consider establishing a single entity, such as an implementing agency, to be 

responsible for the stockpile and its costs. 

 

2

 Taken from a presentation given by Dr Tim Noakes at the South Asia and Southeast Asia and Pacific 

Regional Thematic Workshop on Phasing-out CFC Metered Dose Inhaler (MDI) in Langkawi, 

Malaysia, during 13-15 March 2008. 
28 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

2.7.6 Destruction of surplus or out-of-specification CFCs 

Destruction of out-of-specification CFCs can take place at any CFC manufacturing facility with 

destruction technology approved by Parties (Decision XV/9), such as high-temperature 

incineration, and with the ability to handle fluorinated chemicals. Virtually all CFC production 

facilities have such incinerators or access to them, and there are many more commercial 

operators. 

Parties are reminded that surplus CFCs, acquired under an essential use exemption, have to be 

used in another essential use or destroyed according to means approved by the Montreal Protocol 

(Decision XV/9). Destruction technologies for ozone-depleting substances have been discussed 

previously in the 2002 Report of the TEAP Task Force on Destruction Technologies. 

Destruction of surplus CFCs will require consideration of the logistics of collection, handling, 

and transport to a facility with approved destruction technology. It will be important to use 

tracking and reporting systems, such as through the accounting frameworks for essential uses, to 

avoid unauthorised venting. The requirements of the Basel Convention on the Control of 

Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal will also need to be 

considered. Liaison with government officers responsible for Basel Convention requirements for 

a Party will need to be consulted. 

The costs of destruction are extremely difficult to estimate accurately since they are regionally 

driven and dependent on the distance and means for transporting waste CFCs to destruction 

facilities, and the destruction facility used. Nonetheless, TEAP has reported previously in its 

2005 Supplement to the IPCC/TEAP Report Special Report "Safeguarding the 

Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System; Issues related to Hydrofluorocarbons and 

Perfluorocarbons” that average destruction costs (destruction only, excluding collection and 

transport) are US$2,500-4,500 per tonne (up to US$5/kg in 2005). Consolidation of national 

stocks for destruction, and a co-ordinated collection and transport system, could reduce the total 

costs of destruction through economies of scale. Liability for destruction, including associated 

costs, would reside with the MDI manufacturer that had been allocated the CFCs under an 

essential use exemption. 

2.8 Recommended modifications to the essential use process to accommodate Article 5 

Parties and final campaign production 

MTOC has reviewed the Protocol’s current essential use decisions and supporting guidance in the 

Handbook on Essential Use Nominations (TEAP, 2005), to conclude whether the essential use 

process can accommodate the situation of Article 5 Parties, the last stages of global transition and 

final campaign production. 

While Decision IV/25 and subsequent related essential use decisions provide a good starting point 

for an essential use process for 2010 and beyond, much has changed since 1992 when the 

framework was established. The final stages of global transition after 2009 will be characterised 

by circumstances that make desirable refinement of and modifications to the essential use 

framework and guidance on information requirements in the Handbook. 

Parties may wish to consider the following suggested options in making a set of new Decisions 

that build on the previous essential use Decisions and associated guidance on information 

requirements in the Handbook. Parties may wish to consider a suite of new Decisions because: 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 29

some of the existing Decisions are currently not applicable to Article 5 Parties but their intended 

effects are still relevant; other Decisions may need strengthening; and new decisions may be 

needed to take account of issues not currently included. 

These circumstances and suggested options include the following. 

• While Decision IV/25 is applicable to Article 5 Parties after the 2009 phase-out, many of 

the subsequent Decisions related to essential use nomination requirements and procedures 

have language that make them specifically applicable only to Parties not operating under 

Article 5. All of the Decisions on MDIs and essential uses have been reviewed with a 

view to suggesting options for consideration by Parties on a new set of Decisions that 

provide for an essential use process after 2009 that includes Article 5 Parties. 

• Under Decision IX/19(5) and other Decisions (including Decision XII/2), Parties not 

operating under Article 5 have been required to develop and implement national 

transition strategies and report on progress each year, and included as a requirement in 

making essential use nominations. To date, Article 5 Parties have been encouraged but 

not required to develop national transition strategies (under Decision XII/2(6)). Parties 

may wish to consider making a national transition strategy a requirement for Article 5 

Parties nominating for an essential use exemption to produce CFCs for MDIs, as has been 

the case for Parties not operating under Article 5. Prompt financing for development of 

these national transition strategies, as encouraged in Decision 54/35 of the Executive 

Committee, will assist these efforts. 

• Global manufacturing transition is well progressed except in some Article 5 Parties 

manufacturing CFC MDIs. There are many technically feasible alternatives to CFC 

MDIs for a range of active ingredients available in Article 5 Party markets. However 

price may be one issue affecting the uptake of alternatives in some countries (where 

government or commercial pricing policies do not favour the alternatives), and the rate of 

regulatory approval may be another issue. These factors make technical feasibility of the 

alternatives no longer as relevant as economic feasibility when considering the essential 

nature of CFC MDIs, and more information is needed about the circumstances in 

consuming countries, including the availability and affordability of CFC-free alternatives 

in the intended markets. Adjustments to the Handbook can provide additional guidance 

to nominating Parties. Parties may also wish to consider strengthening Decision VIII/11 

to include Article 5 Parties and to request, rather than encourage, the promotion of coordination between government authorities to facilitate the transition and the expeditious 

review of regulatory approvals and launch of CFC-free alternatives. 

• The cost to manufacture CFC and HFC MDIs is now generally comparable, and 

arguments to justify essentiality will be difficult to sustain where intentional or 

inadvertent pricing policies are unfavourable to CFC-free alternatives. Parties may wish 

to consider strengthening DecisionVIII/11 to include Article 5 Parties, and to request, 

rather than encourage, Parties to set pricing policies that do not discriminate against CFCfree alternatives. 

• With the implementation of projects in Article 5 Parties it should be possible for 

manufacturing countries to establish phase-out policies and deadlines for stopping the 

manufacture of CFC MDIs. Essential use nominations will need to justify the volume 

and timing of a final campaign production in accordance with national transition 

strategies, project timelines, the status of CFC free alternative development and approval, 
30 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

and the anticipated timing of introductions. Article 5 Parties will need to work closely 

with implementing agencies, industry, and other stakeholders to prepare essential use 

nominations. The Executive Committee of the MLF may wish to consider the advantages 

of assisting the Article 5 Parties with MDI manufacturing to establish phase-out policies 

and deadlines under regulations in this regard. 

• Reformulation/development and registration of inhalers is a complex undertaking. 

Criteria will need to be considered to properly elaborate the status of research and 

development by companies in Parties nominating essential uses, as well as limits on a 

reasonable period for the reformulation/development and registration of products where 

there is limited opportunity of alternatives becoming available. Parties may wish to 

consider strengthening and expanding the existing Decisions around research and 

development (Decisions XIX/13(3), XVIII/7(3), and VIII/10(1)) to include Article 5 

Parties and also to establish clear criteria for reasonable levels of active research and 

development (removing ambiguity around what constitutes ‘active’), and an end-point or 

trigger point for the conclusion of reformulation/development efforts that may ultimately 

prove unsuccessful. 

• Despite the fact that the date of CFC production phase-out for Article 5 Parties has been 

known for many years, some MDI manufacturers in Article 5 Parties are even recently 

registering and marketing new CFC MDIs in markets in Article 5 Parties. Parties may 

wish to consider that a CFC MDI approved in an Article 5 Party after 31st December 

2007 should not be considered an essential use, similar to the requirement for non-Article 

5 Parties under Decision XII/2(2). Parties may also wish to require nominating Parties to 

specify the date that CFC MDI production commenced for each active ingredient subject 

to a nomination. 

• Some MDI manufacturing companies are practising dual marketing of CFC MDIs and 

their CFC-free alternatives for the same active ingredient. After an adequate postmarketing period for the CFC-free alternative of not more than 12 months, absent 

compelling circumstances, the company’s corresponding CFC MDI product cannot be 

considered essential. Parties may wish to consider clarifying this in a Decision, that is, 

absent compelling circumstances, CFCs should not be requested in an essential use 

nomination or allocated to a company for a product where the company has launched the 

corresponding CFC-free alternative, after an adequate parallel marketing period of not 

more than 12 months. The Governments of such Parties may wish to consider the 

advantages of establishing policies and regulations to ban such dual marketing. 

• Parties may wish to consider the advantages of encouraging Parties not manufacturing 

CFC MDIs to establish bans on the import of CFC MDIs at a certain date, when adequate 

alternatives to CFC MDIs will be available. MTOC will consider information in essential 

use nominations next year, and can suggest options for a possible date to ban the import 

of CFC MDIs in Article 5 Parties. 

• Due to the uncertainty surrounding the security of future supply of pharmaceutical-grade 

CFCs, there will be a point in the next few years when annual just-in-time CFC 

production will no longer be economically feasible and a final campaign production will 

be needed. From 2010 onwards, production of CFCs can only occur under an essential 

use exemption. As concluded earlier, final campaign production is less advisable for 

2010 but an essential use exemption will still be needed for that year for CFC production 

for MDIs. In order to anticipate a final campaign production, accurate forward 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 31

projections will be needed of annual quantities of CFCs required for MDI manufacture 

for 2010 and for each year thereafter until each Party’s agreed phase-out date in national 

transition strategies. This should accompany and justify each year’s nomination for 2010 

and onwards, starting with the nominations submitted in 2009. This would allow an 

accurate global picture to be developed from 2009, and a recommendation by TEAP on 

the necessary date for a final campaign to be made. Parties may wish to consider a 

Decision to clarify information for a final production campaign in each year’s essential 

use nomination. Information needs for a final campaign are elaborated below. 

• Final campaign production for CFC MDI manufacturing countries that do not have 

domestic CFC production could be feasible in 2011. This assumes that project 

implementation is not delayed any further, and that China maintains domestic production 

of CFCs beyond 2011 to complete its national phase-out. Lead times need to be 

considered for a Decision on the quantity for a final campaign production, to ensure 

nominations for multiple years are made in time to allow a decision in the year prior to 

the production campaign. For example, multi-year essential use nominations for a final 

campaign in 2011 would be required by 31st January 2010 at the latest. 

• A final campaign production risks exaggerated, non-essential use of CFCs produced for 

multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essential use exemption to allow a final campaign 

production will need to work in parallel with an exemption process to approve annual 

quantities to be used from the stockpile produced under a final campaign, and to signal 

the need for destruction of any surplus CFCs. Decision IV/25 and subsequent Decisions 

imply review provisions for previously qualified essential uses, but do not clearly 

articulate yearly processes such as might be needed. Parties may wish to consider a 

Decision to clarify an essential use nomination process that would allow approval by 

Parties of future annual use of the stockpile produced in a final campaign previously 

approved by Parties. 

• Exporting countries nominating for essential uses need to demonstrate that importing 

countries deem the nominated products to be essential. Decision XII/2(3) requests 

Parties, including Article 5 Parties, to notify the Ozone Secretariat of any MDI products 

determined to be non-essential, which is then posted on the website of the Ozone 

Secretariat, and for Parties to take this information into consideration when nominating 

for essential uses. However only one Party’s information is listed on the Ozone 

Secretariat’s website. Given the complexity and fluidity of export markets, Parties may 

wish to consider strengthening this decision, with a request for all Parties, including those 

operating under Article 5, to make annual declarations of any MDI products determined 

to be non-essential within their own country, and that these declarations accompany 

essential use nominations from Parties manufacturing and exporting CFC MDIs to these 

countries, in order to justify an essential use under Decision IV/25. Decision XIV/5 also 

requests each Party to supply annual data on CFC MDIs and their CFC-free alternatives 

to the Ozone Secretariat. Twenty-two Article 5 Parties have submitted data pursuant to 

Decision XIV/5 since its inception, but in many cases the data have not been updated 

annually. Parties may wish to consider a decision emphasising the importance of 

providing such data as part of the final stages of transition. 

• One-year operational supply has been an important mechanism to control overproduction and hoarding of CFCs produced annually for essential uses. However in the 

final stages of transition and after a final campaign production, a one-year operational 

supply may not be as desirable as part of an essential use process. Prior to a final 
32 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

campaign, flexibility in stockpiling may be desirable for Article 5 Parties wishing to build 

a stockpile prior to a final campaign, and thereby reduce the final campaign production 

quantity. After a final campaign production, one-year operational supply is not relevant 

to a multi-year stockpile. Decisions XIX/13(2), XVIII/7(2), XVII/5(2), regarding oneyear’s operational supply, do not include Article 5 Parties. Decision XVI/12(3) asks 

Parties, in general, nominating for essential uses to give due consideration to existing 

stocks with the objective of maintaining no more than one year’s operational supply. 

Parties may wish to consider more flexibility in stockpiling for the final stages of 

transition than is available through the current Decisions. 

• Sourcing CFCs from existing stockpiles of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs in preference to 

new CFC production is a requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b), but not one that has been 

strictly adhered to by non-Article 5 Parties. In the final stages of transition, Parties 

should be encouraged to facilitate the identification and transfer of suitable stocks. 

Parties should be encouraged to facilitate intra-company, international CFC transfers. 

Nominating Parties must confirm that nominated quantities cannot be sourced from 

existing global stockpile to meet the requirements of Decision IV/25(1)(b). Decisions 

VII/28(2)(c), IX/20 and XII/2(8) address the means and conditions for the transfer of 

essential use exemptions and authorisations by Parties, although in the case of Decision 

VII/28(2)(c) for non-Article 5 Parties only. Parties may wish to clarify that with these 

Decisions, Parties can transfer CFCs already produced under an essential use exemption 

and ensure that the Decisions provide the flexibility and accountability needed to allow 

the transfer of stockpile. Parties may also wish to review domestic laws to facilitate 

transfers of stockpiles between companies and/or countries. In addition, it is not clear 

whether a stockpile produced before the phase-out date (that is, not produced under an 

essential use exemption) can be transferred. Parties may wish to consider authorising 

through a Decision the transfer of any stockpile under the conditions of IX/20. Parties 

may wish to strengthen Decision VII/28(2)(c) to include Article 5 Parties. Parties may 

also wish to consider minor modifications to the accounting framework under Decision 

VIII/9 to allow reporting of stockpile transfers. 

• Well-monitored and accounted stockpile management and destruction of out-ofspecification or surplus CFCs becomes even more critical after 2009. Any out-ofspecification CFCs produced after 2009 and any pharmaceutical-grade CFC remaining at 

the conclusion of MDI transition must be destroyed by approved technologies. Parties 

may wish to strengthen Decision VII/28(2) to include Article 5 Parties regarding the 

requirement to destroy any surplus essential use CFCs. In relation to a nomination for a 

final campaign production, Parties may wish to consider requiring nominating Parties to 

describe storage capacity, facilities and maintenance arrangements, access to approved 

destruction technologies and contingency plans for destruction of surplus stocks, 

including consideration of Basel Convention requirements. Parties may also wish to 

consider strengthening the accounting framework under Decision VIII/9 to require Parties 

to report the destruction via approved technologies of out-of-specification CFCs or 

surplus essential use pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. 

MTOC lists below the Decisions that might be considered relevant in making modifications to the 

essential use process to provide coverage for Article 5 Parties and final campaign production: 

Decision IV/25; Decision V/18 par. 5; VI/9 par. 4; VII/34 par. 5(b); VII/28 par. 2; VIII/9 pars. 8, 

9 and 10; VIII/10; VIII/11; VIII/12 par. 3; IX/19 par. 5; IX/20; X/6 par. 5; XII/2 pars. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

and 8; XIV/5; XV/5; XVI/12 pars. 2 and 3; XVII/5 par. 2; XVIII/7 pars. 2 and 3; XVIII/16 pars. 7 

and 8; and XIX/13 pars. 2 and 3. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 33

This list may not be complete but represents the most relevant Decisions, in MTOC’s view, that 

might need modification and incorporation into a new set of Decisions. 

TEAP and its MTOC remain ready to assist Parties in these refinements and modifications (and 

with subsequent accompanying changes to the Handbook) for which Decisions by Parties will be 

needed this year (to allow essential use nominations to be considered in 2009 for any CFC 

production in 2010). 

2.8.1 Information needed to define quantities for a final campaign production of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs 

In 2007 MTOC reported information needs for a final campaign. These information requirements 

have been updated since last year and are elaborated below. All of the information requirements 

can be accommodated under the existing Decisions and with the suggested modifications to the 

essential use Decisions and associated changes to the Handbook recommended in this report. 

In order to calculate the quantities to be produced in a final campaign, the following information 

will be needed on a country-by-country basis: 

• Country transition strategy for CFC MDIs, including a phase-out date for CFC 

MDI production; 

• Quantity required for each year (2010 and beyond), and historical three-year 

consumption data; 

• Within the Party, a summary of conversion projects for CFC MDI manufacturing 

plants, including: timelines; availability of manufacturing equipment, delivery 

and commissioning dates; 

• Availability of CFC-free alternatives from local manufacture and from import, 

status of CFC-free alternative development and approval, anticipated timing of 

introduction, relative pricing of imports compared with locally manufactured 

products and whether this presents a barrier to transition; 

• The destination, quantity and essentiality of CFC MDIs intended for export; 

• Information on storage capacity, facilities and maintenance arrangements, access 

to approved destruction technologies and contingency plans for destruction of 

surplus stocks, including consideration of Basel Convention requirements; 

• The date CFC MDI production commenced; and 

• Existing stockpile size, CFC type, availability and quality, and demonstrated 

efforts to acquire CFCs through the transfer of stockpile from within and outside 

of the Party. 

The annual accounting process will need to continue to track the quantities of CFCs: produced for 

MDI manufacture; transferred for MDI manufacture; used in MDI manufacture; within exported 

finished product and to what destinations; stockpiled; and destroyed. 
34 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

2.8.2 Suggested changes to Section 2.5 of the Handbook on information requirements 

MTOC has some initial suggestions for changes to Section 2.5 of the Handbook, relating to 

information requirements for essential use nominations. These suggestions are based on the 

current Section 2.5, taking into account the recommendations above for changes to the essential 

use process and the Handbook, and are presented for the purposes of illustration. A final set of 

changes to the Handbook can be recommended following Decisions by Parties about the form of 

any new essential use process to include Article 5 Parties and final campaign production. 

Due to the timelines for adoption of any Decisions by Parties at the 20th MOP and subsequent 

related changes to and publication of an updated Handbook, Parties may wish to consider 

provisional approval of the suggested changes below to Section 2.5 of the Handbook to assist 

Parties planning to submit essential use nominations in early 2009. 

The following information is requested for each essential use nomination. 

1. Provide a detailed description of the use that is the subject of the nomination. (Decision 

IV/25, pars. 2 and 3) 

2. Provide details of the type, quantity and quality of the controlled substances that is 

requested to satisfy the use. Specify whether the quantity is requested for production or 

for use from existing stockpile. (Decision IV/25, pars. 2 and 3). 

3. Indicate the period of time and the annual quantities of the controlled substances that are 

requested. For CFC MDIs, indicate the expected annual future requirements until CFC 

MDI transition is completed and historic 3-year consumption data to satisfy the use. 

(Decision IV/25, pars. 2 and 3) [This Decision is flexible and allows for multi-year 

essential use nominations, as would be required for a final campaign production, and 

also allows for Parties to provide data for all future years until anticipated phase-out]. 

5. For CFC MDIs, specify the intended market(s) for sale or distribution for the use, the 

active ingredient(s) for the use in each market and the quantity of CFCs required for each 

active ingredient in each market. If necessary, provide the best estimate for quantities for 

intended markets, using available data from requesting companies. When more specific 

data are not available, data aggregated by region and product group may be submitted for 

CFC MDIs intended for sale in export markets. (Currently covered by Decisions XV/5, 

par. 2 and XVI/12, par. 2). Specify the date that CFC MDI production commenced for 

each active ingredient subject to the nomination. 

6. For CFC MDIs, state whether each intended market for sale or distribution is subject to a 

transition strategy adopted and submitted to the Secretariat and posted by the Secretariat 

on its website (pursuant to current Decision XII/2 or Decision IX/19). (Currently covered 

by Decision XV/5, par. 3) Summarise the nominating Parties national transition strategy, 

including national phase-out dates and CFC MDI manufacturing plant conversion 

timelines (including new manufacturing equipment delivery and commissioning dates). 

7. For CFC MDIs, briefly describe progress made on the transition to CFC-free alternatives 

under a national or regional MDI transition strategy. (Currently covered by Decision 

IX/19, par. 5 and Decision XII/2, par. 5(c) for non-Article 5 Parties only. Decision 

XII/2(6) encourages, rather than requires, Article 5 Parties to develop strategies and 

annually report on progress, and there is no equivalent requirement for Article 5 Parties 

submitting essential use nominations to present national transition strategies as for nonArticle 5 Parties in Decision IX/19, par.5). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 35

8. Explain why the nominated volumes and the intended use of these quantities are 

necessary for health and/or safety, or why it is critical for the functioning of society. 

(Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(i), 2 and 3). 

9. For CFC MDIs, confirm that the Secretariat's list of CFC MDI active ingredients and/or 

category of products determined to be non essential by a Party has been consulted and that 

none of the volumes requested shall be used for items posted on that list. (Decision XII/2, 

par. 3). Attach annual declarations by Parties, for each of the intended markets subject to 

the nomination, of active ingredients and/or CFC MDI products determined to be nonessential by the Party. 

10. Explain what other alternatives and substitutes have been employed to reduce the 

dependency on the controlled substance for this application in the intended markets 

subject to the nomination. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 1(b)(i), 2 and 3(d)). 

11. Explain what alternatives were investigated or are available in the intended markets and 

why they were not considered adequate. Describe information on the availability and 

affordability of alternatives in the intended markets subject to the nomination. Explain 

whether any barriers, such as the pace of regulatory approvals or unfavourable pricing 

policies, are slowing the uptake of alternatives. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 1(b)(i), 2 

and 3(d)). For CFC MDIs, confirm that the global database of CFC MDIs and their 

alternatives has been consulted and taken into account in the nomination (Decision 

XIV/5). For the intended markets for sale or distribution, confirm that each company, 

requesting essential use allocations, does not have a CFC-free alternative marketed for 

more than 12 months for each active ingredient for which a CFC MDI is also being 

marketed that is subject to the nomination. Confirm that CFCs are not requested for and 

will not be allocated to a company, absent compelling circumstances, for a product where 

the company has launched the corresponding CFC-free alternative (for any of the 

intended markets for sale or distribution), after an adequate parallel marketing period of 

not more than 12 months. 

12. For CFC MDIs, confirm that each company requesting essential use allocations has 

demonstrated ongoing active research and development of alternatives to CFC MDIs with 

all due diligence and/or collaborate with other companies in such efforts. (Currently 

covered by Decision VIII/10, par. 1 for non-Article 5 Parties only) Describe the status of 

the development of alternatives to CFC MDIs, plans for their approval and expected 

launch dates. 

13. Explain what efforts are being undertaken to employ other measures for this application 

in the future, including, in the case of MDIs, efforts to foster approval of alternatives in 

the domestic and export markets. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 3(d) and 4; Decision 

XII/2, par. 4; and current Decisions VIII/10, par. 1 and VIII/11 for non-Article 5 Parties 

only). 

14. If the use is for a CFC MDI product approved after 31 December 2000 for non-Article 5 

Parties (currently covered by Decision XII/2, par. 2 for non-Article 5 Parties only) or after 

31 December 2007 for Article 5 Parties for the treatment of asthma and/or chronic 

obstructive pulmonary disease, provide documentation to demonstrate that this product is 

necessary for health or safety and that there are no technically and economically feasible 

alternatives available. 

15. Describe the measures that are proposed to eliminate all unnecessary emissions. At a 

minimum, this explanation should include design considerations and maintenance 

procedures. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(b)(i), 2 and 3(b); Decision VI/9, par. 4; and current 

Decision VIII/10, pars. 6 and 7 for non-Article 5 Parties only) 
36 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

16. Explain whether the nomination is being made because national or international 

regulations require use of the controlled substance to achieve compliance. Provide full 

documentation including the name, address, phone and fax number of the regulatory 

authority requiring use of the controlled substance and provide a full copy or summary of 

the regulation. Explain what efforts are being made to change such regulations or to 

achieve acceptance on the basis of alternative measures that would satisfy the intent of the 

requirement. [MTOC queries the need for this requirement for MDIs.] 

17. For CFC MDIs, describe progress made towards determining and submitting a specific 

date by which time the Party, for those not operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5, will 

cease making nominations for essential use exemptions for CFCs for metered-dose 

inhalers where the active ingredient(s) is not solely salbutamol and the metered-dose 

inhalers are expected to be sold or distributed on the market of any Party not operating 

under paragraph 1 of Article 5. (Decision XV/5, par. 6) [MTOC queries whether this is 

relevant to Article 5 Parties where salbutamol will likely be reformulated in parellel with 

other active ingredients.] 

18. Describe the efforts that have been made to acquire stockpiled or recycled controlled 

substance for this application both domestically and internationally. Explain what efforts 

have been made to establish banks for the controlled substance. (Decision IV/25, par. 

1(b)(ii)). For CFC MDIs, in relation to a nomination for a final campaign production or 

for the use of a final campaign stockpile, describe storage capacity, facilities and 

maintenance arrangements, access to approved destruction technologies and contingency 

plans for destruction of surplus stocks, including consideration of Basel Convention 

requirements. 

19. For CFC MDIs, indicate the existing stock of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs (pre- and post1996 for non-Article 5 Parties, and pre- and post-2010 for Article 5 Parties) held by the 

Party requesting an essential use exemption, describing the quantity (metric tonnes), the 

quality and the availability for the year prior to the nomination. Confirm that existing 

stockpiles have been taken into account in making essential use requests. Describe how 

this stockpile will be utilised in coming years. (Decision IV/25, par. 1(b)(ii), current 

Decision XVI/12, par. 3, and current Decisions XVII/5 par. 2 and XIX/13 par. 2 for nonArticle 5 Parties only) 

20. Briefly state any other barriers encountered in attempts to eliminate the use of the 

controlled substance for this application. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 37

3 Medical Technical Options Committee Progress Report 

3.1 Executive Summary 

The Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) thanks Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company, 

and MTOC member Mr Hideo Mori, for hosting the MTOC meeting in Tokushima, Japan, 1-4 

April 2008. As part of its hospitality, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company provided meeting rooms 

and other in-kind support, such as local transport, telecommunications and copying, and also food 

and beverages. 

The global use of CFCs to manufacture metered dose inhalers (MDIs) in 2007 is estimated to be 

about 3,400 tonnes, a reduction of 600 tonnes from 2006, of which about 64 per cent of the total 

is used by Article 5 Parties. In 2007, non-Article 5 Parties used 1,221 tonnes of CFCs in MDI 

manufacture under essential use exemptions. This represents a 42 per cent reduction in use 

compared to 2006, demonstrating acceleration in the CFC MDI transition in non-Article 5 Parties. 

Stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties now stand at about 160 per cent of annual use of CFCs, 

contrary to Parties’ commitments to keep stocks to one year’s operational supply and highlighting 

the importance of flexible stockpile management in the final stages of phase-out. In 2007, MTOC 

estimates that Article 5 Parties used about 2,100 tonnes of CFCs for MDI manufacture. The 

majority of this was for manufacture by locally owned companies; multi-nationals operating in 

Article 5 Parties account for a small proportion of CFC use for MDIs. 

Technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs are available for all therapeutic categories for 

asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), with significant progress towards 

transition in Article 5 Parties for certain key moieties. However, the development and 

registration of CFC-free products cannot alone lead to a full uptake in the market without 

additional regulatory action, appropriate pricing and a clear national transition strategy. 

3.2 Global Use of CFCs for MDIs 

The global use of CFCs to manufacture MDIs in 2007 is estimated to be about 3,400 tonnes, a 

reduction of 600 tonnes from 2006, of which about 64 per cent of the total is used by Article 5 

Parties. 

Figure 3-1 and Table 3-1 show the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) for the manufacture of 

MDIs for asthma and COPD in non-Article 5 Parties for essential uses. In 2007, 1,221 tonnes of 

CFCs were used by non-Article 5 Parties in MDI manufacture under essential use exemptions, as 

reported through accounting frameworks. This represents a 42 per cent reduction in use 

compared to 2006, and an 86 per cent reduction in use compared with the year of maximum use 

in 1997 (8,905 tonnes), demonstrating acceleration in the CFC MDI transition in non-Article 5 

Parties. Stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties now stand at about 160 per cent of annual use of 

CFCs, contrary to Parties’ commitments to keep stocks to one year’s operational supply and 

highlighting the importance of flexible stockpile management in the final stages of phase-out. 
38 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 3-1 Quantities of CFCs for MDI manufacture in non-Article 5 Parties 

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Year

Nominated or exempted Used Stock

Table 3-1 Quantities (in tonnes) of CFCs for MDI manufacture in non-Article 5 Parties 

Year of 

Essential Use 

Amount Exempted/ 

Nominated for year 

of Essential Use 

Used for Essential 

Use 

On Hand End of 

Year 

1996 12,987.20 8,241.13 7,129.59 

1997 13,548.00 8,904.99 8,515.24 

1998 11,720.18 8,013.60 7,656.63 

1999 9,442.13 7,906.35 5,653.95 

2000 8,364.95 6,062.75 5,433.32 

2001 6,126.53 6,121.62 4,402.59 

2002 6,714.75 4,751.92 4,133.71 

2003 6,641.55 4,261.91 3,570.27 

2004 5,443.12 2,840.82 2,460.10 

2005 3,321.10 2,735.40 3,671.01 * 

2006 2,039.00 2,107.10** 2,957.37 * 

2007 1,778.00 1,220.90 1,987.97 * 

2008 797.00 - - 

2009 568.00 - - 

2010 182.00 

*Includes pre-1996 stock 

**Includes material approved in 2005 but used in 2006 in the Russian Federation 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 39

Technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs are available for all therapeutic categories for 

asthma and COPD. The availability of CFC stocks coupled with the wide range of alternatives 

assures patient safety during the transition in most non-Article 5 Parties. Transition in nonArticle 5 Parties is achievable by about 2010. However, the Russian Federation has indicated that 

lack of financial resources and regulatory processes are causing delays in the conversion of the 

local manufacture of affordable salbutamol CFC MDIs. Any non-Article 5 Parties that have not 

achieved transition by the end of 2009, will need to consider the uncertainty of supply of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs from 2010 onwards and participate in any global production strategy, 

such as a final campaign production, along with Article 5 Parties. These issues are elaborated 

later in this report. 

The flexible management and transfer of stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties at this final stage of 

the phase-out will be extremely important to avoid unnecessary production of CFCs and the need 

for large quantities of CFCs to be destroyed. To ensure transparency, any pre-1996 stocks should 

be accounted for in the Reporting Accounting Framework for Essential Uses. In addition, 

Decision IV/25 (Report of the TEAP, May 2005, Progress Report, section 1.1.4.1, page 35) 

requires companies that hold pre-1996 stocks to use them first before using newly produced 

CFCs. This means that in principle no company that has received an essential use allowance can 

claim that its surplus CFC is pre-1996 stock. The only exception could be if the company could 

prove that the essential use allowance was for a different type of CFC than the one it has in its 

pre-1996 stock (although CFC types have been aggregated in essential use decisions for many 

years). 

In 2007, MTOC estimates that Article 5 Parties used about 2,100 tonnes of CFCs for MDI 

manufacture. The majority of this was for manufacture by locally owned companies; multinationals operating in Article 5 Parties account for a small proportion of CFC use for MDIs. 

With increasing use of CFCs for MDIs in Article 5 Parties, and declining use in non-Article 5 

Parties, in 2007 CFC use for the manufacture of MDIs in Article 5 Parties exceeded that in nonArticle 5 Parties. 

3.3 Transition to alternatives to CFC MDIs 

Technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs are available globally for short-acting betaagonists and a wide array of other therapeutic categories for asthma and COPD. 

Progress in the transition to CFC-free alternatives has been evaluated by comparing the most 

recent data provided by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC)1

, on 

available products manufactured by its constituent member companies, with that previously 

summarised by MTOC in its 2006 Assessment Report. Data from 3M (which no longer markets 

inhalers) and Teva (which is not an IPAC member) were not available on this occasion. 

Table3-2 lists the HFC MDI replacement products that have been developed and registered for 

each moiety as of February 2008. This does not include a number of new products developed 

directly as HFC MDIs, for which a CFC version did not exist. 

 

1 The International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium is a group of companies (Abbott, Astrazeneca, 

Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxosmithkline, Inyx, Inc. and Sepracor, Inc.) that manufacture 

medicines for the treatment of respiratory illnesses, such as asthma and COPD. 
40 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

It is clear that progress has continued in the development and registration of HFC MDIs and 

DPIs, with a number of the IPAC member companies well underway in phasing out their CFC 

MDIs. However, while some companies such as GlaxoSmithKline and Chiesi have made 

continuing progress over the past two years, transition for other companies appears to have 

reached a plateau. 

Device approvals and subsequent launches for both DPIs and MDIs are presented for each moiety 

in Table 3-3. This shows that in many countries, more than one product is widely available for 

certain moieties. Taking salbutamol as an example, there are 64 countries where there are CFCfree products available from multiple IPAC producers, with a further 105 countries where a single 

CFC-free inhaler is on the market. In total, there are 73 countries where there is more than one 

short-acting β-agonist available from more than one company, an increase of 13 in the last two 

years. Furthermore, the corresponding numbers for corticosteroids, long-acting β-agonists and 

combinations thereof (not shown in Table 3-3), are 93, 48 and 62 respectively. Therefore, there 

are technically feasible alternatives that are widely available. 

As may be seen from Table 3-4, significant progress has been made towards transition in Article 

5 Parties for certain key moieties. In many Article 5 Parties, more than one CFC-free product is 

available; for example, there are 33 countries where there is more than one short-acting β-agonist 

available from more than one IPAC company. Furthermore, the corresponding number of 

countries for corticosteroids, long-acting β-agonists and combinations thereof (not shown in 

Table 3-4) are 49, 13 and 26 respectively. 

Nonetheless, the pace of progress in availability of CFC-free products from IPAC companies in 

Article 5 Parties appears to have been slower in the last two years in contrast to the global picture. 

However, this takes no account of CFC-free products that have been introduced by non-IPAC 

members companies. For example, Cipla in India lists on its web-site (http://www.cipla.com) 

over 100 respiratory products that do not contain CFCs, including CFC-free MDIs for 

beclomethasone, budesonide, fluticasone propionate, formoterol, ipratropium bromide, 

salbutamol, salmeterol, terbutaline sulphate and various combinations of the above. According to 

data available on the Ozone Secretariat’s website (http://ozone.unep.org), many of these products 

were approved 6 years ago and are produced for export. However, the detail behind these 

exports, together with DPI and oral alternatives, is not well documented. It is important that 

Article 5 Parties collect their own basic data on CFC and CFC-free inhaler use annually and 

provide it to the Ozone Secretariat by 28 February each year in accordance with Decision XIV/5 

to be posted on its website. This will aid in the development of effective transition plans within 

each country and in the determination of any essential use nominations for Article 5 Parties 

beyond 2010. 

Based on these data, transition is well under way in many Article 5 Parties. However, it is clear 

from accumulating experience in non-Article 5 Parties that the development and registration of 

CFC-free products cannot alone lead to a full uptake in the market without additional regulatory 

action, appropriate pricing and a clear national transition strategy. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 41

Table 3-2 Number of countries where HFC MDIs are launched, by moiety and company (IPAC 

companies only) 

∗

Includes one launch of sodium cromoglycate in combination with reproterol. 

Moiety Company Launched by 

Dec 05 

Launched by 

Feb 08 

Beclomethasone 3M 22 N/A 

 Chiesi 22 38 

 GlaxoSmithKline 19 23 

 Ivax 27 N/A 

Budesonide Chiesi 15 25 

Fenoterol Boehringer 

Ingelheim 20 21 

Fenoterol and 

Ipratropium 

Boehringer 

Ingelheim 19 22 

Fluticasone GlaxoSmithKline 111 130 

Formoterol Chiesi 11 19 

Ipratropium Boehringer 

Ingelheim 28 28 

Nedocromil Sanofi-Aventis 9 9 

Salbutamol 3M 30 N/A 

 GlaxoSmithKline 96 168 

 Ivax 34 N/A 

Salmeterol GlaxoSmithKline 1 41 

Sodium 

cromoglycate Sanofi-Aventis ∗

14 ∗14 
42 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 3-3 Device approvals and subsequent launches (IPAC companies only) in all countries: 

table data refer to numbers of countries 

**Includes one launch of sodium cromoglycate in combination with reproterol. 

Moiety Device Marketed 

Oct 06

Marketed 

Feb 08

Approved, 

but not 

launched 

Feb 08 

One product 

marketed in 

country 

More than 1 

product 

from more 

than 1 

company 

Beclomethasone DPI 39 16 26 

HFC MDI 61 112 23 } 42 } 32 

Budesonide DPI 76 79 6 

HFC MDI 15 25 1 } 63 } 20 

Fenoterol DPI - - - 

HFC MDI 25 25 1 } 25 } 0 

Fenoterol and DPI - - - 

Ipratropium HFC MDI 27 27 1 } 27 } 0 

Fluticasone DPI 77 64 41 

HFC MDI 111 131 21 } 122 } 0 

Formoterol DPI 52 59 2 

HFC MDI 11 24 - } 44 } 19 

Ipratropium DPI - - - 

HFC MDI 40 40 1 } 40 } 0 

Nedocromil DPI - - - 

HFC MDI 9 9 - } 9 } 0 

Salbutamol DPI 66 56 32 

HFC MDI 112 236 33 } 105 } 64 

Salmeterol DPI 65 54 42 

HFC MDI 1 41 13 } 61 } 0 

DPI 2 2 - Sodium 

cromoglycate HFC MDI **14 **14 - } 16 } 0 

Terbutaline DPI 51 56 17 

HFC MDI - - - } 56 } 0 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 43

Table 3-4 Device approvals and subsequent launches in Article 5 Parties from IPAC companies 

only: table data refer to numbers of countries 

3.4 Transition strategies 

Transition strategies from only 6 Parties are listed on the Ozone Secretariat’s web site. Pursuant 

to Decision XV/5(4), plans of action regarding the phase-out of the domestic use of CFCcontaining MDIs from the European Community, the Russian Federation and the United States 

are also listed on the Ozone Secretariat’s web site2

. 

 

2

 http://ozone.unep.org/Exemption_Information/Essential_Use_Nominations/index.shtml 

Moiety Marketed 

Oct 06

Marketed 

Feb 08

One product 

marketed in 

country 

More than 1 

product 

from more 

than 1 

company 

Beclomethasone 37 37 24 13 

Budesonide 39 42 36 6 

Fenoterol 4 4 4 0 

Fenoterol and 

Ipratropium 3 5 5 0 

Fluticasone 75 78 56 22 

Formoterol 21 26 23 3 

Ipratropium 3 3 3 0 

Nedocromil 0 0 9 0 

Salbutamol 91 110 77 33 

Salmeterol 37 23 20 3 

Sodium 

cromoglycate 0 0 0 0 

Terbutaline 23 26 26 0 
44 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

According to Executive Committee Decision 45/54, Low Volume Countries (LVCs) submitting 

Terminal Phase-Out Management Plans (TPMPs) can obtain up to US$30,000 for MDI transition 

strategies upon provision of basic data demonstrating the need for such a strategy. However, 

there is the additional issue of whether funding can be extended to countries that have either 

submitted their TPMPs before the 45th Meeting of the Executive Committee or are not LVCs. 

Furthermore, a number of Article 5 Parties with major manufacture of CFC MDIs are still in the 

process of preparing transition strategies. It should be noted that some transition strategies have 

been approved under national ODS/CFC phase-out plans; others have been approved as part of 

MLF-funded MDI investment projects; and yet others as stand alone projects. Transition 

strategies have been approved at least in the following countries: Bangladesh, Colombia, Cuba, 

Egypt, Iran, Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Nicaragua, Thailand, and Uruguay. However, none of 

these appear on the Ozone Secretariat’s web site. 

It is important that Article 5 Parties develop their own national transition strategy and provide 

them to the Secretariat, to be posted on its website, and then to report each year on progress in 

transition, both in accordance with Decision XII/2. Parties may also wish to consider making a 

national transition strategy a requirement for Article 5 Parties nominating for an essential use 

exemption to produce CFCs for MDIs, as has been the case for Parties not operating under 

Article 5. 

3.4.1 Progress reports on transition strategies under Decision XII/2 

Under Decision XII/2, Parties are required to report to the Secretariat by 31 January each year on 

progress made in transition to CFC-free MDIs. In 2008, one report was received from the 

People’s Republic of China on the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). 

In 2002, the Government of the HKSAR submitted its strategy to facilitate transition to CFC-free 

MDIs. All MDIs in the HKSAR are imported products. Major registered substitutes available on 

the market include dry powder inhalers (DPIs) and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) MDIs. Public 

health care services are progressively phasing out CFC MDIs in favour of CFC-free alternatives, 

while some multinational pharmaceutical companies have discontinued the marketing of a 

number of CFC MDIs for which direct replacements have been developed. As a result of these 

combined actions, there has been a sizeable reduction in CFC MDI consumption. In 2006, the 

percentages of consumption of CFC MDIs, CFC-free MDIs and DPIs were 13, 84 and 3 per cent 

respectively. However, the Government of the HKSAR reports that some CFC MDIs are still 

considered to be essential as their practical alternatives are not yet fully available. 

3.5 Global database in response to Decision XIV/5 

Under Decision XIV/5, Parties are requested to submit information on CFC and CFC-free 

alternatives to the Secretariat by 28 February each year. In 2008, reports were only received from 

Canada, the European Community, and Uruguay3

. Twenty-two Article 5 Parties have submitted 

data pursuant to Decision XIV/5 since its inception, but in many cases the data have not been 

updated annually. These Parties are Argentina, Australia, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, China, 

Croatia, Cuba, Eritrea, Georgia, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Macedonia, Malaysia, 

Mauritius, Moldova, Namibia, Oman, Romania, Sri Lanka, and Uruguay. 

 

3

 http://ozone.unep.org/Exemption_Information/Essential_Use_Nominations/index.shtml 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 45

It is important that Article 5 Parties collect their own basic data on CFC and CFC-free inhaler use 

annually and provide it to the Secretariat by 28 February each year, to be posted on its website, in 

accordance with Decision XIV/5. Decision XII/2(3) also requests Parties, including Article 5 

Parties, to notify the Ozone Secretariat of any MDI products determined to be non-essential, and 

for nominating Parties to take this information into consideration. The Ozone Secretariat website 

only has information from the European Community. Collection of such data is needed to 

successfully implement transition strategies. Given the complexity and fluidity of export 

markets, Parties may wish to consider a requirement for all Parties, including those operating 

under Article 5, to make annual declarations of any MDI products determined to be non-essential 

within their own country, and that these declarations accompany essential use nominations from 

Parties manufacturing and exporting CFC MDIs to these countries. 

May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 47

4 Chemicals Technical Options Committee Progress Report 

4.1 Executive Summary 

The 2008 CTOC Progress Report covers issues and progress on all the sub-sectors for which the 

CTOC is responsible. It includes chapters on matters that have been requested by the Parties: 

process agents, n-PB updates, reconsideration on carbon tetrachloride emissions and essential use 

nominations of CFC-113 by the Russian Federation. 

Process Agents 

The CTOC reviewed the reported information from Israel, Netherlands and China under decision 

XVII/6(7) and affirmed that the information reported by Israel and the Netherlands has been 

included in Table A of Decision XIX/15, listed as #1 (Elimination of NCl3 in chlor-alkali 

production) and #8 (Production of aramid polymer (PPTA)), respectively. Regarding the 

information from China, the CTOC assessed that three applications could be added in Table A of 

Decision XIX/15. Those process agent applications include CTC as a dispersant or diluting agent 

in the production of polyvinylidene fluoride, CTC as a solvent for esterification in the production 

of tetrafluorobenzoylethyl acetate and CTC as a solvent for bromination and purification in the 

production of 4-bromophenol. Also the CTOC confirmed that the process agent use in production 

of Dicofol (#6 in Table A of Decision XIX/15) had ceased in India in 2007 and recommend to 

delete this application from Table A. 

Under the Decision XVII/6(8), the TEAP was requested to review emissions in Table B of the 

Decision X/14, taking into account information and data reported by the Parties and to 

recommend any reductions to the make-up and maximum emissions on the basis of that review. 

However, the TEAP/CTOC could not make any recommendation regarding the revision of Table 

B due to the fact that not all the data were available. Only three Parties, EC, USA and Brazil 

submitted data to the Ozone Secretariat. The data from Brazil are ‘in confidence’ due to the fact 

that only one plant was reporting in each case, while EC and USA data were public. 

Feedstocks 

The CTOC reported a detailed summary of feedstock applications in the TEAP May 2005 

Progress Report under the Decision X/12 and no further studies were requested by the Parties in 

2008. The CTOC updated the list of feedstocks and estimated that the emissions from feedstock 

uses of ODS were of the order of 4,250 metric tonnes or 1,650 ODP tonnes in 2005. 

Laboratory and Analytical Uses 

Decision XIX/18 requested the TEAP/CTOC to provide, by the 21st MOP (2009), a list of 

laboratory and analytical uses of ODSs, indicating those for which alternatives exist and which 

are therefore no longer necessary and describing those alternatives. 

The CTOC has produced an interim report this year on analytical uses and standard analytical 

methods such as infrared analyses, iodometric titrations, bromine index determinations, etc. 

The Latin America and Caribbean Ozone Officers Network provided information about analytical 

uses of ODS with quantitative data for Argentina and Chile. While analytical uses were identified 

in Bolivia and Mexico, no quantitative data were available. 
48 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

As far as the CTOC was able to ascertain, the use of ODS in analytical procedures has ceased in 

non-Article 5 Parties, but such Parties may wish to ascertain whether this is correct. Replacement 

with non-ODS alternatives has occurred in some but not all Article 5 Parties. The cost of 

alternatives may be high in some cases, but work is underway in at least one Article 5 Party to 

test alternatives and make the transition away from ODS, so ‘casebook’ studies should be 

available by the time the CTOC completes its report in 2009. 

Solvents and n-PB Updates 

No new alternatives for solvent applications have been developed since the last report in 2006. 

Currently HFCs, HCFCs and HFEs still lead the field of in-kind solvent applications. 

Decision XIII/7 requested the TEAP to report annually on n-PB use and emissions. The following 

is a summary of the investigations by the CTOC this year. 

• The ODP values of n-PB calculated by a three dimensional (3-D) model are consistent 

with the previous calculations by a two dimensional (2-D) model, and fall between 0.013 

and 0.105. 

• The global production of n-PB is estimated to be around 20,000-30,000 metric tonnes of 

which 5,000 tonnes are probably used as pharmaceutical and chemical intermediates or 

feedstock. Its consumption as a solvent is growing at a rate of 15-20 % per year in the 

USA (5,000 tonnes in 2006) and other Asian countries, but has begun to level off in Japan 

(1,310 tonnes in 2006). There is no information for other regions. 

• Obtaining more complete and accurate data on production and uses of n-PB, as well as its 

emissions, continues to be difficult owing to business confidentiality. 

• The Parties may wish to establish a reporting system so that accurate data for n-PB can be 

considered by the TEAP/CTOC. 

• The situation of its toxicity remains the same as described in the 2006 CTOC Progress 

Report. The major areas of concern regarding its toxicity are chronic toxicity, 

reproductive toxicity and genotoxicity. 

Reconsideration of carbon tetrachloride emissions 

The Parties requested the TEAP/CTOC to prepare a final report for the 27th OEWG for the 

consideration of the 19th MOP in 2007 under the Decision XVIII/10, but the CTOC could not 

complete the task mainly due to difficulties in accessing relevant information. 

The TEAP decided to complete this study with a Task Force and the final report will be published 

by the Task Force and presented at the 28th OEWG in Bangkok in July 2008. 

Essential Use Nomination of CFC-113 by the Russian Federation 

Decision XIX/14 noted the readiness of the Russian Federation to receive a small group of 

experts nominated by the TEAP/CTOC. The arrangement for their visit to Russia is now under 

negotiation among the Russian Federation, the Ozone Secretariat in Nairobi and the 

TEAP/CTOC. 

The TEAP/CTOC will report the results of the discussion at the upcoming 28th OEWG in 

Bangkok in July 2008. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 49

Recovery, Recycling and Destruction 

Updated information was obtained from Japan and the Russian Federation with regard to recovery 

and recycling. In Japan, 4,384 metric tonnes of refrigerants including ODSs and HFCs were 

recovered from commercial air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment and mobile airconditioners under the Fluorocarbon Recovery and Destruction Law in 2005. The Russian 

Federation reported the function of the Centers for CFC Recovery and Reclaiming that give 

service mainly for commercial and domestic refrigeration equipment and established the Center 

for Halon Recovery and Reclaiming (H-CRR) with a total capacity of approximately 2,000 metric 

tonnes per year. 

Regarding ODS destruction activities, the Russian Federation opened facilities in fluorochemical 

manufacturing companies to destroy any kinds of CFCs, HCFCs, HFCs and PFCs. 

In Article 5 Parties, two cases were reported from Indonesia and Fiji. The Indonesian cement 

industry through technical assistance provided by the Japanese Government has developed a 

facility to destroy CFC wastes, and its operation will start by July 2008. The National Ozone Unit 

of the Department of Environment in Fiji exported a container containing halons to DASCEM 

Holdings in Melbourne in Australia for destruction in 2007 since Fiji did not have a disposal 

facility to destroy ODS. 

4.2 Introduction 

The CTOC met on February 19-21, 2008 in Shanghai, China, where the meeting was hosted by 

the co-chair, Professor Jiang Biao. The courtesy of the Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry 

(SIOC) was highly appreciated. Fifteen out of twenty CTOC members participated in the 

meeting. Attending members were seven from the Article 5 Parties (Chile, China, India, Kuwait, 

Mauritius and Tanzania) and eight from the non-Article 5 Parties (Australia, Japan, Netherlands, 

Russia and USA). 

The agenda of the meeting covered issues on all the sub-sectors for which the CTOC is 

responsible, including process agents, feedstocks, laboratory and analytical uses, emissions of 

carbon tetrachloride, update of n-propyl bromide, solvents, non-medical aerosols and destruction 

technologies. 

The main purpose of the meeting was to respond to the requests in the relevant decisions from 

Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, and the conclusions of the meeting have been 

summarised in the following chapters. 

4.3 Process Agents 

The 19th Meeting of the Parties, held in Montreal, Canada in September 2007, adopted a new 

Table A in the Annex to the Decision XIX/15 as a list of process agent applications to replace 

Table A of Decision X/14 as it was amended in Decision XVII/7 and to replace Table A-bis in 

Decision XVII/8. 

The Decision XVII/6(7) requests the TEAP to review the information submitted in accordance 

with Decision XVII/6(4) and to report and make recommendations to the Parties at the 20th MOP 

in 2008, and every other year thereafter, on process-agent use exemption: on insignificant 

emission associated with a use, and process-agent uses that could be added to or deleted from 
50 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table A of Decision X/14 (which has now been replaced by the new Table A of Decision 

XIX/15).

Further, the Decision XVII/6(8) requests Parties with process agent uses to submit data to the 

TEAP by 31 December 2007 and 31 December of each subsequent year on opportunities to 

reduce emissions listed in Table B of the Decision X/14 and for the TEAP to review in 2008, and 

every other year thereafter, emissions in Table B, taking into account information and data 

reported by the Parties and to recommend any reductions to the make-up and maximum emission 

on the basis of that review. On the basis of these recommendations, the Parties shall decide on 

reductions to the make-up and maximum emissions with respect to Table B. 

The new Table A in Decision XIX/15 approved 42 uses of controlled substances as process 

agents based on the detailed CTOC review of previous Table A and Table A-bis requested by the 

decisions XVII/6(7) and XVII/8, respectively, as well as a potential list of process agents 

applications from China (see pp 27-42 in the TEAP April 2007 Progress Report).

By the time of the 2008 CTOC meeting, the Ozone Secretariat in Nairobi or the TEAP/CTOC 

received new information from Israel, Netherlands and EC, and the information from China was 

received by the Ozone Secretariat after the CTOC meeting. All of the information has been 

reviewed by the CTOC as shown in Section 4.3.1. Regarding the emissions listed in Table B, the 

CTOC received information only from EC, USA and Brazil. The data from Brazil are ‘in 

confidence’ due to the fact that only one plant was reporting in each case. The review by the 

CTOC is described in Section 4.3.2. 

4.3.1 Review of information from Israel, Netherlands and China 

The CTOC reviewed the information from Israel. There are two identical installations that use 

carbon tetrachloride (CTC) for the elimination of nitrogen trichloride (NCl3) in the production of 

chlorine with the capacities of 7.2 metric tonnes of CTC. The CTC quantities used were 3.5 

metric tonnes but there were no direct emissions to the atmosphere although some losses of CTC 

occurred through an entrainment by chlorine gas. This application is included as #1 in the list of 

Table A in Decision XIX/15. 

The Netherlands reported the process agent use of CTC in the manufacturing process of polyphenylene-terephthal-amide (PPTA) during 2006. The usage of CTC was 6.9 metric tonnes and 

its emission was reported as 2.86 metric tonnes with destruction of 4.0 metric tonnes. The Party 

expects to reduce the emissions of CTC below 1.0 metric tonnes over 2007 and the following 

years. This application is included as #8 in the list of Table A in Decision XIX/15. 

India had indicated the process agent use in production of Dicofol (#6 in Table A of Decision 

XIX/15) would cease by 31 December 2007. In response to confirmation by the CTOC, India 

reported that the process agent use (CTC) in production of Dicofol has ceased in India. Therefore 

the #6 application could be deleted from Table A of Decision XIX/15. Also, information was 

received from UNIDO that the process agent use for production of Sultamicillin (#31 in Table A 

of Decision XIX/15) in Turkey has ceased but that the process is still operated in South Africa so 

this process agent use needs to remain in Table A. 

The CTOC investigated a potential list of process agent applications from China in 2007 and 

commented that more information was needed to assess the listed applications, No. 8, 10, 12, 13, 

15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 22 in the Table 4.3 on pp 36-37 in the TEAP April 2007 Progress Report. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 51

China submitted information on those ten applications to the Ozone Secretariat on March 4, 2008. 

The CTOC examined this information and its findings are summarised in Table 4-1. 

Table 4-1 Findings by CTOC for the additional information submitted by China 

Nos. in Table 4-3 Applications Information from 

China

CTOC Findings

No.8 Chlorofluazuron No production Not a Process 

Agent

No.10 Dope No information 

available

Not a Process 

Agent

No.12 Ethyl-4-chloroacetoacetate 

(one of the two facilities)

No production Not a Process 

Agent

No.13 GCLE No production Not a Process 

Agent

No.15 Ozagrel No production Not a Process 

Agent

No.16 PVdF CTC as a 

dispersant or 

diluting agent

Meets process 

agent technical 

criteria

No.17 Tetrafluorobenzoylethyl 

acetate

CTC as a solvent 

for esterification

Meets process 

agent technical 

criteria

No.19 Using as G.I No information 

available

Not a Process 

Agent

No.20 Beta-Bromopropionic acid No production Not a Process 

Agent

No.22 4-Bromophenol CTC as a solvent 

for bromination 

and purification 

Meets process 

agent technical 

criteria 

The CTOC assessed the following three applications, No.16 (PVdF), No.17 

(Tetrafluorobenzoylethyl acetate) and No.22 (4-Bromophenol) as process agent uses and these 

could be added in Table A of Decision XIX/15. 

4.3.2 Attempted review of Table B of Decision X/14 

Table 4-2 shows an updated Table B of Decision X/14 by adding reported data in 2006. Not all 

the data have been available, but the reported data by EC and USA are in line with the Table B of 

Decision X/14. For the EC it should be taken into account that not all data of the new Member 

States are included in the reported data. Due to the fact that not all the data are available, the 

CTOC can not make any recommendation on reductions to the make-up and maximum emissions 

regarding the Table B of Decision X/14. 
52 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 4-2 Updated Table B of decision X/14 

Countries/Regions 

Make-up or 

consumption 

Make-up or 

consumption 

(2006) 

Maximum 

emissions 

Emissions 

(2006) 

European Community 1000 594* 17 5* 

United States of America 2300 No data 181 47** 

Canada 13 No data 0 No data 

Japan 300 No data 5 No data 

Russian Federation 800 No data 17 No data 

Australia 0 No data 0 No data 

New Zealand 0 No data 0 No data 

Norway 0 No data 0 No data 

Iceland 0 No data 0 No data 

Switzerland 5 No data 0.4 No data 

TOTAL 4501 594 221 52 

Updated table B in metric tonnes; *European Commission DG Environment and CTOC data ** EPA data 

4.4 Feedstocks 

The CTOC reported a detailed summary of feedstock applications in the TEAP May 2005 

Progress Report (pp 85-87) under the Decision X/12 and additional information on a feedstock 

use of trifluoromethyl bromide (halon 1301) as a trifluoromethylating agent useful for 

manufacturing pharmaceuticals and of CTC for manufacturing various HFC compounds in the 

TEAP May 2006 Progress Report (pp 67-69 and pp 80-81, respectively). 

Further studies on feedstock uses were not requested by the Parties in 2008, but the CTOC 

updated the list of common feedstock applications and the estimated emissions from feedstock 

uses of ODSs. 

4.4.1 Important feedstock applications 

CTC, CFCs and HCFCs can be feedstocks either by being fed directly into the process as a raw 

material stream, or by being produced as an intermediate in the synthesis of other desired 

products. Losses can occur during production, storage, transport and transfers. Intermediates are 

normally stored and used at the same site, so fugitive leaks are somewhat lower in this case. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 53

Common feedstock applications include, but are not limited to the following: 

• Conversion of HCFC-21 in the synthesis of HCFC-225 which finds application as a 

solvent 

• Conversion of CFC-113 to chlorotrifluoroethylene. The latter is subsequently 

polymerized to polychlorotrifluoroethylene, a barrier resin used in moisture-resistant 

packaging. 

• Conversion of CFC-113 and CFC-113a to HFC-134a and HFC-125. As this is the route to 

much of the HFC volumes, it is a high volume use. 

• Conversion of HCFC-22 to tetrafluoroethylene (TFE). TFE forms the building block of 

many fluoropolymers both by homopolymerization and copolymerization. This is a very 

high volume use. 

• Conversion of 1,1,1- trichloroethane as a feedstock in the production of HCFC-141b and 

HCFC-142b. This can continue until 2030 at high volume for emissive uses of these 

products and can continue long-term for uses related to conversion to polymers as noted 

below. 

• Conversion of HCFC-142b to vinylidene fluoride, which is polymerized to 

polyvinylidene fluoride or to copolymers. These are specialty elastomers. This use of 

HCFC-142b is not subject to phase-out and is likely to continue long term. 

• Conversion of carbon tetrachloride (CTC) to CFC-11, CFC-12, etc. This has historically 

been a very high volume application. However, as the phase-out of CFC production 

continues and becomes limited to only essential uses, volumes of CTC for this 

application will diminish significantly. 

• Conversion of CTC to chlorocarbons, which, in turn, are used as feedstocks in production 

of HFC-245fa and other fluorochemicals. 

• Reaction of CTC with 2-chloropropene to eventually lead to production of HFC-365mfc. 

• CTC is used in the reaction with vinylidene chloride for preparation of HFC-236fa with 

production volumes under 1 million pounds annually. 

• Consumption of CTC in the production of DV acid chloride, a precursor of synthetic 

pyrethroids. 

• By-product CTC can be produced in the manufacture of chloroform, which is a feedstock 

used in production of HCFC-22, a long-term high volume operation. 

• Conversion of HCFC-123, HFC-123a and HFC-133a in manufacture of pharmaceuticals, 

which is a long term use not subject to phase-out. 

• Conversion of HCFC-123 in the production of HFC-125. While this usually occurs as an 

intermediate, it is possible that this could be done using HCFC-123 as a starting material. 

We are not aware of using HCFC-123 as a starting material at this time. 

• HCFC-124 can be used as a feedstock to prepare HFC-125. 
54 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

4.4.2 Estimated emissions of ODS 

The IPCC recommends that emissions can be estimated from production facilities at 0.5% for 

HFCs and 0.2% for SF6. This includes fugitive and transport emissions. If one accepts that 0.5% 

is an appropriate guidance level for products transported and used as raw materials, calculations 

from 2002 production data suggest that: 

ODS used in production of HFCs = 293,000 tonnes 

Emission volume of ODS = 1,465 tonnes 

ODP impact of emissions = 1,172 ODP tonnes 

Production of fluoropolymers = 225,000 tonnes 

Emission of ODS = 1,125 tonnes 

ODP impact of emissions = 62 ODP tonnes 

TCE used in production of HCFCs = 282,175 tonnes 

Emission volume of ODS = 1,411 tonnes 

ODP impact of emissions = 141 ODP tonnes 

CTC used in production of CFCs = 50,000 tonnes 

Emission of ODS = 250 tonnes 

ODP impact of emissions = 275 ODP tonnes 

These data are only for emissions associated with manufacture and do not include any emissions 

related to uses. Therefore, total emissions from feedstock use are on the order of 4,250 metric 

tonnes and contribute about 1,650 ODP tonnes in 2005.

4.5 Laboratory and Analytical Uses 

The use of ozone depleting substances (ODS) in laboratory and analytical procedures has been a 

concern of the Parties. The 2006 TEAP report included information provided by the CTOC on the 

development and availability of laboratory and analytical procedures that can be performed 

without using ODS under the Decision XV/8. 

Decision VII/11, taken in 1995 following receipt of a report by the Laboratory and Analytical 

Uses Working Group, urged Parties to move to alternatives to the ODS currently used in 

laboratories and the TEAP to evaluate possible alternatives and to report progress in their 

adoption. Decision IX/17 continued the exemption and asked Parties to report annually on such 

uses. At the following Meeting of the Parties (Decision X/19) this provision was extended to 31 

December 2005 and this was subsequently (Decision XV/8) extended to 31 December 2007. Two 

further Decisions (Decision XVI/16 and XVII/13) addressed the general issues and, in particular, 

noted the continuing use of CTC in analytical procedures, which caused the consumption targets 

to be exceeded. 

Before then, however, Parties had agreed (Decision XI/15) to eliminate the use of ODS in some 

specific analytical applications, among which was ‘testing of oil, grease and total petroleum 

hydrocarbons in water’. In a related Decision XIX/18, Parties later agreed to eliminate the testing 

of organic matter in coal from the global exemption for laboratory and analytical uses of 

controlled substances, since the TEAP had reported that an alternative procedure was available. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 55

The most recent Meeting of the Parties also made Decision XIX/17, which included the deferral 

until 2010 consideration of the compliance status in relation to the control measures for CTC of 

Parties operating under Article 5, which provide evidence to the Ozone Secretariat with their data 

reports, submitted in accordance with Article 7, showing that any deviation from the respective 

consumption target is due to the use of CTC for analytical and laboratory processes. The Decision 

also urges these Parties to minimise the consumption of CTC in laboratory and analytical uses by 

applying the global exemption criteria and procedures for laboratory and analytical uses of carbon 

tetrachloride currently established for Parties not operating under Article 5 (that is, developed 

countries, which have agreed consumption quotas). 

Decision XIX/18 extended the global laboratory and analytical-use exemption until 31 December 

2011, under the conditions set out in earlier Decisions, and requested the TEAP and its CTOC to 

provide, by the Twenty-first Meeting of the Parties (2009), a list of laboratory and analytical uses 

of ozone-depleting substances, indicating those for which alternatives exist and which are 

therefore no longer necessary and describing those alternatives. 

This report describes the progress of the CTOC studies. A final list will be submitted to the 21st

MOP in 2009 under Decision XIX/18. This report concentrates on analytical uses.

4.5.1 Usage surveys 

The Nordic Council of Ministers conducted a review of the use of ODS in analytical procedures 

in 2001, and published it in 2003 (TemaNord 2003:516, 'Use of ozone depleting substances in 

laboratories', www.norden.org/pub/ebook/2003-516.pdf, accessed December 2007). Based on 

returns of the questionnaire, it was estimated that 205 laboratories used ODS for oil-in-water 

assays and 44 other procedures. Alternative solvents and also gravimetric procedures were 

reported and so, although a little dated, the review provides much valuable information. A 

subsequent report placed more emphasis on alternatives (TemaNord 2005:580, 'Potential Ozone 

Depleting Substances. Uses and Alternatives in the Nordic Countries, 

‘www.norden.org/pub/miljo/miljo/uk/ TN2005580.pdf’ accessed December 2007). 

In seeking to get some idea of the nature and scale of ODS uses that might need replacement, 

CTOC members from a number of countries and regions were able to provide data. In the Russian 

Federation, the standard method for Determination of Petrochemicals in Potable Water (GOST P 

51797-2001) employs CTC as the extracting solvent, which is used for infrared determination, 

although CFC-113 may be used as a substitute. At present, the gravimetric method is preferred so 

that the use of ODS can be avoided. 

A CTOC member reported that ODSs are no longer used in these analyses in Tanzania. Work is 

in progress to gather information from countries in the Arabian Gulf, where the petroleum 

industry has an appreciable presence, and also in other Article 5 Parties. 

The Latin America and Caribbean Ozone Officers Network provided information about analytical 

uses of ODS by a number of Latin American countries. In each case, the major reason for using 

ODSs (CTC and CFC-113) was the analysis of petroleum residues in water, using a number of 

standard methods that relied on infrared spectroscopy. Some TCA was also used in petroleum 

analyses, while CTC is used also as a standard for chemical analysis and as a solvent in student 

laboratories. While these uses were identified in Bolivia and Mexico, no quantitative data were 

available. Quantitative data for Argentina and Chile are shown in the Table 4-3. 
56 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 4-3 Analytical Uses of ODSs in Latin American Countries (liters/year) 

Country CTC CFC-113 TCA

Argentina 845 Nil 426

Chile 212.8 122.5 13 

 4.5.2 Standard analytical methods 

There is a considerable body of standard analytical methods used in a range of industry sectors. 

Standard methods are followed because they allow comparisons over time and between different 

laboratories. The use of a standard method is often required by a customer as a form of quality 

assurance for a product, or by a regulatory authority. Considerations such as the ease and 

reliability of the assay, workplace health and safety, or the availability of substances under 

intergovernmental agreements such as the Montreal Protocol can cause new standards to be 

written. The production of new standards takes time and care and often lags behind the 

identification of the need for change. In addition, users can be slow to adopt new standards for a 

number of reasons, including cost, familiarity with techniques, availability of equipment and 

comparability of results measured using previous and new methods. 

In the case of Article 5 Parties, the use of standard methods continues because of the need for 

quality assurance and quality control in certified laboratories. Many of the laboratories are part of 

international companies, and standard methods apply world-wide. In addition, some countries 

have their own norms or regulations that require the use of standard methods or local adaptations 

of standard methods. Thus the situation is extremely complex and varies from country to country. 

Non-Article 5 Parties may also specify specific analytical techniques: the Russian Federation, for 

example, specifies three methods for oil-in-water analysis, one of which uses CTC as the solvent 

for extraction and infrared analysis (see below). 

4.5.3 Infrared analyses of hydrocarbon residues 

A number of assays for hydrocarbon materials (often petroleum-derived) that use CTC or CFC113 consist of collecting the hydrocarbon from the sample – often contaminated water with a 

small amount of oily phase – in a solvent that is immiscible with water and not possessed of C-H 

units in its structure. An infrared spectrum of the solution will show the C-H vibrations of the 

hydrocarbon solute, near 3μm (3000 cm-1), and the assay may be quantitated by the use of 

standards. Oil mists in air can be analysed by drawing the contaminated air through a filter, which 

retains the hydrocarbon material, and then dissolving this in the appropriate solvent and 

performing the infrared assay. 

CTC was the solvent of choice for such assays in methods such as ASTM D-3921 (total 

hydrocarbons extracted from water, wastewater and sediments), and in method APHA AWWAWPCF 5520C (IR method) for hydrocarbon extraction from water and soils. However, concerns 

with the possible carcinogenicity of CTC, and later its listing as a controlled substance under the 

Montreal Protocol, led to its replacement in many assays by CFC-113. Despite the fact that CFC113 was already a controlled substance, ASTM method D3921-96, proposing its use, was 

introduced in 1996, and revised in 2003 (ASTM D3921-96(2003). Other standard methods also 

described the use of CFC-113 (APHA, AWWA and WEF (2000), Standard Methods for the 

Examination of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association, 20th edition, 

Washington, DC. Method 5520C (Partition-infrared), USEPA (1978), Method 5520B 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 57

gravimetric method, US EPA (1978), Method 418.1: Petroleum Hydrocarbons, Total 

Recoverable, Storet No. 45501, ASTM (2003), Method D 3921-96: Standard Test Method for Oil 

and Grease and Petroleum Hydrocarbons in Water, ASTM International, ASTM (2003)). CTC is 

also used in US EPA method 418.1, to extract total petroleum hydrocarbons from water samples, 

for analysis by infrared spectroscopy. 

Use can be envisaged of a number of non-controlled chlorofluorocarbons that meet the 

requirements of solvency, liquid range and absence of C-H infrared absorptions, and which are 

not controlled substances and are unlikely to become controlled. Only one such chemical has 

come into commercial use, a reaction product of chlorotrifluoroethylene known as S-316. It is 

produced by the Japanese company Daikin and marketed by another company, Horiba, for use in 

FT-IR assays of oil-in-water. 

There is some uncertainty concerning the composition of S-316, which is formed by 

polymerization of chlorotrifluorethylene. Further information (TemaNord 2005:580, pages 37-39) 

is that several isomers of tetrachlorohexafluorobutane are present in S-316, but in some 

publications it is described as 'dimer/trimer of chlorotrifluoroethylene', and some researchers 

believe that one or more cyclodimers (dichlorohexafluorocyclobutanes) may be present, also. 

Provided the product has consistent composition and that satisfactory calibrations can be 

established, the exact composition of S-316 is probably irrelevant. 

A new standard method ASTM D 7066-04 (Test Method for Dimer/Trimer of 

Chlorotrifluoroethylene S-316 Recoverable Oil and Grease and Nonpolar Material by Infrared 

Determination) (Rintoul, S. (2005), 'New ASTM Test method Offers Quick and Easy Oil and 

Grease Measurement for Water and Soil Samples', www.eco-web.com/editorial/02675-01.html, 

accessed December 2007.) describes the use of this solvent. One reason for persisting with the 

search for a replacement for CFC-113 is that, given the availability of portable infrared analysers, 

analysis can be performed in the field. Alternative methods that rely on gravimetric analysis 

require sensitive equipment that would only be found in a laboratory. 

The new solvent S-316 is more expensive than those it is designed to replace, but it is being 

adopted in developed countries. One laboratory reported paying US$ 450 for a 1.5 kg bottle 

(April 2006 data). The method employed was developed in-house, based on NIOSH method 5026 

(which specified CTC as solvent) and OSHA ID178SG (which specified CFC-113). 

The US National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) reported in 1995 that 

tetrachloroethylene (also known as perchloroethylene, PCE) was a useful substitute for CFC-113 

in certain applications at the Kennedy Space Center (NASA (1995). In these applications, CFC113 was used to degrease components and then to validate their cleanliness by a further treatment 

with the solvent. Fourier Transform infrared spectroscopy was used to measure the amount of 

hydrocarbon removed in the validation step. Calibration curves were prepared for a series of 

standard dilutions of hydraulic fluids in TCE and they showed that detection down to 20 ppm was 

possible, using the infrared absorbance of selected peaks in the analyte. 

Some laboratories have rejected the use of PCE on the grounds that it was a suspected carcinogen 

(as is CTC), but its widespread use as a dry-cleaning solvent has been sufficient to reassure others 

that it can be safely used under controlled conditions. A group from the Athens Water Supply and 

Sewerage Company has recommended the use of PCE following their detailed study of its use for 

FT-IR analysis of oil and grease in contaminated water (Farmaki, E., Kaloudis, T., Dimitrou, K., 

Thanasoulias, N., Kousouris, L and Tzoumerkas, F. (2005, 2007), 'Validation of an FT-IR method 

for the Determination of Oils & Greases in Water, with the use of tetrachloroethylene as the 
58 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

extraction Solvent', Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Environmental Science 

and Technology, Rhodes Island, Greece, 1-3 September 2005. Farmaki, E., Kaloudis, T., 

Dimitrou, K., Thanasoulias, N., Kousouris, L and Tzoumerkas, F., 'Validation of an FT-IR 

method for the Determination of Oils & Greases in Water, with the use of tetrachloroethylene as 

the extraction Solvent', Desalination, 2007, 210 (1-3), 52-60.. Calibration with a mixture of isooctane and n-hexadecane was established over the range 0.6 to 50 mg/L. 

The isomer of CFC-113, CFC-113a (1,1,1-trichloro-2,2,2-trifluorethane) is not a controlled 

substance, although the possibility has been raised that it was simply overlooked when the list of 

controlled substances was drawn up (TemaNord 2005:580, page 35). Notwithstanding this 

objection, the substance meets other criteria for the FT-IR analysis since it is a good solvent with 

no C-H absorption in the infrared spectrum. There is a problem, however, with its liquid range – 

between m.p. 14o

 and b.p. 46oC (compare CFC-113 m.p. -35o, b.p. 48oC). Its melting temperature 

means it would be solid at temperatures only a little below those of most laboratories and possibly 

in the field. 

In response to the inappropriateness of using CFC-113 as extractant for the FT-IR method, a 

gravimetric method was developed (APHA, AWWA and WEF (2000). This involved the use of 

n-hexane as the solvent with which the hydrocarbons are extracted, and which is later evaporated, 

leaving the oil and grease as a residue that can be weighed. Great care is needed to ensure that 

volatile components of the total petroleum hydrocarbons are not lost in removal of the n-hexane. 

Another example of such an assay is the US EPA Method 1644A. In cases where the volatile 

components of the total petroleum hydrocarbons have been lost to the atmosphere – for example, 

from contaminated water that is exposed to the environment for a time – then only the fixed 

hydrocarbons remain and the gravimetric method is appropriate. 

In the medical field, the use of CFC-113 is also described in the British Pharmacopoeia. The 

apparatus to be used in connection with 'medical air' is to be washed with CFC-113 prior to 

trapping oil contaminants in a glass fibre filter, followed by extraction with CFC-113 and 

measurement of infrared absorbance of the solution of oil in CFC-113 solution. The toxicity of 

tetrachloroethylene would preclude its use in this application, but S-316 should be suitable. 

4.5.4 Iodometric titrations 

An analytical method that uses CTC is the titration of iodine in solution by the addition of sodium 

thiosulfate. The end point of the titration - the disappearance of the last traces of iodine – can be 

detected by the fading of the blue color produced by adding starch solution to the mixture. In an 

alternative detection method, the iodine is dissolved in an organic liquid (one with no oxygen in 

the molecule). In such solutions the iodine color is strong purple whereas in water alone it is pale 

yellow. CTC is commonly used as the organic liquid but other organic liquids with relative 

density >1, and in which the iodine can dissolve, could be used. Occupational Health and Safety 

(OHS) and Montreal Protocol considerations would still apply, but dichloromethane (d 1.33), 

chloroform (d 1.48), trichloroethylene (d 1.46) and tetrachloroethylene (d 1.62) could all be 

considered. One of the older standard texts on analytical chemistry (Vogel, A.I. (1951), A 

Textbook of Quantitative Inorganic Analysis. Theory and Practice, second edition (Longmans 

Green, London), page 331) comments, during discussion of the use if CTC, that 'equally 

satisfactory results can be obtained with chloroform', but in today’s workplace environment 

chloroform may be discriminated against on the grounds of toxicity. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 59

4.5.5 Bromine index determination 

The use of 1,1,1-trichloroethane or methyl chloroform (TCA) was mentioned in the 2006 TEAP 

Progress report. The Bromine Index is the amount of bromine (mg) taken up in a 100 grams 

sample of a hydrocarbon mixture in which there are some unsaturated (= olefinic) components. 

There are several ASTM methods for this assay. Method D2710-99 involves generation of 

bromine in situ by electromeric methods from bromide and bromate ions in a suitable solvent 

mixture. The procedure closely resembles that used for Karl Fischer determination of traces of 

water, and the same apparatus may be used for both determinations, and is available 

commercially. A similar method is ASTM D1159, which employs a mixture of glacial acetic acid, 

methanol, sulfuric acid and 1,1,1-trichloroethane. The last of these, an ODS, is a co-solvent that 

ensures that higher hydrocarbon fractions will be soluble in the mixture. 

An instrument company seems to be leading in the development of alternatives to the use of 

1,1,1-trichloroethane. One bulletin (Metrohm. Method 9 – Bromine index of heptane. 

www.metrohm.com/products/01/pac/oilpac/e/oilpac_method9_e.pdf, accessed January 2008.) 

describes a mixture of glacial acetic acid, 1-methylpyrrolidone, methanol and sulfuric acid. A 

bulletin from another branch of the company (Metrohm Application Bulletin 177/4e. Automatic 

determination of the bromine index and/or bromine number in petroleum products. 

(www.metrohm.co.uk/bulletins/177_e.pdf), accessed January 2008.) describes the use of 1,1,1-

trichloromethane but also comments that ‘if possible one should refrain from using chlorinated 

solvents. Our investigations have shown that carbon tetrachloride and 1,1,1,-trichloroethane can 

be replaced by diethyl carbonate’. 

Thus, two alternatives to the use of an ODS – 1-methylpyrrolidone and diethyl carbonate – are 

available for use in this method. 

4.5.6 Iodine number 

A similar analysis, but in a different field of chemistry, is used for determination of unsaturation 

in hydrocarbon chains. The Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International (formerly the 

Association of Official Analytical Chemists) 18th edition (2005) describes the use of CTC as an 

organic solvent in the procedure for determination of iodine number, but CTC is only one of a 

number of alternatives. The AOAC Official method 920.158 (Hanus Method) dates from 1920 

and uses iodine bromide prepared in situ to react with the unsaturated linkages, after which the 

excess reagent is estimated by means of titration with sodium thiosulfate and starch indicator. The 

solvent for the iodine reaction is a mixture of acetic acid and chloroform. 

However, also dating from 1920 is an alternative procedure 920.159 (Wijs method) which uses in 

situ iodine chloride in a mixture of acetic acid and CTC. In 1993 and 1996 the AOAC published 

Official Method 993.20 (also described as the IUPAC-AOCS-AOAC Method) and this uses preformed iodine chloride as reagent, and as solvent a mixture of acetic acid and cyclohexane. This 

Official Method also includes a table of correlations between results obtained with CTC and 

cyclohexane, respectively, as co-solvent with acetic acid. The clear intention of the latest method 

993.20 is to avoid the use of CTC. The AOCS (American Oil Chemists Society) method referred 

to is #Cd 1-25, which was revised in 1988 and reapproved in 1989. Imperial Industrial Chemicals 

(Thailand) (www.iic.co.th/products/iodine.htm accessed February 2009) used CTC as co-solvent 

with acetic acid, but made the following observation: 
60 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

At the time of the revision of this method in 1989, studies were under way to find a replacement 

for CTC in this method. The most satisfactory replacement found to date has been cyclohexane 

(see AOCS Recommended Practice CD 1b-87 and JOQCS 65:745 (1988)), although erratic 

results may be obtained for oils with iodine values 100-120, and especially marine oils. Owing to 

environmental concerns, CFC-113, is not recommended. Acetic acid alone and a mixture of acetic 

acid and cyclohexane (1:4 ratio, respectively), have been shown to be satisfactory. 

Such analyses are often performed in the food industry, a sector that can be overlooked when 

concentrating on petroleum hydrocarbons in industry and the environment. For example, Bolivia 

(see above) reported the use of CTC in determination of the iodine index. 

4.5.7 Extraction of natural products 

Some pharmaceutical products are prepared from natural materials, usually of vegetable origin, 

and assays are required to determine the proportion of the active component in the natural 

mixture. The laxative effect of cascara bark is assayed by repeated extraction with CTC, 

following a method in the US Pharmacopoeia and the British Pharmacopoeia. Following this 

extraction procedure, the amount of (coloured) material in the CTC is determined by a 

chromatographic procedure. Although CTC may be recovered and reused, a proportion is lost 

with each recycling. However, there seems to be no specific reason for the use of CTC. Suitable 

replacements would be dichloromethane, ethyl acetate or acetone, but comparative assays would 

need to be performed on batches of material until their equivalence could be demonstrated, since 

other solvents may extract more or less of the active principle than CTC does. 

4.5.8 Estimation of CTC contamination of pharmaceutical products 

Small quantities of CTC and other solvents may be present in pharmaceutical materials if these 

substances have been used as solvents at some stage in the synthetic sequence that leads to the 

production of the material. The assay for trace contamination by solvents is conducted by gas 

chromatography, and it is necessary that CTC be available – albeit in microlitre quantities – to 

allow calibration of the assay. Unless it could be shown that the detector use in the gas 

chromatography responded equally to CTC and an alternative standard, the use of CTC is 

essential, although consumption would be small. 

In the British Pharmacopoeia, CTC is listed as a possible impurity and included as one 

component of a reference solution for use in gas liquid chromatography (contains – in order of 

emergence from the column - CTC, 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA), dichloromethane, chloroform, 

ethanol, bromochloromethane, and propan-1-ol). 

Until CTC is no longer used in chemical reactions to produce pharmaceutical products, this 

analytical method will need continuation in usage. 

The Pharmacopoeia also includes an extensive guide to residual solvents in four groups, based on 

risk assessment: to be avoided, to be limited, low toxic potential, and no adequate toxicological 

data available. In the first of these categories are: benzene (carcinogenic), CTC (toxic and 

environmental hazard), 1,2-dichloroethane (toxic), 1,1-dichloroethene (toxic) and 1,1,1-

trichloroethane (environmental hazard). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 61

4.5.9 Simeticone 

According to the British Pharmacopoeia (2007), the polydimethylsiloxane content of this 

pharmaceutical is assayed by infrared spectroscopy of a solution in toluene (intensity of 

absorption band at 1261 cm-1 (7.93 μm) is measured). In earlier editions of the British 

Pharmacopoeia (up to 2004) the recommended solvent was CTC. Since toluene is satisfactory, 

there is no case for the continued use of CTC. 

4.5.10 Miscellaneous uses 

The British Pharmacopoeia describes the use of a solution of the reagent dithizone in CTC for 

pre-treatment of acetate buffer. The purpose of this is presumably to remove metal ions from the 

buffer solution, since dithizone is a typical metal sequestrating agent and CTC a common solvent 

for it. There should be no difficulty in finding another non-ODS solvent to use in this application. 

The British Pharmacopoeia describes the use of CFC-113 as internal standard in the gas 

chromatographic analysis of the anesthetic, Halothane (1-bromo-1-chloro-2,2,2-trifluoroethane). 

It should not be difficult to find another standard that is not an ODS. 

4.5.11 Cement analysis 

Little information is available about the extent to which CTC is used in cement analysis ('specific 

weight of cement'), but there is a standard method for this determination (Kemp, B.G. (1981). 

'Investigation of ASTM Paste and Mortar Bleeding Tests'. Published on line at 

www.astm.org/cgibib/SoftCart.exe/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOURNALS/CEMENT/PAGES/433.htm?E+mystore, 

accessed January 2008. 

In the cement literature is a paper by King and Raffle (King A. and Raffle, J.F. (1976), 'Studies on 

the settlement of hydrating cement suspensions', J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys., 9, 1425-35.) in which 

the authors observe that: 

Concentrated particulate suspensions tend to settle in a hindered settling mode in which all 

particles whatever their size settle at the same rate. Normally this phenomenon is studied by 

observation of the movement of the upper interface between the solids and the free water. In the 

case of cement suspensions, hydration reactions between the solids and the suspending fluid 

lead to a reduction of the total volume of the system and a suction of water into the settling mass 

that continues long after a fully self-supporting structure has been formed. 

The methods of measurement of the settling velocity of the upper interface are either to follow the 

fall of a small float that rests on the surface of the suspension or to flood the surface of the 

suspension with carbon tetrachloride, which sinks with the interface and the free water rising 

through it. 

The replacement of CTC by TCA – unfortunately, also an ODS – was investigated by ASTM and 

their test, ASTM C 243-95 Standard Test Method for Bleeding of Cement Pastes and Mortars, 

was withdrawn in 2001 and no replacement was offered. 

The method using CTC is described in a sales brochure from the Humboldt company (Humboldt 

(2002). H-3600 Instruction Manual. Cement Bleeding Apparatus. www.ehumboldt.com/pdf/H-
62 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

3600_man.pdf, accessed January 2008.) for their cement bleeding apparatus H-3600. 

Approximately 500 ml of CTC is used in each test. 

The use of benzene in place of CTC for cement analysis has been described by ASTM C 188-44 

(revised in 1967) and it was established that this method has been used in Chile (under the 

heading Chilean Norm NCh 154 of '69) by the cement industry. This is likely to be the situation 

in non-Article 5 Parties. Further information is being sought about Article 5 Parties, but since the 

replacement standard method has been available for over 30 years it is likely that CTC has been 

phased out of this use world-wide. 

4.5.12 Conclusion 

As far as the CTOC was able to ascertain, the use of ODS in analytical procedures has ceased in 

non-Article 5 Parties, but such Parties may wish to ascertain whether this is correct. Replacement 

with non-ODS alternatives has occurred in some but not all Article 5 Parties. The cost of 

alternatives may be high in some cases, but work is underway in at least one Article 5 Party to 

test alternatives and make the transition away from ODS, so ‘casebook’ studies should be 

available by the time the CTOC completes its report in 2009. 

4.6 Solvents 

As reported in the 2006 CTOC report, the phase-out of the widely used CFCs and TCA is 

complete in non-Article 5 Parties and in many Article 5 Parties. The new fluorinated alternatives 

are hydrofluoroethers (HFEs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and low ODP HCFCs. With Decision 

XIX/6 at the 19th MOP in Montreal in 2007, the phase-out of HCFC will be accelerated by ten 

years. 

HFEs and HFCs are generally used with some additives such as alcohol, chlorocarbons and/or 

hydrocarbons as azeotropic or pseudo-azeotropic mixtures in many applications to achieve 

desired cleaning efficacy and at the same time non-flammability and improved compatibility. 

Also, the low cost additives help in reducing over all cost of the solvents as the fluorinated 

components are considerably more expensive. 

HCFC-225 has been used in niche applications including aerospace and military programs in the 

US in the replacement of CFC-113 where no other alternatives are available. 

The most common substitute for TCA are other unsaturated chlorocarbons such as 

trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE), and methylene chloride. In some cases 

higher boiling hydrocarbons, alcohols, and ketones are also used either neat or in blends for 

specific applications. Normal propyl bromide (n-PB) has captured some of aggressive cleaning 

applications in spite of its high toxicity and lack of adequate exposure guidelines. This is a result 

of heavy promotion by the n-PB industry and no reporting requirement of n-PB uses. (See 

Chapter 5.1) Volatile methyl siloxanes and chlorinated aromatics have also been used in niche 

applications. 

Another category of alternative solvents being explored is that of bio-based materials. Essentially 

these are compounds formed from bio-organic products such as corn and soy beans. While there 

is considerable enthusiasm in this area, the likelihood of these replacing solvents that are used for 

critical cleaning applications appears small at this time. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 63

Stockpiles of critical cleaning solvents (CFC-113, TCA and HCFC-141b) continue to decline and 

hence their use is decreasing. Of course when the supply is depleted a critical situation again 

arises and stockpiling only delays the inevitable need to adopt alternatives. 

No new alternatives have been developed since the last report. Further, it is unlikely that there 

will be a new solvent alternative break through because of a reduced market size, high cost, 

lengthy and expensive research projects, toxicological testing, and uncertainties associated with 

the market and regulations. Thus far only the HFCs, HCFCs and HFEs are leading the field in 

solvent replacements. 

4.6.1 n-Propyl Bromide (n-PB) Update 

Under Decision XIII/7, the TEAP has been requested to report annually on n-PB use and 

emissions. 

n-PB is a non-flammable, brominated alkane. Its high solvent strength makes it effective in a 

variety of cleaning applications including both vapour degreasing and cold cleaning. Its 

application area continues to expand from vapour degreasing in the metal finishing industry to 

precision cleaning, electronics cleaning, glass and ceramics cleaning, and others. The suppliers 

advertise n-PB to be a replacement of trichloroethylene, perchloroethylene, methylene chloride 

and HCFC-141b, in spite of the concern exhibited by the Parties to limit its use to only where 

more economically feasible and environmentally friendly alternatives are not available (see 

Decisions XIII/7(1) and XIII/7(2). 

The ODP of n-PB varies depending upon the latitude at which it is emitted. ODP values for 

Short-Lived Gases from 2-D and 3-D model studies for mid-latitudes / tropics emissions 

scenarios showed that the 3-D model agree well with the 2-D model and previous studies and that 

the ODP for n-PB remains the same as reported by SAP ranging from 0.013 to 0.105. 

The US EPA in its Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, made a ruling on n-PB 

as an acceptable substitute for ozone-depleting substances in some applications such as in metals, 

electronics, and precision cleaning. The US EPA is also issuing a separate proposal for other uses 

and is proposing that the use of n-PB for coatings is acceptable subject to a use condition, but for 

aerosol solvent and adhesive carrier solvent it is unacceptable. 

The global production of n-PB is estimated to be around 20,000-30,000 metric tonnes, of which 

about 5,000 metric tonnes are probably used as pharmaceutical and chemical intermediates or 

feedstock. It is assumed to be produced in China, France, India, Israel, Japan, Jordan and the 

USA. China is estimated to have produced 16,000 metric tonnes, of which 12,000 metric tonnes 

were exported and it is available in most regions. The use, as a solvent is growing at a rate of 15-

20% per year in USA (5,000 t) and other Asian countries, but began to level off in Japan (1,310, 

metric tonnes). No information is available for other regions. 

Obtaining more complete and accurate data on production and uses of n-PB, as well as its 

emissions, continues to be difficult. The CTOC’s attempt to obtain production, uses and emission 

data from the manufacturer/supplier failed as they claim business confidentiality. No 

governmental records are available on emission or uses due to n-PB being not classified or 

registered as a chemical substance such as CFC, and HCFC (ODS class I and II) nor designated 

as a hazardous air pollutant in the Clean Air Act in the USA or reportable compound for pollution 

release (emission) and transfer (PRTR) in Europe and Japan. Thus there is a dilemma. Although 

n-PB has a finite ODP range of 0.02-0.1 similar to other HCFC and halogens, its use is unchecked 
64 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

and continues to grow with no accurate data due to no reporting requirements. Thus, Parties may 

wish to establish a reporting system so accurate data for n-PB can be considered by the CTOC 

and TEAP. 

The situation of n-PB toxicity study remains the same as described in the 2006 CTOC Progress 

Report. It has low acute toxicity but its complete toxicological profile necessitates a low exposure 

guideline. The major areas of concern regarding its toxicity are chronic toxicity, reproductive 

toxicity and genotoxicity. Several toxicological studies on n-PB have indicated that the substance 

is potentially toxic to reproduction in animals and, while not showing blood effects, it has 

demonstrated neurological effects in rats. Owing to the known serious toxicity of its isomer, isopropyl bromide (i-PB), which has caused serious reproductive function problems and blood 

effects in Asian workers while handling i-PB as a degreasing agent, it raises concern about n-PB. 

Based on limited available (no 1-2 year chronic studies) chronic toxicity data, ACGIH and Israel 

have set exposure guide line of 10 ppm, with Europe setting the lowest 8-hour occupational 

exposure limit (OEL) value in humans and enforcing the tightest labeling classification. The US 

EPA has set the exposure guideline of 25 ppm similar to the guidelines set by most n-PB 

manufacturers at 25ppm (except one at 5ppm). 

4.7 Reconsideration of sources of CTC emissions 

Under the Decision XVI/14 entitled “Sources of carbon tetrachloride emissions and opportunities 

for reductions”, the TEAP and CTOC made a comprehensive review on various sources of CTC 

emissions, concluding a significant discrepancy between reported emissions and the observed 

atmospheric concentrations on the order of approximately 33 kilo tonnes in 2002, as seen in the 

TEAP May 2006 Progress Report, pp 78-90. 

Following these results, the Parties requested the TEAP to continue its assessment of global 

emissions of CTC and to prepare a final report for the 27th Open-ended Working Group for the 

consideration of the 19th Meeting of the Parties in 2007 under the decision XVIII/10. 

The CTOC could report only the effect of CTC emissions from landfills (pp 52-54, in the TEAP 

April 2007 Progress Report), but could not complete the task, mainly due to difficulties in 

accessing relevant information. 

With these backgrounds, the TEAP organised a small Task Force to reconsider any missing 

estimations of associated emissions of CTC, especially in the manufacture of chloromethanes and 

perchloroethylene other than the consideration of CTC as feedstock for CFCs and HFCs and 

emissive process agent uses as already studied in the 2006 TEAP/CTOC assessment. Its objective 

is to study possible emissions of CTC from production and consumption of CTC with particular 

emphasis on these feedstock uses with the goal to estimate emissions and try to reconcile them 

with values calculated by atmospheric scientists with a focus on 2006. 

The following consideration will be necessary to complete this task: 

• Better or improved assumptions and calculation 

• Search for other CTC sources (such as production of other chlorocarbons) 

• Studies on lifetime uncertainties of CTC 

• Necessary check of UNEP data (inventory and replenishment etc.) 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 65

The final report will be published by the Task Force separately and will be reported at the 28th

OEWG in Bangkok in 2008. 

4.8 Essential Use Exemptions of CFC-113 for aerospace applications in the Russian 

Federation 

The comprehensive studies on this issue were summarised in the TEAP April 2007 Progress 

Report (pp 42-49) and reported at the 27th OEWG in 2007 according to the request by the Parties 

under Decision XVIII/8(4). 

Decision XIX/14 noted the readiness of the Russian Federation to receive prior to February 2008 

a small group of experts in replacing zone-depleting solvents in the aerospace industry nominated 

by the TEAP/CTOC with the aim of evaluating the applications and recommending proven 

alternatives where possible, 

(1) To authorise the levels of production and consumption of CFC-113 for essentialuse exemptions in the amount of 140 metric tonnes in 2008; 

(2) To authorise the volume of 130 metric tonnes of CFC-113 nominated for 2009 

provided that no alternatives are identified by the TEAP that can be implemented 

by 2009; 

(3) To request the Russian Federation to explore further the possibility of importing 

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

accordance with the recommendations of the TEAP/CTOC. 

The TEAP/CTOC could not send a small group of experts to the Russian Federation by February 

2008, but has identified two experts in this field. The TEAP is continuing dialogue with the 

Russian Federation to set up a new date and also to reconcile the agenda during their stay so that 

the TEAP/CTOC could report the results in the coming 28th OEWG in Bangkok, Thailand and the 

21st MOP. 

4.9 Recovery, Recycling and Destruction 

4.9.1 Recovery and recycling 

Recovery and recycling of ODSs continue as reported in the previous progress report. Recent 

information has been obtained from Japan and Russia. In Japan, refrigerants including ODSs and 

HFCs have been recovered from commercial air-conditioning, refrigeration equipment and 

mobile air conditioners on the basis of the Fluorocarbon Recovery and Destruction Law. Since 

enforcement in 2001, the total refrigerants recovered were 4,384 metric tonnes in 2005. 

Regarding mitigation of global warming, it is noteworthy that the amount recovered corresponds 

to 12.05 million tonnes of CO2 if global warming potential of ODSs such as CFCs is taken into 

account. 
66 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 4-4 Refrigerants recovered from waste appliances in Japan 

Recovery at disposal 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

For commercial use ton 0 1,225 1,958 1,889 2,102 2,298

For household use ton 0 603 1,041 1,147 1,306 1,410

Mobile air conditioners ton 0 0 389 638 637 676

Total ton 0 1,828 3,388 3,674 4,045 4,384

Million-ton CO2eq 0 5.37 10.75 12.09 12.05 12.05

HFCs of the above total ton 0 0 389 638 637 676

Million-ton CO2eq 0 0 0.24 0.44 0.62 0.75

Japan Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Industry Association and Japan Industrial Conference for Ozone Layer and 

Climate Protection

The Russian Federation reported that there are Centers for CFC Recovery and Reclaiming (CFCCRR) comprised of 24 enterprises belonging to the association “Torgtechnika”, which service 

mainly commercial and domestic refrigeration equipment. CFC-12 in commercial, transport and 

industrial refrigeration systems is estimated to exceed 6,000 metric tonnes in Russia. Technicians 

for systems with more than 2,000 from each refrigeration sector are educated and trained in CFCCRR regarding recovery and reclamation of CFC in old equipment, and replacement with nonODS refrigerants. The specialists from 24 CFC-CRRs require certificates and permission for 

training the technicians. The Center for Halon Recovery and Reclaiming (H-CRR) was 

established by a number of enterprises. Major organisations and their capacities are JSC Halon 

1,400 metric tonnes/year, JSC Ozone metric 200 tonnes/year, RSC “Applied Chemistry” (stateowned) 200 metric tonnes/year, JSC GosNIIGA 50 metric tonnes/year, and JSC PromcomplektNN 200 metric tonnes/year. The total of halons in fire extinguishing equipment was assessed to 

exceed 3,000 metric tonnes that may be subjected to recovery and reclamation. 

4.9.2 Destruction 

ODS destruction facilities were listed in a previous report, TEAP Vol. 3B, Report of the Task 

Force on Destruction Technologies, April 2002. Recently, the Russian Federation opened ODS 

destruction facilities, as shown in Table 4-4. These facilities are installed in fluorochemical 

manufacturing companies to destroy any kinds of CFCs, HCFCs, HFCs and PFCs. The argon 

plasma facility in the table with a capacity of 150 metric tonnes/year was constructed by a 

China/Russia joint venture in Zhejiang province in China. 

Table 4-5 ODS Destruction Facilities in Russia 

Company Process Capacity 

(tonnes/y) 

Notes 

Halogen Incineration with methane 1,000 Finish product CaF2 

KChChK Incineration with hydrogen 500 Finish product CaF2 

VOCCO Incineration with methane 200 Finish product CaF2 

RSC 

ACh 

Argon plasma 150 Pilot plant 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 67

Regarding ODS destruction activities in Article 5 Parties, the following two cases were reported 

from Indonesia and Fiji. 

The Indonesian cement industry through technical assistance provided by the Japanese 

Government, has developed a facility to destroy CFC wastes and its operation will start by July 

2008. 

The National Ozone Unit of the Department of Environment in Fiji exported a container 

containing halons to DASCEM Holdings in Melbourne in Australia for destruction in 2007. 

DASCEM Holdings Pty Limited is a company formed from the privatisation of the Department of 

Administration Service Centre for Environment Management, the Australian Government body 

that established the National Halon Bank. Currently DASCEM stores and destroys halons from 

Government Agencies and industry at a cost. The Australian Government offered to support Fiji 

in destroying the halons, since Fiji does not have a disposal facility to destroy ODS.

May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 69

5 Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) Progress Report 

The HTOC met on January 21-23, 2008 in Altrincham, England. Attending HTOC members were 

from the following countries: Bahrain, Canada, China, India, Japan, Jordan, Italy, Russia, 

Singapore, South Africa, UK, USA, and Venezuela. A representative from the Polish Ministry of 

Defence also attended, and the contractor for UNEP’s Study on Challenges Associated with 

Halon Banking in Developing Countries attended for the discussion on this study. 

The primary purpose of the meeting was to discuss Decision XIX/16 and its mandate for a further 

study on the projected regional imbalances in the availability of halons 1211, 1301, and 2402, and 

investigation into mechanisms to better predict and mitigate such imbalances in the future. 

5.1 Update on Decision XIX/16 

Decision XIX/16: Follow-up to the 2006 assessment report by the Halons Technical Options 

Committee is as follows. 

Welcoming the 2006 assessment report of the Halons Technical Options Committee of the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, 

Welcoming also the continuing reduction in global halon use, 

Noting the concern expressed by the Halons Technical Options Committee about the availability 

of certain halons around the world, 

1. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to undertake a further 

study on projected regional imbalances in the availability of halon 1211, halon 1301 and 

halon 2402 and to investigate and propose mechanisms to better predict and mitigate such 

imbalances in the future; 

2. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, when undertaking the 

study, to consult with the Secretariat of the Multilateral Fund on the outcomes of its study 

on the operation of halon banks around the world and to use such information from that 

study as may be relevant to its own review; 

3. To request the Ozone Secretariat to make available 2004, 2005 and 2006 halon 

consumption figures by type of halon to the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

for its study; 

4. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to submit its study in time 

to allow the Twentieth Meeting of the Parties to consider its results; 

5. To encourage Parties which have requirements for halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 

2402 to provide the following information to the Ozone Secretariat by 1 April 2008 to 

assist the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel with its study: 

(a) Projected need for halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 2402 to support critical or 

essential equipment through the end of its useful life; 
70 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

(b) Any difficulties experienced to date, or foreseen, in accessing adequate halons to 

support critical or essential equipment; 

6. To encourage Parties, on a regular basis, to inform their critical users of halons, 

including the maritime industries, the aviation sector and the military, of the need to 

prepare for reduced access to halons in the future and to take all actions necessary to 

reduce their reliance on halons; 

7. To request the Ozone Secretariat to write to the International Maritime Organization 

secretariat and to the secretariat of the International Civil Aviation Organization to draw 

their attention to the decreasing availability of halons for marine and aviation uses and to 

the need to take all actions necessary to reduce reliance on halons in their respective 

sectors. 

The HTOC co-chairs assisted the Ozone Secretariat in drafting their letters to the International 

Maritime Organization (IMO), the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the 

Parties. To date, responses have been received from IMO, ICAO and 12 Parties. 

The Ozone Secretariat has provided the HTOC with 2004, 2005, and 2006 halon production and 

consumption figures by type of halon as reported by the Parties. 

The HTOC has decided to divide its investigative Study into the following major sectors: All 

halons - Aviation, Merchant Shipping; Halons 1211 and 1301 - Asia, Europe, Middle East, North 

& West Africa, South & Central Africa, North America & Australia, South America; and Halon 

2402. A summary of the presently reported information for each sector is as follows. 

5.1.1 Aviation 

ICAO resolution A36-12, adopted at their 36th Session, September 2007, will encourage a move 

away from halons in new aircraft in the post-2011 timeframe. In line with this resolution and their 

business plan for 2008, ICAO has issued a letter to all their member States urging them to advise 

their aircraft manufacturers, airlines, chemical suppliers and fire-extinguishing companies to 

move forward at a faster rate in implementing halon alternatives in engine and auxiliary power 

units, hand-held extinguishers and lavatories; and investigating additional halon replacements for 

engines/auxiliary power units, and cargo compartments. These cargo compartments remain a 

problem with no alternatives currently available that meet the regulatory authorities’ minimum 

performance standards. Cargo compartments are the largest use of halon on civil aircraft. For 

example, lavatory halon 1301 systems are in the range of 0.1- 0.5 kg; auxiliary power unit halon 

1301 systems are in the range of four to five kg; portable halon 1211 extinguishers contain five to 

ten kg each, with the total depending on the passenger capacity of the aircraft; engine nacelle 

halon 1301 systems are in the range of 20 to 50 kg; and cargo compartment halon 1301 systems 

range from as little as 14 kg in small cargo compartments to more than 500 kg in freighter aircraft 

cargo compartments. 

Many experts believe that a key issue for long-term aircraft fire protection sustainability is halon 

1211, which some members of the International Fire Systems Working group believe may be in 

severely short supply for the world-wide fleet within five years. This appears to be in 

contradiction to the emerging situation within China (see section 1.1.3) and may be an indication 

of regional imbalances that need to be addressed. Nevertheless, alternatives for the primary 

aircraft use of halon 1211, in cabin portable extinguishers, are commercially available; a shortage 

of halon 1211 supplies may incentivise the conversion of in-service fleets. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 71

5.1.2 Merchant Shipping 

IMO has been asked to encourage its member states to collect data on the number of halon 

systems, the number of ships so equipped, and the total amount of halon installed on merchant 

fleets. This sector is fully prepared for the future with several alternatives systems being used in 

new construction and most retrofitted systems going to CO2. Demand for halon is declining and 

discharge rates are low. It is believed that enforced decommissioning without incentives could 

lead to halon venting owing to the cost of handling the decommissioning of the systems and 

recovery of the halon. Responsible authorities should therefore consider carefully the potential 

consequences of mandatory decommissioning and implement policies that make recovery, reuse, 

and destruction of halon attractive. 

5.1.3 Asia 

Japan has very low halon emission rates and has collected and destroyed about 30MT of halon 

2402 from floating roof tank protection in the petrochemical industry. 

In China, halon 1211 is coming out of service as portables reach 10-year servicing dates and 

recharge is not permitted - the HTOC is trying to determine what is happening to the halon in 

those portables. In addition, approximately 2,400 MT of halon 1211, manufactured prior to the 

cessation of production in 2006, has been warehoused. Of this, only approximately 50MT has 

been used and/or exported in the last year. China’s current low rate of use and export suggests 

that they have more than enough banked halon 1211 to support their needs. 

In 2006, there were 1,046 commercial aircraft in China and this number increased by 158 in 2007 

– further increases are anticipated annually for at least the next 5-10 years. Most new aircraft are 

designs that rely totally on halon, e.g., 737s, A320s, etc. 

5.1.4 Europe 

Good data are available on critical uses of halons by sector within the European Union because of 

mandatory annual reporting by Member States. These quantities are, however, substantially 

smaller than expected from HTOC estimates of the installed base so some uses may not yet be 

accounted for. Shortages are claimed by the European aviation sector but it is not clear whether or 

not these are simply a case of the price being higher than the industry is prepared to pay for it. 

5.1.5 Middle East, North & West Africa 

Data on the installed base of halon is not readily available. The Saudi Arabian Petrochemical 

sector has probably the largest installed base, but Egypt is probably the largest user of recycled 

halons. Recycling centres have been a mix of failed and successful projects. There is a perception 

that halon 1211 is in short supply because its current cost is much higher than it was in the past 

when newly produced halon was being purchased from China. The cost of fully recycled halon 

1211 is now on a par with costs in other international markets – a result of China ceasing 

production of halon 1211. Halon 1211 is reportedly readily available in the Dubai free trade zone. 

5.1.6 South & Central Africa 

Johannesburg is the regional hub for airlines, and has a comprehensive aircraft repair and 

maintenance facility. The facility estimates that it uses about 50 kg of halon 1211 annually. It is 
72 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

estimated that the inventory for the region is 10-15 MT of halon 1301 and 5-7 MT of halon 1211 

and is widely distributed over a large area. 

5.1.7 North America & Australia 

In the U.S., halons 1211 and 1301 are readily available. Prices are steady and similar to those in 

other countries. There are no restrictions on halon use and the migration of halons from noncritical uses to critical uses is driven by market forces. About half the needed halon 1301 is 

currently being imported, but no halon 1211 is being imported because of an import tax that is 

currently US$74 per kilogram, increasing annually by US$3 per kilogram. 

Canada has enough halon to meet its needs. As Canada has no destruction facilities in operation, 

when halons become available from decommissioned systems and end-of-life portable 

extinguishers they are exported for destruction or use in critical applications. 

The Australian national halon bank continues to collect halon 1211 and 1301 from 

decommissioned non-critical uses. However, they have not destroyed any halon 1211 since 2000 

and no halon 1301 has been destroyed at all. The halon is being used to support on-going critical 

uses. 

5.1.8 South America 

The total inventory of halons 1211 and 1301 is approximately 248 MT, mainly in Brazil (90MT), 

Argentina (60MT), and Venezuela (48MT). Halon imports have been prohibited in Argentina 

since 1991; Brazil since 2000, except for essential uses, with annual reductions to elimination 

after 2007; Colombia since 1995; and Venezuela since 1996. Halon banks are operated by private 

companies. Projected needs for halon are only for aviation. 

5.1.9 Halon 2402 

In Russia, halon 2402 is no longer being used as a process agent as there are now cheaper 

alternatives. The Russian bank of halon 2402 is approximately 960MT. Four Russian companies 

offer halon recycling services. By 2010 about 160MT of halon 2402 will need to be recycled 

annually to support existing equipment. By 2015, merchant shipping and commercial uses are 

expected to have ceased, but military demand is expected to increase. There is no surplus 

available for export. 

In Poland, the main user is the Polish military, with a small quantity in industrial uses. 

Approximately 2.6MT is installed and in storage for replenishment. Poland has enough halon 

2402 to meet its projected needs. 

In India, halon 2402 is only used in military applications. The Army needs 50MT over the next 15 

years to support ground vehicles, and the Navy is looking for 60MT over the next 15-20 years for 

its servicing needs. Owing to the current halon 2402 shortage within India, the military is looking 

at conversion to halon 1301 in the crew/engine compartments of ground vehicles, and halon 1211 

pressurised with CO2 for portables. The shortage of halon 2402 in India for servicing is a major 

concern, which if not addressed may lead to an essential use production exemption request. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 73

6 Critical Military and Space Uses of HCFCs 

At the time the Montreal Protocol was signed in 1987, virtually every military system in the 

developed countries and some military systems in developing countries relied on ODS for their 

manufacture, maintenance and operation. In addition, CFCs, halons, and methyl chloroform were 

used in Space applications, such as the manufacture of most rockets and payloads, including the 

scientific instruments used to monitor Earth’s atmosphere and ecosystems. Since then, most 

countries have made impressive progress in eliminating ODS applications for these uses.1

 

The primary remaining military ODS use is for halon in applications considered to be critical to 

operations, lacking technically or economically feasible retrofit alternatives, or not yet budgeted 

or scheduled for retrofit or retirement. CFC refrigerants continue to be used in some Naval 

vessels (ships and submarines) because: the refrigeration plants were designed specifically to use 

a particular ODS refrigerant, the refrigeration plants are sized according to the needs of the 

vessel, the acoustic signature of the vessel would be changed by using an alternative, and because 

the cost of removing the plant and replacing it is cost prohibitive. For example, in some vessel 

designs, the hull of the vessel must be opened in order to remove and replace the plant.2

 

The primary remaining Space applications for ODS uses are in thermal insulating foam, 

manufacture of solid rocket motors, and in cleaning of electronic and precision mechanical 

assemblies. 

In non-Article 5 Parties, military and space applications continue to be satisfied by recycling 

existing stocks of ODS, with a small number of uses met through Essential Use Exemptions 

previously granted by Parties: 

 Poland 

 CFC-113 to clean torpedoes. 

The Russian Federation 

 Halon 2402 for specific fire protection applications, and 

 CFC-113 for aerospace industry. 

The United States 

 Methyl chloroform for manufacture of civilian and military rockets. 

 1

 See: Andersen, Stephen O. and K. Madhava Sarma, “Protecting the Ozone Layer, the United Nations 

History,” Earthscan, London 2002 Chapter 5 and Stephen O. Andersen, K. Madhava Sarma and Kristen N. 

Taddonio, “Technology Transfer for the Ozone Layer: Lessons for climate Change, Earthscan, London, 

2007. 

2

 For the latest TEAP findings on critical military and space uses see: TEAP, “2006 Assessment Report of 

the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel,” United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, 

2006, pp. 127-137. 
74 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

6.1 Military-Unique and Space-Unique Uses of HCFCs 

Most current use of HCFCs by Military and Space organisations is in applications that are not 

unique or critical. It can be expected that ordinary HCFC uses will be replaced by the same 

technology that is implemented in civilian sectors. 

There are a few low-volume HCFCs uses that are unique to military and space organisations and 

critical to safe operations. These unique uses can be: 1) phased out with new technology, 2) 

supplied from stockpiles or from recovered HCFCs, or 3) provided under terms of an Essential 

Use Exemption (if agreed by Parties). 

Mission-critical HCFC uses include: 

• Solvent HCFC-225 used for cleaning oxygen systems, electro-optical devices, precision 

navigation systems and similar components where a combination of materials must be 

compatible with the solvent and the solvent must remove soil with little residue left 

behind. Small amounts of CFC-113 and HCFC-225 will continue to be used for some insitu cleaning of oxygen systems having complex geometries. 

• HCFC refrigerants used in a battlefield environment can be replaced with existing or new 

no flammable or possibly mildly flammable HFCs, but cannot be replaced with nonfluorocarbon refrigerants such as hydrocarbons and ammonia due to flammability and 

safety concerns in a battlefield environment. However, some militaries are considering 

extending the use of HCFCs in some battlefield equipment for a few years by using 

recycled refrigerant rather than shifting to high-GWP HFCs to allow time for the 

technical maturity of low-GWP refrigeration systems, such as transcritical carbon 

dioxide. Military-unique systems tend to have very long development and operational 

lifetimes, lasting half a century or longer in both developed and developing countries. 

The systems are highly integrated, their designs are highly constrained in terms of space 

and weight, and modification costs are generally very high. 

• HCFC-141b used for thermal insulating foam on the oxygen tank of the United States 

(U.S.) Space Shuttle is critical today, but is expected to be phased out when the next 

generation spacecraft replaces the Space Shuttle sometime in the next decade. 

6.2 Continuing International Co-operation 

The Montreal Protocol has benefited from close co-operation between developed and developing 

nation military organisations working through bilateral and multi-lateral military-to-military 

exchange projects. 

There were four workshops on the Military Role in Implementing the Montreal Protocol. The first 

in 1991 in Williamsburg, VA, the second in 1994 in Brussels, Belgium, the third in Vienna, 

Virginia in 1997, and the latest in Brussels, Belgium in 2001. 

Military-to-military technology co-operation projects were sponsored by developed countries 

involving Mexico, Thailand, Turkey, and Malaysia. UNEP sponsored workshops in India and 

Jordan that included regional military participation. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 75

 Table 6-1 ODP and GWP of HCFCs in Military and Space Applications3

Halocarbon WMO 2003 

ODP 

Montreal Protocol 

ODP 

Lifetime 

(years) 

IPCC 2001 GWP 

(100 year) 

HCFC-22 0.05 0.055 12 1780

HCFC-123 0.02 0.02 1.3 76

HCFC-141b 0.12 0.11 9.3 713

HCFC-225ca 0.02 0.025 1.9 120

HCFC-225cb 0.03 0.033 5.8 586

In September 1996, the US, Canada and Australia sponsored a Defence Environmental Workshop 

for nations of the Asia Pacific Indian Ocean region with a focus on ODS. Virtually all 

participating countries sent representatives of their military and environmental ministries. In June 

1997, the same tri-lateral group sponsored a conference for nations of the Western Hemisphere. 

In November 1997, a global conference on military uses of ODSs was organised in conjunction 

with the annual Conference on Ozone Protection Technologies in Baltimore, Maryland. The U.S. 

Navy and Defense Logistics Agency provided training on the use of halon recycling equipment, 

halon banking strategies and halon alternatives in a number of Article 5 Parties, including India 

and China. There have been significant efforts over the years to spread awareness of the Montreal 

Protocol and the availability of measures militaries can take to manage the phase-out. 

On 3-5 November 2008 in Paris, the United States Environmental Protection Agency in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme and military and non-government 

organisations from Asia, Europe, North America and elsewhere will sponsor the fifth 

international conference on the importance of military leadership in protecting the climate and its 

fragile ozone layer. For further information on the Climate Change and Defence 2008

conference, contact Stephen O. Andersen (Andersen.stephen@epa.gov; 1-202-343-9069). 

6.3 Summary 

Military and space organisations have invested significant effort and funding, and have made 

great strides to reduce their dependence on ODS. Modifications to existing systems and practices 

have been made where technically and economically feasible alternatives exist. Very few new 

military systems continue to rely on ODS. For military and space applications that continue to 

need ODSs, military and space operators of reserve stocks have been diligent in preventing 

leakage and ensuring that ODSs are only used for approved critical applications. The following 

actions will further minimise ODS emissions and reduce the need for essential use nominations: 

• Collection and recycling of ODSs for continuing critical uses; 

• Best practices for ODS recovery/recycling, storage, reuse and destruction; and 

 3

 IPCC/TEAP, “Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System,” Cambridge University 

Press, 205, Table 1.2 page 125 and Table 2.6 page 160-161. 
76 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

• Flexibility that will enable transnational shipment necessary to supply recycled ODS for 

military-critical needs. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 77

7 Foams Technical Options Committee (FTOC) Progress Report 

7.1 General 

This update is the first foam sector review published since the 2006 Report of the Flexible and 

Rigid Foams Technical Options Committee, issued in April 2007. It highlights changes in 

technology and transition that have occurred in the last year and particularly focused on the 

impacts of Decision XIX/6 on the future direction of regional foam strategies and technology 

selections. The key conclusions from this update report are as follows: 

7.2 Transition Status - Article 5 Parties 

• Decision XIX/6 has placed new emphasis on the need to transition from HCFC-141b 

systems in polyurethane (PU) foams within the next 5-7 years 

• Experience from non-Article 5 Parties in HCFC phase-out needs to be disseminated to assist 

decision-making in Article 5 Parties 

• Hydrocarbon technology is being extensively used in the domestic refrigeration sector and, 

to a limited extent, in other insulation applications. There is still little experience globally in 

the handling of hydrocarbons in small/medium enterprises and further research in handling 

and process options is necessary. An application that deserves special mention is PU spray 

foam, where hydrocarbon is not an option for safety reasons. 

• HFCs are (or will be) available to meet transition requirements, although efforts will need to 

focus on formulation cost optimisation if these blowing agents are to see widespread use in 

PU and extruded polystyrene (XPS) board foams. 

• Some new technology options (e.g. methyl formate) show promise, particularly in integral 

skin applications, but there is little non-Article 5 Party experience on which to draw, 

especially in insulation foam applications. Some pilot projects may need to be conducted by 

suppliers, users and supported by other interested stakeholders to strengthen the 

understanding of these technologies. 

• The growth of XPS board foam production in China has been field-researched further and 

the existence of 350 small-scale XPS plants has been confirmed. Although not fully utilised 

at present, these could account for over 50,000 tonnes of HCFCs (predominantly HCFC-22, 

but possibly with some HCFC-142b). Additional growth has been reported in Turkey, where 

up to 10,000 tonnes of HCFCs is also being consumed for XPS board products. 

• The technology exists to replace HCFCs in these XPS board plants up to a level of about 

30% using CO2. However, it has been reported that there is currently no replacement for 

HCFCs in totality bearing in mind that HFCs are viewed as too expensive. Work is currently 

focusing on CO2/ethanol and CO2/hydrocarbon blends, and perhaps even pure hydrocarbon 

technologies if the blowing agent can be removed from the foam immediately after 

manufacture. 

• Consideration continues to be given to ODS bank management projects in some countries 

although foam recovery may be difficult logistically (and therefore more costly), particularly 

in remote regions. 
78 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

7.3 Transition Status - Non-Article 5 Parties 

• The use of HCFC-141b in insulation foams is now very limited in non-Article 5 Parties 

(most notably Australia and Canada) and will be virtually phased out by the end of 2009. 

• There is some further de-selection of HFC use in Europe as product fire standards have now 

been reached by modified formulations based on hydrocarbons. 

• The use of HFC-134a in one-component foams is being phased-out in the EU, primarily by 

re-formulation around various hydrocarbons. However, where hydrocarbons cannot be used 

for safety and performance reasons, a new low-GWP blowing agent (HBA-1) has been 

launched by Honeywell, which will be commercially available in July 2008, in time to 

enable compliance with the requirements of the EU F-Gas Regulation. 

• Insulation markets continue to grow rapidly in several markets in response to more stringent 

building and appliance energy efficiency requirements. The market share of foams is also 

growing against not-in-kind technologies such as fibrous insulation as a result of the greater 

thermal efficiency of foam insulation and improvements in fire performance (greater use of 

polyisocyanurate technologies). 

• PU Spray Foam is being increasingly recognised as an efficient means of retrofitting a 

number of building types. 

• Super-critical CO2 spray foam technologies have become established in Japan but market 

penetration is no more than 10%. The technology is yet to make any significant market 

penetration beyond Japan. The Green Procurement Law has also promoted the greater uptake 

of CO2 (water), which is particularly suited to the Japanese market and growth of this 

technology has exceeded that of super-critical CO2. 

• North American XPS board producers are still on course to phase-out HCFC use by the end 

of 2009. The alternative of choice is likely to rely on combinations of HFCs, CO2, 

hydrocarbons and/or water. 

• The ‘green building’ agenda continues to prescribe against high GWP blowing agent 

solutions, although often without proper reference to comparative LCCP assessments. 

Nevertheless, where parity of performance can be achieved and demonstrated with lower 

GWP solutions, uncertainties about future blowing agent containment during the lifecycle 

can be circumvented. 

7.4 Other relevant issues 

• The role of building energy efficiency in combating climate change has been highlighted in 

the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. 

• Although blowing agents can be recovered efficiently from appliances, the effectiveness of 

regulation varies substantially by region. 

• Significant additional work has been conducted on evaluating the practicality of blowing 

agent recovery from building foams. Cost effectiveness depends substantially on underlying 

waste policy and, in particular, segregation of demolition waste. The potential of carbon 

finance to assist in the bank management process is under serious evaluation. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 79

7.5 Technology Update 

The following Table illustrates the main substitute technologies currently considered or already 

used in the polyurethane, extruded polystyrene/polyolefin and phenolic foam sectors. The strikeout items indicate the likely changes initiated by the implementation of Decision XIX/6. 
80 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

Table 7-1 FOAMS TOC Update Report 2008 - Technical Options Table 

SECTOR DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 

 CURRENT CURRENT FUTURE 

POLYURETHANE RIGID 

Domestic refrigerators and freezers HCs (cyclopentane & cyclo/iso pentane blends), HFCs Majority HCs, balance HCFC-141b or HCFC-141b/22 HCFC-141b, HFCs & Other appliances HCs, HFCs Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141b & HCs HCFC-141b & HCs Transport & reefers HCs, HFCs HCFC-141b, HCFC-141b/22 HCFC-141b, HCFC-2

HFCs & HCs 

Boardstock Mainly HCs, minor use of HFCs No known production Art 5.1 NA Panels – continuous Mainly HCs, some HFCs HCFC-141b & HCs HCFC-141b & HCs Panels discontinuous Residual HCFC-141b, HFCs, some HC Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141b HCFC-141b & HFCs Spray Residual HCFC-141b, HFCs, CO2, (HC) Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141b HCFC-141b & HFCs Blocks Residual HCFC-141b, HCs, HFCs, Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141b HCFC-141b & HFCs Pipe-in-pipe Mainly HCs, minor HFC Mainly HCFC-141b HCFC-141b & HCs One Component Foam Mainly HCs, some HFCs HFCs, HCs Mainly HCs, some HFPOLYURETHANE FLEXIBLE Slabstock & block-foam LCD, EMT, methylene chloride Methylene chloride, LCD Methylene chloride

(EMT) 

Moulded Mainly CO2 (water), minor LCD Mainly CO2 (water), minor LCD CO2 (water) Integral Skin CO2 (water), HFCs, HCs Residual CFC-11, CO2 (water), some HCFCs and HFCs CO2 (water), some HC

and HFCs 

Shoe Soles CO2 (water), HFCs CO2 (water), HCFCs, HFCs CO2 (water), HCFCs, PHENOLIC Board & block HFCs, HCs (particularly in Japan) HCFC-141b HCs EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENE Sheet HCs Mainly HCs Boardstock 

HCFC-142b/(22), HFC-134a, HFC152a, CO2, CO2/ethanol, (HCs in 

Japan), blends of CO2/hydrocarbons 

Mainly HCFC-142b/22 but growing HCFC-22. Some minor use of HCs 

HCFC-142b/22, HFC

CO2, blends of CO2/ e

or CO2/hydrocarbons 

POLYOLEFIN Sheets, planks & tubes HCs (iso-butane & LPG) Mainly HCs NOT-IN-KIND INSULATIONDomestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre, cellulose Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technolNon-domestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technolIndustrial applications Mostly rock fibre, calcium silicate Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technol
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 81

7.6 Methyl formate 

In which sectors and regions is it in use? 

As far as is known, methyl formate has only been used to a very limited extent in 

developed countries. Accordingly, relevant experience is scarce to facilitate technology 

transfer to Article 5 Parties. 

Methyl formate has only been adopted to any significant extent in one Article 5 Party, 

Brazil, where it is used in steering wheel applications, bottle coolers and steel-faced panels. 

In each case the customers require non-ODS/low GWP product. In addition, the same 

producers frequently use HCFC-based systems for those customers who have no specific 

ozone or climate demand. 

What are the product and process implications? 

Experience in Brazil shows that product performance in steering wheels (integral skin 

foam) is similar to that achieved when using HCFC-141b. However, there are considerable 

reductions in viscosity of the formulation. This can provide advantage in flow, cell 

formation and density distribution, but may require equipment modifications in some 

instances. One other advantage is the ability to use higher viscosity polyols. In bottle 

coolers, a measurable deterioration of the foam insulation value has been detected, 

although customers who measure energy consumption in cabinets claim no change. In 

steel-faced panels, where blowing agents are normally more easily retained, no change in 

insulation value has been reported. 

What are the cost implications? 

Although opinions vary about the impact of methyl formate on foam density, its increased 

solubility may create challenges in maintaining dimensional stability. To counter this, high 

index formulations can be used or densities can be increased. An example is the case of 

bottle cooler applications, where a 5% increase in density has been required to keep the 

dimensional stability of the foam. There are, however, also some cost factors in favour of 

methyl formate in that it has a lower cost than HCFC-141b in some (but not all) regions 

and a significantly better blowing efficiency – thereby requiring less blowing agent to 

produce foam of a given density. 

7.7 HFC usage 

Sectors in which HFC use is most focused 

HFCs have been adopted in the following key applications and markets: 

 Domestic appliances (mostly North America) 

 Spray foam (globally, where HCFCs are not allowed) 

 Steel-faced panels (where fire requirements demand) 

 PU boardstock (for products in regions with stringent fire requirements) 

 Various SME applications (where financial constraints dictate) 
82 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

Of particular note in this context, is the rapid growth of the PU Spray Foam market in China, 

driven by the climate policy decision to renovate domestic properties in order to improve energy 

efficiency. The market has reached 60,000 tonnes of PU system in 2007, but, more importantly, is 

estimated from one source to be growing at a Compound Annual Growth Rate of 117%. The 

current market would account for 6,000-8,000 tonnes of HCFC-141b based on typical 

formulations. This market is already comparable in size to the largest PU Spray Foam markets in 

the world (e.g. North America, Spain, Japan). With no widely available low GWP alternative for 

HCFC-141b, this could be a substantial future market for HFCs, particularly if HCFC-141b 

replacement is forced early under the ‘worst first’ approach mandated under Decision XIX/6. In 

such an instance, care should be taken to assess the energy efficiency benefits against the direct 

HFC emissions arising from the process. 

Optimisation of formulations to minimise price implications 

In order to optimise the cost-effectiveness of HFC-based systems, foam formulators have 

reformulated many HFC containing foam products to utilise higher levels of co-blowing agents 

than have traditionally been used with HCFC-containing formulations. The levels of HFCs used 

in a given formulation are carefully selected so that the foam provides the required performance 

at the lowest possible cost. 

The most prevalent co-blowing agent used is CO2(water), although other co-blowing agents 

including hydrocarbons, CO2(LCD), CO2 (GCD) methyl formate, trans 1,2 di-chloro-ethylene, 

alcohols, and others are used. Levels of up to 70 mole percent of co-blowing agent are used in 

certain applications to minimise the cost impact of HFC use, although there is a corresponding 

loss in performance compared to using higher levels of HFCs. This approach also creates the 

potential to offer families of products with varying levels of performance and cost, which in turn 

allows the end foam manufacturers more options to tailor their product offerings. 

Energy efficiency versus emissions 

In many applications, HFCs are selected as the blowing agent in order to provide the best 

available energy efficiency. This can be particularly important where limited space prevents an 

increase in insulation thickness. Such applications include domestic refrigerators and freezers, 

closed cell spray foam insulation for existing building envelopes, building panels, and insulated 

transport containers (e.g. reefers). In many cases the energy efficiency requirements are dictated 

by regulation, building codes or voluntary programmes such as the US EPA/DOE Energy Star 

Program, LEED, BREEAM and CASBEE. 

Several analyses have been carried out on these applications that demonstrate that the Life Cycle 

Climate Performance (LCCP) associated with the use of HFCs is, in many cases, favourable and 

no worse than neutral in others compared to low GWP alternatives, even when all of the blowing 

agents contained in the foams are deemed to be emitted over the lifecycle. The situation is further 

improved when measures can be adopted to minimise emissions, particularly at end-of-life. 

7.8 Hydrocarbons for small consumers 

Non-Article 5 Parties’experience 

In the absence of financial assistance, SMEs in non-Article 5 Parties have been unable to adopt 

hydrocarbon technologies to any significant extent. Most have defaulted to HFC-based 

technologies despite the higher system costs. Where insulation requirements are less stringent, 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 83

greater use of CO2 (water) has also occurred. The implication of these trends is that there is little 

developed country experience on which to draw. The role of systems houses in optimising 

formulations for SMEs has been particularly important – a trend that is expected to extend to 

Article 5 Parties. 

Need for further work 

Historically, costs to implement hydrocarbon technologies were estimated at not less than US$ 

400,000 per facility. This would include a high-pressure explosion proof dispenser with premixer and other auxiliaries as well as explosion proofing of the processing area. With 

convertible high-pressure baseline equipment this may be reduced to around US$300,000, which 

would still be a very large investment for SMEs. In addition, many SMEs would not have the 

capacity to cope with such a technology from a technical and a safety standpoint. Options to 

lower these costs have not been pursued in the past because HCFCs have offered cost-effective, 

ready-to-use alternatives. In the context of phasing out HCFCs, however, the need for initiatives 

to lower HC related investment is evident if this technology is to penetrate smaller users. Cost 

reduction options that have been proposed and/or applied in incidental cases are: 

 direct injection of HCs 

 premixing at system house level 

 alternative, simplified equipment for limited applications but lower costs 

There may be more and, because none have been applied in an Article 5 context, all would need 

verification 

7.8.1 Implications on costs 

While no experience in the Article 5 context exists, exclusion of individual pre-mixers would 

save around US$ 60,000 per facility (including the related explosion proof environment). Other 

simplifications may make a total cost reduction of around US$ 100,000 possible. This implies 

that most likely HC technology, while more affordable, will never be able to address the 

requirements of very small users (i.e. consumption of less than 10 tonnes per annum) 

7.9 Extruded polystyrene technology options 

7.9.1 Status of transition in non-Article 5 Parties 

North American XPS board producers are still on course to phase-out HCFC use by the end of 

2009. The alternatives of choice are likely to rely on combinations of HFCs, CO2, hydrocarbons 

and water. The significant differences in the products required to serve the North American 

market (thinner and wider products with different thermal resistance standards and different firetest-response characteristics) will result in different formulations than have been adopted already 

in Europe and Japan for similar XPS board products. These new formulations are almost certain 

to rely on HFC-134a as a large component of the final blowing agent.

7.9.2 Pace of growth of XPS board manufacture in China 

Equipment manufacturers have reported that approximately 350 small-scale XPS plants have 

been installed across China since 2001. Around 200 of these have been supplied by one 

manufacturer. A small number of similar plants are also being supplied to Russia. Plants were 
84 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report

initially based on the use of HCFC-142b (to optimise thermal performance), but switched to 

HCFC-22 in 2003 – primarily on the basis of price (16 RMB/kg and 12 RMB/kg respectively). 

Typical plant capacities are approximately 50,000m3

 and process recycled polystyrene almost 

exclusively. Foam densities are typically 33kg/m3

 with a blowing agent content of 9% w/w. On 

this basis, blowing agent consumption at full utilisation could exceed 50,000 tonnes of HCFC-22 

with a relatively rapid emissions profile. 

7.9.3 Technology options for alternative blowing agents in China 

Work is being carried out by the equipment suppliers to modify existing units to introduce CO2

into the extruder. The cost of this modification is estimated to be around 100,000 RMB. 

However, where bottled CO2 cannot be used and additional storage is required, a further cost of 

300,000 RMB is currently being budgeted. These modifications could allow the replacement of 

HCFCs by up to 30%. However, full replacement is not possible with pure CO2. 

Total HCFC phase-out will require 100% substitution, but HFC-134a and/or HFC-152a are 

viewed as too expensive for the Chinese market. Work is continuing with CO2/ethanol and 

CO2/hydrocarbon blends to achieve higher levels of substitution. There is some belief that a total 

hydrocarbon solution (n-butane) might be possible, but this would require blowing agent 

evacuation immediately after production to avoid major fire risks in storage and use. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 85

8 Refrigeration, Air-conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical 

Options Committee (RTOC) Progress Report 

The phase-out of CFCs in new manufacturing of refrigeration and air-conditioning systems is 

now nearly complete in Article 5 Parties. Some of them have started using alternatives to HCFCs 

in some applications for both their domestic and export markets. There has been a further 

significant reduction in the use of CFCs in servicing due to the adoption of good practices and the 

retrofitting of refrigeration and Mobile Air-Conditioning (MAC) equipment to alternative 

refrigerants. Technical developments are currently focused on transitioning from high GWP to 

non-ozone-depleting low GWP fluids and on improving the energy efficiency of systems. 

8.1 Refrigerant Data 

The search for new alternative refrigerants continues to be driven by concerns over the climate 

effects of HFC refrigerants having high GWPs. The Fluorine gas (F-gas) regulation and the 

MAC-directive of the European Union have given new impetus to research and development for 

low GWP refrigerants. Some new non-ozone-depleting low GWP refrigerants have recently been 

registered, which are expected to provide climatic benefits. 

Research and experimentation is underway on CO2 (R-744) and on ice slurries as refrigerants for 

a number of applications. These fluids have benefit of much greater heat capacities, and generally 

improved heat transfer coefficient associated with change of phase. Ice slurries consist of water 

containing ice crystals mixed with another fluid such as alcohol, a salt solution or ammonia and 

are used as a secondary refrigerant. Ice slurries can be very effective for distributing and 

preserving cold by optimising the size and total volume of ice crystals to create a uniform 

solution with minimum viscosity. Ice slurries can provide higher refrigerating effect at lower 

flow rate. 

A number of standard designations for non-ODS refrigerants have been adopted or recommended 

as addenda to ASHRAE 34-2007 since the 2006 RTOC assessment report. They include the 

following: 

Adopted

R-429A R-E170/152a/600a (60.0/10.0/30.0) 

R-430A R-152a/600a (76.0/24.0) 

R-431A R-290/152a (71.0/29.0) 

R-432A R-1270/E170 (80.0/20.0) 

R-433A R-1270/290 (30.0/70.0) 

Recommended

R-434A R-125/143a/134a/600a (63.2/18.0/16.0/2.8) 

R-435A R- E170/152a (80.0/20.0) 

R-436A R-290/600a (56.0/44.0) 

R-436B R-290/600a (52.0/48.0)

R-437A R-125/134a/600/601 (19.5/78.5/1.4/0.6) 

R-510A R-E170/600a (88.0/12.0) 
86 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Public review is currently open for the refrigerants indicated as “recommended.” ISO 817 is 

expected to harmonise with ASHRAE 34 on these new designations as well as the associated 

safety classifications. These new designations reflect commercialisation or increased 

commercialisation of new refrigerants. The next RTOC progress and/or 2010 assessment report 

will include consistent physical, safety, and environmental data for these refrigerants. 

A number of new non-ozone depleting low GWP (≤150 for 100-yr time horizon) refrigerants are 

also being developed and tested for automobile air conditioning to meet the new European F-Gas 

regulations, some of which will have the potential for broader applications. The primary 

candidates to replace HFC-134a for automotive use are now carbon dioxide (R-744) and HFC1234yf (1,1,1,2-tetrafluoropropene) in direct expansion systems, and HFC-152a (1,1-

difluoroethane) in indirect systems (with a “secondary” heat transfer loop). 

8.2 Domestic Refrigeration 

Transition from CFC-12 to non- ODS technologies is now completed globally. HFC-134a and 

HC-600a continue as the dominant refrigerant options for domestic refrigerators. Hydrocarbon 

refrigerant usage is increasing in every market world-wide, except in North America because of 

the flammability concerns regarding hydrocarbons in the USA. 

Refrigerator energy efficiency continues to be a highly competitive product attribute and directly 

affects the global warming contribution of competing technologies and products. Beyond these, 

no new technologies or alternatives have emerged for energy-efficient, cost-competitive 

application for these products. Statistics for converting new production to non-ODS alternatives 

have not been updated since the >95% conversion reported in the 2006 RTOC assessment report. 

Future product configurations will likely see evolutionary improvements in product energy 

efficiency, driven by both market competition and by new energy efficiency regulations. 

Renewed efforts in developing non-ozone depleting low GWP alternatives to HFC-134a for 

automotive AC applications are expected to also produce new options for use in domestic 

refrigerators. 

Field service conversion to non-ODS alternatives continues to significantly lag new production 

conversion. This is a consequence of the long product life and the absence of a good drop-in 

substitute for the refrigerants used in systems designed for ODSs. 

8.3 Commercial refrigeration 

The commercial refrigeration sector consists of three sub-sectors: stand-alone equipment, 

condensing units and centralised systems for supermarkets. 

Stand-alone equipment consists of tightly integrated components. The transition to non-ODS 

refrigerants in this equipment is complete, and use of these systems is also increasing in Article 5 

Parties. The dominant alternative choice is HFC-134a in the USA, including for stand-alone 

display cases, where the refrigerant charge exceeds 0.5 kg. Some global companies continue 

transitioning from high-GWP to low-GWP technologies, such as CO2 and HC-290 (propane). 

The CO2 uptake in vending machine equipment does not show a significant increase compared to 

previous years due to cost-issues. The global inventory of vending machines using CO2 in 2007 

is estimated at about 90,000. An important advantage of CO2 is its ability to produce both cold 

and hot temperatures in the same machine using the same thermodynamic circuit. For small 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 87

commercial freezers, isobutane is the preferred option because of its small charge, high efficiency 

and low GWP; it is technically and economically viable for about 80 percent of the vending 

machine market. 

Condensing units are medium size commercial refrigeration systems, which have a refrigerant 

charge ranging from 1-50 kg. For new medium and low temperature equipment, a preference to 

use HFC-134a is apparent in non-Article 5 Parties, especially in systems with a refrigerant charge 

larger than one kg. R-404A and R-507A are used to replace HCFC-22, especially in low 

temperature applications. In some European countries condensing units using hydrocarbons are 

sold, but with a <5% market share. HCFC-22 is still the refrigerant of choice in Article 5 Parties, 

with HFC-134a and R-404A recently introduced in some applications. 

R-422D has been reported as an easy retrofit for HCFC-22 in medium-temperature direct 

expansion refrigeration systems, with potential use also for low temperature systems. A number 

of case studies report successful use in commercial supermarket systems and stationary airconditioning applications, including chilled water systems. Retrofits of HCFC-22 in mediumtemperature equipment using R-422D are being done on a large scale in Europe, driven by the 

pending 2010 phase-out of newly produced HCFC-22 for servicing. 

Centralised systems are similar to condensing units, except that one unit often includes several 

compressors that serve parallel sets of cooling equipment, and can produce a number of different 

temperature levels. They tend to be used in supermarkets, to lower energy consumption and to 

increase redundancy. HCFC-22 is still the most commonly used refrigerant globally. 

The alternative refrigerants for centralised systems are the same as those for condensing units. 

However, these systems are more prone to leakage resulting in high refrigerant emission rates. 

Significant efforts are being made to reduce this problem by using indirect or secondary loop 

systems as well as distributed systems. In low temperature applications in Europe, the refrigerant 

CO2 is used in secondary loops as well as in the low temperature part of cascade systems. In such 

systems, R-404A, R-717 (ammonia) or HC-290 can be used in the upper cascade. The primary 

refrigerant is confined in a shorter refrigeration circuit. This not only allows the use of flammable 

refrigerants but also reduces the charge of primary refrigerant. In this way the charge in these 

systems is reduced by 30% to 40%, which also yields lower refrigerant emissions. 

Some other issues: 

• Retrofit to HFCs increased in the USA during the last quarter of 2007, but still 

represents a relatively small percentage of the installed base. 

• R-22 remains the dominant choice in Article 5 Parties for both new equipment and 

servicing. 

• In Europe and in Japan, for new equipment the preferred refrigerants are generally 

HFCs. 

• The European F-gas regulation stringently controls refrigerant leakage control, but 

outside of Northern European countries emission rates from equipment are high 

(estimated between 15 and 25 percent of the total charge per year). Refrigerant 

emissions are lowest in supermarkets and highest in hypermarkets. 
88 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

8.4 Large Size Refrigeration (Industrial, Cold Storage and Food Processing) 

Since the 2006 RTOC assessment report, there have been no significant changes in the industrial 

refrigeration sector, in which sector both ammonia and HCFC-22 are the dominant refrigerants. 

However, there are three emerging trends that deserve mentioning here: 

1) There is increasing pressure on industrial users of HCFC-22 in Europe, but still no 

universally recognised "drop-in" alternative for large refrigeration systems with flooded 

evaporators. Many users are replacing older plants with new systems using ammonia or 

in some cases ammonia-carbon dioxide cascade systems, but the rate of conversion 

suggests that there will still be a significant number of users with HCFC-22 plants at the 

beginning of 2010, when a ban on the supply of “newly produced” HCFC-22 for 

servicing enters into effect; 

2) Growth continues in the use of CO2 in industrial systems across a very wide range of 

applications, including plate freezers, blast freezers, cold stores, ice rinks, chill stores, 

high temperature IT cooling and heat pumps; 

3) Growth also continues in heat pump applications, in particular integrated systems that 

recover heat from refrigeration plants. There is no universally preferred method for 

doing this; ammonia systems are the most common, with currently a growing number of 

CO2 systems. The uptake of this concept is still restricted by equipment availability, in 

particular high pressure ammonia compressors and even higher pressure CO2

compressors. 

Technical options continue to evolve quickly for low temperature applications, with CO2 entering 

the market as both a heat transfer fluid and refrigerant (as was also mentioned under commercial 

refrigeration). CO2 is being used in new small- and large-scale systems up to 5 MW cooling 

capacities in the USA, Japan and Europe. Many new CO2 systems continue to be installed in The 

Netherlands due to the support by financial subsidies. The use of indirect systems is increasing as 

a way to reduce the quantities needed for the ammonia refrigerant charge. Research continues in 

the USA, Japan and Europe on CO2 as refrigerant and on CO2 compatible lubricants. New CO2

compressor designs were already introduced in 2004-2006. 

Retrofits are being done from HCFC-22 to CO2 or brine systems, especially in the cold storage 

sector. The use of equipment with small NH3 charges is continuously increasing, and is now 

expanding into industrial refrigeration systems. The use of HCFC-22 is either stable or slightly 

increasing in this sector in Article 5 Parties; however, some interest in non-ODP technologies is 

now also being reported from Article 5 Parties.

8.5 Transport Refrigeration 

Transport Refrigeration includes transport of chilled or frozen products by reefer ships, 

refrigerated containers, refrigerated railcars and road transport including trailers, diesel trucks, 

and small trucks and vans. It also includes the use of refrigeration and air conditioning on 

merchant ships above 300 gross tonnes, and air conditioning in rail cars. This sector is gradually 

shifting to HFC-134a and R-404A or R-507 and more seldom to R-407C and R-410A. Use of R410A is expected to increase in the truck and trailer business. Carbon dioxide is still only used in 

prototype transport systems. Hydrocarbon refrigerants might be a future option for trucks and 

trailers but they will not be an option for containers because these are often transported under 

deck. Ammonia is gaining more popularity on-board ships for refrigeration and in a few cases 

also for air conditioning. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 89

New blends and new refrigerants introduced in prototype systems in car air conditioning systems 

have not been explored in the transport refrigeration sector. Current issues in the transport 

refrigeration sector are (1) refrigerant charge reduction and (2) energy efficiency. Water-cooled 

condensers for marine containers are now found on 85 % of all containers of the “global market 

leader”, substantially reducing energy consumption and the space requirement under deck. HFC134a generally achieves higher energy efficiency than R-404A in the medium temperature range, 

but requires larger compressors and suction lines. R-410A also achieves better energy efficiency 

than R-404A while at the same time reducing the equipment size. The utilisation of waste heat in 

various processes in order to decrease overall carbon dioxide emissions of ships is an upcoming 

issue. 

8.6 Unitary Air Conditioning 

The refrigerant options to replace HCFC-22 in newly manufactured air-to-air air conditioning and 

heat pump applications has remained relatively unchanged since the publication of the 2006 

RTOC assessment report. However, questions about the applicability of the current options in 

high temperature environments has resulted in the need to prepare a special assessment of the 

acceptability of the existing options for high ambient temperature climates, following Decision 

XIX/8 (Montreal, 2007). 

In addition, a number of refrigerant blends have entered the market over the past 24 months. 

These blends are designed to meet the servicing requirements of HCFC-22 air conditioners and 

heat pumps. They generally consist of two or more HFC components combined with a small 

quantity of hydrocarbon refrigerant. The addition of the hydrocarbon allegedly allows these 

blends to work with existing compressor and lubricant systems. However, there is limited 

published information on the performance and reliability of air conditioning systems using these 

blends. More field experience is needed to determine whether these blends are suitable as 

service, retrofit or drop-in repair refrigerants. 

8.7 Chiller Air Conditioning 

HCFC-123 and HFC-134a continue to be the primary options for centrifugal chillers. Conversion 

of existing CFC chillers to use non-CFC refrigerants has nearly ended in non-Article 5 Parties 

because most good candidates for conversion have already been covered. As already reported in 

other sectors, two --beneficial-- trends are continuing to drive chiller development: 1) increases in 

energy efficiency, and 2) reduced refrigerant emissions. Improvements in energy performance 

are driven by concerns over global warming and by new more aggressive energy performance 

standards or regulations being enacted by a number of Parties. Reduced refrigerant emissions are 

the result of better designs and service practices. The replacement (or sometimes conversion) of 

CFC chillers by energy efficient HCFC-123 or HFC-134a chillers is occurring in a number of 

Article 5 Parties. The main reason is energy cost savings, since the current average chiller uses 

35% less electricity compared to the average chiller produced 20 years ago. 

New chillers employ scroll compressors in the range from 7 kW to 350 kW, and screw 

compressors in the range from 140 kW to about 2200 kW. These chillers generally use HFC134a as the refrigerant, but scroll compressor systems are now starting to use R-410A. 

An important development in several non-Article 5 Parties (outside Europe) is the accelerating 

transition away from HCFC-22 in new air-cooled and water-cooled chillers. HCFC-22 cannot be 

used in new chillers manufactured in many non-Article 5 Parties by January, 1, 2010, and newly 
90 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

produced HCFC-22 cannot be used in servicing in Europe by that date. HCFC-22 is still used, 

primarily in chillers with positive-displacement compressors, which includes reciprocating, 

screw, and scroll compressors. Manufacturers of these chillers have redesigned their products to 

use HFC refrigerants. Chillers with cooling capacities up to about 350 kW are generally being 

redesigned to use R-410A. Chillers above this capacity generally are being redesigned to use 

HFC-134a. 

As was mentioned under the unitary air conditioning sector, HFC refrigerant blends (containing 

HFCs and small amounts of hydrocarbons) are now offered for the servicing of HCFC-22 based 

equipment. 

8.8 Water-Heating Heat Pumps 

Use of these devices is high in parts of Europe, Japan, and growing in China. In Europe, comfort 

heating is provided by 10-30 kW heat pumps using fan coils with outside air or the ground as the 

heat source. Hot water temperatures are in the 45-55o

 C range. In the mild climate zones of 

China and Japan, air-source heat pump chillers are widely used for heating and cooling of 

residential and commercial buildings with fan coil units. 

• In Japan, the market for heat pumps continues to grow. They are operated primarily at 

night and the hot water is stored for day-time use. Similar heat pumps have been used in 

Germany and Austria for a number of years. 

• In Japan, CO2 is used extensively in domestic hot water heat pumps in the residential 

market, a trend the Japanese government is encouraging through subsidies. However, 

CO2 heat pumps are now also gaining market share in Japan, and the government is 

providing financial incentives for the purchasers of these units as well. 

• HCFC-22 is used still in some heat pumps, but manufacturers are increasingly offering 

models that use HFC-134a, R-410A or CO2. Hydrocarbons are used as refrigerants in 

some smaller low-charge heat pumps in Europe. 

• The market for water-heating heat pumps also is expanding in Europe, especially in the 

more northern countries where the heat pumps can replace boilers in hydronic heating 

systems. 

• Manufacturers are introducing new models that offer higher hot water temperatures 

(above 60o

 C) or are capable of operating at low outdoor temperatures, e.g., at -20o C. 

• The market for water-heating heat pumps has now started to develop in China. 

8.9 Vehicle air conditioning 

HFC-134a has now fully replaced CFC-12 as the globally accepted mobile A/C (MAC) 

refrigerant. 

The European Union has enacted legislation to limit the allowable GWP of refrigerants used in 

new vehicle types to 150 or less (for a 100 year time horizon) by 2011, and in all new vehicles by 

2017. This eliminates the use of HFC-134a (with a GWP of about 1400) and is helping to drive 

research into zero ODP and low GWP refrigerants that can be used throughout the global 

automobile market. Refrigerants that meet the 150 GWP criteria include CO2, HFC-152a, HFC1234yf and hydrocarbons (mainly propane). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 91

Since 1998, the leading potential replacement refrigerant in Europe has been CO2. Almost all 

vehicle manufacturers and suppliers world-wide are working on such systems and many have 

already demonstrated prototype cars. Currently, technical and commercial hurdles exist, such as 

leakage, leak detection, materials selection, lines and fittings materials, component technology 

selection, and costs, all of which require resolution. The use of HFC-152a was proposed in 2001 

and has been publicly demonstrated in several prototype vehicles. Although only moderately 

flammable, vehicle makers have not shown strong interest in pursuing HFC-152a. 

Following finalisation of the EU F-gas regulation for vehicle A/C, the industry has been actively 

developing and testing alternative refrigerants with low GWPs. Of those prominently addressed in 

public, the proprietary blends once believed to be commercially promising [identified as AC-1, 

DP-1, Fluid H, and JDH all containing one or more unsaturated hydrofluorocarbons (olefins)] 

have been abandoned based on toxicity and/or other findings. 

The primary candidates for automotive markets to replace HFC-134a are now 

• carbon dioxide, and 

• HFC-1234yf (1,1,1,2-tetrafluoropropene, an unsaturated HFC or olefin) in direct 

expansion systems, and 

• HFC-152a (1,1-difluoroethane) in indirect systems (with a secondary heat transfer loop). 

German carmakers announced in September 2007 that they have decided to use R-744 (carbon 

dioxide) as refrigerant in their MAC systems in order to meet the EU F-gas regulation. 

Companies from the United States, Japan, Korea, Italy, and France have not made a final choice 

and continue to investigate both HFC-1234yf as possible a alternative refrigerant and also HFC152a in indirect systems. Final decisions on refrigerant candidates for future use are expected by 

the end of summer 2008. 

CO2, HFC-152a and probably also HFC-1234yf are comparable to HFC-134a in terms of cooling 

performance and system fuel use for the use of AC. All exhibit comparable environmental 

performance and qualify for use in the EU under the current regulation. 

8.10 Conservation and Containment 

Substitutes for ODS refrigerants have been introduced in each stationary air-conditioning and 

refrigeration end-use sector. Many of these alternatives are azeotropic or zeotropic blends of 

various HFC refrigerants, have high GWPs and operate at high pressures. These characteristics 

present significant challenges for containment and recycling. It is uncertain whether the current 

stock of refrigerant recovery and/or recycling equipment is capable of properly recovering these 

substitutes. 

In addition, many of these blends are proprietary, making it difficult, if not impossible, to 

accurately “reconstitute” the blend. It may not be legal in many areas to reclaim refrigerants 

when the resulting formulation cannot be precisely known or controlled. Further, using incorrect 

blends can compromise the performance of equipment and, in some cases, present safety hazards. 

These factors call into the question the potential effectiveness of future efforts to recover, recycle, 

and reclaim used non-ODS refrigerants. At a minimum, it would be necessary to restrict who can 

accept and reprocess refrigerants to organisations with proper information about formulations, 

special equipment and highly trained technicians. 
92 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Destruction of excess refrigerants is gaining attention, but is not yet globally viable because of 

high cost, energy intensity of incineration and limited destruction capacity. A similar situation 

exists for refrigerant separation technologies. Experience by a number of TOC experts has shown 

that any impediment to reclaiming used gases, whether technical or economic, provides an 

incentive to release gases to the atmosphere. To avoid such problems, workable plans to properly 

dispose of or recycle used gases and to incentivise users to do so, should be in place prior to their 

commercial introduction.
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 93

9 Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) 

Progress Report 

This section updates trends in methyl bromide (MB) production and consumption, and gives 

progress in the development and adoption of alternatives. Preliminary information on registration, 

re-registration and deregistration of in-kind methyl bromide alternatives is also presented in 

conformity with Decisions Ex. I/4(i) and Ex. I/4(j). 

9.1 MB production and consumption update 

Following is an update on MB production and consumption, compiled primarily from the 

database on ODS consumption and production of the Ozone Secretariat available in March 2008. 

Under the Protocol, consumption at the national level is defined as MB production plus MB 

imports minus exports, minus QPS, minus feedstock; it thus represents the national supply of MB 

for uses controlled by the Protocol (i.e., non-QPS fumigant). Some countries have revised or 

corrected their historical consumption data at certain times, and in consequence official figures 

and baselines have changed. At the time of writing this report, the vast majority of Parties had 

submitted data for 2006 and the database for MB is much more complete than in the past. In the 

few cases where data gaps exist, data from the previous year were assumed to apply. 

9.1.1 Production trends 

Trends in the reported production of MB for all controlled uses (excluding QPS and feedstock) 

are shown in Figure 9.1. MB production for controlled uses in 2004 was about 24,635 metric 

tonnes, which represented 37% of the production baseline (67,376 tonnes) and 18,141 tonnes in 

2005 which reduces this proportion to about 27%. However, in 2006 the global MB production 

for controlled uses increased to 19,635 tonnes (29% of baseline), although the consumption in 

both Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties has continued to decrease each year (details can be found 

in section 9.2). 
94 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 9-1 Historical trends in reported global MB production for all controlled uses, 

excluding QPS and feedstock, 1991 - 2006 (metric tonnes) 

Data for 1991 and 1995-2006 were taken from the Ozone Secretariat dataset of March 2008. Data for 

1992-94 were estimated from Table 3-1 of the 2002 MBTOC Assessment Report and Table 3-1 of the 

2006 MBTOC Assessment Report. 

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

MB Production for controlled uses

(metric tonnes)

Non-Article 5

production

Article 5

production

Non-Article 5 Parties reduced their MB production for controlled uses from about 66,000 tonnes 

in 1991 (non-A5 baseline) to less than 24,100 tonnes in 2004 and 17,603 in 2005. However, nonArticle 5 production for controlled uses increased to 18,666 tonnes in 2006 due to increased 

production in Israel. Non-Article 5 MB production in 2006 was about 28% of the baseline; this 

included production for export to Article 5 Parties. Article 5 Parties reduced their production for 

controlled uses from a peak of 2,397 tonnes in 2000 to about 536 tonnes in 2004, with an increase 

to 969 tonnes in 2006. MB production in Article 5 regions fell from 70% of baseline in 2003 to 

39% of baseline in 2004, and increased to again 70% in 2006 (baseline 1,375 tonnes, average of 

1995-98). At present, production of MB for controlled uses in Article 5 Parties takes place 

entirely in China and a MLF project to phase-out this activity is approved and underway. 

A list of known MB production facilities was published in the MBTOC Assessment of 2006 

(Table 3-3). In 2006, MB was produced for controlled uses in one Article 5 Party (China) and 

three non-Article 5 Parties (Israel, Japan and USA). 

9.1.2 Production for QPS purposes 

Reported methyl bromide production for exempt QPS, as reported to the Ozone Secretariat under 

** by Parties, rose substantially in 2005 over the long term and decreasing trend. Data reported 

for 2006 shows a return to the expected trend (Fig. 9-2). There has speculation as to the reasons 

for the sudden increase shown in 2005. These include stock issues, impact of adoption of ISPM 

15 (**) on demand and inclusion of uses previously not considered as QPS. The latter may have 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 95

been as a result of review at time of 100% phase-out of non-exempt consumption. In the light of 

the 2006 data, it appears that the changes, whatever they were, were unusual and probably 

specific to 2005. 

Fig. 9-2 Reported or estimated QPS production 1990 - 2006 

Reported or estimated QPS production

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

Methyl bromide for QPS (metric tonnes)

9.2 Global consumption 

On the basis of Ozone Secretariat data, global consumption of MB for controlled uses was 

estimated to be about 64,420 tonnes in 1991 and remained above 60-63,000 tonnes until 1998. 

Global consumption was about 45,527 tonnes in 2000, falling to about 26,336 tonnes in 2003 and 

16,474 tonnes in 2006 as illustrated by Fig 9-3 below. 

9.2.1 Consumption trends in Non-Article 5 Parties 

Figure 9-2 shows the trends in MB consumption in Non-Article 5 Parties for the period between 

1991 and 2006. The official baseline for Non-Article 5 Parties was about 56,043 tonnes in 1991. 

By 2003, this consumption had been reduced to about 14,520 tonnes, representing 26% of the 

baseline. In 2004, consumption appeared to increase to 18,454 tonnes (33% of baseline), 

however this occurred primarily because 3,310 tonnes scheduled for export to Article 5 Parties 

were not shipped before 31 December of that year and this consignment was counted as part of 

the official national consumption of a Non-Article 5 party. Without this, the total Non-Article 5 

consumption in 2004 would have been approximately 15,144 tonnes, representing 27% of 

baseline. In 2005 and 2006, MB consumption was reduced to 11,468 and 9,452 tonnes in NonArticle 5 Parties for critical use exemptions, accounting for 20% and 17% (respectively) of the 

total Non-Article 5 baseline. In 2007 the estimated consumption based on quantities approved or 
96 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

licensed amounted to 8,475 tonnes or about 15% of the baseline. For 2008 about 6,966 tonnes 

were approved or licensed which is a further reduction to 12% of the baseline. 

Figure 9-3 Baselines and trends in MB consumption in Non-Article 5 and Article 5 regions, 

1991 – 2006 (metric tonnes)

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1991

1992

199319941995

19961997

1998

199920002001

200220032004

2005

2006

Years

Baseline non-Article 5

Baseline Article 5

MB consumption non-Article 5

MB consumption Article 5

 Source: MBTOC estimates calculated from Ozone Secretariat data of March 2008. 

Figure 9-4 shows trends in MB consumption in major Non-Article 5 regions. In 1991 the USA, 

European Community, Israel and Japan used 95% of the MB consumed in Non-Article 5 Parties. 

By 2003 these four Parties had reduced consumption to 26%, 26%, 28% and 23% of their 

respective national baselines. And in 2007 the authorised or licensed consumption (for CUEs) 

was reduced to about 24%, 3%, 27% and 10% of national baselines in the US, EC, Israel and 

Japan, respectively. For 2008, permitted levels amounted to 21%, 1%, 24% and 7%, in the same 

order. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 97

Figure 9-4 Trends in MB consumption in the three largest non-Article 5 Parties and other 

non-A5 regions, 1991 – 2008 (metric tonnes) 

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

MB consumption (metric tonnes)

Other Non-Article 5 countries

Israel

Japan

United States

European Union (25 Member States)

MB was consumed for controlled uses by 40 out of 45 Non-Article 5 Parties in the past. The 

majority of these countries no longer use MB (Table 9-1). 11 countries used MB for CUEs in 

2007, and this was reduced to 7 countries in 2008. 

Table 9.2 summarises national MB consumption as a percentage of national baseline in countries 

that were granted critical use exemptions (CUEs). Several Parties have made significant 

reductions in CUEs. The EC, for example, reduced CUE consumption to 13% and 8% of baseline 

in 2005 and 2006 respectively, followed by reductions to 3% and 1% in 2007 and 2008. 

Table 9-1 Summary of MB consumption in Article 5 and Non-Article 5 Parties 

Number of Parties 

Status of MB use Non-Article 5 

Parties in 2008 

Article 5 Parties in 2006 Total 

Parties using MB 7 44 51 (27%) 

Parties that used MB in past 

and now have zero 

consumption (a, b) 

33 48 81 (42%) 

Parties that have not consumed 

MB since 1990 (b) 

5 54 59 (31%) 

Total 45 146 191 (100%) 

(a) MB consumption reported by Ozone Secretariat. A small number of countries have not reported data 

for 2006 – in such cases the data for 2005 was used in this analysis.. 

(b) Excluding QPS 

Source: Ozone Secretariat data of March 2008; data for 2007-8 were calculated from 

MB consumption approved or licensed for CUEs. 
98 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Recently, the EC announced that the EC countries will no longer use MB for critical uses from 

the end of 2008 (UNEP OzoNews, 15 April 2008), and informed the Ozone Secretariat and 

MBTOC that the EC is not submitting critical use nominations (CUNs) for 2009. 

Table 9-2 MB consumption in relation to national baselines in Non-Article 5 Parties that 

currently use MB 

Note. MB consumption data for 1991-2006 are from Ozone Secretariat dataset of March 2008. Figures 

for 2007-2008 are authorised or licensed CUEs from Meetings of the Parties reportsand licensing data 

Party MB consumption, tonnes (percentage of national baseline)

1991 2003 2005 2006 2007 (a) 2008 (a)

Australia 704 182 (26%) 116 (16%) 55 (8%) 49 (7%) 50 (7%) 

Canada 200 58 (29%) 62 (31%) 42 (21%) 53 (27%) 42 (21%) 

European 

Community 

19,612 (b) 5,162 (26%) 2,431 (13%) 1,487 (8%) 522 (3%) 213 (1%) 

Israel 3,580 992 (28%) 1,072 (30%) 841 (23%) 967 (27%) 861 (24%) 

Japan 6,107 1,430 (23%) 595 (10%) 489 (8%) 636 (10%) 444 (7%) 

New 

Zealand 

135 35 (26%) 30 (22%) 27 (20%) 18 (13%) 0 (0%) 

Switzerland 43 11 (24%) 4 (9%) 4 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 

United 

States 

25,529 6,755 (26%) 7,255 (28%) 6,475 (25%) 6,230 (24%) 5,356 (21%) 

(a) Authorised or licensed CUEs (actual MB consumption has not yet been reported) 

(b) Baseline of the 25 EC countries that were member states in 2005 

9.2.2 Consumption trends in Article 5 and CEIT countries 

Figure 9-2 shows the trend in MB consumption in Article 5 Parties in the period between 1991 

and 2006. The Article 5 baseline was about 15,703 tonnes (average of 1995-98), rising to a peak 

consumption of more than 18,125 tonnes in 1998. Recently, total Article 5 consumption was 

reduced from 75% of the baseline in 2003 to 67% of baseline in 2004 (about 10,512 tonnes) and 

less than 45% of the baseline in 2006 (7,022 tonnes). 

Most Article 5 Parties have achieved considerable MB reductions at national level, as illustrated 

by the following information. Further details are presented in Tables 9-1 and 9-3. 

• The vast majority of Article 5 Parties achieved the national freeze level in 2002. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 99

• By 2004, 87% of Article 5 Parties (125 out of 144) had achieved the 20% reduction 

step earlier than the scheduled date of 2005. In consequence, only 19 remaining 

Parties needed to take action to meet the 20% reduction step in 2005. 

• According to latest reported consumption data (for 2005/6) only 6 Article 5 Parties 

(Ethiopia, Fiji, Guatemala, Honduras, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Saudi Arabia) 

were in non-compliance with the 20% reduction step of 2005. The remaining 140 

Parties complied with this reduction step fully. 

• 84% of Article 5 Parties (120 Parties) reduced their national MB consumption to 

less than 50% of national baseline in 2006 (Table 9-3). 

• 81% of Article 5 Parties (117 Parties) reported MB consumption between zero and 

10 ODP-tonnes in the latest reported year (2005/6). 

• 70% of Parties (103 Parties) reported zero MB consumption in 2006. 

• Many Article 5 Parties are implementing MLF projects to reduce or totally phaseout MB. This includes 14 of the 15 largest MB consuming countries (i.e. countries 

that consumed more than 300 metric tonnes in 2000). The exception is South 

Africa, which is currently preparing a GEF project for MB phase-out. A project to 

achieve complete phase-out of MB in Mexico for controlled uses in the country 

(1,492 metric tonnes) by 2013 has recently been approved 

• Tunisia and Algeria, together with UNIDO and Italy as implementing agencies 

have also submitted a project to identify alternatives for high moisture dates, which 

has been approved by the 54th Executive Committee Meeting. Tunisia was 

exempted from Montreal Protocol commitments by Decision XV/12, which 

deferred “the consideration of compliance of the 20% reduction of MB 

consumption as established by the Protocol for Article 5 Parties in 2002 for 

countries using more than 80% of their consumption of methyl bromide on highmoisture dates until two years after the TEAP (through its MBTOC) formally finds 

alternatives for high-moisture dates”. In 2006 Tunisia reported consumption at 

64% of baseline, while Algeria reported 77% of baseline. 

Table 9-3 National MB consumption compared to national baselines in Article 5 Parties. 

Analysis of Ozone Secretariat data of March 2008

National status Number of A5 countries

2003 2004 2006

MB consumption was 0% of national baseline 87 91 101

MB consumption was 0 - 50% of national baseline 106 115 120

MB consumption was 50 – 80% of national baseline 11 10 19

MB consumption was more than 80% of national 

baseline

25 19 4

Total 142 144 143 
100 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Regionally speaking, consumption decrease has been greatest in CEIT countries, followed by 

Asia and Africa, while Latin America is the region with smaller relative reductions as seen in 

Figure 9-5 below. Some agricultural sectors in Latin America increased use of MB in recent 

years: melon production in Central America, strawberry production in Chile and Argentina and 

cut flower production in countries such as Ecuador. 

Figure 9-5 MB Consumption trends in Article 5 and CEIT countries 1991 - 2006 

A5 Regional MB consumption trends 1991 - 2006

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

1991199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006

Year

Latin America and Caribbean

Africa

Asia, Middle East

CEIT

Source: Ozone Secretariat database, 2008 

About 70% of Article 5 Parties reported zero consumption in 2006. Only 11 Parties still report 

consumption between 100 and 500 metric tonnes and only five countries remain in the usage 

category above 500 tonnes as illustrated in Figure 9-6 below. 

Figure 9-6 Number of small, medium and large Article 5 MB consumers 

No. of small, medium and large A5 MB consumers

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0t

>0–100 t

101–500 t

> 500 t

MB consumption (tonnes)

No. of A5 Parties

2006

2005

2001

Source: Ozone Secretariat database, March 2008
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 101

9.3 Alternatives for soil treatments 

9.3.1 Key alternatives 

Major chemical alternatives, 1,3-D/Pic, chloropicrin and metham sodium, used alone and/ or in 

combination with other alternatives are proving as effective as MB and continue to be widely 

adopted in many preplant soil applications (UNEP, 2005 a,b; Mann et al. 2005; Trout and 

Damodaran, 2004; CDPR PUR data; Spotti, 2004; Carrera et al. 2004; Porter, 2005; MBTOC 

2007). The recent registration of iodomethane has offered an option for many of the remaining 

uses, which are proving difficult to control with other alternatives. Various Parties previously 

applying for CUNs particularly in strawberry fruit, tomatoes and vegetable crops, have adopted 

these alternatives on a wide scale. This includes control of pathogens in the more difficult 

nursery and replant industries where high levels of disease control are required to meet quality 

standards (e.g. certification requirements). 

Formulation changes and more adequate application methods continue to improve the 

effectiveness of several alternatives (Pic EC, 1,3-D/Pic EC) and wider adoption has occurred 

where these are available. In many instances, this has involved a change in cropping practice, i.e. 

slightly longer plant back times and a greater awareness of soil conditions, which improve the 

efficiency of alternatives; modification to application machinery, sometimes with economic 

implications have sometimes been also necessary. Some sectors that were formerly heavily reliant 

on methyl bromide have completely switched to other chemical alternatives and improved crop 

rotation practices (e.g. tomato and pepper production in Australia); other sectors have adopted 

more diverse types of alternatives including substrates, steam and various combinations of 

fumigants, other pesticides, grafted plants and resistant varieties (e.g. Spain, Italy) (Porter et al,

2007). Notably, the EC has declared that its member states will no longer use MB for critical 

uses from the end of 2008. 

Combinations of fumigant alternatives (1,3-D/Pic, Mna/Pic) with a range of herbicides have been 

shown to be effective for nutsedge (Cyperus spp), which is the key target pest for many CUN’s 

(Gilreath et al, 2004; Belcher et al 2007; Clpepper, 2007). 

Methods which avoid the need for methyl bromide, such as cropping in substrates, grafting plants 

onto resistant rootstocks and using resistant varieties, continue to expand in the ornamental and 

vegetable industries requesting CUNs (Cantlifee and Vansickle, 2003; Cantliffe et al, 2003; 

Sawwas, 2003; Tognoni et al, 2004; UNEP 2005 a, b). 

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

with lower concentrations of methyl bromide (e.g. MB:Pic 50:50 or less). Their use can be 

achieved with application machinery that allows co-injection of methyl bromide and chloropicrin 

or by using premixed formulations. These formulations have proven equally effective for 

controlling soilborne pathogens as formulations containing higher quantities of methyl bromide 

(e.g. 98:2, 67:33) (e. g. Porter et al. 1997; Melgarejo, 2004; López-Aranda et al. 2004). At least 

one Party applying for CUNs reported that MB/Pic formulations can be modified to contain as 

little as 2% MB and 98% Pic, which would dramatically reduce MB dosage. This treatment 

would be extremely effective for pathogens, but not as suitable for weeds or nematodes. 

Low permeability barrier films, LPBF, (e.g. VIF or equivalent) allow increased retention of MB 

and extended effective exposure periods for pests, thus controlling pathogens and weeds at 

reduced MB application rates compared to those used with conventional films (e.g. Gilreath et al., 

2003; Gilreath et al., 2005a; Hamill et al., 2004; Minuto et. Al., 2003; Reuven et al., 2000; Santos 
102 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

et al., 2005; Wang et al., 1997). These films allow for substantial reductions in dosage rates of 

MB compared with the minimum effective rate under polyethylene film. Reductions are typically 

between 25 – 50%, for both 98% methyl bromide and MB/Pic (30:70, 67:33 and 50:50). Studies 

are also proving their use for effective dosage reduction of alternatives, such as 1,3-D and Pic 

(Gilreath et al., 2004; Noling, 2004; Hamill et al., 2004; Fennimore et al., 2004; Austerweil et al., 

2006; Ou et al., 2007, MBTOC 2007). This is important because dosage reduction may increase 

areas available to be treated with specific fumigants that are limited by township caps and may 

lead to further reduction in MB use (Gilreath et al., 2003; Fennimore et al., 2004; Fennimore et 

al., 2003; Ou et al., 2007) and possibly reduce the buffer zone requirements, which limit adoption 

of alternatives in some countries. 

At present the state of California in the US prohibits the use of certain barrier films (VIF), over 

concerns of possible worker exposure to MB when seedlings are planted or the film is removed 

(California Code of Regulations Title 3 Section 6450(e)). Studies to validate emission levels of 

fumigants with barrier films are presently being conducted to review the regulation. Adoption of 

barrier films has increased substantially in other states such as Florida. The use of low 

permeability barrier films (e.g.VIF or equivalent) is compulsory in the 25 member countries of 

the European Union (EC Regulation 2037/2000). 

9.3.2 Update on registration of alternatives 

Iodomethane received registration for strawberry, peppers, tomato, ornamentals (field grown), 

nurseries, trees and vines in all but 7 States of the U.S. on September 27, 2007. It is presently for 

one year, when it will be reviewed with all other fumigants under the cluster analysis to ensure 

guidelines are compatible with other fumigants including MB. At this time, iodomethane has not 

received state registrations in key California or Florida. 

A new registration for other materials such as DMDS is pending in the U.S. 

In Israel, registration of metham sodium is expanding in the horticulture and ornamental sectors, 

allowing for substitution of MB previously used in these sectors. Registration of chloropicrin is 

being considered and would allow its use alone or in combinations with other fumigants and 

possibly for registration of 1,3-D/Pic. The registration of MB\pic formulation is not likely to take 

place since it all depends upon the company’s registration.

9.3.3 Crop specific strategies 

This section below provides an overview of the main strategies adopted in both Article 5 and onArticle 5 Parties, for those crops presently applying for CUNs. 

9.3.3.1 Vegetables 

9.3.3.1.1 Tomatoes 

Effective alternatives adopted in the tomato sector include combinations of chemicals such as 1,3-

D, chloropicrin (Mann et al. 2005), metham sodium and dazomet and non-chemical methods (e.g. 

substrates, grafting, resistant varieties, biofumigation, solarisation) (Besri, 2004, 2007a, 2007b, 

Runia, 2006). 

MB use has been entirely phased out from all European countries as well as Australia and Israel. 

In northern Europe the main alternative adopted is soilless culture often in association with other 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 103

alternatives e.g. resistant cultivars and grafting A more diverse selection of alternatives is used in 

Southern Europe and Mediterranean countries including grafting, alone or in combination with 

fumigants such as MS (Besri, 2004, 2007a, 2007b,). In Morocco, grafting is applied on a wide 

commercial level on 95 % of the total protected tomato producing area. In Turkey, yields in 

grafted tomato increased by about 35% when using grafted plants, although this proportion varied 

with the rootstock used. Production of grafted plants grown in soils treated with solarization (6 to 

8 weeks, during the summer months) in combination with fumigants (metham sodium or 1,3-D) 

was very successful for avoiding damage caused by Fusarium oxysporum. f. sp. lycopersici, 

F.oxysporum. f. sp. radicis-lycopersici and root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne spp.) (Yilmaz, 

2006, 2007ab). 

Tomato grafting has been reported as a feasible alternative for tomato growers in the Southeast 

USA (Rivard and Lows 2006, Rivard et al., 2007), although at present this production system has 

been adopted primarily by organic producers. 

In Japan, grafting is used singly or in combination with alternative chemicals (1,3-D, pic, metham 

sodium and fosthiazate when nematodes are present) for 60% of the regular tomatoes and 90% of 

the cherry tomatoes produced in the Kumamoto region where a high proportion of the country’s 

production is concentrated (Nishi and Tateya, 2006a). 

In Florida, Telone C35 was reported to be as effective as MB for controlling root-knot nematode 

attacking tomatoes (Dickson, 2007). Nutsedge control has been efficiently achieved in the USA 

with the herbicide halosulfuron. Acrolein combined with other chemicals such as Eptam=EPTC, 

halosulforon or dazomet enhanced control of nutsedge and other weed species without adversely 

affecting yield. Yields were comparable or higher than those obtained with MB. (Belcher et al., 

2007). 

Iodomethane applied under metalized mulch controlled nutsedge as well as MB at various 

dosages, with highest obtained at 252 kg/ha. Incidence of Bacterial wilt (Ralstonia solanacearum) 

was reduced when using metalized mulch as compared to the same treatment with VIF (Olson 

and Kreger, 2007, Bernal, 2007). Telone C35 applied with metallic mulch produced marketable 

yields that were statistically equivalent to those obtained with MB:Pic 65:35 (Thomas et al., 

2007). 

9.3.3.1.2 Eggplants 

Adoption of grafting continues to expand in the eggplant sector as new and more suitable 

rootstocks become available. In Turkey for example, yields of grafted eggplants were shown to 

increase by 25-30% in comparison to non-grafted plants. Fruit quality was much improved and 

although planting density remains largely unchanged. Growers find it possible to leave grafted 

plants in production for several years (Yilmaz et al, 2007b) 

9.3.3.1.3 Peppers 

Various chemical alternatives have proved efficient for the control of soilborne pathogens and 

weeds. Iodomethane: Pic 50:50 with VIF, DMDS (Dimethyl sulphide) +Pic (79:21 with LDPE) 

and a combination of Telone II /Pic and dazomet under LDPE were tested in Georgia (USA) on 

bell pepper with results that were fully comparable to those obtained with MB (Culpepper et al., 

2007) 
104 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

In Spain, biofumigation has proved successful for peppers grown in the Murcia and Castilla-La 

Mancha regions (Bello et al., 2008). Biofumigants most commonly applied include goat, sheep 

and cow manure, as organic matter from rice, mushroom, olive, brassicae, and garden residues. 

New varieties resistant to root knot nematodes (Meloidogyne sp.) are now available in Spain 

(Piedra Buena et al., 2006, López-Pérez et al., 2006) and US (Bausher et al., 2007). 

9.3.3.1.4 Cucurbits 

Production of grafted cucurbits is expanding significantly in Mediterranean countries. When 

combined with other treatments, grafted plants can avoid the need for MB fumigation (De 

Miguel, 2004b, Beltran et al, 2008). In Italy, for example, grafted plants are used with alternative 

fumigants (e.g. 1,3-D or Pic) instead of MB (Spotti, 2004). Resistant rootstocks are available for 

pests and pathogens such as Meloidogyne sp. and Fusarium oxysporum in melon, watermelon and 

cucumber, Monosporascus cannonballus in melon, and Phomopsis sclerotiodes in cucumber 

(Blestos, 2005; De Miguel 2004 a, b, c; López-Galarza, et al. 2004). 

In Israel, grafting is also showing promising results, particularly when this system is carefully 

adapted to particular growing conditions of each region (Cohen et al., 2005; Koren, 2002; Koren 

et al., 2007). Grafting is commercially adopted for crops such as tomatoes, watermelons. Melon 

grafting is successful for prostrate cultivars. However trellised cultivars show incompatibility and 

are not successful at this stage. 

In the USA the main focus has been on alternative fumigants, combined with additional weed 

control when necessary (Culpepper et al., 2007), and grafted plants have not played a significant 

role as MB alternatives. Iodomethane applied under metallized tarps has shown to be as 

efficacious as MB (Hausbeck and Cortright, 2007; Olson and Kreger, 2007), but this fumigant is 

not yet registered for these crops. In Florida, 1,3D /Pic (97.5:2.5) showed better control against 

soil borne pathogens of melon than MB/Pic formulations (Olson and Kreger, 2007). 

Grafting + avermectin is an important alternative to MB for cucumber production presently in use 

in China (Cao, 2008, Pers. Comm.). 

9.3.3.2 Ornamental crops 

Non-Article 5 Parties presently requesting CUNs for this use are Israel and the United States. All 

other Parties previously requesting CUNs (e.g. Portugal, Greece, Belgium, France, Italy, Spain 

and Australia) have not reapplied for 2009 or 2010. The Australian outdoor flower industry for 

example, no longer uses methyl bromide and 1,3-D/Pic and metham sodium in combination with 

crop rotation is in widespread use. Member states of the EC once using MB have adopted 

substrates, and different chemical alternatives. 

Floriculture is a complex industry with hundreds of flower types, production cycles and cropping 

systems involved. Shifting to alternatives often requires growers to change production practices 

substantially and implement integrated pest management programs. This may include transition to 

soilless systems, at times with increased investment, but often with improved quality and yields 

(Savvas, 2003; Graffiadelis, 2000; Grillas et al., 2001; Akkaya et al., 2004; Yilmaz et al., 2007a). 

Constraints to adoption of alternatives include regulatory issues (e.g. township caps in USA), and 

registration. However, alternatives that do not need registration such as steam and substrates are 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 105

used by many growers around the world particularly for flowers grown in protected 

environments. Effective results have also been obtained with solarisation, for example in Israel, 

Italy, Turkey and the state of Florida in the United States (McSorley et al., 2006; Gullino and 

Garibaldi, 2007; Yilmaz et al., 2007a). 

Roses, carnations and gerberas are the flowers most commonly grown in substrates, but other 

flower types – particularly bulbs of many types - are also produced with this cropping system 

(Nucifora, 2001; Gullino et al., 2003; Grillas et al., 2001; Pizano, 2005; Savvas, 2003; Akkaya et 

al, 2004; Yilmaz et al, 2007a; Rea, 2008). Although the initial set up cost of a soil-less production 

system is comparatively expensive, growers are generally able to compensate the extra cost 

through significantly better yields and quality that result from higher planting density, optimum 

plant nutrition and better pest and disease control. (Grafiadellis et al. 2000; Minuto et al., 2005; 

Akkaya et al. 2004; Pizano, 2004; Schnitzler and Grudda, 2002; Akkaya et al, 2004; Vos and 

Bridge, 2006, Yilmaz et al, 2007a). 

Steaming, although expensive, controls soil fungi at levels that are comparable to MB when 

properly applied (O’Neill et al. 2005; Reuven et al. 2005; Barel, 2003). Steam is generally suited 

for protected flower production and for sterilising re-utilised substrates. Costs associated with 

steaming may be reduced through implementation of IPM strategies and by considering different 

types of fuels, boiler types and steaming systems (Runia 2000). 

Chemical alternatives increasingly used in ornamental production include dazomet, metham 

sodium and 1,3 dichloropropene, the latter often combined with Pic. These have proven equally 

effective to MB for many kinds of flowers in Israel (Reuven et al 2002; Reuven et al, 2005), the 

USA (Schneider et al. 2003, Gerik, 2005 a and b, Gerik and Green, 2004, Gerik et al., 2006), 

Spain (Peguero, 2004), Australia (Mann et al, 2005; Tostovrsnik et al, 2005) and other countries. 

Combined chemicals such as 1,3 D, Pic and metham sodium or dazomet have given good control 

of pests and diseases in field-grown cut flowers in the United States (Elmore et al. 2003; Gilreath 

et al., 2005). Nutsedge has been successfully controlled with Pic, 1,3-D/Pic, 1,3-D alone, 

Chloropicrin, furfural and metham sodium (Gerik et al., 2006). Recent trials show encouraging 

results with methyl iodide (MI) in the US (Klose et al, 2007). Application of fumigants with LPB 

films such as VIF is allowing for reduced rates of chemicals, including MB (Klose et al, 2007). 

 

9.3.3.3 Strawberry fruit 

9.3.3.3.1 Chemical alternatives in strawberry fruit sector 

Recent trials in strawberry fruit comparing four key alternatives in strawberry fruit crops in 

Florida and Spain showed that 1,3-D/Pic, Pic alone, MI/Pic and DMDS/Pic gave yields that did 

not differ from MB/Pic (e.g. Santos et al., 2007). Large scale validation trials with 1,3-D/Pic in 

conjunction with herbicides (trifluralin) confirmed that this combination is as effective as MB/Pic 

(67:33) for control of nutsedge and nematodes (Gilreath et al., 2006). In late 2006 a review 

article on alternatives research in SE USA, concluded that the majority of available MB 

alternatives provide effective control against most soil-borne diseases and nematodes, as long as 

appropriate application methods and rates were used. In situations where Cyperus infestations are 

severe, alternative fumigants may be combined with herbicides to minimise weed interference 

(Santos and Gilreath, 2006). 

Key formulations of 1,3-D/Pic, Pic alone and metham sodium combined with other fumigants 

have been adopted widely throughout industries applying for CUN’s, and replaced at least 60% of 

the production area treated with methyl bromide/chloropicrin mixtures. Of the Parties previously 
106 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

applying for CUN’s, most have completely implemented these alternatives. Australia and France 

phased out in 2005, United Kingdom in 2006 and Italy, New Zealand and Spain in 2007 (EC 

2007). In 2008, USA and Israel are the only non- Article 5 Parties continuing use of MB for this 

use. The recent registration of methyl iodide/Pic and the recent good results with dimethyl 

disulphide/Pic in trials in Spain and USA (López-Aranda et al., 2007) offer further effective 

alternatives and potential for rapid phase out of methyl bromide for all strawberry fruit uses. 

The combination of chloropicrin and metham sodium, applied sequentially, has gained new 

interest, particularly in regions where use of 1,3-D is limited by regulatory restrictions. Previous 

research has shown that sequential application of metham sodium after reduced rates of 1,3-D/Pic 

(InLine) or chloropicrin controlled soil pests in strawberry fruit and produced fruit yields 

equivalent to standard MB/Pic fumigation (Ajwa et al., 2004). Demonstration trials confirmed 

earlier research that metham can be used to reduce application rates of InLine and Pic without a 

loss in yield in strawberry fruit in California, even though pathogen pressure was severe (Ajwa et 

al. 2004). 

In the EC, a range of chemical alternatives are used, including 1,3-D, MS, dazomet and Pic (EC 

MB alternatives database, 2006). Depending on the country, these may be applied simultaneously 

or sequentially but have led to successful replacement for MB. Combination of these fumigants 

with herbicides that are now registered has been found to be an effective way of achieving weed 

control sometimes not possible when these fumigants are used alone. 

In China, a new formulation of 1,3-D/Pic in capsules has been developed as well as methyl iodide 

and methyl iodide/chloropicrin capsules. Initial results showed that there was no significant 

different between 1,3-D capsule application with injection application. Avermectin is registered 

as a nematicide and is in wide use (Cao, 2008, Pers. Comm.). 

9.3.3.3.2 Non-chemical alternatives in strawberry fruit sector 

Strawberry production in substrates accounts for approximately 5% of world production. It occurs 

mainly in greenhouses and in cool climates with short cropping cycles, targeting early season 

markets or niche markets. The Netherlands, Japan, Italy, New Zealand, UK and China are some 

of the key producers using substrates for strawberry fruit production (Lieten, 2004; LópezMedina, 2004; Nishi and Takeya, 2006). Efforts to reduce initial set up costs for substrate systems 

are expected to increase their adoption as a MB alternative world-wide for this crop.

9.3.3.4 Strawberry nurseries 

MB is used for the production of strawberry runners in order to meet the stringent certification 

standards for virtually pest-free strawberry runner stock, which is often grown in high altitudes 

under cold and wet conditions. In some situations the certification standards officially issued by 

Parties require the application of MB, however others do not mandate MB or specify a particular 

fumigant. Since a single strawberry runner grown in year one can expand to several million 

runners by year five, the adverse impacts of pests is of particular importance. 

Presently, three potential alternatives have emerged for this use: The combination of 1,3-D + Pic, 

where allowed and registered appears to be the most viable alternative to MB at this time (De Cal, 

2004; Kabir et al., 2005, Porter et al., 2004). Methyl iodide, which has just been registered in 

parts of the USA has provided comparable results to MB/Pic in the USA, Spain and Australia 

(Mann et al., 2005, 2007). In Australia and Spain, Ethane dinitrile, which is not yet registered, has 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 107

provided encouraging results (Mann et al, 2005, García-Mendez et al., 2008). In some countries 

large buffers restrict the use of 1,3-D + Pic (Kabir et. al., 2005). In some circumstances the 

inconsistent results using 1,3-D + Pic constrain its further adoption for runner production (De Cal 

et al., 2005). 

In Japan, a simple, economically feasible system using trays filled with substrate is proving 

particularly useful for the production of strawberry runners. Various materials are used as 

substrates (e.g. rock wool, peat moss, rice hulls, coconuts husk and bark) and can be reused after 

sterilising with solar heat treatment or hot water (Nishi and Tateya, 2006b). 

9.3.3.5 Nurseries and propagation material for other crops 

Propagation material of many types (bulbs, cuttings, seedlings, young plants, sweet potato slips, 

and trees) are subject to high health standards. This is critical to prevent the spread of 

economically important pests and pathogens from the nursery fields to the fruiting or production 

fields. Thus the required level of pest and pathogen control for propagation material is higher 

than for crops where the product is a fruit or vegetable and must be maintained through the entire 

crop. 

For certified nursery stock, regulations might specify either a level of control that must be 

achieved or approved soil treatments that are accepted as meeting certification standards. For 

non-certified stock, the market sets the standard that must be met. In either case, lack of a clean 

root system could mean a 100% loss in marketable product for the grower. MB has commonly 

been used to meet clean propagative material standards. In some cases, sufficient data and 

grower experience have allowed growers to transition from the 98:2 formulations of methyl 

bromide that were commonly used to 67:33 or 50:50 formulations depending on the pest or 

pathogen to be controlled and level of severity of the infestation (US Forest Nursery CUN, 2008; 

US Strawberry Nursery CUN, 2008). Other research trials, indicate some materials (such as 

iodomethane) and some combinations (such as 1,3-dicholoropropane + chloropicrin) show 

promise as methyl bromide alternatives for specific circumstances (Schneider et al., 2003; 

Schneider et al., 2006. 

Nursery soil treatments normally require broadacre, or broadcast, application in order to ensure 

adequate protection against colonization by pests and pathogens in adjacent untreated soil. Strip 

treatment sometimes may not achieve this level of protection. The requirement for broadacre 

treatment has hindered adoption of LPBF in some areas where gluing of LPBF for broadacre 

treatment is not commercially available. However, options to overcome this problem are available 

in some countries such as Israel where heat sealing of VIF films is commercially practised. 

An alternate approach to the use of soil treatments is the use of containerised, or soilless substrate 

for production systems where this approach is technically and economically feasible. 

9.3.3.6 Other crops 

9.3.3.6.1 Potatoes, Sweet potatoes 

Nominations have been submitted for continued use of MB for the control of soilborne fungal, 

bacterial and nematode pests of potato, sweet potato, and ginger. Present research efforts reported 

in the literature focus on the control of fungi and nematodes of potato using various organic 

amendments (Collins et al., 2006; Larkin and Griffin, 2007; Larkin and Honeycutt, 2006; Ochiai 
108 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

et al., 2007; Snapp and et al., 2007) and one report for control of nematodes of sweet potato 

(Tateishi et al., 2007). 

9.3.3.6.2 Ginger 

 Pythium sp. (Pythium zingiberis) is the major concern for ginger production. A soil borne 

bacteria, Pseudomonas solanacearum, can also attack this crop (Pegg and Moffett, 1971), 

resulting in heavy losses. A binucleate Rhizoctonia AG-R was recently recognised in China 

(Yang et al., 2008). Several non chemical control methods are considered for the management of 

ginger diseases. These include improving drainage of the soil through appropriate ploughing, 

observing adequate watering practices and using disease free water sources. Tools and shoes 

should be cleaned before entering ginger fields in order to limit disease spread. Infected plants 

should be immediately removed. Several chemical control methods have been tested. Pre-plant 

fumigation with chloropicrin, metham sodium or dazomet has been considered effective in the 

control of root rot although longer plantback times necessary during the cold season are a 

drawback. Metham sodium sprayed and incorporated into the soil gave high efficacy to both root 

rot and weeds. Granule application of metalaxyl during the growing period of ginger plants 

strengthened the effects of pre-plant soil fumigants alternative to MB (Takeuchi Shigeharu et al., 

2000). 

Cyazofamid has been recently registered for rhizome rot disease of ginger in Japan. Propamocarb 

is also available. These two products are applied as a soil drench around the individual ginger 

plants. A mixture of azoxystrobin and metalaxyl M is under registration review. Methyl iodide is 

not yet registered but seems to offer promising effectiveness, however while no data are still 

available with relation to its phytotoxicity. Phosphorous acid based compounds are also under 

evaluation as potential controls. 

9.3.3.7 Replant diseases 

Replant disease is a problem affecting certain orchards of perennial fruit trees and grapevines. 

Orchards and vineyards represent a long term investment as their production cycle can of be 10 to 

40 years. The disorder thus represents a major threat and challenge to growers. Replant is poorly 

understood as it is often caused by undefined pathogens. A major factor contributing to this 

problem is the persistence of old, well developed and established deep seated roots of the 

previous crop, which can act as a reservoir and inoculum source of disease for the new 

trees/vines. Fumigation or other methods are thus not only needed against the undefined pathogen 

complex but also to kill the old roots. 

A number of alternatives to MB are presently in use in many countries, particularly where 

specific pathogens are known to contribute to the problem and/or methods that are effective in 

removing or killing old roots. These include agronomic practices such as rotation where possible, 

resistant rootstocks, organic soil amendments, partially replacing old soil with fresh soil and 

others, singly or in combination. The most appropriate chemical alternatives include 1,3-D used 

singly or with Pic, Metham sodium and Dazomet (Browne et al., 2003; Tostovrnisk et. al 2005). 

Widespread commercial use of these mixtures occurred in Australia for example, before phase 

out of methyl bromide (Tostovrnisk et. al 2005; VDPI 2003, 2004). 

Constraints to adoption of alternatives exist in the US and are mainly of regulatory nature. In 

California, for example, although 1,3-D is effective in killing old roots and used in light sandy 

soils, the dosage needed for the heavy soils exceeds the maximum allowed under California 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 109

regulations (Schneider et al., 2005). Metham sodium and dazomet are inconsistent at the depths 

required although the development of improved application technologies and effective moisture 

control in the heavy soils are ongoing (Schneider 2002a, b). Promising results were obtained with 

grapevines by killing the old roots with herbicides, starving the old soil ecosystem and replanting 

with a different rootstock (McKenry et al., 2007). Further studies are also being conducted on 

almonds and other stone fruit with alternative fumigants at reduced rates in California with 

promising results (Browne et al., 2007). Similar trials are underway with walnut but no results are 

available as yet (Kluepfel et al., 2007). Site specific fumigation entailing the accurate placement 

of the fumigant based on global positioning can reduce the amount of fumigant needed whether 

alternative or MB to up to 78% (Coates et al., 2007). 

9.3.3.8 Weeds 

9.3.3.8.1 Boomrape 

Broomrapes are obligate root holoparasites of the genus Orobanche. These parasites lack 

chlorophyll and depend entirely on their hosts for their supply of carbon, nitrogen and inorganic 

solutes. Orobanche species parasitize a wide range of economically important hosts such as 

tomato (in greenhouses and in the open field), sunflower, chickpeas, groundnuts, potato, 

crucifers, carrots, fresh and processing herbs from the Umbelliferae family such as parsley; melon 

and watermelon. Broomrape appears in the nomination of Israel for eradication purposes in 

heavily infested field of which crop production is no longer feasible. A scientific research in the 

countries of which this pest is considered a major pest is carried out with regard to the biology, 

physiology and host-weed interaction. However the literature in the last two years lacks any new 

progress with regard to new or improved ways to control this parasitic weed, especially to reduce 

the huge seed bank, which is generated each year in the soil. The main challenge with broomrape 

is reducing the seed bank in heavily infested soil, which are no longer in production such as 

processing tomato fields in Israel. 

Recently, Abanga et. al (2007) have described a community-based integrated management 

approach for controlling broomrape in seven countries in the Near East and North Africa (NENA) 

where this weed causes serious problems. The paper reviews conventional Orobanche research 

and development approaches, and highlights their weaknesses as opposed to participatory 

approaches. 

9.3.3.8.2 Nutsedge 

Yellow and Purple Nutsedge, Cyperus spp are stubborn pests that have been identified as the 

limiting factor preventing the elimination of methyl bromide in many Critical Use Nominations. 

In the past year, trials involving combinations of herbicides and combinations of fumigants as 

well as strategies involving both herbicides and fumigants have been reported. 

In an Alabama field trial, yellow nutsedge control was provided by the aquatic herbicide acrolein 

in combination with other herbicides and with metham sodium. The successful combinations 

included acrolein + Eptam, acrolein + halosulfuron and acrolein + metam sodium. Tomato 

yields were not affected in these trials (Belcher, et al, 2007).

In a Florida study, DMDS, under VIF and metalized film, controlled yellow nutsedge as well as 

MB/Pic in a tomato field trial (Olson and Kreger, 2007). 
110 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

In Georgia trials, MB/Pic (57/33), iodomethane/Pic (50/50) and a three fumigant system of 1,3-/D 

followed by chloropicrin, followed by metam sodium were evaluated on peppers. Nutsedge was 

controlled similarly with MB/Pic, iodomethane/Pic and the 1,3-D/chloropicrin/metam 

combinations. DMDS did not perform as well and at harvest there were 2.9 to 3.2 more nutsedge 

with DMDS compare to MB/Pic (Culpepper, 2007). 

9.3.3.9 Virus diseases of cucurbits and peppers 

Cucumber green mottle mosaic virus (CGMMV), Kyuri green mottle mosaic virus (KGMMV), 

Melon necrotic spot virus (MNSV) and Pepper mild mottle virus (PMMoV) are important 

pathogens of watermelon, melon, cucumber (CGMMV, KGMMV , MNSV ) and on peppers 

(PMMoV ) world-wide. Seeds, grafted seedlings, soil, plant sap and cuscuta (Cuscuta subinclusa, 

C. lupuliformis, C. campestris) are the main means of dissemination for these viruses. However, 

the only country using MB to control them is Japan. 

Except for 1,3- D/Pic, which is registered to control MNSV in Japanese melons no other chemical 

alternatives can be used. However these viruses can be controlled with an IPM program that 

includes seed treatment with heat (Nagai 1981), sanitation practices such as removing residues 

from the previous crop before transplant and immediate removal of infected plants. Soilless 

culture and treatment of soil with hot water or steam are also recommended control practices. 

Pepper varieties that are resistant to the P123 strain of PMMoV have been developed (Tsuda et al., 

1997), however another strain of PMMoV which overcomes resistance has been reported (Genda 

et al., 2007). 

9.3.4 Economic aspects of methyl bromide alternatives 

In the Assessment Report of 2007, MBTOC showed that the existing peer-reviewed literature on 

the economics of the impact of the methyl bromide phase-out could be divided into three 

categories: 

• Articles that report only the changed (increased) costs of using MB alternatives; 

• Articles that use partial budgeting techniques to assess the impact of MB alternatives on 

the revenues and costs of a particular application; 

• Articles that report the impact of MB alternatives on the sector (e.g. California 

strawberries, cut flowers in Spain) as a whole. 

The review showed that much work needs to be done to increase understanding of the impacts of 

the methyl bromide phase-out. The existing literature is narrow in the sense that more work needs 

to be done on countries outside of the USA (especially in Article 5 Parties) and on a wider range 

of methyl bromide uses. 

To this end, a further six articles have been traced, all of which fall within the category of partial 

budgeting identified above. One of these addresses economic aspects of structures in the USA 

(Adam, 2007), four address economic aspects of soils use in the USA (Byrd et al., 2006; 

Sydorovych, et al., 2006; Subbarao, 2007; Taylor, et al., 2006), and one economic aspects of soils 

use in Turkey (Engindeniz, 2007). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 111

9.4 MBTOC QSC Progress Report and Report on Article 5(1) Issues 

9.4.1 Update on Registration of Alternatives 

Lack of full registration and approval of alternative chemically-based technologies continues to 

delay or restrict uptake of technologies identified as effective for post harvest and quarantine 

uses. 

9.4.1.1 Structural uses 

One of the key alternatives for disinfestations of structures, heat treatment, does not generally 

require registration, although other authorities, such as local fire prevention or health and safety 

authorities or insurance providers may become involved in the approval of treatment plans. 

Furthermore, the effective use of spot heat treatment may require combination with other 

measures, including insecticidal barriers around treated areas to kill escaping pests. These 

methods may or may not require registration. 

Sulfuryl fluoride has emerged as a major alternative to methyl bromide for some structural 

treatments, particularly of flour mills and some other food-processing facilities. Registration of 

sulfuryl fluoride usually proceeds in a two phase process. First, its use in empty mills or foodprocessing facilities is registered. Then, as trials and adoption progress, the need to set maximum 

residue levels (MRLs) and/or approve food contact registration for the foods, which may be 

present in those facilities, becomes apparent and registration is then sought for them. The latter 

registration typically avoids the need to totally clear out the treated mills of foodstuffs. 

Currently, of the countries that submit critical use nominations for mills and food processing 

structures, Canada and the United States have registered sulfuryl fluoride, although differently. 

Sulfuryl fluoride is not registered in Israel. In Canada, sulfuryl fluoride is registered for empty 

facilities, and there has been no maximum residue level set for food contact. As a result, in 

Canada, there is no incidental fumigation of flour or food allowed and a mill must be completely 

emptied before fumigation. This presents difficulties for the adoption and use of this fumigant in 

some circumstances. In the United States, mills and food processing facilities and numerous 

different food commodities have been approved for treatment by SF. However, many of the 

ingredients found in, or food commodities produced by, mills and food processing facilities are 

not registered for contact with SF and/or no MRLs have been established. At the moment, this 

situation is delaying or preventing adoption of SF for some mills and food processing facilities in 

Canada and the United States. 

Meanwhile, in the European Union, registration for the use of sulfuryl fluoride in empty mills and 

processing facilities, combined with quickly expanding approvals of commodities has contributed 

strongly to pest control without the use of methyl bromide. The European Commission submitted 

a survey of 12 EU member countries and over 137 flour mills as a contribution to the MBTOC 

flour milling review published in the 2008 Spring Progress report. That report notes that many 

mills in the EU have adopted sulfuryl fluoride now that all EU mills have moved away from MB 

use. 
112 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

9.4.1.2 Commodities 

At this time in the US, many processed foods or food mixtures are not approved for treatment 

with sulfuryl fluoride, because of lack of appropriate residue tolerances. On the other hand, there 

are many single commodities registered and tests of the technical efficacy of pest control in those 

commodities are progressing. Very significantly, reductions in allowable bromide residues in 

food (EU 149/2008, in force Sept 2008), combined with registration of sulfuryl fluoride as a plant 

protection fumigant in the European Union, together with the upcoming publication of MRLs for 

fluorine, are expected to have a significant effect on the ability to use methyl bromide and 

sulfuryl fluoride on various commodities. At this time, MBTOC has not been able to fully assess 

the impact of these changes, but they may be expected to impact critical use nominations for 

some US produced commodities since the EU is a major market. 

9.4.2 Adoption of alternatives for treatment of commodities and structures 

In the Philippines, MB will not be used for non-QPS purposes after 2008. The Party is currently 

using about 7 tonnes of non-QPS MB. The National Methyl Bromide Phase-Out Strategy 

supported by the Multilateral Fund commenced 3 years ago. Fumigators and flour mill operators 

have been trained on IPM. Only one flour mill still uses MB. The Philippines Fertiliser and 

Pesticide Authority has changed the label so that MB will only be allowed for QPS only. 

Philippines also has a reliable system for tracking MB use. Cylinderised phosphine and ethyl 

formate formulations are registered and available as methyl bromide alternatives. SF will not be 

registered in Philippines due to the lack of commercial interest from registrants. 

There has been significant progress in the adoption of controlled atmosphere treatment for 

commodities, replacing methyl bromide treatments in some cases. For example, controlled 

atmosphere facilities have been established in Bangalore, India (45,000 tonne capacity for 

treatment of sesame seed for export to Germany), Bolivia for sesame seed, Greece (for processed 

packaged rice on pallets), India, for some durable foodstuffs under exports, Netherlands (35,000 

tonne facility for cocoa beans in Amsterdam and a Rotterdam facility 12 rooms each holding a 20 

foot container for QPS treatment) and Thailand (for processed packaged rice). 

MBTOC does not know of a technically effective alternative for MB treatment of infested 

traditional cured ham in storage in Southern US and this use is the subject of a CUN. The United 

States has begun a multi-disciplinary research program to resolve this issue. In the interest of 

collaborating in research ideas, MBTOC has gathered some information about control of pests in 

cured pork in other countries, while recognising that these traditional products and their 

processing varies by country. In Spain, dipping in hot oil and lard is used early during the 

manufacture process for both preventive and curative reasons. The high temperature kills mites 

that could be already present on the surface of the ham and lard fills crevices preventing the 

colonisation of mites deep into the ham (this is the most important reason). Also, lard has another 

very important advantage not related to mite control, as it slows the drying process. During 

processing, temperature and relative humidity determine the behaviour of mites. Controlling both 

parameters contribute to the prevention of infestation by this pest. In Spain, hams are maintained 

at low ambient RH conditions (50 – 60%) mainly during the last period of storage. This prevents 

the development of surviving mites to the hot oil treatment and the re-invasion from outside the 

store. The Spanish traditional ham industry considers it essential to maintain high hygiene 

standards inside the rooms and in and around the entire facility, and to empty, clean and spray 

facilities and frames before new hams are introduced. Additionally, USG may wish to investigate 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 113

the potential for controlled or modified atmosphere storage for cured pork. Specifically, a low O2

environment, which does not elevate the CO2 level, might be effective. 

9.4.3 Quarantine and Pre-Shipment MB Issues 

The third meeting of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (3CPM) approved a policy 

document relating to the reduction of methyl bromide use in phytosanitary measures. These are 

essentially Quarantine measures as defined under Decision VII/5, particularly applied to plants 

and plant-derived products in trade. This document (IPPC 2007) recommends IPPC members to 

seek to put in place alternatives for methyl bromide where possible for QPS treatments covered 

by IPPC. 

There continues to be only limited information available on the exact uses to which QPSexempted methyl bromide is put. Three surveys on QPS uses of methyl bromide have recently 

been completed – one of Australian uses (Banks, 2008) and one of uses in the Asia Pacific region 

(UNEP ROAP, 2007). The Australian survey identified the treatment of timber and wooden 

materials, both import and exports as the major QPS use, followed by treatment of export hay and 

grains. In the Asia Pacific region, the predominant treatment by volume was for logs and wooden 

materials, both for imports and exports, followed by export and import grains, particularly rice. In 

both surveys a diverse range of low volume uses were identified. 

Most exporting countries have now adopted procedures to meet ISPM 15 requirements to treat 

wood packaging materials for prevention of spread and importation of harmful pests of standing 

timber. Croatia implemented ISPM 15 as of Jan 1, 2008 with the result that Croatia now expects 

imported packaging materials to meet this standard. Some alternatives to the two specified 

procedures under the current version of the standard (methyl bromide or heat treatment) are under 

consideration by the IPPC. The recent meeting of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 

called for further data on these candidate alternatives and did not approve them as alternatives to 

meet ISPM15. Canada and Taiwan have now discontinued any methyl bromide use to meet ISPM 

15 and rely only on heat treatments. Heat treatment facilities to treat wooden pallets (new or used) 

to ISPM 15 have been set up in many countries including Australia, Bangladesh, China, Jamaica, 

Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. These use a variety of heat sources, including hot water 

systems, electricity, and natural or liquefied petroleum gas. A project in Fiji to develop a solarassisted treatment system to treat pallets to ISPM 15 is ongoing. 

Commercial scale fumigation tests for timber under tarps were conducted in Japan in March 2008 

using sulfuryl fluoride/methyl isothiocyanate mixture and also methyl iodide to confirm each 

fumigant’s efficacy, the gas concentration obtained under commercial conditions and safety 

hazards that they present. 

These tests were carried out to generate data to allow amendment of the Japan plant quarantine 

regulations to authorise treatment with either fumigants for imported timber. These successful 

tests gave complete mortality of added test insects, including longhorn beetles, bark beetles and 

wood borers (Ambrosia beetles). Both the sulfuryl fluoride/methyl isothiocyanate mixture and 

also methyl iodide have been registered as agrochemicals in Japan. After the completion of public 

hearings, it is expected that both fumigants will be introduced into the Japan quarantine treatment 

schedules. 

The export of forestry products from New Zealand requires fumigation to control quarantine 

pests. New Zealand’s QPS MB use continues to increase (14% in one year) with the growth of 

trade in forest produce to China, India and Malaysia. Forest produce fumigation is 74% of the 
114 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

177.3 tonnes QPS MB used in 2006. Some 200 tonnes annual demand of MB have been replaced 

with the phosphine fumigation of logs in transit to China; negotiations are underway with India to 

use the same process. 

As an additional approach to reducing MB quarantine use in New Zealand, following an 

international symposium on MB alternatives held in March 2008. A stakeholders group has been 

formed and is collecting a voluntary levy of $1/kg of MB, which will be used for research and 

development of QPS alternatives. A strategy to reduce and replace MB for QPS uses is being 

developed. The priority will be for timber treatments with further validation of phosphine, tests 

with methyl iodide and sulfuryl fluoride (not yet registered) in particular. New Zealand requires 

collaboration with other Parties to test phosphine against wood insects to progress approval as an 

internationally acceptable treatment to meet ISPM 15. 

New Zealand is implementing a program to ensure only clean empty shipping containers leave 

ports in the Pacific Islands. This has been successful in reducing the high frequency of MB 

fumigations due to hitchhiking pests. The program also includes assistance with all treatments 

such as ISPM 15 and high temperature forced air treatment of fresh fruit and vegetables to reduce 

the number of MB fumigations on arrival in New Zealand. 

The Australian Fumigation Accreditation Scheme (AFAS) seeks to assist fumigators involved in 

quarantine fumigations to maintain a high standard of fumigation performance. AFAS is a 

bilateral agreement between Australia and some four countries in Asia, with negotiations 

continuing to expand the scheme to other countries in the region. By promoting best practice, it 

reduces the need for repeat fumigations with methyl bromide, thus reducing methyl bromide use 

for quarantine purposes and utilising the gas well where it is used. The scheme includes training 

programs to improve methods and decrease the incidence of inadequate fumigation and injury to 

dock workers when opening imported containers. 

In Japan, imported vegetables are fumigated with MB if quarantine pests are found at inspection. 

The quarantine MB dosage for vegetables is fixed at 48.5 g/m3

 despite variation of susceptibility 

of pest species. Last year, mortality tests with frequently-detected pests on vegetables were 

performed to establish a MB-saving fumigation standard, taking into account susceptibility of 

pest species. The results indicated that the newly established MB dosage could reduce MB use 

down to as much as 50% while retaining sufficient fumigation efficacy against pests. 

Used vehicles arriving in New Zealand require a pest control treatment. A stand-alone, mobile, 

heat treatment unit capable of treating large vehicles and 40ft containers is operating at New 

Zealand’s largest port. This unit has replaced the fumigation of used vehicles imported with a 

savings of nearly 2 tonnes of methyl bromide per year. The heat treatment unit is diesel operated 

at 8L diesel per hour. 

9.4.3.1 Irradiation quarantine update 

Recent regulatory approvals expanding the use of irradiation as a quarantine treatment have 

resulted in increased adoption of the process and indications that irradiation is being accepted by 

consumers. 

USDA-APHIS published a rule in 2007 providing generic irradiation quarantine treatments. The 

rule approved irradiation doses of 150 Gy for any tephritid fruit fly and 400 Gy for all other 

insects except the pupa and adult stages of Lepidoptera. The generic irradiation treatments apply 

to all fresh horticultural commodities. Hawaii has used generic doses to export tropical fruit since 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 115

2000. In May 2007, India began exporting mangoes to the U.S using irradiation, becoming the 

first country to use the newly approved generic doses. Thailand was recently approved to export 

six tropical fruits using the new generic doses and export of irradiated mangosteen to the US has 

begun. 

New Zealand has recently begun importing irradiated Australian mango and papaya. While the 

irradiation of mangoes in export trade does not replace a methyl bromide treatment (some likely 

pests are not reachable by methyl bromide), it does indicate the utility of the treatment with some 

other fresh fruit that are currently MB treated. 

9.4.4 Recapture of methyl bromide 

Decisions to install methyl bromide recapture systems continue to be driven by local pollution 

control concerns and regulations, not solely protection of the ozone layer. There has been 

substantial increase in adoption of methyl bromide recapture systems in a few regions during 

2007/08, as urged under Decisions VII/5(c) and XI/13(7). However, in the absence of approved 

systems under XV/9, there is no benefit received under the Montreal Protocol production and 

consumption framework for the effort and expense of recapture. 

There has been adoption of recapture in Belgium, driven by the regulations that came into force 

on 1 June 2007 requiring fitting of recapture to all methyl bromide fumigations there. Typically, 

these systems are fitted to standard freight containers when under fumigation. 

A Belgian company, Desclean, has 7 units operational in Belgium with capacity to service 15,000 

containers a year in total. The Desclean units also use carbon for methyl bromide capture, but the 

sorbed methyl bromide can be released for reuse by controlled heating. Desclean estimates 50-

60% of methyl bromide used is reused. 

An environmental court in one region in New Zealand has ruled that recapture is to be used on all 

fumigations using more than 3 kg of MB within the local port, this ruling results in the 

requirement for recapture equipment that is bigger in capacity than any currently available 

commercially. 

Nordiko, an Australian supplier of fumigant recapture equipment, report their methyl bromide 

capture units are now operating in several countries. These are based on MB absorption on 

charcoal, followed by regeneration of the carbon or disposal of the used material. The 4 units 

operating in Belgium can service up to 60,000 containers a year. Systems are operational in 

Australia (10 systems), Malaysia (2 systems), India (1 system) and USA (1 system). 

The registration status of methyl bromide recovered from recapture systems is not clear in many 

countries. 

9.4.5 MBTOC QSC Article 5 Issues 

Two issues pertaining to problems of quarantine, structure and commodity treatments in Article 5 

Parties have been brought to the notice of MBTOC. 

The first is a trade issue, which has been reported to be negatively affecting trade in goods 

shipped on MB treated packaging materials from Sub-Saharan African Parties. 
116 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

These countries report a serious problem resulting from their use of MB to treat wood packaging 

materials to meet ISPM 15 (IPPC 2006) for international trade. Some large EU companies are 

refusing to accept product that has been placed on MB treated wooden packing materials. ISPM 

15 requires that treated wooden pallets and crates be labelled with type of treatment. Heat 

treatment of pallets and crates is allowed as an alternative to methyl bromide under ISPM 15, but 

its use is problematic in many Sub-Saharan countries due to lack of reliable energy sources and 

the high cost of providing the energy. The major products affected by the action of the EU 

companies are tea, bananas, flowers and other fruits, even though these commodities are not 

themselves treated with MB. 

The second issue is the need for technology transfer of alternatives to methyl bromide in 

fumigation of flour mills, grain storage structures, processed and stored products in Article 5 

Parties. 

Tropical ecology with relatively high temperatures and humidity, prevalent in developing 

countries, exacerbate pest infestations resulting in the need for specialised control strategies for 

grain storage, flour milling and other food processing uses. These environmental conditions also 

mean that techniques used in developing countries may have different functionality. Although 

fumigants and techniques have been extensively trialled in developed countries, it is not clear 

whether these methods will work the same way in developing country environmental conditions 

and circumstances. 

Phosphine is widely used in the developing countries as an alternative to MB for control of pests 

in the flour mills, grain storing structures, and stored products. However, due to emergence of 

resistance of pests to phosphine, coupled with its corrosive nature to equipment, and long 

treatment time, flour mills, processed and stored product industries continue to favour using MB 

in some situations. 

Developed countries are making good progress in replacing methyl bromide with pest control 

techniques for flour milling and food processing that include heat treatments (full site or spot heat 

with additional pest barrier methods), and with the fumigant sulfuryl fluoride (SF). 

From experience, flour milling and food processing sectors have learned that effective 

accomplishment of full-site heat treatment methods can be unexpectedly complex and potentially 

considerably more expensive, depending on the mill or processing situation and local 

environmental conditions. On the other hand, techniques for spot heat treatment of mill and 

processing equipment can be simpler, once appropriate equipment and monitoring techniques 

have been established and tested. 

However neither heat technique has been trialled and adapted to the needs of developing 

countries located in tropical zones where high humidities can affect treatment efficacy. 

Although developed countries are making good progress adopting sulfuryl fluoride, in flour 

milling and for food processing facilities, the efficacy of SF has not yet been demonstrated in 

most developing countries. One country, Mauritius, has trialled the use of sulfuryl fluoride in its 

only flour mill, with good results. As with all trials, there is a learning curve and continued 

experience tends to lead to improvements in fumigation results. 

Currently, regulatory barriers do not significantly constitute a major constraint to the use of SF in 

a number of the developing countries. For example, the use of SF in Eastern Africa (Ethiopia, 

Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania and Uganda) and in Southern Africa would readily be registered for use 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 117

once documents are submitted to show that SF is registered by USA-EPA for use in fumigation of 

the flour mills, grain storage structures, and stored products. 

The main constraint holding back the use of SF in the developing countries is the lack of 

technology transfer as regards the fumigant and lack of interest by commercial suppliers of the 

material. 

The phase out of MB use in flour mills, grain storage structures, and stored products in the 

developing countries would augment global efforts to save the ozone layer. Phosphine has widely 

been used to replace MB in grain storage, but heat treatments and SF, the techniques most 

commonly used in the milling and processing sectors, have not yet been adopted by the 

developing countries. 

Whereas heat treatment and SF are currently promoted and encouraged for widespread use to 

replace MB in the developed countries, no similar efforts have made to explore or demonstrate 

the efficacy of heat treatment or SF in developing countries, China excepted. For these reasons, 

MBTOC QSC encourages financial and technical assistance for Article 5 Parties to acquire 

appropriate technologies, skills, and expertise that would lead to efficient, and cost-effective use 

of heat treatment techniques and/or the use of SF, under IPM strategy, in Article 5 Parties. These 

technology transfer projects could assist developing countries to accelerate MB phase out used in 

flour mills, grain storage structures, processed and stored products. 

9.5 References 

Abanga, M.A. , B. Bayaaa, B. Abu-Irmailehb and A. Yahyaouia (2007). A participatory farming system 

approach for sustainable broomrape (Orobanche spp.) management in the Near East and 

North Africa. Crop Protection 26(12): 1723 - 1732 

Adam, Brian D. (2007). Cost comparison of methyl bromide and ProFume* for fumigating a food 

processing facility: a report to the National Pest Management Association and Dow 

AgroSciences. Working paper #AEP-0704, Oklahoma State University, Dept. of Agricultural 

Economics, 2007, http://agecon.okstate.edu/faculty/publications_results.asp?page=1 

AQIS (2008) Australian Fumigation Accreditation Scheme. http://www.daff.gov.au/aqis/import/generalinfo/pre-border/afas 

Ajwa H.A., S. Fennimore, Z. Kabin, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, T. Trout, A. Kahn and O. 

Daugovish, (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. 

Akkaya, F., A. Ozturk. and B. Ozkan (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. 

Banks, J (2008). Quarantine and Preshipment (QPS) uses of methyl bromide in Australia and potential for 

the replacement of methyl bromide for QPS uses. Dept. of Environment and Heritage, 

Canberra, February 2008. iv + 16pp 

Barel, M. (2003). Steam training course manual, UNDP, New York.

Bausher, M., N. Kokalis-Burelle and E. Roskopf (2007). Evaluation of Rootstocks for Management of 

Meloidogyne incognita on Grafted Bell Pepper; USDA, Fort Pierce, 2007 

Belcher, J., R. Walker, R. Rodriguez-Kabana and R.L. Simmons, (2007) Tomato and Nutsedge Response to 

Acrolein and Herbicides Applied Preplant, Alabama Agric. Exp., Auburn University 

BelloA., M.A. Díez Rojo, J.A. López-Pérez, M.R. González López, L. Robertson, J.M. Torres, M. de Cara, 

J. Tello, M.J. Zanón, I. Font, C. Jordá, M.M. Guerrero, C. Ros, A. Lacasa (2008). The use of 

biofumigation in Spain. FAO publications, Rome (In Press) 
118 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Beltrán R., A. Vicent, J. García-Jiménez, and J. Armengol (2008). Comparative epidemiology of 

Monosporascus root rot and vine decline in muskmelon, watermelon, and grafted watermelon 

crops. Plant Disease, 92(1): 158-163

Bernal R.F. (2007). Effect of Midas (chloropicrin 62 %, methyl iodide 33%) on the control of Meloidogyne 

incognita in greenhouses of Salto, Uruguay. In: Annual International conference on Methyl 

Bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, 

California, 33-1, 33-4 

Besri M. (2007a). Economical aspects of grafting tomato in some Mediterranean countries. Proceedings of 

the international research conference on methyl bromide alternatives and emissions 

reductions, October 29- November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 59-1, 59-5 

Besri, M. (2004). Leading Methyl Bromide alternatives in commercial use for tomato production in 

different geographic regions except the United States. Fifth International Conference On 

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 26-30 September, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal Sept 2004. 

Besri, M. (2007b). Current situation of tomato grafting as alternative to Methyl Bromide for Tomato 

production in Morocco. In: International research conference on methyl bromide alternatives 

and emissions reductions, October 29- November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 62-1, 62-5 

Blestos, F.A. (2005). Use of grafting and calcium cyanamide as alternatives to methyl bromide soil 

fumigation and their effects on growth, yield, quality and Fusarium wilt control in melon. 

Journal of Phytopathology 153 (3): 155-161. 

Browne, G., J. Connell, H. Becherer, S. McLaughlin, S. Schneider, R. Lee, and E. Hosoda. (2003). 

Evaluation of rootstocks and fumigants for control of almond replant disease. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Nov. 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, 11.1 –11.2. 

Browne, G., B. Lampinen, B. Holtz, S. Upadhhyaya, D. Wang, S. Gao, L. Schmidt, B. Hanson, N. Goodell, 

M. McKenry and K. Klonsky (2007). Integrated pre-plant alternatives to methyl bromide for 

almonds and other stone fruits. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

Byrd, M., C.L. Escalante, M. Wetzstein, E. Fonsah and G. Esendugue (2006). A farm-level approach to the 

methyl bromide phase-out: Identifying alternatives and maximizing net worth using 

stochastic dominance and optimization procedures. Southern Agricultural Economics 

Association 2006 Annual Meeting, February 5-8, 2006, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

(http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/123456789/582) 

Jordá, C., M.M. Guerrero, C. Ros and A. Lacasa (2008) The use of biofumigation in Spain unpublished 

paper 2008 

Cantliffe, D.J. and J.J. Vansickle. (2003). Competitiveness of the Dutch and Spanish greenhouse industries 

with the Florida fresh vegetable industry. Univesrity of Florida Extension Service Bulletin 

HS918. 

Cantliffe, J. N. Shaw, M. Smither-Kopperl and P.A. Stansly (2003). Greenhouse production with soil-less 

media as a Methyl Bromide alternative. Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 3-6, 2003, San Diego, 

California, pp. 135.1 – 135.2. 

Cao, A. (2008). Personal Communication, Beijing, China 

Carrera, T,, A. Carrera and A. Pedros (2004). Use of 1,3-dichloropropene / chloropicrin for the production 

of strawberries in Spain. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl 

Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

CDPR. Pesticide Use Report (PUR Data). California Department of Pesticide Regulation 

Coates, R., Upadhhyaya, S. and Browne, G. 2007. Trre planting site-specific fumigant fumigant application 

to controlalmond replant disease. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

Cohen, R., Y. Burger, C. Horev, A. Porat and M. Edelstein (2005). Performance of Galia-type melons 

grafted grafted on to Cucurbita rootstock in Monosporascus cannonballus- infested and noninfested soils. Annals of Applied Biology 146(3): 381

Collins, H.P., A. Alva, R.A. Boydston, R.L. Cochran, P.B. Hamm, A. McGuire and E. Riga. (2006) Soil 

microbial, fungal, and nematode responses to soil fumigation and cover crops under potato 

production. Biological Fertilization of Soils 42: 247–257 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 119

Culpepper A. S., P. Sumner, D. Langston, K. Rucker, G. Beard, and J. Mayfield; T. Webster; W. Upchurch 

, (2007). Can Georgia growers replace methyl bromide? Proceeding of the Annual 

International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductios, October 

29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 20-1, 20-5 

De Cal, A., A. Martínez-Terceno, J.M. López-Aranda and P. Melgarejo (2004) Alternatives to methyl 

bromide in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Plant Disease 88(2): 210-214. 

De Cal, A., A. Martínez-Terceno, J.M. López-Aranda and P. Melgarejo (2005). Effect of chemical 

fumigation on soil fungal communities in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Applied Soil Ecology

28: 47-56 

De Miguel, A. (2004a). 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. 

De Miguel, A. (2004b). Use of grafted plants and IPM methods for the production of tomatoes in the 

Mediterranean region. Fifth International Conference On Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 

26-30 September, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal Sept 2004. 

Dickson D. W. (2007). Efficacy of Mi gene in tomato against root-knot nematode in florida. Proceeding of 

the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions 

reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 39-1, 39-2 

EC, European Community, (2006). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of the 

critical uses of Methyl Bromide. May 2006. European Community, Brussels. 

EC, European Community, (2007). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of the 

critical uses of Methyl Bromide. May 2007. European Community, Brussels. 

Elmore, C., J. Roncoroni and S. Tjosvold (2003). Treatment combinations to improve efficacy in fieldgrown flowers. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. November 3 – 6, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. 

p. 112-1. 

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. 

Engindeniz, S. (2007). Economic analysis of agrochemical use for weed control in field-grown celery: A 

case study for Turkey. Crop Protection 27: 377–384. 

Fennimore, S., Z. Kabir, H. Ajwa, O. Daugovish, K. Roth and J. Valdez (2003). Chloropicrin and Inline 

dose response under VIF and HDPE film: Weed control results. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov 3-6, 

2003, San Diego, California, USA. 

Fennimore, S., Z. Kabir, H. Ajwa, O. Daugovish, K. Roth and J. Rachery (2004). Weed response to 

chloropicrin and InLineTM dose under VIF and standard film. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Nov 3-6, 

2004, Orlando, Florida. USA. 

García-Mendez, E., D. Garcia-Sinovas, M. Becerril, A. De Cal, P. Melgarejo, A. Martinez-Treceno, S.A. 

Fennimore, C. Soria, J.J. Medina and J.M. Lopez-Aranda (2008) Chemical Alternatives to 

Methyl Bromide for Weed Control and Runner Plant Production in Strawberry Nurseries 

HortScience 43: 177-182 

Genda Y., A. Kanda H. Hamada K. Sato J. Ohnishi and S. Tsuda (2007) Two Amino Acid Substitutions in 

the Coat Protein of Pepper mild mottle virus Are Responsible for Overcoming the L4

 GeneMediated Resistance in Capsicum spp. Phytopathology 97(7): 787-793 

Gerik, J.S. (2005a). Evaluation of soil fumigants applied by drip irrigation for Liatris production. Plant 

Disease 89: 883-887. 

Gerik, J.S. (2005b). Drip applied soil fumigants for floriculture production. Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov San 

Diego, California, 105-1 - 105-4 

Gerik, J.S. and I.D. Greene (2004). Drip applied soil fumigants for calla lily production Phytopathology

94(6): 

Gerik, J.S., I.D. Greene, P. Beckman and C.L. Elmore. (2006). Preplant drip-applied fumigation for calla 

lily rhizome nursery. HorTechnology 16(2): 297 – 300 
120 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Gilreath, J.P., T. Motis and M. von Hulten (2004). Retention of 1,3-D and nutsedge control with VIF. 

Powerpoint presentation. University of Florida. Available on University of Florida IFAS 

website. 

Gilreath, J.P., T. N. Motis, B.M. Santos and J.W. Noling. (2003). 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., T.N. Motis and B.M. Santos (2005a). Cyperus spp. control with reduced methyl bromide plus 

chloropicrin doses under virtually impermeable films in pepper. Crop Protection 24(3): 285 - 

287. 

Gilreath, J.P., R. McSorley and R. McGovern (2005b). Soil fumigant and herbicide combinations for 

caladium. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov San Diego, California 

Grafiadellis, I., K. Mattas, I. Tzouramani and K. Galanopoulos (2000). An economic analysis of soilless 

culture in gerbera production. HortScience 35(2): 300 – 303. 

Grillas, S., Lucas, M., Bardopolou, E., and Sarafopoulus, S. 2001. Perlite based soilless culture systems: 

Current commercial applications and prospects. Acta Horticulturae 548:105 – 113. 

Gullino, M.L. and A. Garibaldi (2007). Critical aspects in management fo fungal diseases of rnamental 

plants and directions in research. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 46: 135 – 149 

Gullino, M.L., A. Camponogara, A. Gasparrini, V. Rizzo, C. Cini and A. Garibaldi (2003). Replacing 

Methyl Bromide for soil disinfestation. The Italian experience and its implications for other 

countries. Plant Disease 87 (9): 1012 – 1019. 

Hamill, J.E., D.W. Dickson, L. T-Ou L.H. Allen, N.K. Burelle and M.L. Mendes (2004). Reduced rates of 

MBr and C35 under LDPE and VIF for control of soil pests and pathogens. Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions. 3-6 November 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Hausbeck M. and B. Cortright (2007). Managing melon soil-borne pathogens in Michigan with MBR 

alternatives. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emission Reductions. October 29- November 1, 2007. San Diego, California. 

IPPC (2006). ISPM No. 15. Guidelines for regulating wood packaging material in international trade 

(2002) with modifications to Annex 1 (2006). Rome, IPPC: 11 pp. 

Kabir, Z., S.A. Fennimore, J.M. Duniway, F.M. Martin, G.T. Browne, C.Q. Winterbotton, H.A. Ajwa, B. 

B. Westerdahl, R.E. Goodhue and M.J. Haar (2005). Alternatives to methyl bromide for 

strawberry runner production. HortScience 40(6): 1709 – 1715. 

Klose, S., J. Gerik, Ajwa, H. and C. Wilen (2007). Pacific area-wide MB alternatives program for cut 

flower and bulb crops. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

Kluepfel, D. and B. Beede. (2007). Methyl Bromide alternatives for use in walnut production 

systems.Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

Koren A. (2002) Grafting vegetable transplants in Israel, 2002. International Methyl Bromide Compliance 

Workshop, December 8-13, 2002, Israel, 46 pp. 

Larkin, R. P., and C.W. Honeycutt (2006). Effects of different 3-year cropping systems on soil microbial 

communities and Rhizoctonia diseases of potato. Phytopathology 96:68-79. 

Larkin, R.P. and T.S. Griffin. (2007). Control of soilborne potato diseases using Brassica green manures 

Crop Protection 26:1067–1077 

Lieten, F. (2004). Substrates as an alternative to methyl bromide for strawberry fruit production in 

Northern Europe in both protected and field production. Proceedings of International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

López-Aranda, J.M., Miranda, L., Romero, F., De Los Santos, B., Soria, C., Medina, J.J., Montes, F., 

Vega, J.M., Páez, J.I., Bascón, J., Martínez-Treceño, A., García-Sinovas, D.,García-Méndez, 

E., Becerril, M., De Cal, A., Salto, T., Martínez-Beringola, M.L. and Melgarejo, P. (2004). 

Main results of trials on methyl bromide alternatives for strawberry fruit and runners 

produced in Spain. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl 

Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 121

López-Aranda J.M., L. Miranda, F. Romero, B. De Los Santos, C. Soria, R. Pérez-Jiménez, T. Zea, M. 

Talavera and J.J. Medina. (2007) Strawberry production in Spain: Alternatives to MB, 2007 

results. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emission Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. 

López-Galarza, J., A. San Bautista, D. M. Pérez, A. Miguel, C. Baixaulil, B. Pascual, J. V. Maroto, J. L. 

Guardiola 2004. Effects of grafting and cytokinin-induced fruit setting on colour and sugarcontent traits in glasshouse-grown triploid watermelon. Journal of Horticultural Science and 

Biotechnology 79(6): 971-976 

López-Medina, J., A. Peralbo, M.A. Fernández, D. Hernanz, G. Toscano, M.C. Hernández and F. Flores 

(2004). Substrate systems for production of strawberry fruit in Spain and Mediterranean 

climates. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 

September 2004. Lisbon. 

López-Pérez, J.A., M. Le Strange, I. Kaloshian and A.T. Ploeg. (2006). Differential response of Mi gene 

resistant tomato rootstocks to root-knot nematodes (Meloidogyne incognita). Crop Protection

25: 382–388 

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, USA. 

Mann R.C., S.W. Mattner, R.K. Gounder, and I.J. Porter (2007). Iodomethane offers opportunities for 

methyl bromide phase out and soil disinfestations in Australia. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, San Diego, 

California, USA. 

MBTOC. 2007. 2006 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi. 494pp. 

McKenry, M. V., Buzo, T. and Kaku, S. 2007. Replanting vineyards without soil fumigation. Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

McSorley, R., K.H. Wang and N. Kokallis-Burelle. (2006). 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. 

Melgarejo P. (2004). Main results on trials on methyl bromide alternatives for strawberry fruit and runners 

produced in Spain. Proc. 5th Int.Conf. on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 27-30 September, 

Lisbon, Portugal. 

Minuto, A., A. Garibaldi and M.L. Gullino (2003). Chemical alternatives to Methyl Bromide in Italy: an 

update. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emission Reductions, November 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. 

Minuto, A., V. Grasso, M.L. Gullino and A. Garibaldi (2005). Chemical, non-chemical and biological 

control of Phytophthora cryptogea on soil-less grown gerbera. Acta Horticulturae 698: 153-

158. 

Nagai Y. (1981) Control of Mosaic Diseases of Tomato and Sweet Pepper Caused by Tobacco Mosaic 

Virus. Special Bulletin of the Chiba-ken agricultural experiment station 9: 32-42. 

Nishi, K. and A. Tateya, (2006a). Soil sterilization by alternatives and use of resistant varietiesand stock for 

the control of soil disease and nematode in tomato production in Japan. Contribution for 

MBTOC progress report of May 2006. 

Nishi, K. and A. Tateya, (2006b). Independence of methyl bromide pre-planting soil fumigation by the 

application of tray-rack culture system for strawberry fruit and runner production in Japan. 

Contribution for MBTOC progress report of May 2006. 

Noling, J.W, and J.P. Gilreath (2004). Use of virtually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida 

strawberry. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions, 3-6 November, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Nucifora, S., G. Vasquez and F. Giuffrida (2001). Spread of soilless cultivation in the area of Ragusa 

(Italy). Acta Horticulturae 554: 305 – 309. 

O’Neill, T.M., K.R. Green and T. Ratcliffe (2005). Evaluation of soil steaming and a formaldehyde drench 

for control of fusarium wilt in column stock. Acta Horticulturae 698: 129 - 134 
122 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Ochiai, N., M.L. Powelson, R.P. Dick and F.J. Crowe (2007). Effects of green manure type and amendment 

rate on Verticillium wilt severity and yield of Russet Burbank potato. Plant Disease 91:400-

406. 

Olson S.M., and R. Kreger (2007). Efficacy of midas (50/50) as a soil fumigant for tomato production. 

Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and 

emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 32-1, 32-4 

Ou, L.T., J.E. Thomas, L.J. Allen, J.C. Vu D.W. and Dickson. (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. 

Pegg K.G. and M.L. Moffett (1971) Host range of the ginger strain of Pseudomonas solanacearum in 

Queensland. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 11, 

696–698. 

Peguero, A. (2004). Use of Agrocelhone in cut flower production in southern Spain. Proceedings of 

International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Piedra Buena, A., López-Pérez, J.A., Bello, A., Díez-Rojo, M.A., Robertson, L., Escuer, M. and de León, 

L. (2006). Screening of cuarentino peppers (Capsiucum capsicumannuum L.) for resistance 

to Meloidogyne incognita. Nematropica 36(1): 13 – 24. 

Pizano, M. (2004). Overview of alternatives to Methyl Bromide for cut flower production in industrialized 

countries. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 

September 2004. Lisbon. 

Pizano, M. 2005. Worldwide trends in substrate use. FloraCulture International, March 20 – 21. 

Porter, I.J., M. Pizano and M. Besri (2007). Impact of the Montreal protocol regulations on preplant soil use 

and trends in adoption of alternatives. In: Annual International Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California USA. 

Porter, I., Brett, R., Wiseman, B., and Rae, J. (1997). Methyl bromide for preplant soil disinfestation in 

temperate horticultural crops in Australia in perspective. In: Annual International Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-5 November, San Diego, 

California USA. 

Porter, I., Mattner, S., Mann, R. and Gounder, R. (2004). Strawberry nurseries: 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.J. (2005). Review and analysis of international research of alternatives to methyl bromide for preplant fumigation. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov San Diego, California 

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. 

Rea, E., A. Salerno and F. Pierandrei (2008). Effect of substrate and nutrient solution reuse on ranunculus 

and anemone plant production in a closed soilless system. Acta Horticulturae 779: 541 – 546. 

Reuven, M., A. Zeveibil and A. Gamliel (2000). Fusarium control in carnation using reduced dosages of 

methyl bromide and metham sodium. Acta Horticulturae 532: 205 – 210. 

Reuven, M., Y. Ben-Yephet, Y. Sznulewich, I. Kolesnik, A. Gamliel, V. Zilberg, M. Mor and Y. Cahlon 

(2002). Control of fusarium and root-knot nematodes in carnations using steam and 

chemicals. In: International Workshop on Methyl Bromide Compliance Assistance. Dec 8 - 

13, 2002, Israel. 

Reuven, M., Y. Szmulewich, I. Kolesnik, A. Gamliel, V. Zilberg, M. Mor, Y. Cahlon and Y. Ben-Yephet 

(2005). Methyl bromide alternatives for controlling fusarium wilt and root knot nematodes in 

carnations. Acta Horticulturae 698: 99 - 104 

Rivard C.R , M.M. Peet and F.J. Louws (2007). Disease management and crop productivity utilizing 

grafted tomatoes . Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide 

alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 

61-1, 61-3 

Rivard, C. and F.J. Louws (2006). Grafting: for disease resistance in heirloom tomatoes. NCSU –CES 

Extension Bulletin AG-675. (http://www4.ncsu.edu/~clrivard/TubeGraftingTechnique.pdf). 

Runia, W. (2000). Steaming methods for soils and substrates. Acta Horticulturae 532:115-123. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 123

Runia, W.T. and L.P.G. Molendijk (2006). Improved efficacy of metam sodium by rotary spading injection. 

Wageningen University and Research Center, Lelystad. 16pp. 

Santos, B.M. and Gilreath, J.P. (2006). Chemical alternatives to methyl bromide for vegetable crop 

production in Florida, United States CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary 

Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2006 1, No. 057 

Santos, B.M., J.P. Gilreath, J.M. López-Aranda, L. Miranda, C. Soria, and J.J. Medina. (2007). Comparing 

Methyl Bromide alternatives for strawberry in Florida and Spain. Journal of Agronomy 6(1): 

225 - 227 

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. 

Savvas, D. (2003). Hydroponics: A modern technology supporting the application of integrated crop 

management in greenhouse. Food, Agriculture and Environment 1 (1): 80 – 86. 

Schneider S.M, H. Ajwa, T. Trout, G. Browne and J. Sims (2002a). Vineyard Replant Disorder – Results 

after 1, 2, and 4 Growing Seasons. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 6-8 Orlando, Florida, pp. 4.1 – 4.6. 

Schneider, S.M., H. Ajwa, and T. J. Trout. (2006). Chemical Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for 

Nematode Control under Vineyard Replant Conditions. American Journal of Enolology and 

Viticulture 57:183-193. 

Schneider S.M, T. Trout, J. Gerik, D. Ramming and H. Ajwa (2003). Methyl Bromide alternatives for 

perennial field nurseries – 1st and 2nd year performance. Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 3-6, San 

Diego, California, 2003, pp. 7.1 – 7.5. 

Schneider S.M, T. Trout, J. Gerik and J. Ajwa (2002b). Methyl Bromide alternatives for tree, vine, and 

rose field nurseries. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 6-8 Orlando, Florida, 2002, pp. 21.1 – 21.5. 

Schneider, S., T. Trout, J. Gerik (2005). Methyl bromide alternatives for perennial crop field nurseries. Pp: 

41-1 – 41-4. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emission Reductions, Oct 31 – Nov 3, San Diego, California. 

Schnitzler and Gruda (2002). Hyrdoponics and product quality. In: D Savvas and H Passam (ed) 2002. 

Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Embryo Publications. Athens. pp. 

373-412. 

Snapp, S. S., K.U. Date, W. Kirk, K. O’Neil, A. Kremen and G. Bird. (2007). Root, shoot tissues of 

Brassica juncea and Cereal secale promote potato health. Plant Soil 294:55–72 

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. 

Subbarao, KV, Z. Kabir, F. N. Martin and S. T. Koike (2007). Management of Soilborne Diseases in 

Strawberry Using Vegetable Rotations. Plant Disease 91(8): 964-972. 

Sydorovych, O., C. D. Safley, L. M. Ferguson, E. B. Poling, G. E. Fernandez, P. M. Brannen, D. M Monks 

and F. J. Louws, (2006), Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for the 

production of strawberries in the Southeastern United States. HortTechnology 16(1): 118- 

128 

Takeuchi S., Y. Kawada and S. Kotani (2000) Evaluation of alternatives to methyl bromide in the control of 

root rot of ginger, Zingiber officinale Rosc., caused by Pythium zingiberis Takahashi . 

Bulletin of the Kochi Agricultural Research Center 9: 17-24 

Taylor, M., B.D. Bruton, W.W. Fish and W. Roberts (2006). Cost benefit analyses of using grafted 

watermelons for disease control and the fresh-cut market. In: Cucurbitaceae 2006, September 

17-21, 2006, Asheville, North Carolina. p. 277-285. 

Thomas J. E., L.-T. Ou, L.H. Allen, Jr., J.C. Vu and D.W. Dickson (2007). A 2-year study of wavelength 

selective plastic mulches in Florida tomato production . Proceeding of the Annual 

International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, October 

29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 55-1, 55-4 

Tognoni F, L. Incorcci and L. A. Pardossi (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 
124 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

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: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov, San Diego California USA. 

Tsuda S., M. Kirita M. and Y. Watanabe (1997) Characterization of a Pepper Mild Mottle Tobamoviurs 

Strain Capable of Overcoming the L3

 Gene-Mediated Resistance, Distinct from the 

Resistance-Breaking Italian Isolate. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 11(4): 327-331. 

UNEP (2005a). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, May 2005. Montreal Protocol 

on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment Programme, 

Nairobi 

UNEP (2005b). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2005. Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi. 

UNEP ROAP (2007) Presentation at: Joint Meeting of SEAP and South Asia Networks of ODS Officers, 

11-14 November 2007, Bali, Indonesia. 

UNEP, Ozonews newsletter, April 15 2008 

VDPI. (2004). National Methyl Bromide Update. Issue No. 12, May 2004. Victoria Department of Primary 

Industries, Australia. 

VDPI. (2005). National Methyl Bromide Update. Issue No. 13, February 2005. Victoria Department of 

Primary Industries, Australia. 

Vos, J, and Bridge, J. (eds.) (2006). Cases of methyl bromide alternatives used in commercial practice. 

CAB International. 

Wang D., S.R. Yates F.F. Ernst J. Gan and W.A. Jury (1997). Reducing methyl bromide emission with a 

high barrier plastic film and reduced dosage. Environmental Science and Technology31, 

3686-3691. 

Yang G. H., R.L. Conner H. Cai F. Li and Y.Y. Chen (2008) First report of rhizome blight of ginger 

caused by binucleate Rhizoctonia AG-R in China. Plant Disease, 92, 312. 

Yılmaz, S., M. Gocmen, A. Ünlü, K. Aydinsakir, O. Baysal, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Celikyurt, B. Sayın and İ

.Çelik (2007b). Phase out of methyl bromide for soil fumigation in protected horticulture and 

cut flower production in Turkey. First Progress Report, 2007. Antalya, Turkey. 

Yilmaz, S., M. Göçmen, A. Ünlü, A.F. Firat, K. Aydinşakir, S. Cetinkaya, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Çelikyurt, B. 

Sayin and İ Çelik (2007a). Grafting as an alternative to mb in vegetable production in turkey . 

Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and 

emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 60-1, 60-3 

Yılmaz, S.,Ünlü, A., Gocmen, M., Mutlu, M., Aydinsakir, K., Fırat, F. F., Kuzgun, M., Celikyurt, M. A., 

Sayın, B. And Çelik, İ. (2006). Phase out of methyl bromide for soil fumigation in protected 

horticulture and cut flower production in Turkey. Final Report, 2006. Antalya, Turkey. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 125

10 Current Status of Technical Efficacy, Costs and Adoption of 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives in Flour Mills 

10.1 Introduction 

In its presentation to the Meeting of the Parties in Montreal 2007, MBTOC Quarantine, Structures 

and Commodities (QSC) indicated it would focus on the use of MB and adoption of alternatives 

in the flour milling sector. As we indicated, adoption of alternatives in this sector seemed 

inexplicably slow, in the face of alternatives already registered and in effective use by some 

companies. 

In 2007 and 2008, three Parties, Canada, Israel and the United States, nominated flour mills for 

continued critical use of methyl bromide. Although amounts of methyl bromide requested for 

flour milling use have declined each year, the decrease was slower than for other post-harvest 

sectors. At the same time, we note that some flour sector members express continuing concern 

about the technical efficacy and cost of alternatives. 

MBTOC developed a summary paper reviewing effectiveness, costs and adoption of alternatives 

in the milling sector, in countries where there are CUNs, would be useful to Parties. In January 

2008, MBTOC QSC sent letters requesting information about the current status of adoption of 

alternatives in the flour milling sector to Parties, industry associations and suppliers of 

alternatives. In response, Canada (7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 29) and the United States (2,3,4,5) sent 

several reports and industry correspondence; the European Commission surveyed 12 countries 

and provided an extensive report (16); the UK response was received in the form of several letters 

from fumigators and millers ( 17, 42, 43, 4, 45) and two large reports summarising recent flour 

mill research (6, 9); Israel arranged a meeting for MBTOC with Israeli fumigators (23). 

Additionally, MBTOC members supplied information from their reference data bases, national 

libraries, research and commercial contacts. 

Effectiveness and adoption of alternatives in the milling sector is not often a subject of research; 

the information is more likely to be found in commercial experience. Therefore we could not 

limit our search for information to the research literature. Unfortunately, commercial experience 

and views of sector members do not often arrive in a citable format. To ensure fairness and 

transparency, all cited references and viewpoints used will be made available upon request by any 

Party. We established evidence rules requiring any document to be either in the public domain, or 

submitted to MBTOC as signed and citable. 

Information included in the CUNs also contributed to MBTOC’s evaluation. We can not, 

however, supply CUNs to Parties. The US CUNs are public documents found on the website of 

the US Environmental Protection Agency. Canada’s CUNs are not public documents and are 

protected commercial confidential. MBTOC is not certain of the confidentiality status of Israel’s 

CUNs. 

The reference list forms an important part of this report: summaries of all references were written 

and included in the reference list. Cited references are available to Parties on request to UNEP 

Ozone Secretariat (contact: meg.seki@unep.org) 
126 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

10.2 Executive Summary 

Achieving reliable pest control without using methyl bromide requires more intensive sanitation 

and the use of integrated pest management (IPM) as a prerequisite to the alternative full site 

treatments that are necessary for pest control (7, 9, 11,16, 40, 44). Sanitation standards and 

repercussions for pest presence vary by country but this report did not assess these country to 

country differences. 

Determination is required to resolve the difficulties that are commonly experienced in the first 

trials of a new fumigant or technique (10 17, 42). Reliable methods and parameters have been 

established for each alternative, but these must be fine-tuned through experience at each mill to 

maximise effectiveness. Mills must be evaluated to see which alternative will work best in each 

situation (6, 11, 34). The majority of fumigators who submitted reports noted that as they gained 

experience in treating a particular mill, technical efficacy of the alternative improved. All 

alternatives require extensive planning and experience before success is achieved (7, 9, 11, 13, 

16, 17, 42, 43, 45). 

The most likely and most often used alternatives are, heat treatment either as a full site treatment 

or as spot heat (combined with the use of a further pest barrier method) and sulfuryl fluoride (SF), 

either alone or with the addition of supplemental heat in a combination treatment. 

In the US, while approved, tested and deemed successful by some millers, the phosphine 

combination treatment is not in widespread use because of concerns over the damage to electronic 

equipment. It has been eclipsed by the use of heat treatment and/or SF. However Phosphine 

could be used to treat infested food commodities removed from mills if SF is being used for the 

structure. 

Millers in Canada and the United States report real problems in adopting SF because of the lack 

of regulatory approval for food contact (22, 32). In Canada there is no MRL established for SF 

food contact (11). In the US, many foods which can be contacted by MB can not be contacted by 

SF (3, 22). Mills which produce bakery mixes are the most affected (3, 4). Domestic regulatory 

authorities are working to resolve these problems (4). 

Furthermore, millers and some researchers consistently express concerns about the 

ineffectiveness of SF in killing eggs at low or ambient temperatures, discouraging its adoption (1, 

7, 8, 21, 33). As with MB, which also did not always kill all life stages present (40), other pest 

management methods could be deployed to keep the mill pest free. Egg kill can be obtained by 

increasing SF dosage rates, but the expense of doing so concerns millers. Raising dosage rates 

may also not be the wisest choice from a total environmental perspective. Egg kill can, however, 

be achieved by combining SF and temperatures >27°C (80°F) (5, 14, 17, 30, 36, 37, 45). 

The emerging information does not clearly establish the comparative costs of heat, MB, SF, and 

other treatments. Many reports indicated the alternatives cost more than methyl bromide 

treatment (1, 5, 8, 11, 17, 21, 28) but some reports indicate that alternatives cost about the same 

as methyl bromide, once tailored to site-specific conditions (12, 20, 26 27, 37). To these costs 

must be added the additional costs for improved IPM systems since improved IPM systems are a 

necessary prerequisite to the full treatments needed (35). Two fumigators indicated that the use of 

alternatives plus IPM improvements has reduced costs for some mills (20, 27). 

The relevant cost consideration should be the total cost of a “pest control system”, which would 

include costs for improved IPM, plant modifications, sealing, protecting sensitive items from 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 127

damage, removing or isolating food products and ingredients if necessary, and downtime. At the 

same time, there may be savings resulting from reduced frequency of fumigation, reduced 

downtime due to faster airing and other factors (15, 20). All these factors have to be balanced 

against performance (efficacy) of the system. 

All pest control measures have environmental impacts. Methyl bromide is ozone depleting, but it 

seems that SF and heat alternatives have higher global warming potentials (4 25, 29). All 

fumigants are toxic by nature and must be used responsibly both from the point of view of their 

eventual airing to the outside environment and to avoid possible development of pest resistance 

resulting from sub lethal treatments. Therefore it is important to achieve the best pest efficacy 

possible in exchange for the environmental cost. 

Flour mill industry concerns that the alternatives are not as effective as MB, and are more 

expensive, are delaying adoption of the alternatives. Lack of efficacy is associated with the need 

to re-fumigate or re-treat the mill, which significantly increases expense. Although concerns were 

reported with the use of each alternative, there were no reports indicating that any particular mill 

structure, type or conformation completely lacked a technically effective alternative treatment (11, 

16). In the countries with CUNs for flour milling, there were, however, regulatory barriers to the 

use of effective alternatives, and cost concerns or cost barriers. 

To resolve the flour mill industry concerns about lack pest efficacy with the alternatives, while 

achieving the best possible pest kill efficacy for the environmental impact, MBTOC recommends 

that for any full site treatment (fumigation or heat treatment) in flour milling, the aim should be to 

kill all life stages of pests present. 

For sulfuryl fluoride treatments this recommendation means that SF fumigations should be 

conducted jointly with heat to a temperature of 27°C (80°F) to achieve satisfactory egg kill. In 

many cases, supplemental heat will be required to achieve the necessary temperature (42). 

For heat treatments this means that very careful consideration and planning attention be given to 

ensuring adequate heat sources and to use additional pest protection barriers such as heated mats, 

diatomaceous earth (DE) (and/or insecticidal spraying or oil treatment where allowed by 

regulation) on basement floors, in floor-wall joints, cracks, crevices and wall voids (6, 7, 9, 11, 

18, 19, 24). Spot heat as part of a progressive pest control program is considered effective in 

some circumstances where temperature monitoring is done carefully and where additional pest 

barrier techniques are also used (7, 23). 

Adherence to MBTOC’s recommendations will likely result in additional costs for the 

alternatives but will result in greater pest kill efficacy and may reduce frequency of full site 

treatments, a major contributor to overall pest control costs (20, 43). 

Through reduced dosage rates, fumigation frequency with MB and/or adoption of alternatives, 

plus other factors, CUNs for flour mills in Canada, Israel and the USA combined have decreased 

approximately 170 tonnes or about 51% between 2005 and 2010 (based on MBTOC’s interim 

recommendations).

10.3 Technical Efficacy 

Achieving successful pest control, without the ability to repeatedly fumigate with MB, requires 

much greater attention to mill sanitation and IPM approaches to pest control (7, 9, 11, 16, 40, 44). 
128 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

A determination to work to find an alternative and make it effective in a particular situation was 

an essential part of the eventual successes reported (10, 17, 42). Technical efficacy with MB 

alternatives is achieved through repeat experience. Virtually all the fumigator and research reports 

indicate some difficulties in achieving the desired level of efficacy in initial fumigations or 

treatments. However, these first experiences also identified the problems, for example mill 

sealing inadequacies, which caused low gas concentrations, or inadequate electrical capacity to 

generate the heat required in heat treatments. At the same time, virtually all the fumigator and 

research reports indicate that subsequent fumigations were much more successful (9, 10, 11, 15, 

17, 30, 34, 37). 

At this time in North America, full site fumigations are usually only conducted once or twice per 

year during normal holiday shutdowns. They may be carried out as a precautionary measure, in 

the absence of demonstrated need, to avoid risk of costly unscheduled shutdowns or public 

problems if pest populations reach unacceptable levels. In Israel, spot phosphine or spot heat are 

used as part of a program of rotating pest management treatments. 

Mills are large commercial concerns; and mills are often very different in structure from each 

other. Mill managers are required to be technical skilled and intuitive to respond to changes in 

raw materials, environmental factors and how these factors affect the mill and its output. The real 

measure of success is the satisfaction of the mill management with the alternative treatment at 

that particular mill. 

Aside from the satisfaction of mill management, success in mill fumigation can be demonstrated 

by the immediate, or delayed, death of insects in test cages (40). Other measurement methods 

include recording pest rebound in the mill structure or equipment (10, 11, 14, 15). But since mills 

constantly bring in grains and raw materials, and are often located near significant environmental 

sources of pests, it is difficult to clearly correlate pest rebound with fumigation efficacy (37). 

Rebound due to pest survival will be likely to occur sooner with methyl bromide treatments than, 

for example, sulfuryl fluoride treatments. With methyl bromide, older, pre-adult stages are much 

more tolerant than eggs, while for sulfuryl fluoride the reverse is true and hence survivors will 

take longer to develop through to the adult stage. 

Some management plans for the use of SF have been designed at dosage levels which will allow 

some egg survival. This causes concern to millers who believe such a treatment is different than 

MB, and because a pest control treatment that is designed to allow survival may not meet 

inspection standards (1, 7, 11, 33). Concern about pest egg survival has delayed acceptance of SF, 

yet this review indicates that egg survival can be avoided (5, 14, 17, 30, 36, 37, 45). Sulfuryl 

fluoride treatments that result in egg survival have not been evaluated for the development of pest 

resistance. There is no resistance evidence at this time, but it is an eventual concern when pests 

survive a treatment (33). 

To resolve the flour mill industry concerns about lack pest efficacy with the alternatives, while 

achieving the best possible pest kill efficacy for the environmental impact, MBTOC recommends 

that for any full site treatment (fumigation or heat treatment) in flour milling, the aim should be to 

kill all life stages of pests present. 

According to the researchers who conduct insect assays, the fumigation companies who work for 

mill managers, and reports of satisfaction from mill managers, heat, sulfuryl fluoride and 

phosphine (combination treatment) can each achieve technically successful pest control in flour 

mills (6,7,9,10, 12,14,15,16,17,18,19, 20,24, 26,27,28, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 40, 42, 45). Some 

alternatives may work better in some mills than in other mills. Of these three most likely mill 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 129

treatments, heat (with additional pest barrier techniques) and sulfuryl fluoride with heat (a 

combination as described below), seem most likely to succeed in the current commercial context. 

Although the parameters for a successful full-site heat treatment are clear, there is an unexpected 

degree of complexity to achieve success (6, 7, 11, 18, 21, 33, 34, 35, 38, 43). Structural heat 

treatment commonly involves raising the building temperature to 50-60°C, and to manage risk of 

building damage, at a rate of 5°C per hour (and cooling at a rate of 5-10°C) (6,7,9,18, 38). 

Sufficient heaters to ensure that 50°C is reached within 6-8 hours are required. 

The use of air movers or fans is essential to ensure uniform heating (a cost factor). Using 

insulated and heated floor mats was found necessary in the UK to raise basement floor and floorwall joints to temperature (6, 9). The use of diatomaceous earth (DE), insecticide sprays or other 

pest barrier methods are also reported as necessary to assist efficacy of heat treatment (6, 9, 23). 

Although stored products pests die in <1 hr at these temperatures, structural heat treatment 

requires that these temperatures be maintained for 24-36 hours to ensure uniform heat distribution 

in all portions of the building (6,7,9,18). There are heat calculation models available from US 

university researchers and others to assist mill managers and fumigators to calculate the required 

BTUs for a successful heat treatment (37). Different portions of, or equipment in, the building 

will heat at different rates. Under some circumstances, some parts of the structure, notably walls 

or floors in basements of concrete construction, may prove difficult or impossible to heat to the 

required level because they act as heat sinks. For this reason the use of insulated floor mats, DE 

and/or insecticidal spraying is needed on these harder-to-heat surfaces (7, 9). In portions of the 

building where the temperature is <50°C, insect survival can be expected (38). 

Spot heat treatments are also used by some companies as part of a progressively applied pest 

control program (7, 23). In this instance, a piece of equipment, or a zone of a processing facility, 

is heated with hot air moved by fans or forced hot air (creating a high pressure zone) until the area 

is heated to above 50 ̊C for the required time. In Israel the spot heat treatment for mill equipment 

is 52 ̊C for 30 minutes. (23) Key to the use of spot heat is the additional use of a barrier method to 

kill pests which will crawl from the heated area in search of cool refuge. Diatomaceous earth, 

insecticide sprays or food-grade mineral oil applied in a thick drip line can be placed on the floor 

across routes of escape to kill or trap escaping pests. Spot heat is one alternative available for 

those processing facilities or situations where a full site treatment is not practicable. 

The parameters for successful treatment with sulfuryl fluoride are clear, but have not been fully 

agreed by the users and fumigator suppliers. The current supplier of SF to North American mills 

is Dow AgroSciences. They also supply a fumigant management system called the FumiguideTM, 

which forms part of the registration package in many countries. The Fumiguide calculates 

dosages and fumigation management targets to achieve the level of pest control desired based on 

mill and environmental parameters input by fumigators. It advises necessary dosage rates for 

different temperatures and depending if egg kill is targeted (15, 30, 31, 32). 

Egg kill can be achieved by increasing dosage or by increasing temperature during the SF 

fumigation. Based on fumigation and pest kill data submitted for this report, in virtually all cases 

where sulfuryl fluoride was deemed to be most successful, mill temperature was also recorded as 

> 80°F (~ >27°C) (17, 30, 36, 37, 42, 43) . In many instances this will require additional work, 

and cost, to raise the mill temperature. This might be achievable through the use of comfort 

heating equipment or may require the use of additional heaters (depending on the local 

environmental conditions and mill equipment). 
130 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Although some mills have obtained successful SF fumigations without the use of additional heat, 

weighing the full realm of technical, cost, regulatory and environmental issues, leads MBTOC to 

conclude that the best way to use SF for mill treatment is to use a heat plus SF combination and to 

target all life stages of pests. 

In the US, while approved, tested and deemed successful by some millers, the phosphine 

combination treatment is not in widespread use because of concerns over the damage to electronic 

equipment caused by phosphine gas. It has been eclipsed by the use of heat treatment and/or SF. 

However phosphine could be used to treat infested food commodities removed from mills if SF is 

being used for the structure. 

Although concerns were reported with the use of each alternative, there were no reports that 

indicated any particular mill structure, type or conformation completely lacked a technically 

effective alternative treatment. In the countries with CUNs for flour milling, there were, however, 

regulatory barriers to the use of effective alternatives, and cost concerns or cost barriers. 

10.4 Regulatory Issues Affecting Alternative Adoption 

Heat treatment does not usually require approval by pest management regulatory authorities, but 

insurance companies may become involved. There are additional pest barrier methods 

recommended for use in heat treatments, and these may require regulatory approval. The use of 

DE seems to have widespread regulatory approval, but it is slower acting and ineffective in damp 

areas. The use of insecticidal spraying in a mill is subject to regulation. The use of food-grade 

mineral oil resolves many of these issues. 

Fire protection and occupational health authorities have and may continue to express concerns 

and demand hazard management plans and methods that can contribute to costs and delays in 

adopting heat treatments (7, 11). Many mills have successfully adopted heat treatments. But, 

some facilities can not adopt heat due to the design of their sprinkler system, their inadequate 

electrical capacity and/or the unavailability of adequate footprint for external heater and electrical 

systems (11). 

The real regulatory issues affecting adoption of alternatives have and will continue to pertain to 

the chemical fumigants. Recent years have seen the approval of the use of sulfuryl fluoride at 

national and state levels, followed by the very widespread training of licensed fumigators. 

However, regulatory approval of sulfuryl fluoride has not been complete enough to satisfy mill 

management. 

Millers in Canada and the United States report real problems in adopting SF because of lack of 

regulatory approval for food contact (3, 4, 5, 11). 

For example, in Canada, no maximum residue levels (MRL) have been set for contact with food 

(any food or raw agricultural ingredient) (11). As a result, the mill has to be either completely 

emptied of any grain or finished product or those items have to be completely sealed off. These 

actions are not always possible, and if possible, have an as-yet-undetermined cost. Millers believe 

when the MRL is effectively zero, then they could be liable if fluoride residue is found in small 

amounts of flour left behind when equipment is fumigated. 

In the United States, MRLs have been established for grains and processed flour, but not for the 

other commodities used in bakery mixes and consumer flour mixes (4, 22). One estimate is that 

over 40% of US flour mills also produce these items and would have them present in large 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 131

quantities in the mill. The products would have to be removed or completely sealed off before a 

SF fumigation, which may not be possible, or may be impractical, or too costly. Furthermore, it is 

unknown if sealing off the commodities would satisfy the regulations which prohibit food contact 

by sulfuryl fluoride. Regulatory authorities in Canada and the US are working to resolve these 

issues, but currently these issues remain barriers to greater or lesser extents. 

Phosphine, CO2 and heat combination treatment requires approval of regulatory authorities in 

Canada, but appears to not require separate approval in the US. (Note that the use of phosphine 

alone is already approved in both countries.) The combination treatment of phosphine, heat, and 

CO2 has not yet been approved in Canada (11). 

MBTOC also reviews critical use nomination for flour mills in Israel. Israel does not require 

regulatory approval to use heat, and indeed it is used in Israel’s flour mill sector as spot treatment. 

But, sulfuryl fluoride is not approved and no application has been received for its use. Phosphine 

is allowed to be used, and is used for spot treatments in the majority of Israel’s mills. As with any 

treatment that allows some pest survival, MBTOC is concerned that such spot treatments may 

give rise to continued pest presence. For that reason, MBTOC recommends the use of barrier 

methods to ensure pests seeking cool refuge from the spot heat treatment are killed. In Israel a 

thick drip line of food grade mineral oil placed on the floor around the heat-treated equipment has 

been shown to kill any escaping insects (23). 

10.5 Costs of Alternatives 

The emerging information does not clearly establish the comparative costs of heat, MB, SF, and 

other treatments. Many reports indicated the alternatives cost more than methyl bromide 

treatment (1, 5, 8, 11, 17, 21, 28), but some reports indicate that alternatives cost about the same 

as methyl bromide, once tailored to site-specific conditions (12, 20, 26 27, 37). In more temperate 

environments such as in Canada and the UK, reports generally agree that heat treatment costs 

more than MB (6, 11, 42, 43). 

To these costs must be added the additional costs for improved IPM systems since improved IPM 

systems are a necessary prerequisite to the full treatments needed (35). But, two fumigators 

indicated that the use of alternatives plus IPM improvements has reduced costs for some mills 

(20, 27). 

The relevant cost consideration should be the total cost of a “pest control system” which would 

include costs for improved IPM, plant modifications, sealing, protecting sensitive items from 

damage, removing or isolating food products and ingredients if necessary, and downtime. At the 

same time, there may be savings resulting from reduced frequency of fumigation, reduced 

downtime due to faster airing and other factors (15, 20). All these factors have to be balanced 

against performance (efficacy) of the system. 

There is inadequate information on the comparative costs of alternatives in the milling sector. 

Furthermore, there is not ever likely to be adequate information on a sectoral basis. Mills vary so 

much in structure, design, conformation and other factors that the only valid comparison would 

be on a mill-specific basis. While that information likely exists, it is likely proprietary between 

the mill management and its fumigators and will not likely be reported to MBTOC or Parties (21). 

Where partial costs have been reported, such as in Canada’s heat trials, or in the reports by 

Adams and Bartlett cited here (1, 6, 11) or in the numerous reports from fumigators included 

here, costs of alternatives seem to either higher (1, 5, 8, 11, 17, 21, 28 ) or sometimes, roughly 
132 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

equivalent (12, 20, 26 27, 37). We can assume that if millers found an effective alternative that 

cost them a lot less they would immediately switch to it. Perhaps the millers who have switched 

to alternatives found an alternative that cost less in their specific circumstance. 

10.6 Environmental, Health and Safety Issues 

From a policy perspective, the likely increased costs of alternatives should also be viewed in a 

total environmental perspective. That perspective would evaluate the environmental impacts of 

continued MB use (and ozone depletion), evaluated next to other environmental issues such as the 

GWP of alternatives. However, business finances are driven by actual costs and revenues; 

environmental costs do not appear on profit and loss statements. Nevertheless, some corporate 

environmental policies have resulted in a more determined effort to switch to alternatives that are 

not ozone depleting and/or not contributing to global warming (4). 

Governments take environmental, health and safety issues into consideration during registration 

processes. MBTOC does not take these matters into consideration for that reason. MBTOC does 

not consider an alternative to be available unless it is registered for use in that region and for that 

circumstance. Environmental, health and safety issues with the alternatives are responsible for 

many of the regulatory barriers to the adoption of alternatives. Currently, a US court challenge 

about the safety of fluoride residues arising from the use of SF has the potential to result in 

greater controls being placed on SF use in flour milling in the US. 

MBTOC has not evaluated the global warming effects of the use of alternatives for flour milling. 

However, MB has been reported to have a GWP of 5 (100 yr), (25) and SF has 100-yr GWP of 

278-47 (29). It should also be noted that considerably more SF is used in a mill fumigation than is 

needed for MB in the same mill (1, 5,). Heat treatments would also have an as-yet-unmeasured 

and potentially high environmental impact. 

Since all pest control measures have environmental impacts, it will be sensible to work to achieve 

the best pest control possible in exchange for the environmental cost. 

10.7 Adoption of Alternatives 

In 2003 and 2004 when Parties began to submit critical use nominations, MBTOC received CUNs 

for flour milling from: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, United Kingdom and 

United States. The European Commission reported to MBTOC that MB had been used in mills in 

17 of the EC-27 countries at some time in past years. Now, however, all EU mills are using 

alternatives to MB and are not using MB. Mills in the EU are using a wide range of alternatives, 

in combination with IPM (16). 

Each of the three Parties with flour milling CUNs has decreased MB use. The graphs and tables 

below show the CUNs for flour milling for Canada, Israel and the United States. It is important 

to note that the amount of MB actually used for flour milling in the US could be different from 

the CUE amounts because the sector has had access to MB stocks available for purchase. 

There are several reasons for decreased MB flour milling use in Canada, Israel and the US since 

2003 when the CUN process started. First, mills took several steps to reduce the frequency of 

fumigation. They began by adopting or improving IPM systems and improving mill sanitation to 

reduce pest presence. A need to decrease flour dust presence in mills for health and safety reasons 

also drove the use of improved IPM. Reductions in frequency of fumigation could account for 30 

– 50% of the decrease in MB use. In some cases the adoption of MBTOC’s standard dosage rate 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 133

for MB for structures also resulted in a decrease in MB use. As fumigators began new training 

programs for sulfuryl fluoride they realised that additional sealing and other structural 

improvements would also reduce MB use, a move which was also driven by increasing costs of 

MB. In recent years many flour millers, perhaps as many as half, have tested one or more 

alternative treatments, and many flour mills have adopted alternatives, at least for some of the 

fumigations needed for the mill (2, 11, 14, 24, 30, 31, 41). In this sector, a trial of an alternative 

can replace a methyl bromide fumigation. Finally, there were some early adopters of alternatives, 

especially heat treatment and some mills are now not treated with MB. 

Elsewhere in the TEAP Spring report, MBTOC has published its interim recommendations for 

the 2008 round of critical use nominations, including those for flour milling. As these are interim 

recommendations, Parties may request changes and provide information to support changes in 

these recommendations. 

Currently, mills in Canada seem to be conducting an average of 1-2 fumigations per year with 

MB (the CUN was unclear and MBTOC has requested further information). MBTOC has 

commented that no more than one annual fumigation with MB, (and hopefully fewer) can be 

likely be justified at this time. MBTOC believes that Canadian environmental conditions would 

result in less pest pressure in Canadian mills (compared mills in hotter more humid regions). 

Israel is only using MB for spot treatments in a few of its mills. The other mills use spot 

phosphine or spot heat. Spot heat equipment has recently been imported to Israel and successfully 

tested. Israeli fumigators have developed techniques to kill pests which try to escape the 

treatment. More heat equipment is on order for import and MBTOC has made an interim 

recommendation that Israel should finish its MB use in this sector by 2010. 

In the US, mills average 2.5 fumigations per year. MBTOC has made an interim recommendation 

that the 58% of mills which do not have bakery mixes should be able to transition to no more than 

(and hopefully fewer than) 2 MB fumigations per year by 2010. 

CUN MB in flour milling in Canada, Israel and the United States – Dotted line indicates 

MBTOC interim recommendation for 2008 round

Canada

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Years

Methyl Bromide (Tonnes) 

Israel

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Years

Methyl Bromide (Tonnes)

USA

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Years

Methyl Bromide (Tonnes)
134 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Flour Milling CUE and CUN MB Amounts Canada, Israel and US

 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Canada 35 34.774 30.167 28.65 29.913 22.8781

Israel 2.14 1.49 1.04 0.312 0.32 

USA 302.704 289.39 274.65 240.765 212.352 144.7893

1. This is the CUN for Canada mills for 2010. MBTOC has been unable to assess 

this nomination pending the receipt of further information. 

2. This is the CUN for Israel mills for 2009. MBTOC has recommended this 

amount as a final transition to alternatives. 

3. This is the amount recommended for US flour milling for 2010. The US 

nominated 163.790 tonnes for flour mills for 2010 

Notes: 

The Canadian CUN for 2005 was for 47.2 but it included both mills and pasta. It seems the flour 

mill amount was probably around 35 tonnes in 2005. 

The US flour milling amounts for 2005 and 2006 were estimated from CUNs that included other 

food processing structures. In later years, US submitted disaggregated CUNs that indicated 

separate amounts for flour mills. 

10.8 Reference List and Summaries of References Used 

Copies of cited references are available from: Meg Seki, UNEP Senior Scientific Affairs Officer 

(meg.seki@unep.org) 

1. Adam. B. 2008. Cost comparison of methyl bromide and ProFume for fumigating a food 

processing facility. A report to National Pest Management Association and Dow AgroSciences. 

Economic Consulting LLC. 

This economic analysis covers both food processing and cocoa bean SF economics. The summary 

here only includes the food processing issues. Specifically, the author examined fumigation costs 

for a food processing facility of size 1 Million ft3

. The analytical approach used by the authors 

provides cost estimates for typical firms under alternative scenarios and not firm-specific 

scenarios. The author only examined the use of Fumiguide ‘high dose’ recommendations, since 

the fumigators interviewed said the ‘low dose’ would allow for egg survival and would result in 

dissatisfied customers. All fumigations were assumed to be 24 hours (plus set up and aeration 

times). Data for this study was gathered from interviews with six fumigation companies having 

experience with both SF and MB, from fumigant distributors, from Dow AgroSciences and from 

literature reviews. Most likely price of SF was US$0.50 less than price of MB but SF use rate was 

2.5lb/K ft3

 and the MB use rate was 1.5 lb/K ft3. Adams reported the cost of MB was US$7.00/lb 

and the cost of SF was US$5.00 – 7.00/lb. An analysis of chemical costs relative to insect species 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 135

and temperature showed that SF costs more than MB for all species. Equipment costs assumed 

the fumigator conducted 50 fumigations per year and equipment costs for SF were lower. Labour 

costs for SF were also lower mainly because of faster aeration time. The author presented tables 

which showed the impact on total fumigation costs when use rate and fumigant costs varied. 

Numerous cost scenarios resulted, but if we assume that a use rate of SF of 2.5 lb/1000 ft3 is 

technically comparable to MB at 1.5 lb/1000 ft3, then an SF fumigation of a 1 Million CuFt food 

processing facility costs 12, 29 or 45% more depending if the cost of SF is US$5, $6 or $7 per lb 

respectively. 

2. Bair, J. 2008. North American Millers Association. Email to Michelle Marcotte concerning 

the number of flour mills in the United States. 

Bair reports that the number of flour mills in the US is slightly fewer than 200, spread across 38 

states. 

3. Bair J. 2008. North American Millers Association. Email to Michelle Marcotte. March 12. 

Provided clarification that obtaining data on SF use in mills was difficult because the mill reports 

belong to the fumigators. Also clarified that mill companies not belonging to NAMA may use SF 

more frequently because they can not have CUE MB. Also outlined a label problem that SF users 

are trying to understand and gain clarification from EPA and Dow. The problem concerns the use 

of the words ‘incidental’ and ‘impractical’ on the label. This is not only an EPA problem but also 

a problem of enforcement which is done by the State Departments. 

4. Bair J. 2008. North American Millers Association. Notes of conversation with Michelle 

Marcotte. March 12 

Conversation was held to clarify label and other problems with use of SF by millers and US 

stored product industry. Marcotte took notes. Bair outlined three problems. First is that the label 

includes the use of SF on raw grain, although that use is unlikely because there are other cheaper, 

easier methods to disinfest raw grain (phosphine, aeration etc). However as a result, the raw grain 

potential use contributed to the EPA risk assessment and the whole fluorine residue issue for 

which there is a lawsuit pending. This lawsuit is a great concern. Second is that the label (see 

Dow SF label page 10) lists foods which may be fumigated and says that if a food is not listed it 

may not be fumigated (standard pesticide regulatory language). However the label also later says 

allows ‘incidental’ fumigation of unlisted foods if removing them would be ‘impractical’. The 

problem is understanding ‘incidental’ and ‘impractical’. Pet Food Industry received a letter from 

EPA clarifying that incidental should be defined as ‘negligible amounts of commodity due to 

their presence in a different targeted use site’ (see letter from Hazen of EPA to Payne of Pet Food 

Institute). This problem impacts millers whose flour goes into bakery mixes since they have other 

kinds of foods on their premises (dried eggs, shortening etc). These foods are allowed to be 

fumigated with MB but not SF. Dow disagrees with the Pet Food – EPA letter and says the 

millers could allow the fumigation of those unlisted foods as long as those foods are not the actual 

target of fumigation. Millers are concerned about that interpretation because EPA, or the State 

Dept., which does the enforcement, may decide the use was illegal (after it was used or food 

distributed). There are very large legal and market repercussions arising from the illegal use of 

pesticides on foods (US mill sector can point to some actual examples with resulting very large 

costs and jail time for person held responsible). The third problem worrying the millers is that 

many mill companies, or their parent corporations, have made commitments to reduce their 

carbon footprint to reduce global warming. SF has been found to have a relatively high GWP 

compared to CO2 (see Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Assessment section 5.2). Bair then 
136 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

described the increase in SF required to be used at various fumigation temperatures, but to 

provide more detail, later sent an SF Fumiguide printout to illustrate. 

5. Bair J. 2008. North American Millers Association. Email to Michelle Marcotte and attached 

sample SF Fumiguide printout showing dosages at various temperatures. March 12. 

NAMA submitted four more documents for this study (all of which were reviewed, summarized 

and included as references): EPA letter from Hazen to Payne, Dow AgroSciences SF label, 

Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency SF assessment (specifically responding to GWP 

of SF), and, a ProFume Fumiguide printout showing the need to use considerably more SF than is 

required for MB. As noted by other papers reviewed here, MB dosage is usually 1 – 2 lbs/1000 cu 

ft, or 1000 – 2000 lbs per facility of 1 M cu ft. In the SF scenarios presented, with a 12 hr half 

loss time, and 24 hr exposure, SF requirements ranged from 6648 lbs at 70°C to 2701 lbs at 90°C. 

At 80°F, the temperature that seems necessary for pest control efficacy, 4564 lbs of SF would be 

required. 

6. Bartlett, D., Conyers, S.T., Bell, C.H. and Watson, C.R. (2005). Further development of heatbased methods for disinfesting flour mills. 

HGCA Project Report No. 378, Home-Grown Cereals Authority, London, 62pp. 

This report summarizes a year-long project in heat treatment in UK mills. It provides details of 

studies at two mills, one 3078m3

 and one 6600m3 and discussed heat treatment methods. The 

report recommends that a temperature of 50°C be achieved and that the total heating period be 50 

hours; about half that time will be required for the facility to reach the target temperature. Heating 

larger mills will take longer and the scaling up of heat requirements may introduce other 

problems making heat treatment impractical. It was difficult to achieve adequate temperatures in 

floor-wall joints, outside walls and windowsills indicating that additional methods such as 

insecticidal spraying and the use of diatomaceous earth would be required as an adjunct to the 

heat treatment. Mills with roller mills situated on basement floors will experience difficulty in 

achieving a kill temperature within and beneath the machines. The cost of treatment is likely to 

exceed those currently incurred with MB fumigation. For example, heat treatment in one mill cost 

twice that for a MB treatment at the same mill the previous year. The report concluded that the 

use of DE is recommended for ground floors and wall joints. The report also concluded that it 

will never be practical or economic to heat concrete ground floors to a level that will ensure 100% 

kill (which resulted in the recommendation to use DE when heat treating floors). 

7. Beckett, S.J., Fields, P.G. and Bh. Subramanyam. 2007. Disinfestation of stored products 

and associated structures by heat. In: Heat treatments for postharvest pest control: Theory and 

Practice. Eds: Tang, J., Mitcham, E., Wang S., and S. Lurie. Pp 182-237. CAB International. 

UK. 

This paper reviews the need for, and history of, pest control for stored products and the facilities 

that store and/or process the commodities. Further it reviews pest control methods but places 

more extensive emphasis on heat treatment. Most Western countries have zero tolerance for 

insects in finished food products such as flours or baked goods, and that insect parts in processed 

foods are also restricted. For example, in the USA, wheat flour with 75 insect fragments/ 50 g of 

flour can not be sold. Additionally, buyers of grain and processed food have the right to reject 

entire shipments based on the presence of insects or insect fragments. Further, buyers may also 

impose major penalties for insect infestation. Structural heat treatment involves raising the 

building temperature to 50-60°C at a rate of 5°C per hour (and cooling at a rate of 5-10°C). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 137

Sufficient heaters to ensure that 50°C is reached within 6-8 hours are required. (MBTOC bases its 

heat treatment recommendation on this research paper.) Use of air movers or fans is essential to 

ensure uniform heating (a cost factor) Although stored products pests die in <1 hr at these 

temperatures, structural heat treatment requires that these temperatures be maintained for 24-36 

hours to ensure uniform heat distribution in all portions of the building. Different portions of or 

equipment in the building will heat at different rates. In portions of the building where the 

temperature is <50°C, insect survival can be expected. The paper provides extensive heat 

tolerance data for numerous stored product pests and life stages. The authors note that better 

targeted treatments and predictive models may result in new treatment practices in the future. 

Thorough cleaning of the facility and equipment is needed prior to a heat treatment, because 

insects will find cooler refuge in even small amounts of flour or debris. (Cleaning is also 

necessary prior to any fumigation so this is not an additional cost factor for heat.) Heat 

susceptible materials and packaging materials have to be removed from the facility. If food 

products in the facility are infested, they have to be removed and treated with phosphine or 

another fumigant. (In these ways, heat or SF treatments differ from MB treatment which results in 

additional labour costs.) Spot heat treatments versus full site treatments were compared; in flour 

mills for example, spot heat treatment could be considered if roll stands were infested. However, 

the open floor plans and multi-story design of North American flour mills would favour insect 

escape from spot heat treatments and therefore full site treatment is favoured. (MBTOC notes that 

additional pest barrier methods would assist to resolve this problem.) This report identifies 

potential problems such as difficulties in calculating the amount of heat (and heating equipment) 

required for a treatment, unknown effects on mill equipment and structures, and notes some 

preparatory requirements such as ensuring sprinklers and mill equipment is rated to withstand 

95°C. (MBTOC notes that this setting may cause concern to fire prevention officials since the 

usual sprinkler setting is 165°F or 76°C.) Nevertheless the authors expect greater use of heat 

treatment as pressure to eliminate chemical fumigations increases. 

8. Bell, C. 2008. Stored Product Consultant. Problems with alternatives to MB. Email to 

Marcotte April 4. 

The author cautions that costs of alternatives may be underestimated. Current introductory pricing 

of SF may be giving a false impression of its costs and heat treatments if done ineffectively (but 

inexpensively), may result in the need for multiple heat treatments in a year, which increases 

costs annually. Author reiterates concerns about deliberately aiming an SF treatment to a dosage 

rate that is not likely to kill all eggs present. (Note: Author Bell is a MBTOC member.) 

9. Bell, C. H., Bartlett, D., Conyers, S. T., Cook, D. A., Savvidou, N. and Wontner-Smith, T. J. 

(2004) Alternatives to methyl bromide for pest control in flour mills. HGCA Project Report No. 

329, Home-Grown Cereals Authority, London, 113pp. 

This report covers 39 months of work in UK flour mills, largely to investigate methods to achieve 

effective heat treatments, sometimes in combination with diatomaceous earth (DE) and controlled 

atmospheres. Numerous common stored product pests were included in the studies. Heat plus DE 

very much improved treatment efficacy. (Earlier MBTOC Assessment reports also showed 

considerable benefit from using DE in heat treatments, and particularly for crack and crevice 

treatments in heat treatments and as a residual between treatments.) Heat treatment parameters 

included: limited air delivery of heaters to 65-70°C to avoid activating sprinklers and limit 

thermal expansion and cracking; and maximum air speeds of 5m/s to avoid dust explosions and 

avoid blowing away applied DE. Many practical arrangements for heater and heated floor mats 

were discussed. Considerable attention was paid to the problem of achieving adequate 

temperature on cement floors, floor-wall joints and other difficult to heat surfaces. The use of 
138 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

heaters, fans and heated floor mats were all observed and measured for efficacy. Several mill heat 

treatments were observed in the UK and Germany, but some had inadequate heat sources. The 

authors concluded that: shaped heating mats should be used on basement floors and wall joints, 

especially in the corners to avoid offering a cool area for pest to escape to; use enough heaters to 

raise the temperature to 65°C within 6-8 hours; an 18 kW heater for every 300 – 700m3

 of space 

depending on mill size and temperature will be needed. On upper floors, perforated polyethylene 

ducts can be used to target hot air on floor-wall joints; begin doing so when air temperatures 

reach 50°C. Effective cleaning and spraying of ground floors will minimize survival. Keep the 

building closed to prevent exchange of outside air. Use infra-red hand held thermometers to check 

on heat distribution. (MBTOC based some of its recommendation on heat treatment techniques on 

this research paper.) (Note: Author Bell is a MBTOC member.) 

10. Bradley, R. 2006. Quality Assurance Manager, Brighton Mills. Letter to Dow 

AgroSciences. 

This company expressed their satisfaction with the level of stored product pest control resulting 

from two years experience with ProFume fumigations of their mill. They noted that the first 

fumigation did not give the results they wanted, but they believed this could have been because of 

other variables. They reported working with their fumigator to improve conditions in the mill to 

make further fumigations more successful, and since then they have been pleased with the results. 

They formerly measured the success of methyl bromide fumigations when there were at least 90 

days between fumigation and insect infestation. With ProFume they report no insect emergence 

until four months after fumigation. As a result, the company has switched to using ProFume 

instead of methyl bromide. 

11. Canadian National Millers Association. 2007. Comparative evaluation of integrated pest 

management, heat treatments and fumigations as alternatives to methyl bromide for control of 

stored product pests in Canadian flour mills. pp 48. March. (Also submitted in French with the 

title: Évaluation comparative de la gestion intensive des parasites, des traitments thermiques et 

des fumigants comme solutions de rechange au bromure de méthyl pour le contrôl 

antiparasitaire des produits en réserve dans les minoteries canadiannes. Association 

canadienne des minoteries de farine de ble.) Ottawa Canada. 

This report summarizes a joint project of the Canadian National Millers Association, Agriculture 

and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), and fumigation companies who conducted tests at several mill 

facilities in Canada. Science aspects were managed by Paul Fields, AAFC Cereal Research 

Centre scientist located in Winnipeg Manitoba; his reports are appended to the CNMA report. 

This report also includes an update of CNMA’s 2004 report comparing heat treatment to MB. The 

report details extensive practical learnings and technical efficacy data resulting from: five heat 

trials (in three mills); four SF trials (four mills); one benchmark MB trial; and one phosphine, 

CO2 and heat combination trial (one mill). Some of the trials were conducted prior to pesticide 

registration under agreement of the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (to generate needed 

efficacy data). The report’s detailed investigation of pest management and IPM in Canadian mills 

is not summarized here. This summary focuses on adoption, technical efficacy and economic 

issues. Millers require alternatives for all mill sizes and configurations, that effectively reach and 

kill all pest life stages, with treatments that can be completed in 72 hours, do not require the 

removal of unmilled and milled grain, with either no pesticide residues or pesticide residues 

established in MRLs that can be met in the commercial context, and affordable as measured 

within Canada’s traditional cost structure and in comparison with US costs (since Canadian and 

US mills compete within the North American free trade environment). Millers and fumigators 

have trialled phosphine (combination method), sulfuryl fluoride and heat. The low dose of 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 139

phosphine needed to avoid equipment damage requires that the temperature be raised in the mill; 

this combination treatment requires regulatory approval that has not yet been received. Sulfuryl 

fluoride approval does not allow contact with any milled or unmilled grain, flour enrichments or 

additives; request to approve still pending. A mill has to be completely emptied of all grain and 

finished product, or with bins sealed off. The lack of MRLs for fluoride residues has made 

adoption of this alternative difficult. Three suppliers of heat equipment are present in Canada and 

trials have been conducted on all equipment types (as reported in the 2004 report). The main 

difficulties in using heat include lack of boiler capacity (resulting in the need for either purchased 

or rented heaters), inadequate electrical capacity for the heat equipment, and fire protection 

systems that are incompatible with the heat treatments. All treatments tested killed Red Flour 

beetle adults. In one heat method (propane heaters) egg mortality was 94%. With SF, egg 

mortality varied between 35-99.6%. Pest rebound, while significantly influenced by factors other 

than fumigation efficacy, is nevertheless an important factor for millers judging the efficacy of 

fumigation. In these trials, phosphine and SF showed a similar range of delay of pests to that of 

MB, but heat treatment gave the best delay of pest rebound. With the exception of costs for some 

of the heat treatment factors, treatment costs were not reported for these trials. In any case, given 

the wide variety of mills, sizes, structures etc, knowing the treatment costs might not be too 

helpful. The costs of heat equipment rental, propane or natural gas input costs ranged from 

CDN$400 – $6,600. Fields, summarizing the research determined that SF, heat, phosphine 

(combination treatment), can control insect populations in flour mills for over 18 weeks. He also 

noted some factors that contributed to difficulty in achieving good fumigation results in Canadian 

mills. Mill sealing, a very significant factor in fumigation efficacy needs to be improved; US 

mills have half loss times that are double those seen in the Canadian mills in this study. Higher 

temperatures could be utilized to improve fumigant pest kill efficacy. The increase in temperature 

could be achieved by utilizing the comfort heat furnaces for summer fumigations and/or by using 

additional heaters during fall fumigations. 

12. Coleman, J. 2005. Research Fumigation Company LLC. Letter. 

This fumigation company reported having conducted many successful fumigations with SF, in 

terms of pest control efficacy and because the fumigation management software assists the 

fumigator to improve fumigation management and use less fumigant. This company has managed 

to maintain the same fumigation costs to the customer by reducing unnecessary fumigations, 

improving facilities (often needed to improve SF fumigation efficacy), and offering 

comprehensive pest management plans. 

13. Cryer. S. 2007. Predicted gas loss of sulfuryl fluoride and methyl bromide during structural 

fumigations. Journal of Stored Product Research. 44 (1-10). 

Gas loss from a mill during fumigation affects both fumigant efficacy in killing pests and the 

economic efficacy because excessive gas loss increases fumigation costs. Gas loss results from 

leaks through cracks, crevices and other building structural factors and the loss can be 

compounded by environmental facts such as wind. Computational analysis based on two 

commercial grain mills was used to predict gas loss under various wind scenarios and as a 

function of building structure in conditions of calm wind. In conditions of calm wind, sulfuryl 

fluoride was found to have increased leakage rate (~5.4%0.). In wind conditions, leakage rates for 

sulfuryl fluoride and methyl bromide were statistically indistinguishable. Wind conditions in 

California and Texas, the location of the commercial grain mills were found to be rarely calm, but 

wind conditions vary regionally making knowledge of local wind conditions an important factor 

in planning gas loss prevention. 
140 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

14. Dow AgroSciences. 2006. Comments of Dow AgroSciences LLC on protection of 

stratospheric ozone” The 2008 critical use exemption from the phase out of methyl bromide. 

(RIN 2060 – A030: Docket No.: OAR-2006-1016). Excerpt submitted to MBTOC by 

Prabharkaran, Dow AgroSciences. 

This letter explains the position of this supplier of sulfuryl fluoride (trade name ProFume) vis a 

vis the US government position on domestic allocation of methyl bromide. It makes several 

interesting points. In 2006, Dow says that 60% of the grain milling market had demonstrated 

success using ProFume (page 5). Of the 140 locations fumigated with ProFume, 90 have been 

fumigated multiple times (up to 7 consecutive ProFume fumigations) (page 5). Dow notes that 

typical commercial use rate for MB is 1.5 lbs/1000 f3

, whereas the commercial use rate for SF is 2 

lbs/1000 ft3

. Since gas fumigant contributes only 30% to total fumigation costs, the use of SF 

should contribute a <10% increase in fumigation cost. Over 100 wheat mills and warehouses in 

52 locations have been successfully fumigated with ProFume since registration (page 17). On the 

question of increased temperature required for increased efficacy, Dow points out that increased 

temperature increases the efficacy of all fumigants and that SF fumigations have been conducted 

all year round in various US regions. They indicate that milling equipment operation results in 

increased temperatures in the equipment and in the mill. Dow does not agree with statements that 

a 5-yr transition to alternatives is required for this sector because the same fumigation companies 

who have been conducting SF fumigations for other flour milling companies are available to 

assist the not-adopting companies (pages 7-8). 

15. Dow AgroSciences. Undated (likely 2004). Optimizing Operations: Six year study at rice 

facility demonstrates value of precision fumigation practices. Dow AgroSciences brochure. 

This paper discusses the knowledge gained from six years of fumigation experience at one rice 

mill and the experience of conducting a fumigation during a severe storm with high winds. Since 

high winds are a key factor in fumigation failure, this paper provides an unusual observation 

point. The rice mill was formerly fumigated with methyl bromide twice a year. Beginning in 

1998, and for six years, this mill has only fumigated once a year with ProFume, assisted by 

improved pest control practices. The paper reviewed the improvements made to sealing and to 

reduce fumigant concentration variability throughout the facility. Since sulfuryl fluoride aerates 

faster than methyl bromide did, fumigation downtime has been reduced from a minimum of 36 

hours with methyl bromide to 28 hours with ProFume. Millers consider production downtime to 

be the most important cost factor in a fumigation. During one fumigation, a severe storm set in 

with 50 mph winds for several hours and the loss of electrical power. This event could have 

resulted in the failure of the fumigation with the associated costs. However, Dow reported that the 

sealing methods previously tested, the ability of their fumigant management software to identify 

areas of low concentration and calculate needed gas additions, plus some quick moves from the 

fumigation company to keep the monitoring lines running in a power outage, were able to ensure 

a successful fumigation under adverse circumstances. 

16. European Commission. 2008. Information on the use of methyl bromide and alternatives in 

mills in the EC. Information provided by the EC to MBTOC-QSC. April. 26pp. 

In response to the request for information from MBTOC, the EC surveyed countries on methyl 

bromide and alternative use in flour mills, providing a very extensive report. The report covers 

responses from 12 countries and more than 137 flour mills. The report includes information on: 

pests; mill size; mill regions; current and past MB use by country and mill; alternative use by 

country; current pest control practices; industry standards and guidelines; regulatory 

requirements; and data sources. In addition, an annex to this report includes the actual survey 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 141

responses, which will be attached to this reference for requestors. Of the 137 mills, only about 3 

never used MB. But, none use MB now, following withdrawal of MB licenses for mills in the EC. 

Pest control techniques include: IPM; HACCP; sulfuryl fluoride (sometimes with supplemental 

heat); phosphine (sometimes with supplemental heat); phosphine heat and CO2 (in combination); 

hydrogen cyanide; insecticides; heat; cold (in form of dry ice); and mechanical treatment of 

finished products. Mills were asked to report their pest control treatment results and if they 

received consumer complaints. Although many mills did not report their treatment results or 

consumer complaints, almost the same number of mills noted that pest control was the same or 

nearly the same now that MB is not used. Several reported that pest control was better now. For 

the most part, consumer complaints had not increased. MBTOC notes that some of the 

alternatives registered for use in the EC are not registered for use in the countries for which CUNs 

have been requested. 

17. Falvey, G. 2008. Senior Milling Executive Bread Bakeries Division, Premier Foods. Letter 

to Banks and Marcotte. 

Rank Hovis is the flour milling business of Premier Foods and the largest milling company in the 

United Kingdom. They have been using sulfuryl fluoride (ProFume supplied by Dow 

AgroSciences), for several years. As a result of early research conducted with Igrox (a UK based 

fumigation company), and Central Science Laboratory (a UK government stored products 

research laboratory); they determined that the efficacy of the fumigant could be improved by 

heating to 30°C for the duration of the treatment. They now use ProFume on a regular annual 

basis at 4 of their largest flour mills. As a result of this experience, they noted increasing efficacy 

can be attributed to: greater experience in using the fumigant, improved preparation for 

fumigation including greater attention to sealing and building improvements to prevent leaks, 

scheduling the treatment in the summer months to improve chances of more benign climate 

conditions, and acknowledging that fumigation is part of an overall pest management plan. 

ProFume does cost more than methyl bromide, at 300% the cost of MB. 

18. Fields P.G. 2006. Alternatives to chemical control of stored-product insects in temperate 

regions. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Working Conference on Stored Product 

Protection. Campinas Brazil. Pp 653-662. pfields@agr.gc.ca 

Reviews and describes effectiveness of cold, heat, low moisture, inert dusts, hermetic storage, 

impact and varietal resistance as methods to control or kill insects in grains and other stored 

products. Time-temperature death curves are described by species. Describing heat treatment of 

structures as requiring 50°C for 24-36 hours with a rate of heating or cooling of not more than 

5°C per hour (to prevent structural damage). Although insects die in a few minutes at 50°C, at 

least 24 hours is needed to insure all locations in the facility receive adequate heat. Sprinkler 

heads should be rated for at least 85°C. Some electronic equipment may have to be removed or 

enclosed with cool air. Some plastics may warp with the heat. Fire extinguishers should be 

removed before the heat treatment. As with fumigation, the structure and equipment should be 

cleaned of food residues to allow good penetration of the heat. 

19. Fields, P. 2008. Scientist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. Temperature conditions for 

heat treatments. Email to Marcotte April 4. 

The author was asked by MBTOC to further the understanding of the parameters of a heat 

treatment, specifically, could heat treatments be conducted if the mill temp was <10°C and how 

to conduct heat treatments is cold weather conditions. The author responded that even in Central 

Ontario in November with outside temperatures as low as 0°C, temperatures in an operating mill 
142 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

are still above 20°C. In cold conditions the difficulties with a heat treatment include extra time 

and extra costs to reach sufficient temps, especially on outside walls. One solution is to preheat 

the facility to 25°C, while the facility is operating and then close the facility for the normal time 

for the heat treatment. One problem with reports of lack of efficacy for heat treatments is that 

there was insufficient heat capacity, so the treatment took too long and was stopped early because 

the facility needed to resume operations. To learn how to do a heat treatment, start small, have 

adequate heater and fan capacity, to allow time for correct temperature to be reached with 

adequate cool down time. Learn from experienced people. 

20. Garrett, J. 2005. Fume Tech Inc. Letter to Marta Montoro, USEPA E-Docket No. OAR 

2005-0122. 

This company conducts fumigations of structures and commodities and this letter reports 

experience with adoption of sulfuryl fluoride in rice mills, commodities and warehouses between 

2003 and November 2005. The author reported that his customers have switched from methyl 

bromide to sulfuryl fluoride and customers are satisfied with the efficacy. Costs to the customers 

of sulfuryl fluoride were similar; six commercial fumigation bid sheets submitted show decreased 

costs for sulfuryl fluoride. Fumigation down time (the biggest cost concern to mill operators) is 

the same with SF as with MB. Furthermore, SF fumigations can be manipulated to meet the 

requirements of the mill operator (in other words a faster fumigation can be achieved, if needed, 

by using more gas). From the viewpoint of the fumigation company, costs to seal the mill are 

higher, but this company maintains these higher costs are offset by the decreased time required 

for achieve gas equilibrium and aerate the mill after fumigation. This fumigator also notes the 

fumigation management program required by the SF supplier results in more precise fumigation, 

which maximises fumigation efficacy while minimising the amount of pesticide used. 

21. Harrison, G. 2008. President Canadian National Millers Association. Costs of Alternatives. 

Email to Marcotte, March 19. 

The author provided further information on costs of alternatives in Canadian milling, while 

explaining that it is illegal for a Canadian industry association to gather information on costs of 

goods and services. As part of research studies companies were required to submit invoices and 

so some costs are known and these were reported in the Canadian National Millers Association 

reports summarized above. Costs remain a consideration. It can take significantly greater volume 

of SF to achieve 100% or virtually 100% kill of all life stages including eggs. If heating is 

required to improve efficacy that introduces an additional cost factor, especially in OctoberNovember fumigations done in those mills that traditionally conduct two fumigations per year. 

The author says an SF fumigation requires a higher volume of gas required, at a higher price plus 

the added cost of adding supplemental heat to the structure. The author says that it is decidedly 

more expensive to pursue a satisfactory level of stored product pest control in Canadian flour 

mills using any heat treatment (portable external propane or gas), SF or intensive IPM alone or in 

combination with others. Additionally, at a later date, costs will also be reported resulting from 

studies currently being conducted in Canadian pasta facilities. 

22. Hazen, S.B. 2006. Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, USEPA, Office of Prevention, 

Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Letter to Stephen Payne, Vice President Pet Food Institute. 

November 8. 

Clarifies that pet foods are not listed among the foods that can be treated with SF, however pet 

foods sites can be fumigated. Also says that, “For the purposes of the ProFume label, EAP uses 

the phrase ‘incidental fumigation’ to mean the fumigation of negligible amounts of a commodity 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 143

due to their presence in a different targeted site of use. EPA uses the phrase “direct fumigation’ to 

mean that which occurs when the commodity itself is the targeted use site. These phrases do not 

have specific citations that we can reference but we consider them to be terms that can be 

understood by a certified applicator licensed in fumigation.” (Page 1). The letter further clarifies 

that (pertaining to pet foods and other unlisted foods), “You are correct in your interpretation that 

the label would require all finished product and the majority of the facilities bagged ingredients to 

be removed from the premises. Although the ideal situation would involve removing any and all 

traces of the processed foods from any and all spaces and equipment to be treated, it is not 

practical to expect that absolute removal of all foodstuffs will be accomplished. For example 

small bits of foodstuffs may be trapped within the equipment, may have fallen behind the 

equipment or may be present otherwise in minute quantities and these will receive incidental 

fumigation. To be conservative in assessing the health risks from this use, EPA assumes that these 

small quantities of food will be reincorporated into the bulk of the food being processed or 

discarded.” (Page 2). 

23. Hezy, T. 2008. Project manager Eitan Amichai Pest Control Company, Israel. Meeting with 

MBTOC and notes taken by Marcotte. 

This company conducts spot heat treatments of mill processing equipment and mill zones in 

Israel. This fumigator demonstrated their spot heat treatment method to MBTOC. They ensure the 

equipment reaches 52 ̊C for 30 minutes, and they kill any escaping pests by applying a thick drip 

line of food-grade mineral oil in a solid line around the equipment. The treatment of a piece of 

mill equipment requires 10 litres of diesel fuel. Total treatment time was 45 minutes when 

ambient temperature started at 34 ̊C. This fumigator noted that if ambient temperature is <8 ̊C 

then spot heat can not be used successfully. 

24. Hulasare, R. 2008. Thermal Remediation (Temp Air). Letter to Michelle Marcotte. 

Temp Air’s patented process uses propane/natural gas heaters to positively pressurize the 

structure to be heat treated. Monitoring is effected with wireless temperature transmitters and 

proprietary software. In the United States they have performed heat treatments from Florida to 

California and Texas to North Dakota. In Canada they have performed heat treatments from Nova 

Scotia to Alberta. Starting in 1989, Temp Air has performed over 100 successful heat treatments 

in flour mills, pet food plants, bakeries, food processing plants, bins and silos. Of these they 

report 60-70% were in flour mill sector. Temp Air reports that they have been regularly treating 

6-9 flour mills but that after a year of successful treatment some mills drop out. The reasons for 

this were: rapid adoption of alternatives in this sector, reverting to MB because of its continued 

availability, and vehement opposition of cuts in MB by flour milling industry. Concerning the 

cost of heat treatment, it was reported to sometimes cost more but that the economic benefits of 

heat treatment can be overlooked. These economic benefits include: no mandatory evacuation 

allowing some continued productivity during partial heat treatments; no extensive sealing of 

structure; ability to detect pockets of infestation during the heat treatment and allowing for 

corrective action (such as crack and crevice treatment). Temp Air outlined the many factors that 

contribute to heat treatment costs and how to manage or reduce them. A table was submitted 

showing treatment costs for 7 flour mills ranging in size of 73,600 – 4,500,000 cu ft with per cu ft 

treatment costs of US$0.02-0.45. 
144 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

25. IPCC, 2001, Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I 

to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

[Houghton, J.T., Y. Ding, D.J. Griggs, M. Noguer, P.J. van der Linden, X. Dai, K. Maskell, 

and C.A. Johnson(eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdon and New 

York, NY, USA, pp. 388-389. 

Global warming potential of methyl bromide is 5, relative to CO2 (100 yr horizon). 

26. Martin. S.A. 2005. Operations Manager, Gold River Mills. Letter to Dow Chemical 

Company. 

This letter relates the experiences of Gold River rice processing facility with its ProFume 

fumigations. The company did not experience re-infestation following ProFume fumigation, 

which they noted was an equal or better result than with methyl bromide. The overall cost of the 

sulfuryl fluoride fumigation was competitive with methyl bromide. 

27. Mueller, J.B. 2005. Fumigation Service and Supply. Letter to Marta Montoro, USEPA, EDocket No. OAR-2005-0122. 

This company has lengthy experience as fumigators and they have substituted several hundred 

thousand pounds of methyl bromide with alternatives. As of November 2005, they had used SF in 

over 100 post harvest fumigations. They expected a doubling of SF fumigations in 2006. They 

note that, from the fumigators viewpoint, initial costs of adopting sulfuryl fluoride are higher, a 

factor that can result in resistance to using the fumigant. With commitment to adopting SF instead 

of using MB, however, the fumigator’s initial costs are amortized over more fumigations and 

become insignificant. Furthermore, using SF according to the supplier’s required methods 

improves safety and provides improved observations and accountability. This fumigator also 

notes that, from the customers’ viewpoint, costs and efficacy are similar to methyl bromide. They 

submitted US cost comparisons from 7 fumigations between 2004 and 2005. Initially, the SF 

fumigations were US$2,000 - $2,500 higher in cost. But in 2005, the cost comparison showed 

cost differentials of US$-1,000 - +$1,000. In one instance, three MB fumigations were substituted 

with one SF fumigation plus supplemental foggings for a resulting savings of about US$24,000. 

28. Nomisma. 2006 plus executive summary which is undated but covers work done in 2005. 

Pest Control in the Italian food industry: Selected case studies. 

Nomisma is an economic research institute located in Italy. The report, which examines four food 

processing facilities in Italy, was submitted in English. One of the case studies was for a flour 

mill located in Northern Italy. This summary only pertains to the flour mill and where possible 

the costs of fumigation were highlighted (as opposed to the costs of pest control of wheat since 

MB is not used for wheat). The total cost of pest control in the flour mill was determined to be 

€0.0006 per 1 kg of product (including the cost of pest control of wheat). Since the removal of 

methyl bromide from the Italian market in 2005, the 5,700 m3

 mill now uses sulfuryl fluoride. 

The owner considers it as effective as methyl bromide. Annual SF fumigation is supplemented by 

the use of phosphine in the grain silo and by contact insecticides in out-buildings associated with, 

but not connected to, the mill. The cost of all these pest control measures in 2006 was € 7,000 

whereas in 2004, the cost of fumigation with methyl bromide was € 5,000 (but not including 

phosphine and contact insecticide elements included in the SF scenario). Industrial costs, which 

included mill cleaning, were determined to be 0.32% of the cost of the production of a kg of flour. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 145

29. Pest Management Regulatory Agency (Canada). 2006. Sulfuryl fluoride. Regulatory Note. 

December 20. 

This regulatory note provides a summary of the data reviewed for the registration of sulfuryl 

fluoride and the rationale for the regulatory decision. This document was included here because it 

reports the fate of SF in the environment and its Global Warming Potential (GWP). Once released 

into the atmosphere, SF is expected to persist for long periods of time (on the order of two 

decades) and is expected to be transported throughout the atmosphere. Modelling conducted by 

the applicant (Dow AgroSciences) indicates that SF has a high 100-yr GWP (278-477). This 

means that 1 kg of SF has the same effect as 278-477 kg of CO2. The authors of this report say 

that the California Department of Pesticide Registration has suggested that SF might be a 

greenhouse gas. 

30. Prabhakaran S., and B. Williams. 2007. Global status and adoption of ProFume® gas 

fumigant. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Outreach Conference, San Diego 

California November, 2007. 

This paper reviewed the history of SF use and its current regulatory status. Additionally, it 

reviewed the commercial performance record of SF from April 2004 – Sept 2007. During this 

time period, SF fumigations have increased from 4.7 fumigations per month in 2004 to 7.1 

fumigations per month in 2007 in the US. The US total of fumigations was 318 during this time 

period. Of these, 42% were fumigated multiple times. As of September 2007, 50% of rice mills 

by volume have adopted SF. Of the total fumigations reported in this paper, 85 wheat mills and 

warehouses were fumigated in 81 fumigations. This represented 32 individual locations. In the 

time period from 2003 – 2007, a total of 368 SF fumigations in countries other than the US were 

conducted. Outside the US, in each year since 2005, fumigations have doubled year over year. 

In the US wheat mill fumigations, the mean estimated temperature for these fumigations was 

84°F. In fact, the mean estimated temperature for the fumigation of all rice, wheat and other mills, 

warehouses and food processing facilities was higher than 80°F. (MBTOC based its assessment 

of egg kill efficacy on this research.) Location of mills was cross-referenced to USDA plant 

hardiness zones (an indication of environmental temperature among other factors). SF 

fumigations were conducted in locations ranging from International Falls Minnesota to Naples 

Florida, although the time of year of fumigations was not reported. The import of this cross 

reference is that mill temperatures of over 80°F were achieved, at some time in the year, over a 

very wide variation of location and presumed regional temperature variation in the United States. 

Details of pest efficacy performance have not been released, but the author, representing the 

supplier of this fumigant, says that only 2 structures of 426 structures known to date have not met 

customer expectations. When considering this reported level of reported customer satisfaction, 

with reported temperature of fumigation, we should consider the possibility that successful 

fumigations with SF are achieved when temperature above 80°F is also achieved. In other words, 

the SF fumigation is a combination treatment with temperatures above 80°F. 

31. Prabhakaran S. 2008. Dow AgroSciences. Email to Michelle Marcotte. February 12. 

Fumigation table submitted. Clarifying that, based on the number of fumigations and the amount 

of SF sold; fumigations had again doubled in 2007 over 2006 levels (all sectors). In flour mill 

sector, in 2006, 24 mills were fumigated. In 2007, 29 mills were fumigated. 
146 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

32. ProFume. Applicator Manual. Dow AgroSciences. 

This label is the legal document upon which the use and conditions of use of this pesticide are 

based. The label was reviewed as a fact check on comments made about the use of ProFume. The 

label indicates that although pet food facilities are included in the list of structures that can be 

treated, pet food commodity is not listed. The list of commodities which can be treated with 

sulfuryl fluoride is lengthy and includes many grains, cereals, dried fruits, nuts, ham, cheese, 

herbs and spices (page 10) it does not include ingredients commonly used in bakery mixes such 

as dried eggs, shortenings, leavenings, additives etc. Under Facility Fumigation Restrictions the 

following is written, “Special care should be taken to minimize quantities of processed foods 

prior to space fumigation. Processed food not practical to remove prior to fumigation may 

undergo incidental fumigation with ProFume. However no direct fumigation of processed foods is 

permitted unless the processed food is specifically listed in the section Commodities That Can Be 

Fumigated.” (page 10 and page 56). Additionally, rice mills can not be fumigated more than six 

times a year and other food handling establishments can not be fumigated more than three times a 

year (page 10). 

33. Reichmuth, C. May 22, 2007. Director Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture 

and Forestry and Institute for Stored Product Protection. Germany. 

Emailed comments on effect of heat treatment in large structures, and efficacy problems 

associated with sulfuryl fluoride treatment. [C.Reichmuth@BBA.DE]. 

Structures of volumes greater than 5000 m3

 are difficult to treat with heat, so SF has taken over 

the fumigation of larger buildings. Problems with SF include the Fumiguide suggestion that a 

dosage that will not control eggs could be used, since this intended level of pest kill is not 

consistent with the German food law. Also he asked if, in time, pest resistance might result from 

using the dosage which allows egg survival. Another problem is that the Fumiguide starts its 

dosage calculations at 20°C, which is unrealistic in many situations in Germany. Also the 

Fumiguide does not seem to allow enough time for gas diffusion to all parts of the building. 

(Note: Author C. Reichmuth is a MBTOC member.) 

34. Reichmuth, C. 2008. Heat treatment efficacy. Email to Marcotte. April 7. 

Discussed the difficulty in finding consensus on how to achieve an effective heat treatment. 

Noted there was lack of understanding of the physics of heating materials and that the difficulties 

in achieving a good heat treatment have been underestimated. But heat treatment companies and 

fumigation companies were improving their understanding and the results. Advises against 

making a treatment choice based on cost comparison because the treatment should be selected for 

its appropriateness for the situation and one treatment might not work well in the wrong situation. 

(Note: Author Reichmuth is a MBTOC member.) 

35. Riudavets, J. 2008. Costs of IPM. Email to Marcotte. April 7, 2008 

The author collected data from food industries in Spain concluding that the implementation of 

IPM in Spain increased costs resulting from the hiring of new staff devoted to hygiene. Also, in 

heat treatment trials in Spain, surviving pests were more evident after a heat treatment, possibly 

because the heat increased their activity. (Note: Author J. Riudavets is a MBTOC member.) 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 147

36. Small, G. 2007. A comparison of sulfuryl fluoride and methyl bromide fumigation on stored 

product insect populations in UK flour mills. Journal of Stored Product Research 

Four UK flour mills were monitored for flour beetles (Tribolium spp), and Mediterranean flour 

moths (Ephistia Kuehniella) before and fumigations either with sulfuryl fluoride or methyl 

bromide. Based on trapping results monitored for 12 weeks post fumigation, sulfuryl fluoride was 

determined to compare very favorably with methyl bromide. Pest rebound was attributed to 

incoming infested product or undetected foci of infestation outside the fumigated areas of the 

mills. 

In the sulfuryl fluoride fumigations, temperature during fumigation ranged from 24-35°C and 

30°C in the two mills. Dosage was 571-1326 g h/m3 in one fumigation and 678 -822 g h/m3 in 

the other fumigation. Exposure times were 21 and 18.2 hours. 

In the methyl bromide fumigations, dosages were 231.5 – 428.0 g h/m3 and 274.0 – 476.5 g h/m3 

Temperature was not noted and exposure times were 19 and 21 hours. 

37. Subramanyam. Bh. September 2006. Methyl bromide the debate continues. September. 

World Grain. Pp 52 

This is a general paper about MB alternatives directed to grain and milling managers and 

technical staff. The author also relates a case of the first use of SF to fumigate a pet food facility 

and the second use of SF in a flour mill. The case shows how widely the estimated half loss time 

can vary from the actual half loss time in the first fumigation, with the resulting impact on gas 

use. For example, the pet food facility was much more gas tight than first estimated. MBTOC 

notes, situations such as this help explain inconsistencies in reported costs for SF fumigation. For 

example, without having had the actual fumigation experience, the managers of this facility might 

have continued to predict much higher gas requirement than was actually necessary, and the 

projected costs might have continued to be considered too high. Once information is gathered 

from the first fumigation, many adjustments can be made which can decrease gas costs in 

subsequent fumigations, if necessary and assist better planning for gas supply, fumigation time 

etc. The pet food fumigation evaluated the effect on several test species. Following a 17.5 h 

fumigation, plus 3 h aeration, at 28.9°C (84°F), all test species were killed except for 96%+ 2.1% 

of red flour beetle eggs. In the flour mill fumigation, following a 20.5 h fumigation, plus 3 hr 

aeration at 25.6 °C (78°F), 100% of red flour beetle adults were killed (egg results not reported), 

IMM egg kill was 98.3% +1.7% and egg mortality of warehouse beetle was 95.3%+ 2.6%. The 

author reports that in the US alone 130 commercial SF fumigations took place between 2004 and 

2006, including a total of 53 wheat mills. Concerning pest rebound, the author says pest rebound 

is the same in mills fumigated by MB or SF and that since eggs are laid in product accumulation, 

a good sanitation program should remove the eggs and accumulated product. The author says that 

tests done in the US and UK suggest population rebound is primarily due to lack of inspection of 

inbound product and lack of proper pest inclusion practices. Concerning heat treatment the author 

says it is important to provide at least 7-10 BTU per hour per cubic foot of the area being treated 

based on his research and the use of the Heat Treatment Calculator of Kansas State University. 

This Calculator and heat models should be used to decrease the cost and time and increase the 

efficacy of facility heat treatments. 
148 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

38. Subramanyam, Bh. 2006. Effect of humidity on heat treatment. Milling Journal. Fourth 

Quarter. Pp 36-38 

The effect of humidity variation on lethality of heat treatment to adult red flour beetles was tested 

at the Kansas State pilot flour mill and in their laboratories . The heat sources were portable steam 

heaters supplied by Armstrong-Hunt and a built in steam heater. Humidity variation was achieved 

through the use of glycerol-water. As previously published by various authors and prior work by 

this research team, temperatures of 50°C for 60 minutes will kill 99% of adult red flour beetles. 

This test confirmed that temperatures below 50°C will result in pest survival. One test showed 

that humidity of 53.6%-63.1% will result in higher pest survival, at 50°C, if time is inadequate 

(30 minutes). However, 100% mortality was achieved at all humidity levels tested when 50°C 

was achieved for 50 minutes or more. Since the premise for commercial heat treatment of mills is 

to achieve 50° - 60°C at all mill locations for 24-36 hours, the authors concluded that humidity 

had no effect on lethality of heat treatment. 

39. Subramanyam, Bh. 2006. Rice mill fumigation. Milling Journal. Second Quarter. Pp 44-47 

In spring 2005, Kansas State researchers conducted a nationwide assessment of flour beetle 

population dynamics in wheat and rice mills following ProFume or methyl bromide fumigations. 

This short report dealt with insect trapping in rice mills and a subsequent survey of mill 

managers. Insect monitoring was done by trapping, and the author cautioned that trapping results 

have to be interpreted with caution because the results are affected by numerous factors. Millers 

gave ProFume a performance score of 5 (on a scale of 1-5 where 5 was excellent) based on no 

infestation after 30 days or longer. 

40. Tsai, W.T. Mason L.J. and K.E. Heleji. Undated. A preliminary report of sulfuryl fluoride 

and methyl bromide fumigation of flour mills. Fumigation and Control Atmosphere. 

Departments of Entomology and Agricultural and Biological Engineering Perdue University. 

In this study, fumigations at six US flour mills were monitored. Four mills were fumigated with 

sulfuryl fluoride, and two were fumigated with methyl bromide. Populations of the test species, 

Indian Meal moth (IMM) and Red Flour beetle (RFB) were measured with trapping techniques, 

both inside and outside the mills. Prior to the fumigations, a maximum of 24 IMM and 27 RFB 

were trapped indoors each week. Trappings of pests outside the mills indicate significant pest 

pressure both before and after the fumigations, with the exception of RFB outside the mill treated 

with MB. 

Following SF fumigation, IMM indoor populations dropped to 2-3 per week for the first week, 

but then rebounded to pre-treatment levels. RFB populations dropped to zero in the first week and 

only 3 were trapped by the 4th week after fumigation. 

Following the MB fumigation, IMM indoor population rebounded to pre-fumigation levels within 

one month. Pre-fumigation 135 RFB were trapped indoors (0 outdoors). After MB fumigation 

RFB dropped to 7-12 in the first week but rebounded to 75 captured in the 6th week post 

fumigation for one facility but in another MB treated facility remained low (<25 per two week 

period). 

Both fumigants resulted in 100% mortality of larval and adult stages of both species. Mortality of 

fumigant-exposed pest eggs was measured post fumigation in the lab. Egg mortality was 

measured in two ways, depending on egg hatch counts, and whether hatched eggs survived but 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 149

failed to live to adulthood. SF fumigated IMM eggs had less survival (99.67 – 100% mortality), 

but MB fumigated IMM eggs showed slightly higher survival, (88.67 – 100% mortality). 

MB fumigation resulted in 100% mortality of RFB eggs. Looking at SF fumigations and survival 

of RFB eggs, one facility showed 90 – 99% egg mortality (depending on which way mortality 

was measured). In another facility, mortality as demonstrated by egg hatch was low (40% 

mortality), but since the fumigated then hatched eggs all died before adulthood, eventual 

mortality was 100%. The authors noted that when SF concentration/time ratio (CT) was between 

338 -606 oz/Mcf egg and pupal stages were more difficult to control. However at higher SF CT 

(606 oz/Mcf) there was no problem to control all life stages. 

Populations in all facilities rebounded regardless of fumigant used, and facilities with the highest 

sanitation levels showed the slowest pest rebound. 

41. US Census Bureau. 2005. Flour milling: 2002. 2002 Economic Census Manufacturing 

Industry Series. 

Table 1 of this report indicates that in 2002, there were 340 flour mill establishments. However, 

this information was updated by the email from Jim Bair, North American Millers Association as 

reported above. 

42. Watson, C., Cross, D. and M. Braithwaite. 2008. Igrox Ltd (UK). The development and use 

of ProFume in the UK. Letter to MBTOC. January 31. 

The authors (Chairman, Technical Director and Managing Director of this company), outlined the 

use of SF beginning in 2004 with one fumigation leading to 8 fumigations in 2007 when MB was 

phased out. Initial work with SF and no heat added, or when heat was only added at the beginning 

of the application gave mixed results and results were not as good as expected. In 2005, began 

ensuring a temp of 30°C throughout the building and throughout the fumigation plus CTP of up 

to 700ghr showed good results. By 2007 with further improvements to heat distribution, 

improvements in precision of dosing accurately, relation of temperature to CTP and improved 

mill sealing gave excellent results. All results were as good as and sometimes better than MB in 

the same mills. They concluded that in temperate climates when using CTP in range of 700ghr it 

is essential to maintain temperatures of 30°C plus throughout the fumigation period in the area 

being treated, and to have the ability to adjust CTP precisely throughout the fumigation in relation 

to the temperature actually obtained. In this way, the objective of achieving an economical, fully 

effective fumigation which will compare with the very best methyl bromide fumigations of the 

past is achieved. (Note: Author C. Watson, Chairman of Igrox is a MBTOC member.) 

43. Watson, C. Efficacy and costs of heat versus heat plus SF. Email to Marcotte April 5. 

The author notes that if a facility has heaters it can use, then heat treatment may be inefficient but 

it can be repeated often. As a result the overall cost can be an issue. SF in temperate climates has 

to be used as a combination process with continuous heat to ensure egg kill, but the combination 

treatment does not have to be significantly more expensive than MB. An effective heat treatment 

is more difficult and expensive than a poor heat treatment. Effective heat treatment requires 

sufficient heat, lots of air movement, continuous monitoring with subsequent adjustment of air 

fans. (Note: Author Watson is a MBTOC member.) 
150 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

44. Watson, C. IPM and full site fumigations. Email to Marcotte April 5 

The author agrees that IPM is a necessary component to full site pest control but disagrees that 

IPM alone will result in adequate pest control in a flour mill; a full site treatment method is still 

required. Author maintains that unless there is a regulatory issue with SF or heat or other full site 

treatment cannot be used, then MB can be replaced in almost all flour mills in the world. Author 

submitted an IPM flour mill strategy. (Note: Author Watson is a MBTOC member.) 

45. Watson, R. 2005. Quality Control Director, Stafford County Flour Mills Co. Letter to Dow 

AgroScience. 

The quality control director of this flour mill reported that ProFume fumigation of their flour mill 

is a very good alternative to methyl bromide. In the case of the fumigation of concrete flour bins, 

sulfuryl fluoride worked better than methyl bromide. The company has determined that sulfuryl 

fluoride will meet their fumigation needs, when used with good housekeeping and a weekly pest 

control program (defined as crack and crevice treatment and twice monthly fogging). ProFume 

allows them to plan their fumigations when convenient to the company, as opposed to being 

forced to fumigate because of insect infestation. 

10.9 Acknowledgements 

This report “Current Status of Technical Efficacy, Costs and Adoption of Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives in Flour Mills” was written by the Methyl Bromide TOC, Subcommittee on 

Quarantine, Structures and Commodities (QSC); this effort was co-ordinated by co-chairs 

Michelle Marcotte and Jonathan Banks. 

This is a review paper; MBTOC QSC has based its conclusions on the reference reports provided 

by Parties, researchers, flour mill industries and fumigators. MBTOC QSC sincerely appreciates 

the contributions of all these reports. Especially the research done by the few stored product 

research scientists still currently working on flour milling problems at government and university 

research institutes is greatly appreciated. The results of their work provided the backbone of the 

treatment recommendations made here. 

ProFumeTM and FumiguideTM are trademarks of Dow AgroSciences, which is the usual supplier 

of sulfuryl fluoride (SF) to North American mills. MBTOC QSC’s use of product or company 

names does not equate to an endorsement. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 151

11 Evaluations of 2008 Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 

and Related Matters 

11.1 Scope of the Report 

This 2008 interim report provides initial evaluations by MBTOC of CUNs submitted for methyl 

bromide in 2009 and 2010 by Parties in accordance with Decision IX/6 (Appendix II). CUNs 

were submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by the Parties, in accordance with the timetable set out in 

the Annex I referred to by Decision XVI/4 (Appendix III). 

This interim report also provides information from Parties on stocks (Decision Ex.1/4 (9f)), 

partial information on actual MB consumption for critical uses (Decision XVII/9) and apparent 

adoption rates of alternatives, as evidenced by trend lines on reduction of MB CUNs, for critical 

use exemptions as required under Decision XIX/9. It was noted that these trend lines do not 

necessarily indicate true adoption rates, but may include allowance for use of stocks and changes 

in procedure, such as altered MB dosage rates and/or frequency of treatment. 

A revision of the standard presumptions for some preplant uses of MB, as agreed by Parties at the 

19th MOP, is also shown. 

MBTOC Soils (MBTOC S) has initial responsibility for the pre-plant uses and alternatives of 

methyl bromide. MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and Commodities (MBTOC QSC) has initial 

responsibility for issues concerning methyl bromide uses and alternatives for quarantine, preshipment, structural and commodity treatments. Evaluations of CUNs for the two categories are 

reported separately below. 

11.2 Issues for Consideration by Parties 

Issue No 1. 

In evaluating Critical use Nominations, Decision IX/6(1)(b)(iii) instructs: 

“(1)(b) That production and consumption, if any, of methyl bromide for critical uses should be 

permitted only if: ... 

(iii) It is demonstrated that an appropriate effort is being made to evaluate, 

commercialize 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;” 
152 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP considers that some nominations are not demonstrating appropriate effort to evaluate, 

commercialise and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives and substitutes, as required 

by Decision IX/6. In relation to this Decision, TEAP considers required effort to include: 

• conduct and report on trials, and report efforts to commercialise and secure national 

regulatory approval within the preceding year of the nomination, as well as prior years. 

TEAP suggests Parties may wish to give further guidance on this matter or ask MBTOC to clarify 

specific criteria that would meet the requirements of Decision IX/6 and instruct MBTOC to 

interpret Decision IX/6 according to these criteria, when conducting evaluations of CUNs. 

Issue No 2. 

Several instances have come to the notice of TEAP and MBTOC where particular treatments 

have been classified as QPS treatments by some Parties, but under some interpretations of 

Decisions VI/11, VII/5 and XI/12 may not be so. 

TEAP has discussed the possible limitations to the QPS classification in its previous reports (e.g. 

TEAP 1999). The leaflet entitled ‘Methyl Bromide: Quarantine and Preshipment Uses’, copublished by UNEP and IPPC also discussed this issue (UNEP 2007). 

Parties that exempt particular treatments as QPS from phase out schedules may wish to review 

this classification and take appropriate action (e.g. nominate for critical use, incorporate the use as 

part of a phase out project) if the use is found not to be a QPS treatment after review. 

Issue No 3. 

Technically feasible alternatives are available for almost all the nominated uses (MBTOC 2006) 

and most Parties are transitioning to alternatives rapidly, often within 3 years of local availability. 

In many sectors complete phase out is now possible, but transition rates are slowed by specific 

regulatory and commercial barriers (registration and associated data gathering, commercial 

constraints to registration for minor uses, certification regulations, buffer zones, lack of MRLs for 

food commodities) and slow registration of key alternatives preventing transition. It is recognised 

that legitimate environmental and public health concerns contribute to regulatory limits on 

alternatives and are a matter of national sovereignty. In some instances, governments and 

registrants have not made registration of new alternatives a priority, particularly when the 

alternatives cost more than methyl bromide. 

Like the phase-out of EUEs for MDIs, Parties may wish to require Action Plans that describe the 

steps necessary to achieve a declared final phase-out. A date-certain phase-out date would be an 

incentive to users and a reward for firms offering environmentally-superior and the next best legal 

(registered and not constrained by regulation) alternatives to methyl bromide. An example of 

such a plan is being developed by Japan to phase out all critical uses for soil uses by 2013. 

11.3 Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 

11.3.1 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 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 153

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 

Appendices II and III of this report for copies of these Decisions. 

11.3.2 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 answers to questions requested by MBTOC, up to the date of the assessment. 

MBTOC has again 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 modern references. 

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 relating to CUNs. 

11.3.3 Consideration of Stocks - Decision Ex.1/4 (9f) 

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 with the information on stocks. Since the 

consideration of stocks is an active area of negotiation for the Parties, 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 summarised in Table 11-2 below. Parties may wish to consider this 

information in the light of Decision IX/6 1(b)(ii). Tables 11-1 –13 show the stock data that have 

been reported by the Parties in 2006 and 2007. 

Efficient functioning of commerce requires a certain level of “pipeline” stocks and additional 

stocks to respond to emergencies. Additionally, stocks may be held on behalf of other Parties or 

for exempt uses (feedstock and QPS uses). The correct or optimal level of stocks for virtually 

every input to production is not zero. Economic efficiency dictates that stocks be held in the form 

and location that is least cost. 
154 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-1 Quantities of MB (metric tonnes) ‘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 

authorised 

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 146.6 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 1 072.35 1 088.708 1 088.708 0 

Japan 748 0 594.995 594.995 546.861 48.134 

New 

Zealand 

50 6.9 40.5 47.4 44.58 2.81 

USA(a) 9 552.879 7 613 not reported 7 170 443 

(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. 

Table 11-2 Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2006, as reported by 

Parties in 2007/2008 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorised 

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 75.1 0 55.308 55.308 0 

Canada 53.897 3.713 41.969 45.682 44.114 1.568 

EC 3 536.755 114.953 1 462.747 1 577.700 1 558.557 19.114 

Israel 880.29 0 840.6 840.6 840.6 0 

Japan 741.4 70.735 488.81 559.545 540.207 19.338 

USA 8 081.753 9 974(a) 

443(b) 

6 924 16 898 6 425 8 170(c) 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 155

Amount of pre-2005 stock on hand. 

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

2005). 

The sum of 499 tonnes of stocks produced/imported in 2006 specifically for CUEs, plus 7,671 tonnes 

stocks acquired pre-2005. 

Table 11-3 Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2007, as reported by 

Parties in 2008 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorised 

by MOP for 

2007 

Amount on 

hand at 

start of 

2007 

Quantity 

Acquired for 

CUEs in 2005

(production 

+imports) 

Amount 

available 

for use in 

2007 

Quantity 

used for 

CUEs in 

2007 

Amount 

on hand 

at the 

end of 

2007 

Australia 48.553 0 45.832 45.832 45.832 0 

Canada 52.874 0.897 38.073 38.970 38.622 0.348 

EC(a) 676.306 31.635 484.842 516.477 508.031 8.446 

Israel 966.465 0 940.675 940.675 750.225 190.45 

Japan 636.172 23.417 479.290 502.707 485.113 17.594 

USA 6 749 7 671(b) 4 314 11 985 4 269 6 503(c) 

(a) Preliminary report 

(b) Amount of pre-2005 stocks 

(c) The sum of 45 tonnes of stocks produced/imported in 2007 specifically for CUEs, plus 

6,458 tonnes stocks acquired pre-2005.

11.3.4 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use - Decision XVII/9 

Decision XVII/9(10) of the 17th MOP requests TEAP and its MBTOC to “report for 2005 and 

annually thereafter, for each agreed critical use category, the amount of methyl bromide 

nominated by a Party, the amount of the agreed critical use and either: 

(a) The amount licensed, permitted or authorised; or 

(b) The amount used” 

Since the start of the CUN reviews in 2003, MBTOC has provided the amounts of MB nominated 

and agreed for each critical use (Appendix V). Not all Parties supply data under Table 2 of the 

accounting framework, set out on p. 65 of the Handbook on Critical Use Nominations (version 4. 

2005). Data reported here for (a) and (b) above is thus incomplete. 

Tables and figures in this report (Table 11-4, Figures 11-1 and 11-2, and Appendix V) show the 

nominated MB amounts and the apparent rate of reduction in MB or adoption of alternatives 

achieved by Parties. It should be noted that for those countries that have pre-2005 stocks of MB 

that are being drawn down, the reductions in CUEs from year to year cannot be taken directly as 

evidence of alternative adoption since pre-2005 stocks will have been sold into the same sectors. 
156 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-4 in particular shows the amounts nominated and approved for ‘Critical Use’ in 2009 

and 2010. 

11.3.5 Update on Rates of Adoption of Alternatives (Decision XIX/9) 

As of the 2008 round, Decision XIX/9 para. 3 requests: ‘ the Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel to ensure that recent findings with regard to the adoption rate of alternatives are 

annually updated and reported to the Parties in its first report of each year and inform the work of 

the Panel’. 

In general similar alternatives are being adopted by the same sectors throughout a number of 

countries, although the rate of adoption has varied depending on regulations on their use, 

differences in registration between countries and other market forces. Where possible data is 

included in this report showing actual rates of adoption in key regions which have phased out 

methyl bromide recently. In particular, data is included from the EC Management Strategy 

(2007). In addition, past adoption rates of alternatives are presented in previous Assessment 

Reports (MBTOC 2007). Figures 11-1 and 11-2 in this report show the apparent reduction rates 

for MB use achieved by many Parties in a number of key sectors. As noted above, true reduction 

and adoption rates may vary from the rate of change of CUN/CUE because of factors such as use 

of stocks or transfer of approved MB between categories The CUN reviews presented in Tables 

11-6 and 11-11 also provide detail of some of the key alternatives that Parties have and should 

consider to further replace MB for the remaining uses. 

In several of the remaining CUNs for 2009 or 2010 apparent adoption rates were low. Only one 

CUN has shown no adoption of alternatives. 

In previous rounds of CUNs, MBTOC has recognised that time is needed to effect phase-in of 

alternatives and has accepted this as a reasonable technical argument for lack of availability to the 

end user sensu Decision IX/6. Some CUNs in the 2008 round argued that time was required to 

allow the relevant industry to transition to available alternatives. However, whilst some showed a 

significant reduction in nominated quantity compared to previous years, others had similar 

quantities of MB compared to last year. A CUN for 2010 for packaged rice for domestic use 

continued to claim that zero adoption of alternatives is possible given the poor financial status of 

the applicant. All reductions to date have been achieved through changes in fumigation procedure 

with methyl bromide. 

This year, MBTOC QSC made a special study of technical and economic efficacy, feasibility and 

adoption of alternatives in the flour milling sector. The report is included in this Progress Report 

and was very useful in forming recommendations for this sector. 

There is still limited guidance and data available on what is a reasonable rate of transition to 

existing and available alternatives. In paragraph 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 

must be explained fully in the TEAP report and take fully into account the information provided 

by the nominating Party, the supplier, the distributor or the manufacturer. Relevant factors for 

such a calculation include 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.” 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 157

Previous experience has shown that where industries have been heavily dependent on MB, e.g. 

strawberries, tomatoes and other vegetable crops (e.g., Australia, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, 

New Zealand) almost complete adoption of alternative technologies (especially those requiring 

similar application technologies) has been achieved in a 3 to 4 year period. A full list of adoption 

rates obtained within the EC is shown in Appendix IV. These regions have similar pests 

complexes to those requesting CUNs, but may have different regulatory issues. The European 

Commission also surveyed 12 countries about their adoption of alternatives in flour milling and 

that survey is included in the flour milling report (see Section 10). 

Further guidance from the Parties, giving expected rates of adoption of alternatives following 

registration, would assist MBTOC in evaluation of CUNs in the future. 

11.3.6 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005 

As part of the requirements of Decision XVII/9 trends in phase out by Parties are shown below. 

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

consumption for preplant soil uses and post harvest uses, although this has occurred at very 

different rates. In this round, the phase out of MB for several major uses has slowed. Figures 11-1 

and 11-2 show the trends in the reduction in amounts approved/nominated by Parties for ‘Critical 

Use’ from 2005 to 2010 for some key uses. The complete trends in phase out of MB by country, 

as indicated by change in CUE, are shown in appendix V 
158 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 11-1 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 2009 or 2010. 

Cucurbits and Melons

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

metric tonnes

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Japan

USA

Cutflowers

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

metric tonnes

Australia

Belgium

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Portugal

Spain

USA

Orchard Replant

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

metric tonnes

France

USA

 

Peppers and Eggplant

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2005

20062007

20082009

2010

Years

metric tonnes

Belgium

France

Italy

Japan

Spain

USA

Strawberry Fruit

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

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 2010

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Greece

Italy

USA
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 159

Figure 11-2 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 2009 2010

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Canada

France

Germany

Greece

Israel

Italy

UK

USA
160 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-4 Summary of Critical Use Nomination (2005 – 2010 in part) and Exemption (2005 – 2009 in part) Am

Parties under the CUN/CUE Process. (Note: A breakdown of CUN and CUE amounts by sector is given in App

QUANTITIES NOMINATED QUANTITIES APPROVED 

PARTY 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 

(1ExMOP and 16MOP) 

2006 (16MOP+ 2ExMOP+ 17MOP) 

2007 (17MOP + 18MOP) 

Australia 206.950 81.250 52.145 52.900 38.990 37.61 146.600 75.100 48.517 Canada 61.992 53.897 46.745 42.241 34.375 36.41 61.792 53.897 52.874 European Community1

5754.361 4213.47 1239.873 245.00 0 0 4392.812 3536.755 689.142 

Israel 1117.156 1081.506 1236.517 952.845 716.877 * 1089.306 880.295 966.715 Japan 748.000 741.400 651.700 589.600 508.90 288.500 748.000 741.400 636.172 New Zealand 53.085 53.085 32.573 0 0 0 50.000 42.000 18.234 Switzerland 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 0 8.700 7.000 0 USA 10753.997 9386.229 7417.999 6415.153 4958.034 3999.473 9552.879 8081.753 6749.060 TOTALS 18704.241 15617.837 10677.552 8297.739 6257.176 4361.993 16050.089 13418.200 9160.714 

* 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
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 161

11.3.7 Evaluations of CUNs – 2008 round for 2009 and 2010 exemptions 

MBTOC S and MBTOC QSC subcommittees met concurrently April 14-18, 2008 in Tel Aviv, 

Israel. This meeting was held as required by the time schedule for considerations of CUNs given in 

Annex I referred to in Decision XVI/4. If required, further meetings to consider further input from 

nominating Parties on their various CUNs will be held prior to publication of a final report in 

October 2008. Consensus decisions were made in subcommittees. Outcomes from deliberations by 

the two MBTOC subcommittees were discussed and vetted in plenary. 

CUNs in this report relate to CUEs sought for 2009 and 2010. No nominations in this particular 

round were submitted for longer periods. 

Five Parties (Australia, Canada, Israel, Japan, USA) submitted nominations for either 2009 or 2010. 

These Parties have submitted nominations in previous CUN rounds. Israel submitted a nomination 

for seed production, which had not been applied for in the 2006 and 2007, but was in 2003 and 

2004. The total number of nominations has been reduced from about 58 nominations submitted by 

seven countries in the last round. The EC has submitted no nominations in this round for 2009. 

Japan indicated in correspondence that it plans to phase out all soils uses by 2013. Some CUNs 

were for increased acreages of crop, new areas or increased harvested commodity under methyl 

bromide treatment. 

MBTOC Soils assessed 31 nominations, which included 12 nominations for 2009 and 19 

nominations for 2010. These totalled 697.084 and 4042.582 metric tonnes respectively. In its 

interim assessment, MBTOC has been able to recommend a total of 608.454 for 2009 and 3167.335 

tonnes for 2010. 

MBTOC QSC assessed two new or additional critical use nominations for 2009 and seven 

nominations for 2010, totalling 7.719 and 313.341 metric tonnes respectively. At this time for these 

nominations, MBTOC has been able to recommend 4.4 tonnes for 2009 and 235.177 tonnes for 

2010. 

Two Parties met with MBTOC during the Tel Aviv meeting for discussions with regard to their 

CUNs, in accordance with paragraph 8 of Annex 1 referred to in Decision XVI/4. 

MBTOC has sometimes recommended quantities of MB for 2009 or 2010, which are different from 

those nominated. Grounds used for these recommendations are given in detail after the relevant 

CUNs in Table 11-6. The adjustments follow the presumptions given in Table 11-5. 

Two nominations assessed by MBTOC-QSC were placed in the ‘unable to assess’ category because 

information was insufficient to make an evaluation, as required under paragraph 10 of Annex 1 of 

the final report of 16 MOP. 

In paragraph 20 of Annex 1 referred to in Decision XVI/4, Parties, among other things, specifically 

requested that MBTOC explicitly state the specific basis for the Party’s economic statement 

relating to CUNs. Table 2 provides this information for each CUN. This information was prepared 

by MBTOC economists. 

In general, CUNs resulted mainly from the following issues: regulatory restrictions on alternatives, 

scale-up of alternatives, economic issues and, to a much smaller degree, the technical unavailability 

of alternatives. This was as in the previous two years of CUNs. For the most part, technical 

alternatives exist. Additionally, MBTOC notes that some Parties continue to struggle with the 
162 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

ability to adapt previously identified alternatives to their circumstances, within their definition of 

economic feasibility. 

11.3.8 Critical Use Nominations Review 

In considering the CUNs submitted in 2008, as previously, both MBTOC subcommittees applied 

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

presumptions given below (Table 11-5). In particular MBTOC sought to provide consistent 

treatment of CUNs within and between Parties while at the same time taking local circumstances 

into consideration, and also to provide transparency in its processes and conclusions. 

In evaluating the CUNs for soil treatments, MBTOC assumed that a technically feasible alternative 

to MB would need to provide sufficient pest and/or weed control for continued production of that 

crop to existing market standards. 

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 (Porter et al., 2006). The published studies assisted in providing additional 

transparency to MBTOC evaluations, as requested by the Parties in Decision XV/4. 

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. 

Unless otherwise indicated, the most recent CUE approved by the Parties for a particular CUN was 

used as baseline for consideration of continuing nominations. In some instances, this quantity 

differed from that used as a baseline by the nominating Party. Assessments were independent of 

the size of the nominated quantity. Specific circumstances of each nomination were taken into 

account. 

The standard presumptions, used by MBTOC to assess nominations, are given in the sections 

below. 

11.3.9 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 2008 CUN process, according to a 

standardised format developed by TEAP. 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. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 163

11.3.10 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 (Porter et al., 2006). The published studies provided additional 

transparency to MBTOC evaluations, as requested by the Parties in Decision XV/4. 

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. 
164 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

11.3.11 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 

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

allowed by the relevant regulatory authorities in individual CUN regions, without reference to 

sustainability. 

11.3.12 Frequency of allowed MB use 

In the CUN round for 2008, 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. Instead of annual fumigation, some growers continue to experiment 

with fumigating every 2nd or 3rd year. In some production systems, methyl bromide is already used 

only every 3rd or 4th year as a result of multiple crop rotation. 

Noting this effort, MBTOC will not automatically conclude that episodes when MB is not used 

mean a fully successful adoption of alternatives. There is no instruction from Parties as to how to 

consider renewed CUNs in the future that result from a potential need for methyl bromide in the 

years where a reduced frequency fumigation is to take place. 

11.3.13 Use of disposable canisters of MB 

One non-Article 5 Party is still using small disposable canisters (i.e. 500 to 750g canisters) for 

application of MB for preplant soil use under plastic films under strict worker health guidelines. 

Canister applications have been eliminated in all remaining non-Article 5 Parties as this application 

is considered to be less efficient for the control of soil-borne pathogens than other methods. The 

treatment is considered more dangerous to workers than injection methods, because and generally 

treatment does not involve use of trained contractors. This practice is not considered as effective 

for pathogen control as use of MB/Pic mixtures and also can lead to high emissions of methyl 

bromide as the MB gas is released immediately beneath the plastic sheets. 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. In this case, farmers are reported to use strict controls. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 165

11.4 Interim CUN Report – Issues Specific to MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and 

Commodities 

11.4.1 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities 

Table 11-5 below states the standard presumptions applied by MBTOC QSC in assessing this round 

of CUNs where continued methyl bromide use is sought. These have not changed since 

presentation to the Parties at 17th MOP. 

 Table 11-5 Standard presumptions used in assessment of CUNs – Structures and Commodities 

 Comment CUN Adjustment Exception 

Dosage rate - 

structural 

20 gm-3 Nominations using higher 

dosage rates were reduced 

proportionally 

Where approved label rates 

require higher dosage rate 

or where substantiated by 

the Party 

Dosage rate –

commodities 

EPPO standard for bulk 

commodities as given in 

MBTOC (1994, 1998) 

Nominations using higher 

dosage rates were reduced 

proportionally 

Where approved label rates 

require higher dosage rates 

or where substantiated by 

the Party 

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. 

11.4.2 Adjustments for standard dosage rates 

No adjustments were made to nominated quantities for 2009 or 2010 for excessive dosage rates in 

postharvest applications. All CUNs considered used dosage rates close to or below the standard 

presumptions. 

11.4.3 Details of evaluations 

Fifteen members of MBTOC QSC met in Tel Aviv to review the CUNs. Members were present 

from: Argentina, Australia, Canada, Belize, Croatia, France, Japan, Kenya, Netherlands, New 

Zealand, Philippines (2), Spain, United Kingdom and United States. There were 6 Article 5(1) 

members present. 

Parties submitted nine CUNs for the use of MB in structures and commodities in 2008. 

Three nominations were for 2009 for a total MB amount of 8.467 tonnes and seven were for 2010 

for a total MB amount of 313.341 tonnes. One Party adjusted its nominated quantity downwards 

during correspondence subsequent to submission of the CUN, resulting in a total nomination for 

2009 of 7.719 tonnes. 

Of nominations for 2009, MBTOC recommended 4.4 tonnes in 2009 and for 2010 237.117 tonnes. 

MBTOC did not recommend 23.484 tonnes for 2010. 

Table 11-6 provides the MBTOC QSC interim recommendations for the CUNs submitted in 2008. 
166 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-6 Interim evaluations of CUNs for commodity or structural treatments, submitted in 2008 for 2009 or 201

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

Australia Rice 

6.150 6.150 9.205 9.200 7.820 None - 7.8

Not recommended – MBTOC does not recommend the Party’s nomination of 7.820 tonnes for packaged rice. The Party has not ado

according to the CUN does not plan to adopt any alternatives until after having had 3 years of high harvests. The CUN indicates the unlikely to begin adopting alternatives until possibly 2013. MBTOC recognises that drought has resulted in severe economic hardsh

however, alternatives for this MB use include phosphine and controlled atmospheres; they are registered and commercially available 

Alternatives to MB are technically and economically feasible and in use in many other countries for this product. Phosphine treatmen

tarps or in containers in the yard without the construction of new silos. Controlled atmosphere is used for packaged rice in Greece a

are available on a lease basis. MBTOC observes that the MB used is recaptured. 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN states drought has made it impossible to undertake investment in phosphine facilities. Estim

silos would be $Aus47 million. CUN states it would involve three years of transition, potentially complete in 2013. However, CUN do

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

capital cost over the economic life of the investment CUN describes trials of alternatives, two of which, namely cold disinfestation and ‘packaging alteration with oxygen scavenging’ are 

infeasible. In the former case, party expects costs to exceed $Aus100 million plus an unknown cost for electricity. In the latter case, 

costs increase from $Aus34 per tonne to over $Aus119 per ton. 

CanadaMills 

47 (included mills and pasta) 

34.774 30.167 

(included mills only) 

28.650 26.913 None - 22

MBTOC is unable to assess the nomination of 22.878 tonnes for treatment of particular flour mills in Canada in 2010. The amount re

a 15.3% decrease over the amount granted by the Parties for 2009, but in this sector, trials of alternatives can replace a methyl brom

fluoride as an alternative fumigant to methyl bromide has only recently become available for use in mills in Canada, and it is subject 

constrained by lack of tolerances for residues in foodstuffs that may be present in mills, and not easily removed. Heat systems conti

both as whole-site treatments and as part of IPM systems. In order to allow an assessment, additional data are requested on numbe

nomination and the frequency of fumigations with MB in them. MBTOC will reassess this nomination and requests the Party to provid

to permit frequency for MB fumigation not exceeding once per year and demonstrating adoption of available alternatives. Only one M

should be necessary in Canada where pest pressure from sources external to the mills is expected to be less than that experienced 

periods of warmth and humidity conducive to pest activity. Infestation is managed, both in Canada and elsewhere, by other approac

for additional treatments. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN states the use of alternatives and associated building modifications would add 2 to 4 p

costs that would be passed to Canadian consumers whose use accounts for 80% of annual shipments of milled grain products. Also program for government financial assistance to millers. MBTOC notes that lack of government financial assistance programs has no

assessments of economic feasibility. CUN did not provide detailed data on estimation of the 2%-4% cost increase. Regardless of ex

suggests milled grain product market relationships are such that added costs would be borne in large part by consumers. In turn, thi

and regulatory barriers to adoption of alternatives can be overcome, the Party will have no basis to then assert economic infeasibility

Canada Pasta 

(see Canada mills) 

10.457 6.757 6.067 None 5.319 2 

MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 2.0 tonnes for pasta mills in Canada for 2009. This provision is to allow treatment of any o

this CUN with methyl bromide, as part of orderly transition to alternatives. This volume of methyl bromide is recommended for use, if 

alternative treatment failed, or if MB is required for food storage areas if no other alternative is suitable or available. Interim reports s

trials done late in 2007 have demonstrated some effectiveness in these facilities. It is clear that additional experience with this fumig

premises to optimise efficacy. It may be that moderate supplemental heating will be required to improve effectiveness of the SF trea

stage of pests. Further SF trials are scheduled in 2008. In this sector, trials of alternatives can replace a MB treatment. Use of sulfur

in areas that do not contain raw commodity or foodstuffs, as there is currently no residue tolerance in Canada for fluorine in these m

treatments. In this recommendation, it is assumed that pest control in parts of the premises containing product and raw materials (e.

can be carried out to an appropriate standard without resort to fumigation and the areas can be isolated from the SF fumigation of th

Heat treatments, either as full site or spot heat treatments may also be considered for these facilities as part of their IPM program. H

feasible in pasta facilities elsewhere (e.g. Italy) (Nomisma 2006). (Nomisma. 2006 plus executive summary which is undated but covers work done in 2005. Pest Control in the Italian food industry: SSummarized in the flour milling report of the 2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report. The Party is referred to the flour milling re

2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report for technical information on the conduct of spot heat treatments and recommendations efficacy of SF treatments. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The Economic feasibility section is marked N/A. Elsewhere it is asserted that heat is rough
168 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

Israel Dates 

3.444 2.755 2.200 1.800 None 2.100 2.100 

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 2.1 tonnes for dates in 2009 associated with rapid treatment of fresh dates at time of harvest. This r

tonnes over the amount of MB granted by the Parties for 2008. The increase in methyl bromide is due to projected increase in harve

heat or other treatments have not yet been developed. Israel continues an active research programme to resolve technical, logistica

and adapt heat treatment for the non-Medjool varieties. If upcoming research on either heat or ethyl formate and carbon dioxide res

Israel may consider reducing the amount granted in domestic allocation process. 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN argues that heat treatment is economically feasible for Medjool dates, but that in depth feas

carried out to determine the efficacy of thermal treatment on other varieties. No economic data is provided. 

Israel Flour mills 

2.140 1.490 1.040 0.312 None 0.300 0.300 

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 0.3 tonnes for flour mills in 2009 as a one year transition to spot heat treatment or expanded use of a decrease of 0.012 tonnes over the amount of MB granted by the Parties for 2008. Mills in Israel are not considered suitable for full 

and condition. Spot heat treatment has been determined to be effective for older mills in Israel. Techniques have been developed to 

heat equipment has been purchased by a pest control operator and is in commercial use in the circumstances of this nomination. Mo

been ordered for import. For this reason MBTOC sees a need for one year to transition to heat. Additionally, phosphine is in use in m

be expanded. Improvements in IPM and sanitation would improve pest control in Israel mills. MBTOC sees no reason for continued 

after the transition to heat or phosphine is made by 2010. The Party is referred to the flour milling review report published in the 200Progress Report for technical information on the conduct of spot heat treatments and recommendations to improve technical efficacy 

MBTOC comments on economics: CUN argues that the alternative used in North America and Northern Europe of heating the entire 

feasible in Israel because most of the mills are more than 20 years old, with poor structural upkeep of the mills and so thermal insula

Furthermore, heating equipment is not available because of the small size of the market. However, the CUN argues that new spot h

available from Canada, and that these are economically feasible. No economic data is provided. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

Japan Chestnuts 

7.100 6.800 6.500 6.300 5.800 None - 5.4

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 5.4 tonnes, the amount nominated for fresh chestnuts for 2010. This represents a 0.4 tonne decreas

amount granted by the Parties for 2009. An extensive research program has resulted in the finding that methyl iodide treatment is te

use, and registration has been applied for. The registration process is progressing appropriately. Japan has set an acceptable daily 0.0034 mg/kg body weight. Progress has been made in improving the logistics of treatment to ensure the use of MB is minimised wh

results. MBTOC knows of no other effective alternative treatment for fresh chestnuts. 

MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN states that, for economic feasibility evaluation, it is prerequisite for economic evaluation 

alternative exists. In fact there is no technically feasible alternative, and accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out. 

United States Commodities 

89.166 87.719 78.983 58.921 45.623 None - 43

MBTOC is unable to assess this nomination in total for treatment of dry commodities, but can give recommendations for some parts 

43.007 tonnes for the four subsectors included in this CUN. At this time, MBTOC recommends a CUE of 1.984 tonnes for 2010 for th

nomination relating to pest control treatment of (1) dried beans directly after harvest. It is unable to assess the components concerne

walnuts and (3) dry dates at harvest. MBTOC does not recommend the component relating to postharvest protection of (4) dried plu

beans, there are no alternatives immediately available for rapid disinfestation of dried beans under the circumstances of the nominat

treatment logistics. Fumigation with phosphine, while registered and effective, requires a treatment time that is too long to meet curr

schedules; and sulfuryl fluoride lacks appropriate registration. There appears to be scope for further reduction in this component of t

adoption of phosphine fumigation under revised logistics which MBTOC recommends be incorporated in any future CUN. (2) Methyl 

disinfestion of in-shell walnuts immediately post-harvest to meet timing requirements of particular export markets in advance of holidsulfuryl fluoride can provide treatment in the same length of time. As a result of recent EU decisions, (EU 149/2008 as of September 

tolerances and adding fluorine tolerances, there are uncertainties that prevent a firm recommendation on the CUN at this time. The E

shell walnuts. It is likely that the reduced residue tolerances for bromide in the main walnut export market may prevent effective use 

walnuts prior to 2010 and the increased fluoride tolerance may favour the use of sulfuryl fluoride. The Party is asked to assess the im

change, possibly providing a revised nomination for walnuts. (3) Further information is sought on the need for methyl bromide for ra

dates at time of harvest and the applicability of phosphine and sulphuryl fluoride fumigation, and other pest management options, un

this nomination. The CUN indicates SF trials were conducted in April 2008. These trials may have demonstrated the applicability of S

dry dates. Furthermore, part of the crop may be treatable with phosphine at time of harvest. In a reassessment, MBTOC expects to 

of the nomination that is involved in rapid treatment immediately after harvest, and that is not replaceable by SF, controlled atmosphIn the case of dried plum treatments, the initial processing (drying) involves exposure to temperatures (>60°C) sufficient to achieve d

may become infested subsequently during storage and handling. In the absence of need for very rapid disinfestations, this reinfestat

managed by currently available systems, particularly phosphine fumigation. Phosphine fumigation is the main technology used in the 

similar circumstances to the dried plum industry involved in this nomination. Controlled atmosphere storage and treatment is used by 

same commodities included in this CUN. 
170 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN provides economic data on alternatives for walnuts and dried fruit other than dates. Ph

more because it takes longer to accomplish, leading to increased labor costs, it corrodes equipment and its use means sellers do no

export market window. CUN states walnuts and dried fruit all require substantial additional treatment time and subsequent lost reven

Net revenues for alternatives are negative. CUN states that profit margin decreases from 13.3% to –7.5% for walnuts and from 5% teconomic analysis was not done for dates. In the case of dried beans, response to MBTOC question states that cost of an additiona

unit, but annual costs were not provided. 

United States NPMA food processing structures (cocoa beans removed) 

83.344 69.118 82.771 69.208 54.606 None - 37

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 37.778 tonnes, the amount nominated for food processing facilities in 2010. This nomination represe

(excluding cocoa beans) over the amount granted by the Parties for 2009. The CUN now includes three sectors, after cocoa bean se

alternatives in 2009. (1) MBTOC recommends 1.812 tonnes, the nominated amount, for cheese in storage. Cheese stores are only f

inspectors find mites in the cheese. If cheese stores were held at 7 ̊C instead of 10 ̊C, mites would not develop, but it is unknown wh

temperature would have on cheese maturation and quality. MBTOC knows of no effective chemical alternative for this use, but we n

research on the effect of sulfuryl fluoride on mites in cheese. (2) MBTOC recommends 2.439 tonnes, the nominated amount for herb 

facilities. According to the CUN, 2010 is the final year of a four year transition in herb and spice processing sector. Spot heat treatme

with additional use of barrier methods to prevent pest escape would seem to be a good alternative for this sector. (3) MBTOC recom

amount nominated for the processed food sector. This nomination represents a 45% reduction over the amount granted by the Parti

CUN 2010 is the last year of a 4 year transition to alternatives in processed foods sector. This sector is expecting a registration of m

packaging materials which will assist in achieving post-processing pest control. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: An economic analysis was not conducted because the CUN reports the sector did not have 

For food-processing facilities listed in the NPMA CUN, economic feasibility of such alternatives was not assessed due to the lack of 

is necessary to quantify the economic impacts to food-processing facilities. There is a major change to this 2010 nomination from NP

found that sulfuryl fluoride is economically feasible for cocoa beans (Adam 2007). Therefore NPMA has not requested methyl bromfor 2010. Sulfuryl fluoride is not always economically feasible in all food processing facilities (Adam 2007), therefore that portion of NAdam (2007) conducted a cost comparison of methyl bromide and sulfuryl fluoride in the fumigation of cocoa beans. It is an econom

which estimates of costs that “typical” firms would face under different scenarios (Adam 2007). Adam (2007) found that with regards 

methyl bromide and sulfuryl fluoride are the same price per pound, then a sulfuryl fluoride fumigation costs 1% less than a methyl br

more economical than methyl bromide for cocoa beans, primarily because less sulfuryl fluoride is needed (Adam 2007). Sulfuryl fluoride is highly dependent upon temperature, so should a facility need fumigation during cooler temperatures, it may not be 

because of increased heating costs. Also sulfuryl fluoride requires higher dosages for egg kill, and in many facilities killing eggs is p

lead to higher costs. Cheese does not have a technically and economically feasible alternative to methyl bromide at this time. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

United States Mills and processors 

483.000 461.758 401.889 348.237 291.418 None - 19

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 187.534 tonnes in total for use in US food processing structures (rice mills, dry pet food producers a

CUN nominated 191.993 tonnes for the three sectors. The CUN represented a 35.6% decrease in MB requested over the amount g

2009. In part this large percent decrease resulted from the bakery sector (formerly included in this category), which will complete its 

2009 and did not request MB for 2010. Bakery sector is commended for its work to adopt alternatives. In addition, rice mill sector als

year, for which it is also commended. (1) For rice mills, MBTOC recommends the nominated amount of 14.511 tonnes. The remainin

that contain food mixes for which contact with SF, the alternative largely adopted by this sector, is not registered. (2) For pet food fac

recommends 13.722 tonnes, the nominated amount. The sector has decreased its MB nomination 37.5% over 2009 levels. Since th

treatment of pet food facilities does not include pet food commodity and ingredients, there is a registration barrier to the use of SF in food facilities could, however, expand use of full site or spot heat treatment, utilising appropriate pest barrier methods to prevent pestreatments. (3) For flour mills, MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 144.789 tonnes. The sector nominated a 23% decrease, as palternatives. MBTOC further decreased the nomination because the CUN included an average of 2.5 MB fumigations per mill, includ

USG believes can transition to alternatives, because they do not produce food mixes. MBTOC believes the frequency of fumigation 

registration for SF treatment of flour mills does not include treatment of some food mixes and ingredients that may be held inside the 

Consequently, there is a registration barrier to the use of SF in 42% of mills according to the CUN. During this time when such proce

registered for SF treatment, mills could increase their adoption of heat treatment. MBTOC notes that US researchers have considera

assist millers to accomplish successful heat and IPM treatments. The quantity recommended for this sector, 144.790 tonnes, was ca

the nomination (68.79 tonnes) was unable to transition at this time and needed the nominated frequency of treatment, while the 58% 

transition could reduce their treatment frequency with MB from 2.5 to 2x a year (95.0*2/2.5 tonnes). The three sectors included in thi

to improve treatment logistics that improve product segregation so that more adoption of alternatives can be accomplished even if re

of SF persist. When conducting SF fumigations where food mixes are present, the applicant could test covering the food with a tarp removing food ingredients and mixes to non-fumigated areas or sealing off stored product warehouses to allow SF treatment of facil

is not exposed. The Party is referred to the flour milling review report published in the 2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report fthe conduct of heat treatments and recommendations to improve technical efficacy of SF treatments. 

MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN reports heat will cost 1.5 times and sulfuryl fluoride costs 1.3 times the cost of MB treat

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

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

economic assessment. Sulfuryl fluoride is highly dependent upon temperature, so should a facility need fumigation during cold tempproduct of choice because of the increase in costs. Also sulfuryl fluoride requires higher dosages for egg kill, but in some facilities kagain contributing to higher costs. The CUN cites a new study that compares methyl bromide structural fumigation to an alternative. 

economic-engineering approach to estimate costs that “typical” firms would incur under alternative scenarios, as opposed to specific 

2007). 
172 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Industry Quantity 

approved for 2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

Quantity approved for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

Quantity approved for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

Quantity approved for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Qunofo(ne

United States Cured pork 

67.907 40.854 18.998 19.669 18.998 None - 4.4

MBTOC recommends a CUE of 4.465 tonnes for specific cured (air-dried) pork products in 2010. This CUN has decreased by 14.53granted by the Parties for 2009. The USG is in the second of a three year multi-disciplinary research program to try to find non-MB m

this traditional cured pork product and associated storage houses. No chemical alternatives are registered for pest control in these p

does not know of methods that have been published as effective for this situation. In the interest of contributing to research ideas, w

controlled atmosphere; or dipping the hams in oil and lard at 90oC as practised in Spain with a similar product. 

MBTOC comments on economics: No economic data given. This is a minor use and there is little economic incentive to develop alte
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 173

 11.5 Interim CUN 2008 Evaluation Report – Issues Specific to MBTOC Soils

11.5.1 Summary of outcomes 

In the 2008 round, 31 CUNs were submitted for soil uses, 12 for 2009 and 19 for 2010. Interim 

recommendations were made on all nominations for 2009 and 2010. MBTOC Soils has 

recommended a total of 608.454 tonnes for 2009 and 3167.335 tonnes for 2010. An amount of 

89.000 tonnes was not recommended for 2009, and 875.247 tonnes not recommended for 2010. 

Table 11-7 Summary of MBTOC Soils recommendations for 2009 and 2010 by country for 

CUNs received in 2008 for preplant soil use of methyl bromide (tonnes) 

CUE approved at MOP 

19 

Requests for 2009 and 

2010 

MBTOC-S Interim 

Recommendation 

Country 

2008 2009 2009 2010 2009 2010 

Australia 29.790 29.790 29.790 

Canada 7.462 7.462 7.462 

EC 244.146 

Israel 858.96 697.048 608.454 

Japan 299.580 283.100 214.570 

USA 3854.666 3722.230 2915.513 

Total 4191.498 697.048 4042.582 608.454 3167.335 

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

11.5.2 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, i.e. use of grafted 

plants. 

Key issues which assisted MB reductions and also affected the need for CUNs in the 2008 round 

were i) a new registration of iodomethane (methyl iodide, MI) in the US, ii) regulations on key 

alternatives, particularly 1,3-D township caps and buffer zones on 1,3-D, metham and Pic used 

alone or in mixtures (iii) restrictions on use of high rates of Pic (greater than 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2

)) 

in some counties of California, iv) lack of effective controls for nutsedge, and v) lack of studies in 

specific sectors i.e. nursery industries and some of the replant uses, such as walnuts, almond, stone 

fruit. 
174 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

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 as they are considered not to fully 

satisfy the requirements of Decision IX/6. 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. 

The registration of a key alternative, 1,3-D/Pic is uncertain in Israel, however a recent alternative 

fungicide, fludioxonil has been registered. In addition to registration of iodomethane in the US, 

recent permits for methyl iodide use for trials in Australia look promising for commercial 

registration. 

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

legislation prevent reductions of MB dosage, e.g. the mandatory use of MB at a specified dosage 

for certified propagation material or bans are imposed on the use of barrier films, which can reduce 

MB dosage. 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 2009 or 2010 different from 

those nominated. Grounds used for these changes are given in detail after the relevant CUNs in 

Table 11-8. The adjustments follow the standard presumptions given in Tables 11-6 and 11-7, 

unless indicated otherwise. 

11.5.3 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities. 

Tables 11-8 and 11-9 below 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. They were revised for some sectors after 

acceptance by the Parties at the 19th 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 is shown in 

Table 11-9 below. 

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 Appendix VI and V). 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, especially on 

sandy soils. 

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 either 150 or 175 kg MB/ha (15.0 - 17.5 

g/m2

) where nutgrass is the key pest and 125 or 150 kg/ha (12.5 - 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 (see Table 11-11). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 175

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

production. However, several Parties indicated that rates of 200 kg/ha (20g/m2) or less (Appendix 

IV) 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. 

Table 11-8 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 mixtures of MB/Pic 12.5 to 

17.5 g MB/m2

 for pathogens and 

nutsedge respectively, under barrier 

films depending on the sector. 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, 

emission regulations on MB, 

or open field production of 

high health propagative 

material 
176 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-9 Maximum dosage rates for preplant soil use of MB by sector used in the 2008 round. 

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 

Table 11-10 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 (Appendix VI) 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 

11.5.4 Meta-analysis update 

In response to Decision XVI/5, which provided financial support to MBTOC for expert assistance 

with the assessment of the critical-use nominations, a statistical analysis or metaanalysis study was 

conducted to analyse methyl bromide alternatives for pre-plant fumigation (Porter et al, 2006). 

This report provides the Parties with a technical overview of results from current published 

research. It provides the statistical best estimate of the relative effectiveness of the major chemical 

alternatives to methyl bromide as determined by analysis of information across a large number of 

studies in different regions and under different pathogen pressures. Effectiveness was assessed by 

comparing relative yield of the alternative to the respective methyl bromide/chloropicrin (MB/Pic) 

treatment. The study takes account of both registered and unregistered products and concentrates on 

two major crops, strawberry fruit and tomatoes. Comparisons are made to peppers, melons and 

other cucurbits and eggplants where possible; much of the information for tomatoes (i.e. effect on 

target pathogens and weeds) is relevant to the outcomes for these other crops. The meta-analysis 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 177

also includes a detailed assessment of the effect of alternatives for nutsedge under different 

pressures and the influence of low permeability barrier films across a range of regions and crops. 

Analyses from strawberry fruit trials showed that a large number of alternatives used alone or in 

various combinations had mean estimated yields, which were within 5% of the estimated yield of 

the standard methyl bromide treatment (MB/Pic 67:33). Of these, a number of alternatives and 

MB/Pic formulations (50:50, 30:70) led to results that were similar to MB/Pic 67:33. These 

included PicEC (chloropicrin), TC35EC (1,3-dichloropropene/ chloropicrin), TC35 and 

TC35ECMNa (TC35 EC combined with metham sodium) and MI60 (methyl iodide/chloropicrin), 

which is undergoing review for registration in several countries. 

Analyses from tomato trials showed that a range of alternative treatments used alone or in various 

combinations had mean estimated yields, which were within 5% of the estimated yield of the 

standard methyl bromide treatment (MB/Pic 67:33). While some of these treatments contained 

pebulate, a herbicide which is not commercially available anymore, most treatments did not contain 

this particular product. Several treatments, PicMNa (chloropicrin combined with metham sodium), 

1,3D/Pic in combination with a range of herbicides and MI60 (methyl iodide/chloropicrin) (not 

registered), provided results similar to MB/Pic 67:33. 

Decision XIX/9 reads “To note the importance of transparency in the critical-use exemption 

process and to request the TEAP to provide to the Open-ended Working Group at its next meeting a 

written explanation of its methodology for using its meta-analysis in its work and to disclose to the 

Parties in a written explanation any significant changes or deviations it intends to make to that 

methodology before it undertakes any such change or deviation”. MBTOC uses the meta-analysis 

report as a guide to the relative effectiveness of many alternatives, together with many others 

obtained from scientific journals, conference proceedings, published reports and others, to 

substantiate and support its recommendations. No change to this approach has been made in this 

round. 

11.5.5 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. 

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 use of barrier films in vegetable crops expanded to over 30,000 acres in 06/07 and continued 

expansion has been reported throughout SE USA since then. An 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 
178 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

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. 

11.5.6 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; López-Aranda et al., 2003; Santos et al., 2007). Formulations containing high proportions of 

chloropicrin in mixtures with methyl bromide have been adopted widely by non-Article 5 Parties 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 and non barrier films. Parties are urged to consider lower dosage 

rates, i.e. as low as 75 kg/ha (7.5 g/m2

) of 30:70 or 100 kg/ha (10 g/m2) of 50:50 MB/Pic in 

conjunction with barrier films as these have shown similar effectiveness of higher rates of 67:33 

MB /Pic and much higher rates of 335 to 800 kg/ha (33.5 to 80 g/m2 ) of MB 98% using standard 

polyethylene. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-11 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Australia Strawberry 

runners 

35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 29.790 tonnes for this use in 2010. The key pests affecting strawberry runn

(Phytophthora, Pythium, Rhizoctonia, Verticillium) and weeds (S. arvensis, Agrostis tenuis, Raphanus spp, Poa annua, Cype

MB/Pic 50:50 at a MB dose of 25 g/m2 is required to meet certification standards. The Party’s request exceeds MBTOC’s sta

this rate is not currently registered. The Party is conducting field scale testing to confirm earlier small scale plot trials, which dat a MB rate of 12.5 g/m2. If successful, adoption could occur in 2010. The Party states that the most promising alternative, m

demonstrated in small scale trials to compare with the efficacy to MB/Pic. Commercial scale-up trials are in progress and cou

MBTOC encourages the Party to (1) expedite the registration and use of the MB/Pic 50:50 formulation with a MB rate of 12.5 

expedite the registration of the iodomethane/Pic (MI/Pic), and (3) to continue the pilot testing of soilless production of the fou

commercial adoption possible in 2011.

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic stateme

that the Victoria Strawberry Industry Certification Authority is developing a two-year research program to investigate the feas

of foundation generation runners, but notes that, while this may be feasible for the tens of thousands of runners for the found

feasible for the scaled up production of millions of certified runners required for the industry as a whole. Research on alternat

continuing. No economic arguments or data are provided.

Canada Strawberry 

runners (PEI) 

6.840 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.462 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a CUE of 7.462 tonnes for 2010. The nomination states that MB/Pic 67:33 

required to meet the certification standards for strawberry runners, which exceeds MBTOC’s standard presumption of 200 kg

is not currently registered. PMRA requires data that demonstrates that the reduced rate is efficacious with LPBF before regis

that no progress has been made in more than three years on testing with LPBF and expects that future nominations will show 

the criteria of Decision IX/6. The Party has attempted to replace MB with 1,3-D, but 1,3-D was banned in January 2003 due t

permit for Chloropicrin 100 is still pending approval at PEI, even though Canada registered Pic in 2007. No studies on other pas Pic, DMDS, MI/Pic have taken place . MBTOC expects that future nominations will also demonstrate significant progress wencourages the Party (1) to finalize the permits necessary for use of chloropicrin and dazomet, (2) implement the use of LPB

worldwide and (3) in the absence of an effective alternative becoming available, conduct the necessary trials to support a low

with MBTOC’s standard presumption, (4) provide assessment on the suitability of soilless cultures for at least part of the prod

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: No economic arguments or data provided
180 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Israel Broomrape None None 250.000 250.000 None 125.000 125.000 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 125 tonnes for 2009, which represents 50% of the requested amount . The 

project for 2010 has been reduced by 50% (from 1000 ha to 500 ha). The Party reports that results of field trials with 1,3-D in promising and that registration is expected in 2009. If 1,3-D is registered, MBTOC anticipates that there will be uptake of this 

in the use of MB. The nomination is eradication of broomrape and land rehabilitation of 500 ha in the Golan Heights. The reco

of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of MB:Pic 98:2 using LPBF. MB will be used only once in this region and the treatment is expected to 

disease threshold allowing for adoption of other alternatives. The Party has identified some alternatives for controlling low inf

solarization) but they are considered not adequate for controlling severe infestations of O. aegyptiaca. In 2007, five field trials imazapic, and imazomox. MBTOC acknowledges that a registration for chloropicrin is being considered in Israel and that this 

dosages of MB to be used for Orobanche in the absence of other effective alternatives. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements 

broomrape infestation is being aggravated by the phase out of MB, as all crop-specific registered MB alternatives have a nar

crop-specific efficacy than MB. This is also true for agrotechnical means and long-term fallow cropping which in practice and the long-term vitality of broomrape seeds and their gradual germination mechanism. CUN also states that biological control o

parasitic fly or with Fusaria do not provide economic answers for the problem. No economic data are provided.

Israel Cut flowersbulbsprotected 303.000 240.000 220.185 114.450 None 113.821 85 .431 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 85.431 tonnes for this use in 2009.The nomination is 

under cover, which are mainly affected by weeds (Cyperus in particular), nematodes (root-knot but also ectoparasites such a

does not consider MB essential for the control of ectoparasitic nematodes. MBTOC does not recommend the use of 1.64 t fo

production as alternatives such as steam are efficient for this use. Overall, there is very little change from nominations subm

2007. Phase-out efforts are still based on transitional measures - LPBF barrier films with reduced rates. In spite of this, registmetham sodium and 1,3-D, has now expanded to include additional flower types. More expansion of registration is expected 

protocols are now available for many of the flowers presently treated with MB (Bar-Yosef et al, 2001; Gullino et al, 2003; Sav

2004; Urrestarazu, 2005). The recommended amount is based on a 25% transition rate applied for adoption of chemical alter

nomination states these are now registered. In keeping with the 2007 recommendation a further 25% transition rate has been 

substrate production is possible (lilium, calla lilies, gerberas and carnations outside the Ghaza area). Additionally, MBTOC ha

carnations grown in Ghaza (from the requested 50 g/m2 to the standard presumption of 35 g/m2). MBTOC is aware that carna

wilt are available, commercially used and accepted by international markets (Gullino and Garibaldi, 2007)). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN argues that nutsedge causes heavy economic losses not only under outdoo

well, despite the fact that shade reduces its activity. No economic data are provided.

Israel Cut flowersopen field 77.000 67.000 74.540 44.750 None 42.777 34.698 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 34.698 tonnes for this use in 2009. Overall, there is ve

submitted in previous years, particularly in 2007. Phase-out efforts are still based on transitional measures - barrier films with 

nomination is for open field production of cut flowers, which are mainly affected by weeds (Cyperus spp in particular) and nem

ectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fungi. MBTOC does not consider MB necessary for controlling ectoparasitic nematod

alternatives on flowers such as 1,3-D+Pic, dazomet and metham sodium, continue to be the major constraints affecting subst

formulations with higher chloropicrin content are also not registered. In spite of this, registration of metham sodium and 1,3-D 

additional flower types. More expansion of registration is expected this year. In keeping with the 2007 recommendation, a 25

the nominated amount to allow for adoption of alternatives, including chemicals and solarization, which is being adopted succ

applied to the 10.462 t requested for nurseries of geophytes where high health plant material needs to be produced, although 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN states that nutsedge is a major problem of the flower industry on outdoor cro

causes heavy economic losses under outdoor conditions. CUN also argues that MB substitution and phase out brought abou

pests e.g. the free-living nematode Longidorus spp. became a major economic problem of Aster, Solidago and Lilly. No econ
182 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Israel Melon - 

protected and field 

125.650 99.400 105.000 87.500 None 87.500 87.500 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 87.5 tonnes for this use in 2009. Monosporascus cannonballus is the key p

requested amount at a rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of 98:2 MB under barrier films (LDPF) complies with MBTOC ́s standard p

notes that 70:30 MB/PIC mixtures are registered for strawberry, potatoes, cucumber, eggplant, peppers, tomatoes, gerbera, g

for melon. MBTOC understands that formulations with more chloropicrin (MB/Pic 67:33, 50:50) could be as effective as the c

make the necessary efforts to assess this situation under the criteria of Dec.IX/6. MBTOC notes that alternatives are already used for 100% of the fall melons grown in the Arava valley including Telodrip, me

Formaldehyde+MS, Telopic (only in the southern Arava). The CUN is solely for the spring crop as the alternatives seem not f

is short (2-4 weeks). MBTOC visited the area and was shown experiments testing a strategy based on fumigation and solariz

crop, followed by sanitation with MS at the end of fall crop. The third component is repeated application of the fungicide, azox

drench during the spring crop. Results are promising so far. Another material tested to prevent possible accelerated degrada

fungicide prochloras. The Party is requested to submit information regarding progress in future nominations. MBTOC notes that Pic and MB/Pic mixtures and the fungicide, fludioxonil, are effectively used for Monosporascus in other co

Stanghelini et al. 2003; Martyn 2002). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN concludes that presently Basamid is not feasible economically because the because of waiting period constraints. Economic data provided show that the price of Basamid is lower than that of MB, but t

300kg and Basamid 1200 kg is negative, while for Basamid 600 kg it is significantly lower. CUN also points out that a new approach for inoculum reduction of Monosporascus was developed in the area. It consists of 

end to kill off the roots of the harvested fall melons and subsequently the resting structures of Monosporascus. This practice 

to 20% and became a routine practice applied on the harvested fall crop prior to the spring crop. It is cost effective since the 

high.
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Israel Potato 239.000 165.000 137.500 93.750 None 75.000 75.000 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a CUE for 75 tonnes for this use in 2009. Potatoes are produced in a small 

the Negev regions. The nomination is only in the Sharon (10% of total cultivated area) where tuber yield and quality are impa

Verticillium dahliae, Streptomyces scabies (common scab), Spongospora subterranea (powdery scab), Orobanche spp. (broo

nutsedge), and volunteer plants that carry viral diseases (PVY). The Party has made a 20% reduction with respect to the amo

The dosage rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of MB 98:2 is in accordance with the standard presumptions for hot gas under barrie

identified that 300 of 15,000 ha are located in highly populated areas where winter production occurs and pathogens are high 

place for feasible alternatives such as 1,3-D + Pic (61:35), which as a result of buffer zones prohibit their use. The Party indicalternatives are in development for the pest complexes and that they are transitioning to these. The CUN indicates that devel

underway in the Sharon. MBTOC notes that there are effective alternatives but that their use is affected by buffer zones, whic

MBTOC urges that Party to consider review of these buffers in the light of use with barrier films. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN argues that, because the registered alternatives do not cover the broad spec

high pathogen populations of the area, their application would require the addition of complementary compounds, with self-ex

economic implications. No economic data are provided

Israel Seed 

Production 

56.000 28.000 None None None 22.400 NR 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC does not recommend any MB for this use in 2009. The application is similar to the nomin

for 2005 and 2006 use: same area, same constraints and almost the same requested quantity in 2009 (22.4t) as the approve

has been made during these last 4 years. The same experiments and results are presented. In the 2004 nomination, Israel re

to draw up a new strategy for the industry. No results have been obtained by this task force. The Party states that seeds mu

many specified pathogens, which are the targets of MB fumigation are not carried on seeds (e.g. Verticillium dahliae, Rhizoct

research program, the Party has not provided an explanation for the lack of control with chemical alternatives such as chloropgenerating compounds or non chemical alternatives e.g. grafting (which is considered by the Party only for water melon but 

other vegetables particularly tomato), resistant varieties and steam. In addition, soil less culture is considered by the Party to use for 20% of the crop. The Party considers soilless culture economically feasible only for solanaceous crops, although no c

information is given on the acreages covered by the solanaceous crops and also on the areas fumigated from 2002 to 2007. 

quantitative crop losses caused by soil-borne pests are not the main problem, but the seed quality is the main issue. In the no

health have been reported. The Party identifies economic constraints as the barrier to adoption of the non-chemical alternati

provided. In all other Mediterranean countries with similar climate, vegetable seeds are produced without MB. In the Europea

seed companies are producing vegetable seeds without MB by the adoption of alternatives. 
184 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN argues that growing vegetable seeds requires that the seeds be completely 

the case of strawberry runners. CUN argues that this is a declining industry in Israel because of lower costs of labor in countr

does not state whether MB is used in those countries for this purpose. CUN argues that moving to soilless culture is not econ

are provided

Israel Strawberry 

fruit - protected (Sharon and Ghaza) 

196.000 196.000 93.000 105.960 None 52.250 

(Sharon only) 

77.750 (Sharon and Gaza) 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 42.75 tonnes for Sharon and a reduced amount of 35 tontonnes for these uses in 2009. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination for Sharon based on information from the Party that out 

ha) is grown on new land (not requiring MB) and an additional 30% (i.e. 114 ha) of the cultivated area is expected to apply M

for MB use totalling 42.75 t. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination to the Ghaza strip to conform with its standard presumptio

films. The key pests affecting strawberry fruit in Israel are fungi (Rhizoctonia solani, Colletotrichum acutatum, Macrophomina Fusarium spp.), nematodes (Meloidogyne hapla), and weeds (Cyperus rotundus, purple nutsedge). The Party states that bufkey alternatives 1,3-D/Pic and MB/PIC 70:30. The Party confirmed that the existing buffers were 250 m for PIC,100 m for 1,3

MBTOC urges the Party to consider whether the widespread use of LPBF might reduce the buffers on these alternatives. Mthe technical feasibility of MI/Pic and DMDS on strawberries. MBTOC also urges the Party to consider registration of other a

1,3-D) as well as other formulations of MB/Pic (e.g. 50:50) to assist further reductions in the use of MB. The CUN states that 

results in the control of Macrophomina phaseolina, but these trials did not lead to a registration of metham sodium on strawbe

on a small area in this CUN, but the Party states that further uptake is limited by cost, and commercial scale testing are expe

information on the suitability of such systems is necessary. MBTOC encourages the applicant to consider evaluation and ad

which are used in similar circumstances in other regions, including warm climates (Mutitu et al. 2006; Vos and Bridge, 2006; 

Lieten, 2004). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN states that Dazomet is not registered, and that Telone is not available becau

market. CUN provides a Table that shows that these alternatives deliver a higher net farm income than MB.
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Israel Strawberry 

runners (Sharon and Ghaza) 

None None 0.000 31.900 None 15.800 

(Sharon only) 

28.075 (Sharon and Gaza) 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 28.075 tonnes for this use in 2009 (12.25 t for Ghaza Str

The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungi (Rhizotonia solani, Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium, Phytophtho

Macrophomina phasoeolina), root knot nematodes and purple nutsedge. The Party stated that MB 98:2 at a rate of 500 kg/ha 

polyethylene films and 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) with barrier films are necessary to meet certification standards. The requested am

adjusted to MBTOC’s standard presumption of 35 g/m2 for 98:2 MB. The Party stated that 1,3-D + Pic mixture has been the l

of this alternative is limited by the required 250 m buffer which significantly limits its use in the Sharon strawberry nursery gro

populated. Hot gas application method is used in the Ghaza Strip growing area because the plots are small, adjacent to hous

qualified applicators in the area. 10% of the treated area in the Ghaza strip will be tested with barrier films with a reduced app

faster adoption of LPBF in the Ghaza Strip. 100% of the treated area in Sharon uses barrier films (VIF). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: No economic data provided

Israel Strawberry 

runners and Fruit (Ghaza only) 

67.500 (Ghaza only) 

refer aboveMBTOC comments 2008: 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN argues that the availability of MB for strawberry industry of the Ghaza strip is 

be able to grow the crop and might lose their main source of income, which, it is argued, constitutes ‘a genuine case of econo

are provided, as there are insufficient data on the use of MB alternatives in Ghaza.
186 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Israel Sweet 

Potatoes 

None none None 111.500 None 95.000 95.000 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 95 tonnes for this use in 2009. Sweet potato is a new crop in Israel that is 

The pest complexes are just being identified and studies to identify alternatives have just commenced. The applicant indicate

registered chemical for sweet potato production in Israel. The Party however, also states that the expected primary registratio

that adoption of these alternatives by 2009 was the basis for the reduced quantity applied for in 2009. Although not clearly sta

D/Pic and 1,3-D + metham sodium were effective control alternatives, but registration of 1,3-D has been discontinued by the 

alternatives are not likely to materialize. Formalin, which is registered for control of common scab on potatoes, is being tested 

chemicals for scab on sweet potatoes. Once efficacy trials are completed registration for formalin will be pursued. By 2009, M

nurseries and on not more than 25% of the production area, viz. 300 ha. The MB rates stated in the CUN are consistent with 

and barrier film use. MBTOC recommends that the Party explore the use of nematode resistant varieties of sweet potato as in countries where nematodes are the primary pest problem.

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: Semi-commercial application of 1,3-D on a total area of 100 ha in the Central Coa

unsatisfactory results and economic losses. Party suggests that Cadusafos is not a front-line nematicide in Israel and it canno

inflicted by root-knot nematodes in the Sharon region. CUN argues that the use of 1,3-D 200+MS 400 l/ha will increase the farmers’ net margin by 53%, but 1,3-D is not yet register
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 51.450 34.300 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 23 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended qu

from the nominated amount under the same adoption rate criteria already discussed with the Party. MBTOC has considered 

the need to control particular viruses of cucumber, since 2005. Globally, such viruses are not considered as soilborne pathog

several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated program including cultural practices e.

host, removal and destruction of crop debris, cleaning and sanitation of the greenhouse and the surrounded area, and pathogeffective in similar situations around the world. The Party has indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoe

way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). As a transition strategy, MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoptio

MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC has assumed that since the last nomination 1,3-D/Pic mixtures have become registered, ho

required. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for cucumber in Japan that has been in place for many years. However, 

production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for e

plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widel

and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya et al, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). The Party is encouraged t

which implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2007; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and PaJapan support soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes howe

substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Large numbers 

substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (TEAP, 2004). The CUN states that the Ai

(2005) identified the effectiveness of KGMMV control by methyl iodide in pot tests. MBTOC encourages the Party to continue 

iodide for soil uses (methyl iodide was registered for imported timber in Japan in 2004, under JMAFF registration No. 21407)

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The Party states that the nominated amount is nearly half the nominated amount f

the amount recommended by MBTOC and approved by MOP 19. Further key information provided by the Party is that “Techalternative technology has not been developed yet.” “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is prerequisite that technically feas

there is no technically feasible alternative, and accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out at all.” This CUN sh

for peppers and watermelon. A reference (45) compares costs of soilless systems to MB treatment of soils.
188 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Japan Ginger (Field) 119.400 119.400 109.701 84.075 63.056 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 53.4 tonnes for this use in 2010. The nomination is for control of Pythium sPythium zingiberium) in open field cultivated ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the d

adopting some alternatives and the time required to introduce alternatives and new disease management strategies. The CU

cyazofamid, controls Pythium efficiently but application rates and methods need to be investigated in more detail. The use of 

such as phosphonates, has been tested but data as to efficacy is not provided. Reduced emission technologies such as LPB

should allow for much reduced dosage rates (e.g. 250 kg/ha (25g/m2) for 98:2 with LPBF). This current nomination provides h

MB are now applicable to Japanese production systems for ginger.

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: Methyl iodide is not registered and there are concerns about phytotoxicity. Page 5

economically feasible alternative technology to methyl bromide at present, but reduction and phase-out shall be targeted by c

techniques and developing a reduction program for each region.” Economic section compared MB system with untreated, Dazomet, and Metalaxyl. Negative revenues result in the case of all 

Japan Ginger 

(protected) 

22.900 22.900 14.471 11.100 8.325 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 8.3 tonnes for this use in 2010. The nomination is for control of Pythium sp

Pythium zingiberium) in protected ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the difficulties th

alternatives and the time required to introduce alternatives and new disease management strategies. The CUN states that Cybut application rates and methods need to be investigated in more detail. The use of fungicides specific to Oomycetes, such but data as to efficacy is not provided. Reduced emission technologies such as LPBF films are now being used and should a

(e.g. 25g/m2 for 98:2 with LPBF). This current nomination provides hope that alternative treatments to MB are now applicable 

ginger. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: Methyl iodide is not registered and there are concerns about phytotoxicity. Econom

with untreated, 1,3-D-Pic, and hot water treatment. Negative revenues result from untreated and 1,3-D-Pic. Hot water results 

revenue is 25% of that for MB. This is the same finding as last year. This net revenue decrease demonstrates hot water is no
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 136.650 91.100 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 61.0 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended q

from the CUN amount based on transition to available alternatives, e.g. steam, soil less culture, grafting, pathogen free seeds rotation and sanitation. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on the need to control a particular virus of m

is not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from c

integrated program including cultural practices has been proven to be effective in many other countries. The Party has indica

hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). MBTOC urg

LPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for melons in Jayears. However, in many countries some melon production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and hatechnique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) ar

and are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 

production, when implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Sa

conducted in Japan support soil less culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTO

growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Larg

to use substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). Resistant roo

However, according to the party, the root stocks are not resistant to all the pathogen races. High yielding varieties resistant to 

Phytophthora are also available. Steam has also been found to control the virus, particularly in the upper soil layer.

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: Methyl iodide is not registered and there are concerns about phytotoxicity that cal

success has been achieved with resistant varieties. Economic information is brief. Shows significantly lower gross and net re

MB. “According to the data of Chiba Chosei district, melon resistant variety to MNSV shows only 73.8% for gross income and 

with those treated with MB. As mentioned above, fruits of resistant melon to MNSV are not in favor of market evaluation with 

Furthermore, its yield is not necessarily competitive to the yield of product treated with methyl bromide. So melon of resistant 

to replace methyl bromide treatment.” Furthermore the CUN shows that the market price of the resistant varieties is significan

conventional variety.
190 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Japan Pepper (green 

& hot) 

187.200 200.700 156.700 121.725 81.149 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 54.37 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended 

from the CUN based on transition to available alternatives, e.g. steam, soilless culture, resistant varieties, grafting, pathogen 

such as rotation and sanitation. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on the need to control a particular v

2005. Globally, this virus is not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in crop debris for several years. The pro

monoculture. Avoidance is the best means of control. Only seed that has been tested and determined to be free of the virus s

be treated with heat, acid, or trisodium phosphate. In addition to using certified or treated seeds, follow rigid sanitation proced

plants, especially smokers, should wash their hands, fingernails, and forearms thoroughly with 70% alcohol or strong soap be

Watter 1984). Some cultivars are resistant to PMMoV. This virus does not affect tomato, eggplant or tobacco, which are in th

Therefore these plants can be introduced in a crop rotation. Cultural practices, resistant varieties, biological control with atten

disinfection by hot water or steam, addition of the organic substance material (Tsuda 2006) should be included in an IPM pro

been proven to be effective in many other countries (Demski 1981, Watter 1984, Tsuda 2006). MBTOC urges the Party to inc

for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. In many countries some pepper production has already shifted to substrates in greenho

most widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buck

kind of production and are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; 2004). Substrate production, when implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2007; Batchelo

2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soil less culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzu

now available in Japan. However, according to the Party, the root stocks are not resistant to all the pathogen races. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The CUN states that there are no technically feasible alternatives and thus no ecoSee page 9: “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is a prerequisite that technically feasible alternatives exist. In fact there is and accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out at all.” The CUN notes (page 4 under iii): “Technically and eco

technology has not been developed yet. However, farmers might take into consideration the change to another crop. That is 

methyl bromide critical use nomination for 2010 is shown less than for 2009.” CUN notes on page 5 that substrates involve h

difficulty mastering cultivation skill. Economic and technical potential for hydroponic cultivation of several crops is discussed i

Reference 45, a MAFF document on economics of soilless culture. Reference 45 compares the annualized (1/10 of capital co

threshold limit based on the Agricultural Economics Task Force calculation of $14.4/kg of MB. Assuming 40 kg of MB at $14.

in a limit of 68,008 yen for any alternative to compete with MB. The annual cost for a soilless facility is 550,000 yen, meaning be replaced (68,008 yen) is far lower than the cost of the alternative soilless facility. The AETF value of $14.4 kg represents a 

willing to accept to phase out MB use in MLF projects. The 550,000 yen for soilless facilities is the estimated annual cost to g

in production without MB. Reference 45 goes on to present a budget table comparing soilless culture with MB based product

revenue with soilless production is about 80% less than MB net revenue. If the capital cost for a soilless facility is anywhere n

impact on grower net revenue will be so large that the soilless alternative should be deemed not economically feasible. Note—analyses for soilless production of cucumber and watermelon.
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

Japan Watermelon 129.000 98.900 94.200 32.475 21.650 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 14.5 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended q

from the amount approved at the 19th MOP and a further reduction based on transition to available alternatives, e.g. steam, s

free seeds and cultural practices such as rotation and sanitation. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on 

of watermelons since 2005. Globally, this virus is not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in crop debris for s

arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated program including cultural practices has been proven to be effective in ma

indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to reduce virus inciden

MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF, which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC recognises 

watermelons in Japan that has been in place for many years. However, in many countries some watermelon production has a

greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant patho

systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Led

Passam 2002; Akkaya et al, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrate production, when implemented correctly can produce higher 

2007; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soil less culture as a feasible o

Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high de

pathogen free transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trained to use substrates systems in a short period of time as ex

(TEAP, 2004). Resistant root stocks are now available in Japan. However, according to the Party, the root stocks are not res

yielding varieties resistant to the PMMoV, to bacterial wilt and to Phytophthora are also available. Steam has also been found 

the upper soil layer.

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: Key information Page 3: “Technically and economically feasible alternative techno

Page 8: “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is a prerequisite that technically feasible alternatives exist. In fact there is no te

accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out at all.” This CUN shares the same information as CUN for peppers Reference 45 where costs of soilless systems are compared to MB system.
192 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Curcurbits 1187.800 747.839 592.891 486.757 407.091 None - MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 266.199 tonnes for this use in 2010. From this amount, 8

156.908 t for the rest of the south east region, 5.72 t for Maryland and Delaware, and 13.875 t for Michigan. The rates reporte

not in accordance with the MBTOC rates (125 kg/ha for pathogens and 150 kg/ha for nutsedge, both with barrier films) so the

acknowledged the reductions made by the Party, however further reductions were made for adoption of alternatives of 25.0% 

east region and 3% for Georgia cucurbits. The Party is urged to further adopt grafting for commercial use in melon and wate

MBTOC urges the Party to disaggregate this nomination by major types of cucurbits comprised (melons, watermelons, cucum

pests in each case; submitting specific updated technical references (when pathogens are the issue); stating the limitations to 

each case; and indicating specific R&D efforts. In a similar way the Party has submitted, for example the economic informati

effort of the Party in gathering detailed information and understands that only limited information may be information. Howeve

understand and assess the specific circumstances that prevent the use of MB alternatives in each of the crops, when separa

provided. Since the key pest in the southeast and Georgia is nutsedge, in future nominations the Party is requested to provid

fumigants and herbicides trialed for nutsedge control for each specific crop included in the nomination in order to satify the re

notes the absence of specific trial data and technical references on cucurbits in the U.S. If trial data from other crops (tomato

alternatives are available for both karst and non-karst areas in Georgia (Noling et al 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Gilreath and 

2005a; Gilreath 1999, Santos et al 2006; Chellemi et al 2004; Chellemi 2006) and can be adopted at least on areas of moder

references which supported use of alternatives in combination with LDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effect

(Ristaino and Johnson, 1999, Babadost and Islam 2002, Johnston et al 2002, Driver and Lows 2003). A combination of 1,3-D 

+ herbicides (Trifluralin, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Florida fo

reported that research conducted at the University of Georgia examined the use of a 3 way combination of alternative fumiga

followed by metham sodium and this combination was effective. Hausbeck and Lamour (2004) and others have reported man

control Phytophthora on pepper, including crop rotation with non susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybe

management, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch, raised beds etc.) and use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxa

Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph). Seed treatment with Mephenoxan or metalaxyl control Phytophthora during s

uptake of alternatives for peppers in regions with similar pests has occurred within 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spa

2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik et al 2005; Minuto et al, 2003). The use of grafting and resistant varieties are considered as a

many Mediterranean countries (Bello, et al., 2001). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination is based on economic arguments. Economic statements provid

next best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losses of 6% in Michigan, Maryland and Dela

States and Georgia. CUN states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible in Michigan. However, CUN noted t

yield loss, delayed planting and harvest with the alternatives results in lower average price received from missed market windremaining regions yield losses significantly reduce net revenues. CUN notes other regions may also experience lower prices 

The 3 way research conducted at the University of Georgia is feasible and the CUN was adjusted to reflect this reduction in s

face Karst geology issues as a replacement of a MB+ Pic spring time application.

United States 

Eggplant (field) 

76.721 82.167 85.363 66.018 48.691 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 26.149 tonnes for this use in 2010. From this amount 11.860 t is for Georg

Michigan. A reduction of 4.574 t has been made to account for implementation of MBTOC’s standard presumptions. Overall 

represents a reduction of 29% from the amount approved by the Parties in 2009 due to a significant reduction to alternatives 

MBTOC, however there is little transition in Michigan and an increase in MB use in Florida. As alternatives are available for a 

a reduction of 28% of the nominated amount was made to account for uptake of alternatives. MBTOC notes that this recomm

approved for this region at the 19th MOP by 1.07 t and also that the area of usage had increased by 28%. In Michigan, the ke

According to the Party, P.capsici has been found in the irrigation water in Michigan and occurred after soil treatment with 1,3-MBTOC considers reinfestation can occur with any fumigants, including MB. MBTOC recognizes the Party’s statement that 1

alternative, but growers will miss the optimal market window due to longer plant back times with this alternative. According to 

applied in autumn because of climatic conditions. In addition, a fall application of methyl bromide is not feasible because oveother animals damage the plastic and irrigation tape. In Florida, the key pests are yellow and purple nutsedge, Phytophthora, 

Sclerotinia. In Georgia the key pests are yellow and purple nutsedge, Phytophthora, nematodes, southern blight, Pythium and 

the use of alternatives which include 1,3- D that are the best alternatives for these pests on 40% of the growing acreage in Fl

Georgia. A soil treatment recently developed by the University of Georgia is emerging as a promising methyl bromide replace

spring crops, although not for the summer or fall crops. This treatment, known as UGA-3-WAY, consists of three successive 

D (Telone II) application, followed by a chloropicrin application, followed by a metham application. Hausbeck and Lamour (20other efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora on pepper in Michigan including 3-4 years crop rotation with no

onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa), cultural control (water management, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch 

registered fungicides in Michigan (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide + Mancozeb). The use of grafting is considered an 

countries (Bello et al., 2001). It is important to report that MB is not used any more in the European Community on eggplant.
194 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination is based on economic arguments. Economic statements provid

as UGA-3-WAY, consists of three successive soil fumigations, beginning with a1,3-D (Telone II) application, followed by a chmetam application. Further small plot and large-scale, on-farm research on various aspects is underway. In addition, the ecoalternative, including the cost and durability of films and the modification of fumigation equipment, still needs to be worked ou

all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losses of 6% in Michigan and 29% in Georgia and Florida. CUN state

considered technically feasible in Michigan. In Michigan, since the fall crop is dependent upon timely planting, the required w

the harvest season, thereby missing the higher market windows.

United States 

Forestry nursery 

192.515 157.694 122.032 131.208 122.060 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 117.826 tonnes for this use in 2010, which includes 6

4.94 t for International Paper, 13.78 t for Weyerhauser (SE), 15.19 t for Weyerhauser (NW), 12.096 t for NE Forest & Conser

Michigan Seedling Assoc. The nominated amount has been adjusted to 260 kg/ha (26 g/m2) for nutsedge control and 200 kg/

to the standard presumption for dosage rate of MB/Pic formulation under HDPE. MBTOC notes that key pests are nutsedge, 

propagative material requires a very high level of pathogen control in order to avoid their widespread distribution from the nur

CUN is for nurseries with moderate or high pest pressure where alternatives are not effective. Nutsedge has no effect on cer

does affect yield by 3-5%. MBTOC requests that further nominations clearly show the trend in yield loss caused by nutsedgeover the number of seasons following fumigation with MB and alternatives and a breakdown of the economic comparisons to 

Northeast Forest and Conservation Nursery, only 40% is for nutsedge control and 60% of the nomination was adjusted to con

g/m2. For Michigan Seedlings only 50% is for nutsedge control, so 50% of the nomination was adjusted to 20 g/m2. The nomi

produced in 6 forest nursery regions. The CUN is based on economic infeasibility of use of substrates and the lack of effectiv

and a range of fungal pathogens and nematodes. The key alternatives are 1,3-D/Pic, 1,3-D /Pic/metham sodium and metham 

acknowledged that Pic and metham when used in conjunction with LPBF, may provide an effective technical alternative and a

(2007) found that with LPBF, use rates of MB can be significantly reduced. Party states that glueing of LPBF that is necessa

nursery stock is not commercially available. LPBF will be adopted when the effective gluing technologies are locally, comme

a demonstration of an effective heat welding technique used with barrier films (VIF) that was initially described for use with H

(Grinstein and Hetzroni, 1991; Grinstein, 1992). MBTOC urges the Party to evaluate these technologies in future nomination

can be used as a pre-treatment to reduce pressure from nutsedge. However, this herbicide has been shown to cause phytoto

MBTOC acknowledges the initiation of large- scale demonstration trials for this sector by the Party. A report from this trial on 

indicates that seedling counts similar to MB were achieved by several other treatments, but no indication of pathogen or wee

2007). Limited substrate production of these crops is economical for small niche markets. Frequency of fumigation is once i

crop. Rotation and cover crops are not fumigated. Research is on-going to reduce rates from 98:2 MB/Pic commonly used wh

severe to using reduced rates of 67:33 MB/Pic. This transition has already been made in 70 % of the forest nurseries in the s

not severe. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination is based on economic arguments. Economic statements provid

decrease in yield and higher costs resulting in estimated decreases in net revenue that varied from 11 percent to 53 percent 

states numerical analysis does not include additional impact of quality losses and indirect yield losses resulting from lengthen

direct yield losses, in terms of seedlings/hectare, may not be large on average, intensive seedling production relies on the ab

quality, as well as yield, goals. Converting the large volume of seedlings to containerized production would require significant investment and much higher c

for end users planting the seedlings. Economic issues such as increased application costs (e.g., costs associated with application of metam-sodium and a separaan impact on overall feasibility of these alternatives for the forest seedlings sector.

United States 

Nurseries stock (fruit, nut, flower) 

45.800 64.528 28.275 51.102 25.326 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a total of 17.363 tonnes for this use in 2010. This comprises 9.408 t for ras

for fruit and nut trees. This nomination is for propagation materials that need to be certified as free of pests and diseases, eve

state. MBTOC accepted the rates of 191 kg/ha (19.1 g/m2) for rose nursery and 196 kg/ha (19.6 g/m2) for raspberry nursery, 

(20.0 g/m2) for fruit and nut tree nursery to conform to MBTOC’s standard presumptions. MBTOC recognises that propagativ

of soilborne pest and pathogen control in order to avoid their wide spread distribution and notes the difficulty in protecting ras

MBTOC acknowledges the Party’s adoption of MB/Pic formulations of 67:33 and 50:50 as is used in other countries. MBTOC 

registration of iodomethane for use in nurseries, but also recognizes that it is not yet registered in California and Washington. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: No economic data or alternatives given
196 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Orchard replant 

706.176 527.600 405.400 393.720 292.756 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 215.800 tonnes for this use in 2010. This includes red

fruit, 7.400 t for raisins, 21.800 t for walnuts, 18.600 t for almond and 17.600 t for wine grapes. The CUN is for orchard/vineya

etiology; heavy soils or soils, which cannot be treated to a sufficient depth to effectively use the reduced rates of 1,3-D now a

constraints (maximum labeled rate) prevent the use of 1,3-D at the rates needed for effective kill of old roots and the associatfor heavier (fine-textured) soils. Three alternatives, 1,3-D alone and 1,3-D combined with chloropicrin or metham sodium, are 

according to the CUN for treatment in light soils. Although a two year fallow was found to be effective under Mediterranean cSchneider, et al. 2004 found that a four year fallow did not sufficiently eliminate the causative nematodes. Recent promising r

combined with non-Nemaguard rootstock have been reported by McKenry (2006). The Party confirms that MB/Pic 67:33 form

fruit, Raisin grapes and Wine grapes and now as well for Almond and Walnut. Commercial adoption of 67:33 formulation and 

MB (eg 50:50) were used predominantly for orchard replant treatment in other countries before switching to alternatives. The 

based on application of MBTOC’s standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) for control of pests and pathogens without th

reduction of 10.221 tonnes or 4.5% of the nominated amount. MBTOC recognizes that regulatory restraints prevent the use 

bromide in California but urges the Party to consider continued evaluation of their use to improve the performance of alternat

federal registration of iodomethane for use in orchard replant, but also recognizes that it is not yet registered in California. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements 

plots, spot treatments (individual holes) rates of 0.2 to 0.5 kg chloropicrin per hole were at least as effective as methyl bromid

individual treatments including high labor costs. An economic analysis was not done for this sector because most of the losse

contribute to losses include delayed planting, fallow, additional use of herbicides, tree loss, replant costs to replace tree losseof fruit or nuts, delayed achievement of full yield potential, earlier loss of productivity of whole orchard. McKenry 1999, sugge

are likely to be greater than 20 %. An economic assessment for 1,3-dichloropropene, 1,3-dichloropropene + chloropicrin, and 

sodium, which were alternatives that were assessed as conditionally technically feasible, was made. The economic assessm

methyl bromide, such as for orchard replant, included an evaluation of economic losses from three basic sources: (1) yield lo

quantity produced, (2) quality losses, which generally affect the price received for the goods, and (3) increased production co

cost of using an alternative, additional pest control requirements, and/or resulting shifts in other production or harvesting prac

questions, the Party responded: “The lowest cost alternative to methyl bromide was 1,3-dichloropropene and ranged from a s

including the cost of application. We assumed that this alternative is associated with the higher yield losses and replacement 

control than when it is used in conjunction with chloropicrin or metam-sodium ... Economic losses in this scenario arise prima

caused by the necessity of replacing trees that succumb to the replant disorder. Additional losses occur due to the delay in elosses suffered by trees that are weakened, but not killed, by the pest complex comprising the replant problem. Despite redu

losses over the life span of the orchards could range from US$1,600/ha in walnuts to nearly US$7,000/ha in stone fruit and re

of value of the orchard.”
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Ornamentals 154.000 148.483 137.835 138.538 107.136 None - MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 92.912 tonnes for this use in 2010. This includes 57.9

Michigan, 0.130 t for New York and 32.520 t for Florida. The nomination is for a large number of species, mostly grown in the 

using MB are gladioli, lilies and snapdragon. Additional species using MB in California include calla lily, delphinium, dianthus, 

hypericum, iris, larkspur, liatris, matthiola, and ranunculus. In Michigan, flower crops needing methyl bromide are herbaceous 

divisions. A new application was submitted for production of Anemone coronaria cut flowers in New York. MB is needed to c

Pythium spp., Phytophthora spp., and Rhizoctonia spp.), plant parasitic nematodes (e.g., root knot, root lesion, stunt and dag

Portulacca, Ambrosia and others), and previous crop propagules. MBTOC adjusted the California portion of the nomination to 

kg/ha (21.1 g/m2) to 200kg/ha (20 g/m2) with standard polyethylene films. Similarly, the Florida and New York portions of the 

224 kg/ha (22.4 g/m2) and 734 kg/ha (73.4 g/m2) respectively to the standard dosage rate of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2). An adoptio

alternatives proved to be effective for some flower types: in California for example 1,3-D/Pic, MS and combinations (Klose et 

1,3-D/Pic and solarisation sometimes combined with chemicals (McSorley et al, 2006 ab). In Michigan, the recommended am

account for uptake of a newly registered alternative, methyl iodide, which has been shown to be effective (i.e. Uhlig et al, 200

validated options such as 1,3-D, Pic and MS. MBTOC considers alternatives are available and are in use for anemone cut flo

substrates (Rea et al, 2008). In future nominations MBTOC requires specific information as to areas that cannot be treated w

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic arguments p

analysis shows decreases in yield in California of 20% to 25% result in negative net revenues. In Florida net revenues decrea

losses with alternatives. In Michigan herbaceous perennials, yield losses of 25% lead to net revenue declines of 37%. Althou

possible in higher value cut flower crops, it is not generally feasible, especially for deeper rooted crops and on large acreage

alternative for the crops in the nomination due to high costs and the risks involved. High fuel oil costs also affect the economi

New York, there are additional costs due to a state requirement for an on-site operating engineer for high pressure steam. Ge

offsetting yield or quality increase to defer the costs associated with substrate production. Costs include a large increase in in

systems coupled with high costs of potting mix or substrates, plus the labor to move crates or install the system. Alternatives 

is often unavailable.
198 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Peppers (field) 

1094.782 1,243.542 1,106.753 756.339 548.984 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 457.299 tonnes for this nomination. This represents 2

tonnes for Georgia, 361.348 tonnes for Florida and 8.500 tonnes for Michigan. MBTOC acknowledged the reductions made 

further transition rate of 18.04% Florida for adoption of alternatives in Karst and non-Karst areas of Florida only, a reduction o

Michigan based on adoption of iodomethane and a reduction to meet MBTOC standard presumptions. In the SE, the Party’s 

transition to alternatives and the nominated amount was only adjusted to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions (125 kg/ha 

Kg/ha (15 g/m) for nutsedge). The Party did not request MB for California or for research. The key pests of peppers in Michig

the Southeastern United States, including Florida and Georgia, nutsedge and P. capsici. In Michigan, P. capsici has been fou

and occurred after soil treatment with Telone C35 and metham sodium. However MBTOC considers reinfestation can occur w

bromide. 1,3-D/chloropicrin may be an effective alternative but the Party states growers will miss the optimal market window. 

treatment cannot be applied in autumn because of climatic conditions. In Florida and Georgia the Party states that karst topo

which include 1,3-dichloropropene, which are considered the best alternatives for these pests, on 70% of the growing acreag

Georgia. The Party has stated that metham sodium and metham potassium are promising alternatives. MBTOC, however, co

available for both karst and non-karst areas in Florida and Georgia (Noling et al 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Gilreath and San

2005a; Gilreath 1999, Santos et al 2006; Chellemi et al 2004; Chellemi 2006) and can be adopted at least on areas of moder

references which supported use of alternatives in combination with LDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effect

(Ristaino and Johnson, 1999, Babadost and Islam 2002, Johnston et al 2002, Driver and Lows 2003). A combination of 1,3-D 

+ herbicides (Trifluralin, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Florida fo

reported that research conducted at the University of Georgia examined the use of a 3 way combination of alternative fumiga

followed by metham sodium and this combination was effective. Hausbeck and Lamour (2004) and others have reported man

control Phytophthora on pepper, including crop rotation with non susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybe

management, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch, raised beds etc.) and use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxa

Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph). Seed treatment with Mephenoxan or metalaxyl control Phytophthora during s

uptake of alternatives for this crop in regions with similar pests has occurred within 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spa

2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik et al 2005; Minuto et al, 2003). The use of grafting and resistant varieties are considered as a

least 6 months) in many Mediterranean countries (Bello et al, 2001). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was based on economic arguments. Economic arguments prov

best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield losses of 6 percent in Michigan and California and 

states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible in Michigan. In Michigan, delayed planting and harvest with th

average price (7.5%) received from missed market windows, and negative net revenue. In remaining regions yield losses sig

southern states USG has reduced the request for MB to reflect the apparent feasibility of a 3 way combination (1,3 D followed 

sodium) as a replacement for spring time application of MB and pic in the non-karst geographical areas. A transition rate was 

of yield losses and feasibility associated with likely methyl bromide alternatives and use of high barrier films that could be ma

economists.
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Strawberry (field) 

2,052.846 1,730.828 1,476.019 1,349.575 1,269.321 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 998.063 tonnes for this use in 2010. This comprises 855Eastern USA and 105.020 t for Florida. For California, the Party nominated 952.543 t, and increased the area of usage compnomination is based on the grounds that township caps limit further adoption of 1,3-D and county regulations affect use of higBUNNIE assumed a yield loss of 14%, however data in the nomination showed that specific alternative treatments provide eq

Alternatives based on 1,3-D, Pic and metham sodium have been adopted. In the areas affected by township caps, trials with (such as Pic, Pic EC, Pic + metham, Pic + dazomet, often with LPBF) provide yields that are statistically comparable with MB 

2005, 2006; Nelson et al., 2001ab; Shem-Tov et al., 2005, 2006ab). Pic EC provided an average 99% yield compared to MBFor California, based on 2009 projected data provided by the Party in 2008 and the BUNNIE, MBTOC assumes that neither 1

of 4366 ha, which is equivalent to 855.736 t (196 kg/ha). This calculation assumes that Pic based alternatives can be used o

subjected to Pic regulations. LPBF cannot be used with MB in California, but these films can be used with alternatives and ca

for effective pathogen and weed control. MBTOC encourages the Party to consider regulations which allow adoption of LPBF 

improved efficacy at lower application rates and/or reduced emissions that would result in more use of alternatives under towcounty commissioner constraints on Pic. For Eastern states the Party nominated 75.832 tonnes. The nomination is based on moderate to severe pest pressure (Meloi

Phytophthora cactorum, Cyperus esculentus, C. rotundus, Lolium spp.) affecting 37% of the crop area, and small farm buffer 

affects use of 1,3-D formulations. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for part of the CUN area (on both buffer a

combinations of 1,3-D, Pic and/or metham with herbicides (Ferguson et al. 2001; Sydorovich et al. 2004, 2006; Driver et al. 2Norton et al. 2002; Gilreath et al. 2003c; studies cited in TEAP 2006). MBTOC accordingly reduced the nomination to allow fdose adjustment to 125 kg/ha (12.5 g/m2) for the areas of low nutsedge pressure affected by buffer zones (allowing 150 kg/hpressure areas). In addition, MI/Pic is currently registered and technically feasible for the total nomination, and a further redu

For Florida, the Party nominated 163.440 t. The nomination is based on the grounds that currently available alternatives are nutsedge (37% of area), 1,3-D is restricted in karst/seepage areas (63%), and economic issues. MBTOC considers that alte

CUN area on both karst and non karst areas by use of combinations of 1,3-D, Pic, metham with herbicides and LPBF as stud

are statistically similar to MB (Gilreath et al. 2003bc; Norton et al. 2002; Ajwa et al. 2003, 2004, 2005,2006; López-Aranda et 

Accordingly the nomination was reduced to 105.020 t to allow for transition to alternatives and dose adjustments to 12.5 kg/h

or 150 kg/ha (15.0 g/m2) for high pest pressure areas with use of barrier films to conform to MBTOC's standard presumptions
200 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic comments pcosts for three next best alternatives for California, Florida, and Eastern United States. 1,3-D with chloropicrin is reported to r

Resulting lower production leads to large losses of net revenue. Planting and harvesting delays with alternatives are reported 

received in all regions, but are only shown in the revenue analysis for California. In the eastern U.S. strawberry production ar

should be feasible also, although possibly at a slower rate compared to Florida, primarily due to economic issues and diversit

addition, according to the California Strawberry Commission, the limitation in use of the primary alternative, 1,3-D/chloropicrin

production costs due to longer production timeline for drip-applied fumigation. Economic analysis indicates that alternatives to 

economically feasible, but wide variability of efficacy and costs exist depending on the area within the region (Sydorovych, et 

United States 

Strawberry runners 

54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 7.944 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends 4.69 tonnes for California, but does not recommend amounts for the south 

tonnes for California and 2.691 tonnes for SE. The key pests affecting strawberry runners are weeds (purple and yellow nutsePythium spp in SE, Phytophthora, Verticillium in California), nematodes (root-knot, sting in CA). The CUN is for MB use on 28 

proportion of hectares are exempted under QPS. MBTOC does not recommend use of MB for North Carolina and Tennesee

registered and are technically suitable (TEAP, 2006). MBTOC believes distribution of MI/Pic across 11 ha should be very raptwo year period for total adoption. For California, MBTOC recommends the nomination, but expects that future nominations w

over the last few years in order to satisfy the criteria of Decision IX/6. In addition, MBTOC requests that locations receiving ruThe CUN states that MB at a dosage of 26.3 g/m2 in CA and 25.5 g/m2 in SE is required to meet the certification standards f

request exceeds MBTOC's standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) of MB which is considered effective for production o

using LPBF and other emission control technologies (TEAP 2005); however, California’s certification requirements specify m

applied. Furthermore, California regulations prohibit the use of LPBF with MB. The Party indicates that key alternatives inclu

PIC followed by dazomet and MI/Pic, but that these have not been sufficiently tested on a commercial scale. MBTOC encou

commercial scale testing of these alternatives as well as the registration of MI in CA and to consider changes to there certific

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Economic statements p

1,3-D with chloropicrin as the next best alternative with a 10-percent yield loss in California and the Southeastern States. Ope

chloropicrin are marginally higher in the Southeast and marginally lower in California. In both regions the alternative is predic

in net revenues. Certification requirements for strawberry nurseries (e.g., CDFA, 2003; TDA, 1999; NCDA, 1985) associated 

zero tolerance for any damaging diseases and plant-parasitic nematodes. Since there are no markets for plants that do not m

losses up to 100% are possible when inadequate pest control occurs. Failure to adequately manage pests in transplants will 

transplant and fruit production industries in the U.S., as well as the viability of fruit production in countries that purchase U.S. 

countries in South America, and others).
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Sweet Potatoes slips 

None 0.000 0.000 18.144 18.144 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 14.515 tonnes for this use in 2010. 1,3-D, the alternat

Jan and township caps are exceeded in Nov, which is the fumigation window for slips. MBTOC recognizes the importance of 

of reduced rates of 1,3-D are being carried out as this is the preferred fumigant of growers. Growers also will have available a 

cultivar (Bienville) that will be available in California over the next two years should be useful in managing nematode pests. U

and new alternatives such as non host cover crops followed by application of registered nematicides (ethoprop, aldicarb, met

the quantity of MB use and thus MBTOC recommends a reduced quantity for MB for 2010. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic data on alt

contribute to losses include delayed planting due to use of alternatives; fallow; additional use of herbicides; losses due to weesmaller, less attractive produce (quality loss).
202 May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

United States 

Tomatoes (field) 

2,876.046 2,476.365 2,065.246 1,406.484 1,003.876 None - 

MBTOC comments 2008: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 704.715 tonnes for this use in 2010. This represents 1

Maryland, 128.960 t for SE, 32.072 t for Georgia and 530.691 t for Florida. MBTOC acknowledged the reductions made by th

further transition rate for adoption of alternatives in Karst and non-Karst areas, a reduction of up to 25% for adoption of iodom

MBTOC standard presumptions (125 kg/ha (12.5 g/m2) for pathogens and 150 kg/ha for nutsedge). In Michigan and the SE, 

significant transition to alternatives and the nominated amount was adjusted to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions. In 

nominated amount was adjusted by 22.66 and 25% for uptake of alternatives and to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions

was adjusted to agree with the standard presumptions and adjusted by 18.04% for transition to alternatives, such as 1,3-D/P

Further reductions of 18.71% for Michigan, 24.51% for SE and 25.0% for Georgia were made for transition to iodomethane/P

registered in these states in 2008. The key pest of tomatoes in the southeastern United States, including Florida and Georgia 

capsici. In Florida and Georgia, karst topography limits the use of 1,3-dichloropropene, which is considered as one of the bes

55% of the growing acreage in Florida, 11% in Georgia and 6% of the acreage in SE. The Party stated that metham sodium aalternatives. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for both karst and non-karst areas in SE, Florida and Georgia, 

areas of moderate pest pressure (Noling et al. 2006; Santos et al. 2006; Noling and Gilreath 2004; Gilreath and Santos 2004

2005bc, 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Chellemi and Browne, 2006; McMillan and Bryan 1998, 1999, 2002; Rich and Olson 200

which supported use of alternatives in combination with LPBF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effective alterna

Johnson (1999), Babadost and Islam (2002), Johnston et al (2002), Driver and Lows (2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metha

herbicides (Trifluralin, Devrinol, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Fl

and others have reported many efficient management strategies to control Phytophthora on vegetables, including crop rotatio

(carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa) , cultural control (water management, plant density, soil amendments, and use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide + Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph) and 

metalaxyl. MBTOC considers that further reductions in MB amount is possible with changes to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic combination with barrier films, however the reduction in the nominated amount was not based on use of these formulations. varieties are considered as alternatives in many Mediterranean countries (Bello et al., 2001).
May 2008 TEAP Progress 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+ MOP19) 

Quantity approved for 2009 (MOP19) 

Quantity nominated for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC recommendation for 2009 (additional or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was based on economic arguments. Economic statements prov

losses for 1,3-D with chloropicrin as the next best alternative ranging from 1.75% to 6%. Net revenue declines reported for al

costs are less than 4 percent of total variable costs so have little impact on economic measures. Missed market window in M

research by Gilreath and Santos (2008) has demonstrated that metam sodium fumigant system resulted in reduced root gallsin tomato yield. Assuming that an herbicide is used that is as effective as pebulate, growers using a 1,3-D + chloropicrin + he

average of 0 to 27% yield losses (Santos et al, 2006; Chellemi et al., 2006). As the United States has consistently stated, our 

will force growers to no longer produce a crop. However, in areas of low to moderate pest pressure, information if given a rea

The assessment of need was adjusted to account for this. In areas where karst features are not present it appears that tomat

three pesticides applied sequentially (1,3-D, pic, and metam) and achieve yields that are comparable to those produced by u

only.
204 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

11.6 References 

Adam, B. (2008). Cost comparison of methyl bromide and ProFume for fumigating a food processing facility. 

A report to National Pest Management Association and Dow AgroSciences. Economic 

Consulting LLC. 22 pp 

Ajwa H.A., S. Fennimore, Z. Kabin, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, T. Trout, A. Kahn and O. Daugovish, 

(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, G. Browne, F. Martin, T. Trout, J. Duniway, S. Shem-Tov, and O. Daugovish, 

(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, San Diego, California, USA. 

Ajwa, H.A. T. Trout, S. Fennimore, C. Winterbottom, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, B. Westerdahl, R. 

Goodhue and L. Guerrero (2002). Strawberry production with alternative fumigants applied 

through drip irrigation systems. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 6-8 November 2002, 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. 

Akkaya, F., A. Ozturk, A. Deviren, A. Ozcelik and B. Ozkan. (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. 

Babadost M. and S.Z. Islam (2002). Bell peppers resistant to Phytophthora blight . Phytopathology, (Abstr), 

92: 55. 

Bar-Yosef, B., T. Markovich, I. Levkovich and Y. Mor, (2001). Gypsophyla paniculata response to leachate 

recycling in a greenhouse in Israel Acta Horticulturae 554: 193 - 204 

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., M. Arias, J. López-Perez, A. Garcia-Alvarez, J. Fresno, M. Escuer, S.C. Arcos, A. Lacasa, R. Sanz, 

P. Gomez, M.A. Diez-Rojo, A.P. Buena, C. Goitia, J.L. De la Horra and C. Martínez. (2004). 

Biofumigation, fallow, and nematode management in vineyard replant. Nematropica, Puerto 

Rico, 2004, 34 (1) 53-64.

Bello, A., J. López –Pérez, M. Arias, A. Lacasa, C. Ros, M. Herrero and P. Fernández. (2001). Biofumigation 

and grafting in pepper as alternative to Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California, 

USA. Paper 31. 

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 

CDFA (California Department of Food and Agriculture). 2003. Summary of California Laws 

and Regulations Pertaining to Nursery Stock. 

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PE/Nursery/NIPM.html; 

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov//phpps/PE/Nursery/pdfs/nipm_3_regs_nsy_sees_insp.pdf 

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. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 205

Chellemi, D.O and G.T. Browne (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, Orlando, FL, USA. 

Chellemi, D.O., J. Mirusso and J. Nance. (2004). Evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives on commercial 

vegetable farms. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orkando, FL, USA. 

Culpepper, A.S., T.L. Grey and T.M. Webster. (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. 

Demski, J.W. (1981). Tobacco mosaic virus is seedborne in pimiento peppers. Plant Disease 65: 723-724. 

Driver J.G. and F. Lows, (2003). Management of Phytophthora crown and root rot in peppers (Abstr), 

Phytopathology, 93, S22 

Driver, J.G., P. Brannen, M. Seitz, C. Schiemann, R.M. Welker and F.J. Louws. (2005). On-farm fumigant 

trials for strawberries in the southeast. Proceedings of Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

EC, European Community, (2006). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of the 

critical uses of Methyl Bromide. May 2006. European Community, Brussels. 

Enebak, S., T. Starkey, and D. McCraw. (2006). Tree seedling quality and weed control with Basimid, MBR 

and methyl iodide. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives, Orlando, FL, USA. 

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. 

Ferguson, L.M., G.E. Fernandez, P.M. Brannen, J.M. Louws, E.B. Poling, O.B. Sydorovych, C.D. Safley, 

D.W. Monks, Z. Pesic-Van Esbroeck, D.C. Sanders and J.P. Smith. (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. 

Fukuda, N. and Y. Anami. (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.P. and B.M. Santos. (2008). Managing weeds and nematodes with combinations of methyl 

bromide alternatives in tomato. Crop Prot. 27: 648-652. 

Gilreath J.P., B. M. 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., 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., J.M. Mirusso, J.W.Noling, J.P.Jones and P.R.Gilreath, (2002). Effectiveness of broadcast 

application of Telone C35 and Tilam+Devrinol in Tomato. Proceedings of the Florida 

Horticultural Society., 115,276-280 

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, J. (1999). Living without methyl bromide. Adapt now; thrive in 2005. Florida Farmer: September 

1999. 

Gilreath, J.P. and B.M. Santos (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, J.P. and B.M. Santos (2004c). Manejo de Cyperus rotundus (coquillo) con alternativas al bromuro 

de metilo, en tomate de mesa. Manejo Integrado de Plagas y Agroecología 71: 54-58. 

Gilreath, J.P., B.M. Santos, M. Siham and J.W. Noling. (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. San Diego, 

CA, USA

Gilreath, J.P., B.M. Santos, T.N. Motis, J.W. Noling and J.M. Mirusso. (2005b). Methyl bromide alternatives 

for nematode and Cyperus control in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Crop Protection 24: 

903-908. 
206 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Gilreath, J.P., B.M. Santos, T.N. Motis, J.W. Noling, and J.M. Mirusso. (2005a). Methyl bromide alternatives 

for nematode and Cyperus control in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Crop Protection. 24: 

903-908. 

Gilreath, J.P., J. W. Noling, T.N. Motis, E. Rosskopf and B.M. Santos (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, 

San Diego, CA, USA 

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, Orlando, FL, USA. 

Gilreath, J.P., T. N. Motis, B.M. Santos, J.M. Mirusso, J.P. Gilreath, J.W. Noling and J.P. Jones. (2005b). 

Influence of supplementary in-bed chloropicrin application on soilborne pest control in tomato 

(Lycopersicon esculentum). Crop Protection. 24: 779-784. 

Gilreath, J.P., T.N. Motis, B.M. Santos and J.W. Noling (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., T.N. Motis, J.W. Noling and J. Mertly (2003c). Results of the IR-4 strawberry methyl bromide 

alternatives program in Florida in 2002. University of Florida, Gainseville, FL, USA. 

Gilreath, JP, T.N. Motis, J. Norton and J. W. Noling. (2003d). 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, San Diego, CA, USA. 

Grinstein, A. & A. Hetzroni. (1991). The technology of soil solarization. Pp 159 – 170 In: J. Katan & J. E. 

DeVay (eds.) Soil Solarization. CRC Publications, Boca Raton, FL, USA 

Grinstein, A. (1992). Introduction of a new agricultural technology - soil solarization - in Israel. 

Phytoparasitica 20 (Suppl.):127S-131S. 

Gullino, M.L. and A. Garibaldi (2007). Critical aspects in management fo fungal diseases of rnamental plants 

and directions in research. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 46: 135 – 149 

Gullino, M.L., A. Camponogara, G. Gasparrini, V. Rizzo, C. Cini and A. Garibaldi (2003). Replacing methyl 

bromide for soil disinfestation. The Italian experience and its implications for other countries. 

Plant Disease 87 (9): 1012 – 1019. 

Hausbeck M.K and Lamour K.H., (2004). Phytophthora capsici on vegetable crops: Research progress and 

management. Plant Disease 88(12):1992-1303 

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 

Klose, S., J. Gerik, Ajwa, H. and C. Wilen (2007). Pacific area-wide MB alternatives program for cut flower 

and bulb crops. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

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, F. 2004. (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., 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, J.M., B.M. Santos, J.P. Gilreath, L. Miranda, C. Soria and J.J. Medina. (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. 

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. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 207

 Matsuo K. and Y. Suga. (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 (1994). 1994 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi. 

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. 

McKenry, M., T. Buzo, and K. Stephanie (2006). Replanting stone fruit orchards without soil fumigation. 

Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. 

McKenry, M. T. (1999) First-Year Nematode Control and Tree Growth Using Treatments Appropriate for 

Buffer Zones. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

McMillan, R.T. and H.H. Bryan. (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 H.H. Bryan. (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 H.H. Bryan. (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., K-H. Wang and S.K. Saha. (2006b). Can solarization match methyl bromide fumigation in 

sites colonized by fungi? Phytopathology 96(6), suppl., p. S187 

Melgarejo, P., A. De Cal, T. Salto, M. L. Martinez-Beringola, A. Martinez-Treceno, E. Bardon, J. Palacios, 

M. Becerril, J.J. Medina, J., Galvez and J.M. Lopez-Aranda, (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., A. Garibaldi and M.L. 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., R. Waswa, N. Musembi, J. Chepsoi, J. Mutero and M. Barel (2006). Use of methyl bromide 

alternatives in small scale vegetable sector in Kenya. Methyl Bromide Alternatives Project – 

Kenya. GOK-GTZ-UNDP project. Nairobi, Kenya. 

NCDA (North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services), 1985. 

Nursery Regulations, Nursery Certification. 

http://www.ncagr.com/plantind/Regs/48a1200.htm; 

http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2002%20-

%20agriculture%20and%20consumer%20services/chapter%2048%20-

%20plant%20industry/subchapter%20a/02%20ncac%2048a%20.1210.html 

Nelson M. et al. (2001a). Marketable berry yield cv. Camarosa – Oxnard trial, CA. 2000-01 USDA IR-4 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives Program in Strawberries. 

Nelson M. et al. (2001b). Marketable berry yield cv. Diamante – Salinas trial, CA. 2000-01 USDA IR-4 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives Program in Strawberries. 

Noling, J. W. and J.P. Gilreath. (2004). 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. 
208 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Noling, J.W., J.P. Gilreath and D.A. Botts. (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. 

Nomisma, (2006). Pest Control in the Italian food industry: Selected case studies. Societá di studi economici 

SPA, Bologna, Italy. http://www.nonisma.it/ 38 pp. 

Norton, J., J. P. Gilreath and M. Nelson. (2002). 2000-2001 IR-4 MBA strawberry trial. Chancey Farm, 

Dover / Plant City, FL. USDA IR-4 Methyl Bromide Alternatives Program for Minor Crops. 

Porter, I., R. Brett B. Wiseman and J. Rae. (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. 

Quicke, M., T. Starkey, and S. Enebak. (2007). Area-wide demonstration of alternatives: forest nurseries in 

the southern US. In: Proceedings of the Annual International Research Conf. on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. San Diego, CA, USA 

Rea, E., A. Salerno and F. Pierandrei (2008). Effect of substrate and nutrient solution reuse on ranunculus and 

anemone plant production in a closed soilless system. Acta Horticulturae 779: 541 – 546. 

Rich, J.R. and S.M. Olson (2003). Fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide in North Florida U.S.A tomato 

production. Nematropica. 33, 157-163. 

Ristaino J.B. and S.A. Johnston. (1999). Ecologically based approaches to management of Phytophthora 

blight on bell pepper. Plant Disease, 83, 1080-1089 

Rosskopf, E.N., D.O. Chellemi, N. Kokalis-Burelle and G.T. Church. (2005). Alternatives to methyl bromide: 

A Florida perspective. APSnet Feature, June 2005. 

Sakuma, H. and Suzuki, K. (1995) Development of energy-saving hydroponics systems without requiring 

electricity. JIRCAS J. 4: 73-77. 

Santos, B.M., J.P. Gilreath, J.M. López-Aranda, L. Miranda, C. Soria, and J.J. Medina. (2007). Comparing 

Methyl Bromide alternatives for strawberry in Florida and Spain. Journal of Agronomy 6(1): 

225 - 227 

Santos, B.M., J.P. Gilreath, T.N. Motis, J.W. Noling, J.P. Jones and J.A. Norton. (2006). Comparing methyl 

bromide alternatives for soilborne disease, nematode and weed management in fresh market 

tomato. Crop Protection 25: 690-695. 

Savvas D., and H. Passam (eds) (2001). Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Embryo 

Publications, Athens, Greece, 242 pp. 

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. 

Shem-Tov, S., H.A. Ajwa and S.Fennimore (2006a). Strawberry yield and weed control with alternative 

fumigants applied in combination with metam under various tarps. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, 

USA. 

Shem-Tov, S, H.A. Ajwa, S.A. Fennimore and J. Hunzie. (2006b). Strawberry production and weed control 

in soils treated with basamid and chloropicrin. In: Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. 

Shem-Tov, S., H.A. Ajwa and S.A. Fennimore. (2005). Effect of alternative tarp and fumigants combinations 

with metam sodium on strawberry yield. In: Proceedings of Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, 

United States. 

Sonneveld, (2002). Composition of nutritional solution. In: Savvas D., and H. Passam (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. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 209

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., C. D. Safley, L. M. Ferguson, E. B. Poling, G. E. Fernandez, P. M. Brannen, D. M Monks 

and F. J. Louws, (2006), Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for the 

production of strawberries in the Southeastern United States. HortTechnology 16(1): 118- 128 

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, Orlando, FL, USA. 

TDA (Tennessee Department of Agriculture and Plant Industries). 1999. Rules of 

Tennessee Department of Agriculture and Plant Industries. Regulations 

Governing Strawberry Plant Growers and Dealers. Chapter 0080-6-2. 

http://state.tn.us/sos/rules/0080/0080-06/0080-06-02.pdf 

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. 

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. 

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: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 

31 Oct – 3 Nov, San Diego California USA.Vos, J and Bridge, J. (ed.) 2006. Cases of methyl 

bromide alternatives used in commercial practice. CAB International. 

Tsuda, S. (2006) An Approach for Development of Environment-Friendly Techniques to Control Soil-Borne 

Viral Diseases. Proceedings of Vegetable and Tea Science. No.3. Final Issue: 29-34 

Uhlig, R.E., G. Bird, R. J. Richardson and B. H. Zandstra (2007). Soil fumigants to replace methyl bromide 

for weed control in ornamentals. HortTechnology 17: 111 – 114. 

Urrestarazu, M. (2005) International symposium on soilless culture and hydroponics. Acta Horticulturae 557, 

565pp 

Urrestarazu, M. (2004). Tratado de cultivo sin suelo Mundi Prensa Libros, España, 928 pp. 3a edición. 

Vos, J and Bridge, J. (ed.) 2006. Cases of methyl bromide alternatives used in commercial practice. CAB 

International. 

Wetter, C. (1984). Serological identification of four tobamovirues infecting pepper. Plant Disease 68: 597-

599. 
210 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

APPENDIX I TO CHAPTER 11 

Common Acronyms 

1,3-D 1,3-dichloropropene 

A5 Article 5 Party 

CUE Critical Use Exemption 

CUN Critical Use Nomination 

DOI Disclosure of Interest 

EC European Commission 

EMOP Extraordinary Meeting of the Parties 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

EPPO European Plant Protection Organisation 

IPM Integrated Pest Management 

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention 

ISPM International Standard Phytosanitary Measure 

LPBF Low Permeability Barrier Film (including VIF films) 

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 

MITC Methyl isothiocyanate 

MOP Meeting of the Parties 

MS Metham sodium 

Pic Chloropicrin 

QPS Quarantine and Pre-shipment 

SF Sulfuryl fluoride 

TEAP Technology and Economics Assessment Panel 

US United States of America 

VIF Virtually Impermeable Film 

VOC Volatile Organic Compound 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 211

APPENDIX II TO CHAPTER 11

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. 

Para. 2 of Decision IX/6 does not assign TEAP the responsibility for determining the existence of 

“significant market disruption” specified in paragraph 1(a)(i). 

TEAP assigned its Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) to determine whether 

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, and to address the criteria listed in Decision IX/6 1(b). 
212 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

APPENDIX III TO CHAPTER 11

Report of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol (Annex I), Prague, 22–26 

November 2004, paragraph 15. 

(Decision XVI/4. Review of the working procedures and terms of reference of the Methyl Bromide 

Technical Options Committee) 

“15. An annual work plan will enhance the transparency of, and insight in, the operations of MBTOC. 

 Such a plan should indicate, among other things: 

(a) Key events for a given year; 

(b) Envisaged meeting dates of MBTOC, including the stage in the nomination and evaluation process 

to which the respective meetings relate; 

(c) Tasks to be accomplished at each meeting, including appropriate delegation of such tasks; 

(d) Timing of interim and final reports; 

(e) Clear references to the timelines relating to nominations; 

(f) Information related to financial needs, while noting that financial considerations would still be 

reviewed solely in the context of the review of the Secretariat’s budget; 

(g) Changes in the composition of MBTOC, pursuant to the criteria for selection; 

(h) Summary report of MBTOC activities over the previous year, including matters that MBTOC did 

not manage to complete, the reasons for this and plans to address these unfinished matters; 

(i) Matrix with existing and needed skills and expertise; and 

(j) Any new or revised standards or presumptions that MBTOC seeks to apply in its future assessment 

of critical-use nominations, for approval by the Meeting of the Parties. ” 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

APPENDIX IV TO CHAPTER 11

Methyl bromide reduction trends, based on historical rates of adoption in the EC (EC Management 

Major MB CUEs in 2006 

1991 MB use estimate1(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2005 MB use2(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2006 MB licensed(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB alternatives3

Historical rates of adoptioin individual MSs from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A (ha/year per MS) 

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Pic, Metam Sodium, Dazomet 

up to 838 ha/year/MS 

Grafting on resistant root stock up to 1000 ha/year/MS 

Tomato > 4980 t 

> 7000 ha > 12 MS 

733 t 2423 ha 4 MS 

532 t 1772 ha 2 MS 

Substrates up to 1570 ha/year/MS 

Strawberry fruit 

~ 3420 t 497 t 265 t 

2075 ha (900 

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin, Metam Sodium 

up to 1627 – 2000 ha/year/MS 

1 Refer to Section 3 for data. 2 Use data from Accounting Framework. Hectares calculated on doses stated in CUNs and CUNAs. If not stated, estimated base

this use (tomato: 300 kg/ha; strawberry runners: 300 – 470 kg/ha; strawberry fruit: 100 – 300 kg/ha; cutflowers: 200 – 500 kg/mills and food processors: 20 g/m3) 

3 Further details and alternatives in Annex 4.C. 
214 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Major MB CUEs in 2006 

1991 MB use estimate1(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2005 MB use2(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2006 MB licensed(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB alternatives3

Historical rates of adoptioin individual MSs from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A (ha/year per MS) 

~ 5200 ha Substrates up to 60 – 80 ha / year/MS (>8000 ha in yr 2000) > 12 MS 

3879 ha 4 MS 

ha in 2007) 2 MS Resistant varieties ? 

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin, Metam Sodium, Dazomet 

up to 313 ha/year/MS 

Substrates up to 60 ha/year/MS Steam up to 917 ha/year/MS 

Cut flowers ~ 1610 t 

~ 1,800 ha > 12 MS 

259 t 855 ha 6 MS 

140 t 540 ha 3 MS 

Resistant varieties ? 

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Metam Sodium, Dazomet 

Pepper ~ 2410 t up to 400 ha/year/MS 

~ 3,000 ha > 11 MSs 

250 t 1336 ha 3 MSs 

123 t 577 ha 2 MSs 

Substrates 175 ha / year/MS 

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin, Metam Sodium 

Strawberry up to 870 ha/year/MS runners 

~ 740 t ~ 930 ha ~ 5 MSs 

346 t ~ 1500 ha 4 MSs 

353 t ~ 1500 ha 4 MSs 

Plug plants ? 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Major MB CUEs in 2006 

1991 MB use estimate1(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2005 MB use2(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

2006 MB licensed(tonnes) (ha) (No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB alternatives3

Historical rates of adoptioin individual MSs from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A (ha/year per MS) 

Heat + IPM Sulfuryl fluoride 

up to 3,500,000 – 4,600,000 m3 / year/ MS 

Phosphine ? Controlled atmosphere ?? 

Mills and food processing structures 

640t 12,800,000 m3 5 

~ 15 MSs 

150 t ~7,500,000 m3 6

5 MSs 

91 t 4,536,000 m3 6 MSs Modified atmosphere 

(structures) 

200.000 m3 / year 

5 Assuming average dose was about 50 g/m3 in 1991 6 Assuming dose of about 20 g/m3 
216 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11 – Part A: Preplant Soil Applications List of nominated (2005 – 2010 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2009 in part) amounts of methyl bromide granted by P

process for each crop or commodity. 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 200

Australia Cut Flowers – field 40.000 22.350 18.375 22.350 Australia 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 3.5Australia Strawberry Fruit 90.000 67.000 Australia Strawberry runners 35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 29.790 35.750 37.500 35Belgium 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 7.462 (a)14.792 6.840 7.9Canada Strawberry runners (Quebec) 1.826 1.826 (a) 1.826 1.8Canada Strawberry runners (Ontario) 6.129 6.1
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 200

France Carrots 10.000 8.000 5.000 8.000 8.000 1.4France Cucumber 85 revised to 60 60.000 15.000 60.000 60.000 12France Cut-flowers 75.000 60.250 12.000 60.000 52.000 9.6France Forest tree nursery 10.000 10.000 1.500 10.000 10.000 1.5France Melon 10.000 10.000 7.500 6.000 France Nursery: orchard, raspberry 5.000 5.000 2.000 5.000 5.000 2.0France Orchard replant 25.000 25.000 7.500 25.000 25.000 7.0France Pepper Incl in.tomato cun 27.500 6.000 27.500 6.0France Strawberry fruit 90.000 86.000 34.000 90.000 86.000 France Strawberry runners 40.000 4.000 35.000 40.000 40.000 28France Tomato (and eggplant for 2005 only) 150(all 

solanaceous) 

60.500 33.250 125.000 48.400 

France Eggplant 27.500 33.250 48.400 Greece Cucurbits 30.000 19.200 30.000 19.200 Greece Cut flowers 14.000 6.000 14.000 6.000 Greece Tomatoes 180.000 73.600 156.000 73.600 Israel Broomrape 250.000 250.000 250.000 250Israel Cucumber - protected new 2007 25.000 18.750 25Israel Cut flowers – open field 77.000 67.000 80.755 53.345 42.777 77.000 67.000 74Israel Cut flowers – protected 303.000 303.000 321.330 163.400 113.821 303.000 240.000 220Israel Fruit tree nurseries 50.000 45.000 10.000 50.000 45.000 7.5Israel Melon – protected & field 148.000 142.000 140.000 87.500 87.500 125.650 99.400 105Israel Potato 239.000 231.000 137.500 93.750 75.000 239.000 165.000 137Israel Seed production 56.000 50.000 22.400 56.000 28.000 Israel Strawberries – fruit 196.000 196.000 176.200 64.125 52.250 196.000 196.000 93Israel Strawberry runners 35.000 35.000 20 15.800 35.000 35.000 28Israel Strawberry runners and fruit Ghaza 87.875 67.500 Israel Tomatoes 90.000 22Israel Sweet potato 95.000 Italy Cut flowers (protected) 250.000 250.000 30.000 250.000 187.000 30
218 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 200

Italy Eggplant (protected) 280.000 200.000 15.000 194.000 156.000 Italy Melon (protected) 180.000 135.000 10.000 131.000 131.000 10Italy Pepper (protected) 220.000 160.000 67.000 160.000 130.000 67Italy Strawberry Fruit (Protected) 510.000 400.000 35.000 407.000 320.000 Italy Strawberry Runners 100.000 120.000 35.000 120.000 120.000 35Italy Tomato (protected) 1300.000 1030.000 418.000 871.000 697.000 80Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 68.600 61.400 34.100 88.300 88.800 72Japan Ginger – field 119.400 119.400 112.200 112.100 102.200 53.400 119.400 119.400 109Japan Ginger – protected 22.900 22.900 14.800 14.800 12.900 8.300 22.900 22.900 14Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 182.200 168.000 90.800 194.100 203.900 182Japan Peppers (green and hot) 189.900 200.700 169.400 162.300 134.400 81.100 187.200 200.700 156Japan Watermelon 126.300 96.200 94.200 43.300 23.700 15.400 129.000 98.900 94Malta 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 34.000 12New Zealand Strawberry runners 10.000 10.000 5.720 8.000 8.000 6.2Poland Strawberry Runners 40.000 40.000 25.000 12.000 40.000 40.000 24Portugal Cut flowers 130.000 8.750 50.000 8.750 Spain Cut Flowers – Cadiz 53.000 53.000 35.000 53.000 42.000 Spain Cut Flowers – Catalonia 20.000 18.600 12.840 17.000 

(+Andalucia) 

 20.000 15.000 43

(+A

Spain Pepper 200.000 155.000 45.000 200.000 155.000 45Spain Strawberry Fruit 556.000 499.290 80.000 556.000 499.290 0.0Spain Strawberry Runners 230.000 230.000 230.000 215.000 230.000 230.000 230UK Cut flowers 7.560 6.050 UK Ornamental tree nursery 12.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 200

UK Strawberry (& raspberry in 2005) 80.000 63.600 68.000 54.500 UK Raspberry nursery 4.400 4.400 USA Chrys. Cuttings/roses 29.412 29.412 0.000 USA Cucurbits – field 1187.800 747.839 598.927 588.949 411.757 340.405 1187.800 747.839 592USA Eggplant – field 76.761 101.245 96.480 79.546 62.789 34.732 76.721 82.167 85USA Forest nursery seedlings 192.515 157.694 152.629 133.140 125.758 120.853 192.515 157.694 122USA Ginger 9.200 9.200 0.000 USA Orchard replant 706.176 827.994 405.415 405.666 314.007 226.021 706.176 527.600 405USA Ornamentals 210.949 162.817 149.965 138.538 137.776 111.391 154.000 148.483 137USA Nursery stock - fruit trees, 

raspberries, roses 

45.789 64.528 12.684 51.102 27.663 17.954 45.800 64.528 28

USA Peppers – field 1094.782 1498.530 1151.751 919.006 783.821 658.952 1094.782 1243.542 110USA Strawberry fruit – field 2468.873 1918.400 1733.901 1604.669 1336.754 1191.815 2052.846 1730.828 147USA Strawberry runners 54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 8.837 7.381 54.988 56.291 4.4USA Tomato – field 2876.046 2844.985 2334.047 1840.100 1406.484 994.582 2876.046 2476.365 206USA Turfgrass 352.194 131.600 78.040 52.189 0 206.827 131.600 78USA Sweet potato 224.528 18.144 18.144 18.144 
220 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11– Part B: Post-harvest Structural and Commodity Applicat

List of nominated (2005 – 2010 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2009 in part) amounts of methyl bromide granted by 

process for each crop or commodity. 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 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 7.820 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 22.878 (a)47 34.774 Canada Pasta manufacturing facilities (a) 10.457 6.757 6.067 5.319 (a) 10.457 Canada 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 35.000 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 

France 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 19.350 Greece Dried fruit 4.280 3.081 0.900 4.280 3.081 Greece Mills and Processors 23.000 16.000 1.340 23.000 15.445 Greece 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 2.100 3.444 2.755 Israel Flour mills (machinery & storage) 2.140 1.490 1.490 0.800 0.300 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 65.000 Japan Chestnuts 7.100 6.500 6.500 6.300 5.800 5.400 7.100 6.800 Latvia Grains 2.502 2.502 Netherlands Strawberry runners post harvest 0.120 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 42.065 Switzerland 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 10.195 UK 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 
222 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 

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 43.007 89.166 87.719 

USA Dry commodities/ structures (cocoa 

beans) 

61.519 61.519 64.028 52.256 51.002 61.519 55.367 

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 37.778 83.344 69.118 

USA Smokehouse hams (Dry cure pork 

products) (building and product) 

136.304 135.742 40.854 19.669 19.699 4.465 67.907 81.708 

USA Mills and Processors 536.328 505.982 401.889 362.952 291.418 191.993 483.000 461.758 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 223

12 Decision XIX/8: Scoping Study on Alternatives to HCFC 

Refrigerants under High Ambient Temperature Conditions 

12.1 Introduction 

At MOP-19 in Montreal, the Parties took Decision XIX/8 related to HCFC alternatives and 

specific climatic conditions, which reads as follows: 

1. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to conduct a scoping study 

addressing the prospects for the promotion and acceptance of alternatives to HCFCs in the 

refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors in Article 5 Parties, with specific reference to specific 

climatic conditions and unique operating conditions, such as those as in mines that are not open 

pit mines, in some Article 5 Parties; 

2. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to provide a summary of the 

outcome of the study referred to in the preceding paragraph in its 2008 progress report with a 

view to identifying areas requiring more detailed study of the alternatives available and their 

applicability. 

In preparing the response to this Decision, the RTOC Co-Chairs under the auspices of the TEAP 

assembled a preliminary Subcommittee with seven RTOC members from India, The Netherlands 

and the USA. If needed, the Subcommittee decided to draw on other individuals with specific 

expertise from Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties as needed, specifically those engaged in air 

conditioning design in warm climates and deep mine air conditioning. A summary of the scoping 

study as requested in XIX/8 can not yet be presented in this TEAP Progress Report, since the start 

of the work was delayed until the first quarter of 2008 (and is still underway), owing to a number 

of logistic and technical difficulties. A brief description of the current work-plan can be found 

below. 

The background for Decision XIX/8 is the need for air conditioning in very hot ambient 

conditions, such as hot climates or deep mines. According to the US National Climate Data 

Center [NCDC], the highest temperature recorded on Earth was 58o

C (136oF) measured at El 

Azizia, Libya on 13 September 1922. This is approximately one degree Celsius hotter than the 

record in North America (in Death Valley, CA, on 10 July 1913). The ASHRAE Handbook of 

Fundamentals [ASHRAE Handbook editions from 1997 and 2005] provides extreme 

temperatures for many specific locations. Kuwait experiences the maximum annual daily mean 

temperature in the world, 49.4o C (121o

F). 

HCFC-22 is the most widely used refrigerant in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. It 

is being phased out globally, and since recently, under an accelerated phase-out schedule in 

Article 5 Parties, pursuant to Decision XIX/6. Because of this accelerated schedule for Article 5 

Parties, the performance of alternatives and replacements to HCFC-22 under extreme weather 

conditions has become an important issue for commercial refrigeration and unitary air 

conditioning equipment. 

The critical temperature of a refrigerant is an important parameter in the effectiveness of 

equipment. In the conventional vapour compression cycle the condensing temperature is kept 

well below the critical temperature, because thermodynamic principles result in declining 

capacity and efficiency as heat-rejection (refrigerant condensing) temperatures increase and 

approach the critical temperature. One of the important parameters in the study is therefore 
224 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

related to the critical temperature of HCFC-22 refrigerant alternatives, next to a large number of 

other criteria. 

The study focuses on four topics, which are elaborated upon below. 

12.2 Focus of the Study 

12.2.1 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Air Conditioning 

The driving concern here is the impact of refrigerant replacements for air conditioners operating 

at high ambient conditions, such as those operating in equatorial regions, the Middle East, and 

northern Africa. Most small, packaged, equipment in common usage world-wide employs 

HCFC-22 as a refrigerant. The primary global replacement, especially for the dominant aircooled designs, is R-410A, a blend of hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants. One component of 

this blend, HFC-125, has a comparatively low critical point temperature (66o

C), resulting in 

rapidly declining capacity and efficiency as condensing temperatures approach the critical 

temperature of the blend. Another blend of HFC refrigerants, R-407C, is also used in air 

conditioning; however, one component of this blend is again HFC-125, with thermodynamic 

consequences as described above. The RTOC 2006 Assessment Report mentions that, for unitary 

air conditioning, HFC-134a, HC-290 (propane) and carbon dioxide (R-744) may be the only pure 

fluid replacement options for HCFC-22. 

The scoping study examines the suitability of R-410A, as well as the suitability of a large number 

of other candidate HCFC-22 alternatives for very hot climates such as encountered in the 

identified regions. It pays attention to: 

 Global Warming Potential, 

 capacity at elevated ambient temperatures, 

 input power and related impacts on electricity supplies, 

 efficiency and its implications for greenhouse gas emissions, 

 associated environmental and safety characteristics of the alternatives with focus on the 

consequences of initial, servicing, accidental, and retirement emissions, 

 availability of the alternatives and suitable equipment, and 

 associated cost implications. 

12.2.2 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Refrigeration 

The focal concern is the impact of refrigerant replacements for commercial, transport, and 

industrial use for food preparation, storage, and marketing operating at high ambient conditions, 

such as those operating in equatorial regions, the Middle East, and northern Africa. The 

fundamental concerns are similar to those for unitary air conditioners but for both R-22 and R502, the latter a blend containing HCFC-22 and a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC-115). This blend has 

already been phased out in non-Article 5 Parties, and will soon be phased out in Article 5 Parties. 

The primary replacement for commercial refrigeration world-wide is R-404A, a blend of HFC 

refrigerants. Two components of this blend are HFC-125 and HFC-143a, both having relatively 

low critical temperatures; the result is that compression systems show a rapidly declining capacity 

and efficiency as condensing temperatures approach the critical temperature of the blend. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 225

Whereas R-404A is a primary replacement in commercial refrigeration, the main non-HCFC 

refrigerants currently used in transport refrigeration and in cold storage are HFC-134a (as well as 

some R-404A) and ammonia, respectively. 

The application conditions for the refrigeration sector differ in several significant ways, among 

them the temperature at which heat is removed – generally categorised as low temperature (for 

frozen foods), medium temperature (for fish, meats, and prepared foods), and high temperature 

(for dairy products and typical beverages) – are colder than for comfort air-conditioning. The 

equipment used is factory designed and assembled, but systems require a much higher degree of 

application engineering and often are based on more diverse component selections with more 

significant piping considerations and burdens. In addition, internal refrigerant volumes and 

charge amounts generally are much higher, based on application and especially store layouts, and 

more prone to system and catastrophic failure leakage. The scoping study examines the suitability 

of R-404A, as well as the suitability of a number of other, possible candidate HCFC-22 

alternatives for very hot climates such as encountered in the identified regions. While the 

application conditions and system options differ, the key examination issues (seven preceding 

bulleted items) are the same for refrigeration as for high-ambient temperature air conditioning 

(section 2.1). 

12.2.3 Refrigerants for Deep Mines 

The questions for deep mines are rather different than for high-ambient temperature operation. 

The ambient heat rejection (refrigerant condensing) temperatures generally are less extreme. In 

addition, heat rejection typically employs cooling towers rather than air-cooled condensers, so the 

governing performance parameter is wet-bulb rather than dry-bulb temperature. Moreover, highambient temperature locations actually have an advantage in this regard, since they typically are 

dryer and have greater wet-bulb depression. Conversely, they often are in regions with morelimited water supplies, evaporated to reject heat (by exploiting the latent heat of vaporisation of 

water). In contrast, the heat absorption temperatures often are lower for chillers for deep mines, 

to minimise pumping burdens since equipment generally is installed at the surface. Extra cold 

water, ice slurries, and less commonly brines or other heat transfer fluids are used for heat 

transport to depths currently as low as 3.8 km (2.4 miles) with expected extension to depths 

approach 5 km (3.1 miles) in coming years. The virgin rock temperatures will increase from the 

current 55°C (131°F) to 59°C (138°F), demanding continuous cooling on year-around basis to 

enable miners to survive. The required equipment sizes are quite large, resulting in significant 

energy requirements and heightened concerned with energy-related greenhouse gas emissions. 

Most mine chillers in the last decade have used HFC-134a, or ammonia (R-717); neither is 

considered an ozone-depleting substance. However, some older and some small mines use 

HCFC-22 and some newer installations use HCFC-123 to attain high efficiencies; both are 

HCFCs. Some recent systems use water (R-718) as a refrigerant in a vacuum, vapourcompression flash cycle to produce ice slurries directly. Some proposed systems would use air 

(R-729) in air-standard Brayton cycles. Older equipment tends to be retired more quickly, than 

with systems for comfort conditioning, based on sustained versus intermittent operation. While 

the technologies are in place to deal with the ODS issue for deep mines, refrigerant questions 

remain with respect to future acceptability of options. The current plan is to meet with leading 

mining companies, engineering firms supporting them, researchers, and possibly government 

contacts to verify the problems and confirm needs; the group then will investigate those issues. 
226 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

12.3 Prospects for Promotion and Acceptance of Alternatives 

This approach for this topic (as explicitly mentioned in XIX/8) will depend on the findings of the 

three preceding topics. 

12.4 Priorities and Time Schedule 

In the completion of the scoping study, the priorities of the first three topics are as listed, namely 

for air conditioning first and for deep mines last. The studies for the three sectors will be limited 

to technical options for new equipment. Studies are based on an assessment of all available 

literature published so far on this topic, as well as on modelling using sophisticated models for 

refrigerant and component (heat exchangers and compressors) properties. 

Additional considerations for the three sectors and for existing equipment conversions will be 

deferred for the next RTOC assessment report, publication of which is scheduled for end 2010, or 

identified as areas requiring more detailed study (as mentioned in Decision XIX/8). 

Where it relates to the parts of the scoping study on air conditioning and refrigeration, the initial 

analyses for these two topics are being circulated within the Subcommittee. They are planned to 

be ready for technical review by September-October 2007, so that it should be possible to forward 

a preliminary summary of the findings to the 20th Meeting of the Parties in Doha, November 

2008. The study on air conditioning for deep mines is anticipated to cost more time before 

finalisation. 

The prolonged schedule reflects the time need to complete the study on an unfunded basis 

without real opportunities for Subcommittee meetings. While information requests and 

exchanges are already underway for some time, some of the work depends on other planned 

travel (for example a scheduled travel to South Africa that will facilitate data gathering and 

consultations). 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 227

13 Climate Aspects of Ozone Layer Protection 

13.1 Background 

The Preamble to the 1987 Montreal Protocol includes the sentence: "Conscious of the potential 

climatic effects of emissions of these substances," reflecting the recognition that ODSs are 

greenhouse gases. However, climate protection concerns were secondary in the early 

implementation of the Protocol because 80% of ODS replacement was with zero-ODP not-inkind alternatives, most chemical replacements had a lower GWP than the ODS replaced, and it 

was not yet clear how fast and how far an emerging climate treaty would need to go to 

accomplish its objectives. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) was 

agreed in 1992 (seven years after the 1985 Vienna Convention) and the Kyoto Protocol was 

agreed in 1997 (ten years after the Montreal Protocol--following the 1995 Berlin Mandate). The 

Kyoto Protocol does not include the ODSs controlled by the Montreal Protocol, but includes 

HFCs and PFCs that are alternatives to ODSs in the basket of greenhouse gases. Concerns 

regarding a number of possible scientific and technical interrelationships between the Montreal 

and Kyoto Protocols provided the impetus for a number of reports, including: 

• The 1998 TEAP Task Force on HFCs and PFCs; 

• The 1999 Joint IPCC/TEAP Expert Meeting at Petten Proceedings; 

• The Annex to Chapter III in the IPCC Third Assessment report; 

• The 2005 IPCC TEAP Special Report on Safeguarding the Ozone Layer (SROC) and the 

Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons 

(SROC); and 

• The 2005 Supplement to the IPCC / TEAP Report. 

13.2 New Emphasis on Climate in the Montreal Protocol 

Following the publication of these reports, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol have sought to 

harness the potential climate benefits arising from the on-going phase-out of ODSs through a 

series of further actions. At MOP-17 in 2005, Decision XVII/19 requested the organisation of a 

one-day Workshop (July 2006) to assess the ‘practical measures’ identified in the SROC, 

including assessing the ozone, climate and other benefits of implementing those measures. The 

outputs of that workshop provided a finalised list of practical measures but no time-related 

prioritisation. This additional assessment was included in the TEAP Task Force Report 

responding to Decision XVIII/12 published in August 2007.1

 Other influential reports included a 

paper published by the National Academy of Sciences about the importance of the Montreal 

Protocol in protecting the climate, and papers contained in a book commissioned by UNEP 

celebrating ozone and climate protection.2

 

 1

TEAP, “Report Of The Task Force On HCFC Issues (With Particular Focus On The Impact Of The Clean 

Development Mechanism) And Emissions Reduction Benefits Arising From Earlier HCFC Phase-Out And 

Other Practical Measures—Response To Decision XVIII/12,” 2007. 

2

 See Guus J.M. Velders et al, “The Importance of the Montreal Protocol in Protecting Climate” 

(Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (vol. 104, no. 12, pp 4814-4819, March 20, 2007, 
228 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Following these reports, Parties agreed in Decision XIX/6at the MOP-19 in 2007, to make 

additional efforts to protect the climate as ODSs are phased out. They added the principle of 

climate protection in Decision XIX/6 to the aspects to be considered when taking actions to 

comply with the Montreal Protocol. Parties also directed the Executive Committee when 

“developing and applying funding criteria for projects and programmes...(to) give priority to 

cost-effective projects and programmes, which focus on, inter alia: ...substitutes and alternatives 

that minimise other impacts on the environment, including on the climate, taking into account 

global-warming potential, energy use and other relevant factors...” The fact that the Kyoto 

Protocol excludes ODSs and the previous absence of formal climate considerations under the 

Montreal Protocol served as factors in drafting the language for the 2007 Montreal Protocol 

Adjustment on HCFCs in Decision XIX/6. 

13.3 Past Climate Protection Contributions by Actions Under the Montreal Protocol 

As is now well known, the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer has 

reduced successfully the global production, consumption and emissions of ozone-depleting 

substances (ODSs). However, it is also well known that most HCFC and HFC substitutes are 

potent greenhouse gases (GHGs) that can contribute to radiative forcing if emitted. They are used 

in refrigeration, air conditioning, and thermal insulating foam applications that contribute energyrelated carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions to the atmosphere. Actions taken under the Montreal 

Protocol have led to the replacement of CFCs with HCFCs, HFCs, and other substances as well as 

the adoption of not-in-kind products and processes. Because replacement chemicals generally 

have lower global warming potentials (GWPs), and because total halocarbon emissions have 

decreased, their combined CO2-equivalent (direct GWP-weighted) emissions have been reduced, 

even though some replacements for CFCs and HCFCs still have significant GWPs themselves. In 

some instances the climate impact of these chemicals can be offset in full or in part by chemical 

containment practices and end-of-life recovery, recycle and disposal practices. More importantly, 

making the right choice of alternative substances and technologies can lead to better use-phase 

energy efficiency and a superior overall lifecycle climate performance (LCCP). 

The implementation of the Montreal Protocol has already resulted in significant climate 

protection through the avoidance or reduction of ODS emissions, which are comparable in 

magnitude to Kyoto Protocol and other national and regional actions when expressed in CO2 

equivalent. Compared to the original schedule, the acceleration of the HCFC phase-out agreed in 

2007 for Article 5 Parties can result in a further significant contribution to climate protection 

through the selection of the technology with the most favourable LCCP. This can be achieved by: 

• Ensuring that energy efficiency is optimised 

• Ensuring that emissions of substitute fluorocarbon gases, where used, are well managed 

(contained, recovered, recycled, and destroyed), or 

• Using alternative or substitute fluids with lower GWPs, where possible and appropriate. 

 Washington DC); and Donald Kaniaru (editor), “The Montreal Protocol: Celebrating 20 Years of 

Environmental Progress—Ozone layer and Climate Protection,” Cameron May Publishers, 2007, London. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 229

13.4 Future Opportunities for the Montreal Protocol to Further Protect the Climate 

Careful consideration could also be given to what might be defined as ‘wise substitution’ 

strategies. Where rapid phase-out of HCFCs could create unwanted climate consequences, 

because of the lack of availability of alternative technologies with more favourable LCCP and 

where compliance with a Party’s ozone obligations can still be achieved by reductions in other 

applications in which uncompromised alternatives are available, it might still be logical to delay 

substitution pending further developments. Wise substitution strategies may also require 

continued use of HFC technologies in applications where HFC phase-out could have unwanted 

climate consequences, because of the lack of availability of alternative technologies with superior 

LCCP. 

Other opportunities and options exist to further protect both ozone and climate protection, for 

both Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties, by managing and reducing emissions. Those include: 

1) Further acceleration of the scheduled phase-outs of ODSs for Article 5 Parties beyond 

the requirements of Decision XIX/6; (the current controls provide about 66% reduction 

in consumption, with a potential to reduce 70 or 75% or more via Protocol, national and 

regional initiatives by Article 5 Parties). 

2) Collection and destruction of ODSs and HFCs; 

3) Restrictions or controls on exempted uses (process agents, feedstocks, laboratory and 

analytical uses, and essential uses; 

4) Practical measures to contain, recover, and reuse ODSs and HFCs; and 

5) Requirements and incentives to offset the ozone-depletion and climate impact of any 

continuing uses, including consideration of atmospheric interactions of ozone depletion 

and climate change. 

Decision XIX/6 clearly directed that efforts and investments to protect the ozone layer should be 

done in a way that enhances or, at least, does not adversely affect other parts of environment, 

including climate. Until now, the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund (MLF) has been approving 

and implementing projects primarily in accordance with the mandate to cover incremental costs, 

as contained in the indicative list of incremental costs approved by the 4th MOP, and taking into 

consideration the most cost-effective technologies (as defined by the Executive Committee of the 

Multilateral Fund) to phase out ODS, calculated through the application of established “costeffectiveness” factors. The preferences of some of the enterprises in Article 5 Parties for 

conversions to well established technologies also played a part in choosing non-optimal 

technologies from a climate perspective. Therefore, ways and means need to be found to address 

these new directions in the future, if other environmental aspects, including climate, are to be 

taken into account. 

The recent Adjustment to the Protocol and the associated Decision XIX/6 have directed the 

Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund to consider protecting the environment, including 

climate, while funding the phase-out of HCFC and other ODSs. This dual protection of ozone 

and climate by the Montreal Protocol is an opportunity to increase the cost-effectiveness of 

protecting the global environment by, for example, supplementing the funds under the (MLF) 

with available funds from other sources, if needed. The choice of one window at the MLF is 

recommended because the MLF is recognised by many as an efficient and effective international 

funding mechanism and because delay is less likely with financing managed by a single 
230 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

organisation. The current guidelines and cost-effectiveness thresholds of the MLF may then also 

have to be adjusted to optimise ozone protection in connection with better protection of the 

climate, in harmony with Decision XIX/6. Guidelines are likely to be adjusted in order to deal 

with HCFC phase-out projects on a basis of costs per kg or ODS kg. 

This is because the cost effectiveness factors that have been used historically to fund projects to 

phase out non-HCFC ODS cannot be applied directly and meaningfully compared to HCFCs and 

other high-GWP alternatives. Cost effectiveness of ODS phase-out projects have been 

historically, measured as the USD cost to phase out a unit of ozone depletion, such as ODP tonne 

or ODP kg. There are no technical reasons that the cost of phasing out a physical quantity of an 

HCFC should differ appreciably from the cost of phasing out an equal quantity of another ODS. 

For example, the cost of phasing out a tonne of HCFC-141b will be similar in magnitude to the 

cost of phasing out a tonne of CFC-11. However, the ODP of the HCFC is only a fraction of that 

of the CFC or other ODS. This means that using an ODP-weighted comparison would make it 

appear that the cost effectiveness of an HCFC conversion was many times lower than the 

conversion of another ODS. 

Alternative approaches can be adopted to calculate cost effectiveness for high-GWP ODS 

alternatives that would give a more realistic comparison of technology. 

Life Cycle Climate Performance (LCCP) and other Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) approaches can 

provide the basis for a comparable cost-effectiveness metric for HCFCs and other high-GWP 

alternatives. These techniques estimate the total greenhouse gas emissions of each technology 

choice, including the energy embodied in the chemicals and materials, the direct climate impact 

of chemical emissions, the indirect climate impact of energy use including end-of-life recycle or 

destruction. In many cases within the refrigeration, air conditioning and thermal insulating foam 

sectors, the technology with superior LCCP will be zero-ODP, not-in-kind or low-GWP 

alternatives. However, in some cases there may be high-GWP alternatives that offer 

significantly higher energy efficiency such that the LCCP is superior despite the direct chemical 

emissions and there may be low-ODP options that offer such high energy efficiency that 

continued use is environmentally justified either within the allowed ODS use or under an 

essential use exemption. 

For example, high-GWP HFC foam is thermally superior in many applications to alternatives and 

HCFC-123 building air conditioners achieve significantly higher energy efficiency in many 

applications. Each case is quite different, and requires careful technical evaluation and choice. 

For example, high GWP HFC thermal insulating foams or low-ODP thermal foams can be 

environmentally superior and low-ODP, low-GWP HCFC-123 can be superior, particularly if 

managed for near-zero emissions or if offset by ODS destruction.. 

There will be a small number of cases where an alternative has higher climate impacts than the 

ODS technology it replaces. For example, steam soil pasteurisation likely results in higher 

greenhouse gas emissions than the use of methyl bromide, but is the proper choice for the overall 

environment because its use protects the ozone layer and does not expose farm workers and local 

residents to toxic pesticides. Where steam pasteurisation is implemented to replace methyl 

bromide, additional investment can reduce the energy intensity. 

Parties to the Montreal Protocol may wish to consider the following courses of action (see also 

the actions proposed in the decision tree below): 

a) The first priority by each Party could be to invest in sectors where good technically 

mature alternatives are available but where environmentally superior alternatives are not yet 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 231

under development. Examples of such investments include containment and service of 

refrigeration and air conditioning equipment; alternatives to most solvent and aerosol ODS uses, 

and the use of HCs, CO2, and other natural refrigerants in applications where safety and energy 

efficiency can be achieved. 

b) The second priority by each Party could be to adopt technically mature alternatives 

where additional investment (from any source, but via the MLF for Article 5 Parties) can mitigate 

climate impacts by containing greenhouse gases, improving energy efficiency, and implementing 

best practices to recover ODSs at product end-of-life. 

The last priority for each Party (and for the Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund in case 

of Article 5 Parties) could be to delay investment, still consistent with compliance obligations 

under the Protocol, and deprioritise any projects or activities where available alternatives have 

significant climate and other environmental impacts. 
232 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Decision Tree – Maximising Climate Benefit while Achieving Ozone Compliance

LCCP tools are available for many applications that allow global selection of environmentally 

superior refrigerants. For example, GREEN MAC LCCP (www.epa.gov/cppd.mac) is guiding 

the world-wide selection of the refrigerant to replace HFC-134a in vehicle air conditioning and 

public and private software is available to measure the life-cycle energy use of alternative 

building air conditioning systems installed in specific buildings and climates. Results from this 

LCCP analyses can easily be translated into greenhouse gas emissions by considering the fuel 

mix and energy efficiency of available electric sources and the expected annual and end-of-life 

refrigerant emissions. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 233

13.5 Technical Options for Improving Climate Protection 

TEAP and the IPCC Special Report on Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and Climate have 

identified, by sector, technically and economically feasible in-kind and not-in-kind options for 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Options are categorised for intentionally emissive 

applications, evaporation and leakage from banks contained in equipment and thermal insulating 

foam products during use, testing and maintenance of fire protection and refrigerated equipment, 

and end-of-life practices. 

Carbon dioxide, ammonia and hydrocarbons (HCs) used as halocarbon substitutes have a 

negligible direct effect on global climate. Provided concerns on toxicity, flammability etc. can be 

addressed, they can be applied in a range of products to achieve equal or perhaps better energy 

efficiency relative to the high-GWP HFCs. New low-GWP substitutes such as HFC-1234yf 

(ODP=0; GWP=4), which is currently proposed to replace HFC-134a (ODP=0; GWP=1400) in 

vehicle air conditioning, may well have a comparable LCCP to other low GWP refrigerants such 

as CO2 (ODP=0; GWP=1) and HFC-152a (ODP=0; GWP=140). Time will tell whether CO2 or 

HFC-152a will become next generation refrigerants. CO2 equipment is newly designed and so far 

has difficulties under normal conditions in achieving efficiencies comparable to the other 

alternatives. [Please note that HFC-1234yf is also referred to by its developers as HFO-1234yf, 

but that TEAP uses the standard nomenclature that designates this substance as an HFC.] 

In some foam applications, the high-GWP HFC substitutes for CFC and HCFC thermal insulating 

foam have superior LCCP to foam made with low-GWP options although in these cases, 

assumptions about end-of-life disposition of the blowing gas may still have a significant effect on 

the calculation of overall climate benefits. 

Previously, TEAP and its Technical Options Committees identified cost-effective technology and 

management practices to reduce both direct and indirect GHG emissions: 

Technically and economically feasible options to reduce direct GHG emissions include: 

• Not-in-kind technologies; 

• Improved containment of substances; 

• Reduced charge of substances in equipment; 

• End-of-life recovery and recycling or destruction of substances; and 

• Alternative substances with low-global warming potential. 

• Technically and economically feasible options to reduce indirect GHG emissions include: 

• Improved designs and controls; 

• Heat exchangers designed for better heat transfer; 

• Superior foam structure and application techniques to avoid voids and spaces; and 

• Technical innovations. 

Policy Options for Improving Climate Protection 

Application of policy measures used in the CFC phase-out can speed and reduce the cost of the 

HCFC phase-out, and can maximise the contribution of the Montreal Protocol to climate 

protection. 
234 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

The successful policy measures adopted by many Parties include: 

• Regulations (e.g., non-essential product bans, performance standards, certification, 

restrictions, end-of-life HFC recovery, in some cases paid by product manufacturers and 

importers); 

• Economic instruments (e.g., taxation, emissions trading, carbon offsets, financial 

incentives, and chemical use deposits and refunds); 

• Voluntary agreements (e.g., voluntary reductions in use and emissions, industry 

partnerships, release of patented technology to public domain, and implementation of 

best practice guidelines); and 

• International co-operation (e.g., ozone financing from the MLF with additional 

contributions from climate funding mechanisms such as the Clean Development 

Mechanism, Global Environment Facility (GEF) to enable MLF to ensure that the 

projects financed for developing countries to protect ozone also better protect climate and 

environment). 

13.6 Conclusion 

In conclusion, TEAP notes it is technically and economically feasible to implement Decision 

XIX/6 to: “...give priority to cost effective projects and programmes, which focus......substitutes 

and alternatives that minimise environmental impacts, in particular impacts on climate, as well as 

meeting other health, safety and economic considerations.” However, Parties may not always 

consider these measures to be cost-effective in the terms normally considered by the Montreal 

Protocol funding mechanisms. Nonetheless, co-ordinated investment to protect both ozone and 

climate will almost always be more cost-effective than independently pursuing these goals. 

Additionally, technological developments underway in several foam, refrigeration and air 

conditioning products may make the achievement of climate benefits more cost-effective in 

future. Accordingly, there may be value in delaying some transitions to await these new products 

where such delays do not jeopardise Protocol compliance. It will be important to review and 

strengthen the existing guidelines and procedures followed by the Parties and the institutions of 

the Protocol, such as those of the MLF, in order to comply with the new climate protection and 

other environmental priorities as agreed in Decision XIX/6. 

Some aspects of the Adjustment and Decision apply to all Parties while others specifically 

consider action by Article 5 Parties. Action by Article 5 Parties will be guided by the direct 

instructions given to the Executive Committee when “developing and applying funding criteria 

for projects and programmes”. Parties may wish to ensure therefore that actions to include the 

climate factors in Article 5 Parties are consistent with technologies and policies (and resulting 

products) pursued in non Article 5 Parties because markets are now global and there is a business 

and consumer demand to make all choices sustainable. Success in these efforts will require cooperation by all organisations involved with the success of the Montreal Protocol. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 235

14 TEAP/TOC Organisation Issues 

14.1 Budget 

TEAP is grateful for the continuing support of national governments, the European Commission, 

associations and companies that finance the time and expenses of the participation of experts in 

the TEAP, TOCs and Task Forces. TEAP and its TOCs are concerned over the resignations and 

retirements of some of their most experienced members, who are critical to the quality, 

objectivity, and timeliness of TEAP findings. 

TEAP requests for emergency funding of US$ 100,000 per year for 2008 and 2009 to cover travel 

for non-Article 5 members of TEAP and TOCs and for miscellaneous meeting expenses. If direct 

funding out of the Ozone Trust Fund through the Secretariat is not possible, TEAP respectfully 

requests that assignments to TEAP be paid on time and a cost basis from the Ozone Secretariat, 

the Multilateral Fund or other appropriate sources. Mindful that Parties have repeatedly rejected 

requests for financing, individual TEAP and TOC members will continue to seek adequate 

funding from governments, associations, and companies, while TEAP itself will investigate 

funding from foundations. 

TEAP continues to look for ways to minimise its costs including: choosing cost-effective 

locations for meetings; seeking hosts form meeting rooms and discounts for hotel rooms; using 

internet for communications and discussions; and rationalising membership, as needed. MBTOC 

and RTOC, which currently has a larger than needed membership, have indicated it will review 

membership to ensure cost efficiency. 

14.2 Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee 

TEAP is pleased to report that the recent strengthening of the MBTOC has further improved the 

efficiency of meetings and simplified the process of coming to consensus. TEAP finds that 

MBTOC Sub-Committees need not meet together and that separate meeting locations can be 

selected to minimise costs and to make important visits. 

Dr. Jonathan Banks has assumed the position of Co-Chair of MBTOC Structures and 

Commodities Sub-Committee in 2007, following the response to the nomination. 

14.3 Likely Future Changes in TEAP Organisation 

It is likely that work of the MTOC will diminish after 2011 as both Article 5 and non-Article 

MDI EUEs decrease and that work of the MBTOC will also probably diminish after 2012 when 

CUEs decrease. At that time, TEAP will further consolidate and simplify its organisation. 

14.4 Notice of Positions Available on the TEAP and its TOCs 

TEAP welcomes nominations of experts for all committees at any time. Currently, TEAP is 

particularly seeking: 

• Article 5 Co-Chair for the Halons Technical Options Committee
236 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

• Expert in nutsedge control, orchard replant, forestry, and nursery propagation for the 

Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC-S Subcommittee) 

• Experts in aviation fire protection for the Halons Technical Options Committee 

• Article 5 experts in the manufacture of MDIs 

14.5 Conflict of Interest 

TEAP now maintains the latest Disclosure of Interest information on the Ozone Secretariat web 

site.
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 237

ANNEX I: TEAP Member Biographies 

The following contains the background information for all TEAP members as at April 2008. 

Dr. Radhey S. Agarwal 

(Refrigeration TOC Co-chair) 

Professor of Mechanical Engineering 

Mechanical Engineering Department 

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi 

India- New Delhi – 110016 

Telephone: 91 11 2659 1120 (O), 2658 2160 (R) 

Fax: 91 11 2652 6645 

E-Mail: rsarwal@mech.iitd.ernet.in or 

agarwalrs@gmail.com 

Dr. Radhey S. Agarwal, Co-chair of the Refrigeration, Air-conditioning and Heat Pumps 

Technical Options Committee, is the Professor of Mechanical Engineering at the Indian Institute 

of Technology Delhi (IIT Delhi). He co-chaired the 2003 HCFC Task Force, the 2004 Chiller Task 

Force, Force and the 2007 Task Force on the Strengthening the Protocol (Decision 18/12). IIT 

Delhi has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol since it is one of the academic institutes 

of higher learning in India. Dr. Agarwal holds a M. Tech. and a Ph.D. from IIT Delhi. Dr. Agarwal 

has been actively pursuing research in the area of refrigeration & air-conditioning. He has guided a 

number of Ph.D. and M. Tech. theses and published research papers in the field of refrigeration 

and air-conditioning. Dr. Agarwal has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to 

ODSs, does not own any stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives/substitutes to ODSs. 

Dr. Agarwal’s spouse has no interest in matters related to the Protocol. Dr. Agarwal occasionally 

takes consultancies and advisory roles operated through IIT Delhi from the engineering industry, 

UNEP, GTZ and INFRAS for research & development, technical advice, developing technical 

manuals and training materials etc. IIT Delhi makes in-kind contribution for wages. Cost of travel 

and other expenses related to participation in the TEAP and the RTOC are paid by UNEP’s Ozone 

Secretariat. 

Dr. Stephen O. Andersen 

(Panel Co-chair) 

Director of Strategic Climate Projects 

Climate Protection Partnerships Division 

United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Ariel Rios Building 

Mail Code 6202J 

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20460 

U.S.A. 

Telephone: 1 202 343 9069 

Fax: 1 202 343 2379 

E-Mail: andersen.stephen@epa.gov 

Stephen O. Andersen, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel since 1989, is 

Director of Strategic Climate Projects in the Climate Protection Partnerships Division of the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency and previously Deputy Director of the Stratospheric Protection 

Division. He created EPA’s first voluntary partnerships including accelerated phaseout 

agreements in food packaging foam, mobile AC, and solvents and he helped organize the Halon 

Alternatives Research Corporation and the Industry Cooperative for Ozone Layer Protection Prior 

to joining EPA he was a university professor, a consultant, and an employee of environmental, 
238 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

law, and energy NGOs. With K Madhava Sarma he is author of “Protecting the Ozone Layer: The 

United Nations History,” (Earthscan 2002); with Durwood Zaelke he is author of “Industry 

Genius: Inventions and People Protecting the Climate and Fragile Ozone Layer,” (Greenleaf 

2003); with K. Madhava Sarma and Kristen N. Taddonio he is author of “Technology Transfer for 

the Ozone Layer: Lessons for Climate Change,” (Earthscan 2007); and with Guus J.M. Velders, 

John S. Daniel, David W. Fahey, and Mack McFarland he is author of “The Importance of the 

Montreal Protocol in Protecting Climate,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 20 

March 2007. He earned his M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of California Berkeley. He 

chaired and co-chaired the Solvents TOC from 1989 to 1995, chaired the 1999 HFC and PFC Task 

Force, and co-chaired several Task Forces. He served on the Steering Committee to the 

“IPCC/TEAP Special Report Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: 

Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons” and he participated in the Science 

Assessment Panel in 2006. Dr. Andersen’s spouse works for the U.S. EPA Office of Pesticide 

Programs and Toxic Substances in a division that registers bio-pesticides, including potential 

substitutes for methyl bromide. The U.S. EPA makes in-kind contributions of wages, travel, 

communication, and other expenses and some travel is sponsored by the U.S. DoD. With approval 

of its government ethics officer, EPA allows expenses to be paid by other governments and 

organisations such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 

Mr. Paul Ashford 

(Foams TOC Co-chair) 

Principal Consultant 

Caleb Management Services 

The Old Dairy, Woodend Farm Cromhall, 

Wotton-under-Edge 

Gloucestershire, GL12 8AA 

United Kingdom 

Telephone: 44 1454 269330 

Fax: 44 1454 269197 

Mobile: 44 7774 110 814 

E-Mail: Paul@Calebgroup.net 

Paul Ashford, Co-chair of the Rigid and Flexible Foams Technical Options Committee since 1998 

is the owner and managing director of Caleb Management Services Ltd., a consulting company 

working in the chemical regulatory and sustainability arenas. He co-chaired the TEAP Task Force 

on the Supplement Report to the “IPCC/TEAP Special Report: Safeguarding the ozone layer and 

the global climate system: issues related to hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons” (2005) and 

the Task Force on Emissions Discrepancies in 2006. Until 1994, he worked for BP Chemicals in 

the division that developed licensed foam technology using ODS and was responsible for the 

adoption of alternatives. He has over 25 years direct experience of foam related technical issues 

and has conducted numerous studies to characterise the foam sector and inform future policy 

development. His funding for TEAP activities, which includes some sponsorship of time, is 

provided jointly under contract by the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) and the 

Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in the UK. Much of his recent 

work on banks, emissions and foam end-of-life management, performed to inform both IPCC and 

TEAP processes has been supported by the US EPA. There is increasing overlap with IPCC and 

UNFCCC objectives in support of greenhouse gas emissions reporting by Governments. Other 

related non-TEAP work is covered under separate contracts from relevant commissioning 

organisations including international agencies (e.g. UNEP DTIE), governments, industry 

associations and corporate clients. A considerable portion of the work with private clients relates 

to the lifecycle assessment of products based on ODS alternatives and advice on carbon 

management strategies. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 239

Dr. Jonathan Banks 

(QPS Taskforce Chair) 

Grainsmith Pty Ltd 

10 Beltana Rd 

Pialligo ACT 2609 

Australia 

Telephone: 61 2 6248 9228 

Fax: 61 2 6248 9228 

E-Mail: apples3@bigpond.com 

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 co-inventor 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 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, 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. 

Prof. Mohamed Besri 

(MBTOC Co-chair) 

Department of Plant Pathology 

Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II 

BP 6202-Instituts 

Rabat, Morocco 

Telephone: 212 37 778 364 (office); 

212 37 710 148 (home) 

Fax: 212 37 778 364 

Email: m.besri@iav.ac.ma 

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 Soil-borne 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, his spouse, his business partner and dependant children have no 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. Dr Besri works occasionally as a consultant to UNEP on 

matters related to the Montreal Protocol. 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. 
240 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Mr. David Catchpole 

(Halons TOC Co-chair) 

Technical Consultant 

Petrotechnical Resources Alaska 

Anchorage 

Alaska, U.S.A. 

Telephone 

And fax: 1 907 868 3911 

E-Mail: dcatchpole@gci.net 

Mr. David V. Catchpole, Co-Chair of the Halons Technical Options Committee and Member of 

the Technology and Economics Assessment Panel since 2005, works part time for Petrotechnical 

Resources Alaska (PRA), an Anchorage, Alaska based company that provides consulting services 

to oil companies in Alaska. From 1991 to 2004 he was a member of the HTOC. From 1970 until 

1999, he was an employee of the BP group of companies, most recently BP Exploration Alaska, 

where he worked for nine years in the environmental department on alternatives to halon and on 

halon banking. Mr. Catchpole advises BP Exploration Alaska on fire protection and halon issues 

as his main activity for PRA. BP Exploration Alaska has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol because it uses halon 1301 for explosion prevention and fire suppression in its enclosed 

oil and gas processing modules on the North Slope of Alaska. Mr. Catchpole has no proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, however his retirement portfolio contains stock in BP plc. Mr. 

Catchpole’s spouse does not work for or consult for any organisation that has an interest in the 

topics of 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 not consult for organisations seeking to phase-out ODSs. Mr. Catchpole typically 

receives funding to support salary and travel to TEAP/TOC meetings from the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Defense; and the Halon 

Recycling Corporation and the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation, which are not-for-profit 

industry coalitions that in turn receive contributions for this funding from members. Contributors 

are: BP Exploration Alaska, ConocoPhillips Alaska, DuPont, Chemtura, American Pacific, 

Firetrace, Halon Banking Systems, Westco and Remtec. 

Prof. Dr. Biao Jiang 

(Chemicals TOC Co-chair) 

Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry 

(SIOC), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) 

354 Fenglin Road 

Shanghai 200032 

The People’s Republic of China 

Telephone: 86 21 54925201 

Fax: 81 21 64166128 

E-Mail: jiangb@mail.sioc.ac.cn 

Dr Biao Jiang, Co-chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee since 2005, is Professor 

of Chemistry of Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy Of Sciences and a 

member of editorial advisory board of Chemical Communication, Royal Society of Chemistry, 

United Kingdom. Professor Jiang involves in the research and the development of new 

methodology of organic synthesis, medicinal chemistry, fluorine chemistry as well as organic 

process research and development of clean chemistry. Dr Jiang has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor does he own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Costs of travel, communication, and other expenses related to 

participation in the TEAP, its Chemicals TOC, and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are paid 

by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 241

Dr. Lambert Kuijpers 

(Panel Co-chair, Refrigeration TOC Co-chair) 

Technical University Pav B24 

P.O. Box 513 

NL – 5600 MB Eindhoven 

The Netherlands 

Telephone: 31 49 247 6371 / 31 40 247 4463 

Home: 31 77 354 6742 

Fax: 31 40 246 6627 

E-Mail: lambermp@wxs.nl, lambermp@planet.nl 

Lambert Kuijpers, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel since 1992 and 

Co-chair of the Refrigeration, Air-conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee 

since 1989, works on a part-time basis for the Department “Technology for Sustainable 

Development” at the Technical University Eindhoven, The Netherlands. He co-chaired the TEAP 

Replenishment Task Forces between 1996 and 2005, as well as the latest (2008) TEAP 

Replenishment Task Force. He served on the Steering Committee to the “IPCC/TEAP Special 

Report “Safeguarding the ozone layer and the global climate system: issues related to 

Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons”, he co-chaired the 2005 Task Force for the TEAP 

Supplementary Report to the IPCC/TEAP Special Report, the 2006 Task Force on Emissions 

Discrepancies and the 2007 Task Force on the Response to Decision XVIII/12. He was a Lead 

Author for both the Third and the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report. He was a member of the 

Ozone Science Assessment Panel in 2005-2006. Until 1993, he worked for Philips in the 

development of refrigeration, air conditioning, and heat pump systems to use alternatives to ozonedepleting substances. He is financially supported (through the UNEP Ozone Secretariat) by the 

European Commission (and in certain years by some EU member state governments) for his 

activities related to the TEAP and the Refrigeration TOC. Dr. Kuijpers has no proprietary interest 

in alternatives or substitutes to ODS and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS. He occasionally is a consultant to governmental and nongovernmental organisations, such as the World Bank, UNIDO, UNEP DTIE and the Multilateral 

Fund (e.g. for the 2006 Expert Meeting). Dr. Kuijpers is also an advisor to the Re/genT Company, 

Netherlands, which he co-founded in 1993 and where he still has a minority interest (R&D of 

components and equipment for refrigeration, air-conditioning and heating). 

Ms. Michelle Marcotte 

Marcotte Consulting 

(Marcotte Consulting is located in Canada) 

home address: 

10104 East Franklin Ave 

Glenn Dale, Maryland 20769 

USA 

Telephone: (301) 262-9866 

E-mail: marcotteconsulting@comcast.net 

www.marcotteconsulting.com 

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 agrienvironmental 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 
242 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

its interest in food processing, food safety and trade. In the field of methyl bromide alternatives, 

Ms Marcotte has published case studies in pest control in food processing, in stored commodities, 

in alternatives for quarantine and in greenhouse use. She is a member of the Canada IndustryGovernment Methyl Bromide Working Group and the Canada-US Methyl Bromide Working 

Group; both organisations work to achieve the 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 summarising research in methyl 

bromide alternatives and case studies on food processing for the U.S. 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. Ms Marcotte receives a consulting contract from the Government of Canada, 

Environment Canada. The funds for Ms Marcotte for travel to TEAP, MBTOC and Montreal 

Protocol meetings and to support her work on the MBTOC are provided by the the Government of 

Canada, Environment Canada. 

Mr. E. Thomas Morehouse 

(Senior Expert Member) 

Institute for Defense Analyses 

4850, Mark Center Drive 

Alexandria, VA 22311 

U.S.A. 

Telephone: 1 703 750 6840 

Fax: 1 703 750 6835 

E-Mail: tom.morehouse@verizon.net 

Thomas Morehouse, Senior Expert Member for Military Issues since 1997, is a Research Adjunct 

at the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA), Washington D.C., USA. From 1989 until 1996 he cochaired the Halons TOC. From 1986 to 1989 he was an officer in the United States Air Force 

responsible for developing alternatives to halon. From 1989 until 1994 his responsibilities as an 

Air Force officer included broader environmental and energy policy issues for the U.S. 

Department of Defense. Mr. Morehouse’s spouse works for the U.S. National Oceanographic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in a position that plans long term spending for NOAA, 

including research and operations affecting stratospheric ozone and climate. IDA makes in-kind 

contributions of communications and miscellaneous expenses. Funding for wages and travel is 

provided by grants from the Department of Defense and the Environmental Protection Agency. 

IDA is a not-for-profit Federally Funded Research Center (FFRDC) that undertakes work 

exclusively for the US Department of Defense. He also occasionally consults independently to 

corporate clients, national laboratories and other government agencies on environmental and 

energy related issues. Mr Morehouse –and his spouse- have no proprietary interest in alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs, nor do they own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 243

Ms. Marta Pizano 

(MBTOC Co-chair) 

Consultant 

Calle 85 No. 20 – 25 Of 202B 

Bogotá, Colombia 

Telephone: 57 1 6348020 or 5302036 

Fax: 57 1 2362554 

E-mail: mpizano@unete.com 

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 phaseout 

programs in nearly twenty Article 5 Parties 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. 

Mr. Jose Pons Pons 

(Panel Co-chair, Medical TOC Co-chair) 

Spray Quimica 

Urb.Ind.Soco, Calle Sur #14 

La Victoria 2121, Edo Aragua 

Venezuela 

Telephone: 58 244 3223297 or 3214079 or 3223891 

Fax: 58 244 3220192 

E-Mail: joseipons@telcel.net.ve 

Jose Pons, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel and the Medical 

Technical Options Committee and Member of the 2007 Task Force on the TEAP Legacy, is 

President of Spray Química C.A. Jose Pons is a full time manager/engineer at the Spray Química 

aerosol filling plant in La Victoria, Venezuela. Spray Química has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol because it used, and still uses, ODS in some of its aerosol products for 

industrial maintenance. Mr Pons has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODS, 

does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not 

have an interest in the outcome of essential use nominations, and does not consult for 

organisations seeking to phase out ODS. Mr Pons’s spouse has no interest in matters before the 

Protocol; she is also a manager/engineer at Spray Química. Mr Pons has worked occasionally as a 

consultant to MLF on matters related to the Montreal Protocol. The Task Force worked by e-mail 

and there was no travel or other expenses paid by any organisations to participate in this activity. 

Travel related to participation in the TEAP and MTOC, and relevant Protocol meetings, are paid 

by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. Spray Química makes in-kind contributions of wage, and 

miscellaneous and communication expenses. 
244 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Dr. Ian J. Porter 

(MBTOC Co-chair) 

Principal Researcher, Plant Pathology 

Primary Industries Research Victoria 

Department of Primary Industries 

Private Bag 15, Ferntree Gully Delivery Centre 3156, 

Victoria, Australia. 

Telephone: 61 3 9210 9222 

Fax: 61 3 9800 3521 

Mobile: 61 (0)417 544 080 

Email: ian.j.porter@dpi.vic.gov.au 

Dr Ian Porter is the Statewide Leader of 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 26 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 inkind contributions to attend MBTOC and UNEP meetings, but provides no support at present. In 

2007, Dr Porter funds his own participation. The Australian Federal Government Research Fund 

and funds obtained through the Ozone Secretariat have provided support to finance travel and 

expenses for MBTOC activities. 

Prof. Miguel W. Quintero 

(Foams TOC Co-chair) 

P.U. R&D Development Leader 

Dow Europe GmbH 

Wolleraustrasse 15-17 

CH-8807 Freienbach 

Switzerland 

Telephone: +41 55 416 87 00 

Fax: +41 55 416 87 01 

E-Mail: mwquintero@dow.com 

Prof. Miguel W. Quintero, Co-chair of the Foams Technical Options Committee since 2002, has 

been a professor at the Chemical Engineering Department at Universidad de los Andes in Bogota, 

Colombia, in the areas of polymer processing and transport phenomena during 2000- 2006, where 

he is now a visiting professor. Prof. Quintero worked during 21 years (until 2000) for Dow 

Chemical at the Research & Development and Technical Service & Development Departments in 

the area of rigid polyurethane foam. In January 2007, he returned to Dow Europe as Development 

Leader for Polyurethane Product Research, located in Freienbach, Switzerland. He owns stock in 

companies that now or previously manufactured ozone-depleting substances and products made 

with or containing ozonedepleting substances and their substitutes and alternatives. He has been a 

regular consultant for the Montreal Protocol’s implementing agencies. The participation of Prof. 

Quintero in TEAP and FTOC related activities is funded by Dow Chemical. 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 245

Dr. Ian D. Rae 

(Chemicals TOC Co-Chair) 

16 Bates Drive 

Williamstown, Vic 3016 

Australia 

Telephone: 61 3 9397 3794 

Fax: 61 3 9397 3794 

E-mail: idrae@unimelb.edu.au 

Dr. Rae, Co-chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee since 2005, is a Honorary 

Professorial Fellow at the University of Melbourne, Australia, and a member of advisory bodies 

for several Australian government agencies dealing with chemical issues and in particular the 

Stockholm Convention. He co-chaired the 2001 and 2004 Process Agent Task Forces. He is a 

member of the POPs Review Committee for the Stockholm Convention. On occasions, he acts as 

consultant to government agencies and to universities and companies and he has been an expert 

witness in a case involving alleged patent infringement involving HFC- 134a and its lubricants. He 

contributes the time for his own participation in TEAP activities. The Australian Government 

Department of the Environment and Water Resources finances the cost of travel and 

accommodation for Dr. Rae’s attendance at meetings of the CTOC, TEAP, OEWG and MOP. 

Mr. K. Madhava Sarma 

(Senior Expert Member) 

AB50, Anna Nagar, 

Chennai 600 040 

India 

Telephone: 91 44 2626 8924 

Fax: 91 44 4217 0932 

E-mail: sarma_madhava@yahoo.com 

K. Madhava Sarma, Senior Expert Member since 2001, and member of the Task Force on the 

TEAP Legacy, retired in 2000, after nine years as Executive Secretary, Ozone Secretariat, UNEP. 

Earlier, he was a senior official in the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), Government 

of India and held various senior positions in a state government in India. He works occasionally as 

a consultant to UNEP and is an unpaid member of the Technical and Finance Committee of the 

Ozone Cell, MOEF, Government of India. He is working on a research and writing project on 

technology transfer and change for the protection of the ozone layer financed by the Global 

Environmental Facility (GEF). Neither he or his spouse own stock in any company connected to 

ODS or alternatives or substitutes. Costs of travel, communication, and other expenses related to 

participation in the TEAP and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone 

Secretariat. 
246 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

Dr. Helen Tope 

(Medical TOC Co-chair) 

Senior Policy Officer – Global Issues 

Atmosphere and Noise Unit 

EPA Victoria 

GPO Box 4395QQ 

Melbourne, Victoria 3001 

Australia 

Telephone: 61 3 9695 2637 

Fax: 61 3 9695 2578 

E-Mail: helen.tope@epa.vic.gov.au 

Helen Tope, Co-chair Medical Technical Options Committee since 1995, Member of the 2007 

Task Force on the TEAP Legacy, is Principal Consultant of Energy International Australia (since 

2006) and also Director of Planet Futures (since 2007) with whom she is an independent 

consultant providing strategic, policy and technical advice and facilitation services to government, 

industry and other non-governmental organisations on climate change, ozone-depleting 

substances, and other environmental issues. Dr Tope’s business has an interest in the topics of the 

Montreal Protocol because her potential clients are also interested in these topics. Dr Tope has no 

proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not have an interest in the outcome of 

essential use nominations, and does not currently consult for organisations seeking to phase out 

ODS. Dr Tope’s spouse has no interest in matters before the Protocol. The Ozone Secretariat 

provides a grant for travel, communication, and other expenses of the Medical Technical Options 

Committee from funds granted to the Secretariat unconditionally by the International 

Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC). IPAC is a non-profit corporation. 

Dr. Daniel P. Verdonik 

(Halons TOC Co-chair) 

Hughes Associates 

3610 Commerce Drive, STE 817 

Baltimore, MD 21227-1652 

U. S. A. 

Telephone: 1 443 253 7587 

Fax: 1 410 737 8688 

E-Mail: danv@haifire.com 

Dr. Daniel P. Verdonik, Co-Chair, Halons Technical Options Committee and Member, 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel is the Director, Environmental Programs, Hughes 

Associates, Inc. Dr. Verdonik is a full time, salaried employee at Hughes Associates, Inc., in 

Baltimore, MD and Arlington, VA providing consulting services in fire protection and 

environmental management. Hughes Associates, Inc. has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol because it provides a wide range of fire protection research, design and consulting 

services to government and corporate clients, including work related to halons and halon 

alternatives. Dr. Verdonik 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 through 

Hughes Associates, Inc. provides consulting services for organisations seeking to phase-out ODSs. 

Dr. Verdonik is a partner in Hughes Associates, Inc., which does not own stock in companies 

producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Dr. Verdonik currently provides consulting 

services through Hughes Associates, Inc, for the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy on matters related to 

the Montreal Protocol and has previously provided services through Hughes Associates Inc. for 

Implementing Agencies, U.S. EPA, U.S. Air Force and Chemtura. Dr. Verdonik’s spouse works 

for the U.S. Army, which has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it is trying 

to phase-out halons but in the interim, continues to rely on halons for purposes of national 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 247

security. Dr. Verdonik’s spouse and dependant child 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 organisations seeking to phase out ODSs. Hughes Associates, Inc. 

typically receives funding to support Dr. Verdonik’s salary and travel to TEAP/HTOC/TSB 

meetings from MLF, UNEP, the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. EPA, the U.S. National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Halon Recycling Corporation, and the Halon 

Alternatives Research Corporation, who in-turn currently receives funding to support these efforts 

from the following sponsors: BP Exploration, Alaska, ConocoPhillips, Alaska; DuPont; Chemtura; 

American Pacific; Firetrace; Halon Banking Systems; Wesco; Remtec. From time-to-time, Hughes 

Associates, Inc may also provide support for labor and travel. 

Prof. Ashley Woodcock 

(Medical TOC Co-chair) 

North West Lung Centre 

South Manchester University Hospital Trust 

Manchester M23 9LT 

United Kingdom 

Telephone: 44 161 291 2398 

Fax: 44 161 291 5020 

E-Mail: Ashley.A.Woodcock@manchester.ac.uk 

Prof. Ashley Woodcock, Co-chair of the Medical Technical Options Committee and Member of 

the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, is a Respiratory physician at the South 

Manchester University Teaching Hospital. Prof. Woodcock is a full time physician and academic 

at the North West Lung Centre Manchester United Kingdom. The Hospital and University have no 

direct interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. Prof. Woodcock has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not have an interest in the outcome of essential use 

nominations. Prof. Woodcock carries out unrelated consulting and educational lectures for 

pharmaceutical companies, all of which are completing phase out of CFC MDIs. He advises 

companies on study design for new drugs, some of which have been ODS replacements. Prof. 

Woodcock’s spouse has no interest in matters before the Protocol. Prof. Woodcock does not work 

as a consultant to the UN, UNEP, MLF or Implementing Agencies. In the past, he has responded 

to requests for technical information on CFC MDI phase-out from the European Community and 

the United Kingdom Government. Travel and subsistence for meetings of TEAP, MTOC, OEWG, 

MOP meetings is paid from Hospital and University funds, and Prof. Woodcock’s employers 

allow leave of absence. 

Dr. Masaaki Yamabe 

(Chemicals TOC Co-chair) 

National Institute of Advanced Industrial 

Science and Technology (AIST) 

1-1-1 Umezono, Tsukuba 

Ibaraki 305-8568 

Japan 

Telephone: 81 29 862 6032 

Fax: 81 29 862 6048 

E-Mail: m-yamabe@aist.go.jp 

Dr. Masaaki Yamabe, Co-Chair of the Chemical Technical Options Committee since 2005, is 

research coordinator (Environment and Energy) at the AIST. He is a member of the Task Force on 

the TEAP Legacy and he co-chaired the 2004 Process Agent Task Force. He was a member of the 

Solvents TOC during 1990-1996. Until 1999, Dr. Yamabe was Director of Central Research for 

Asahi Glass Company, which previously produced CFCs, methyl chloroform, and carbon 
248 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

tetrachloride, and currently produces and distributes HCFC, carbon tetrachloride, and HFCs. He is 

the co-inventor of HCFC-225, which is controlled under the Montreal Protocol as a transitional 

substance in the phase-out of ozone-depleting substances and is a substitute for CFC-113 in 

solvent and process agent applications. He owns stock in Asahi Glass Company that produces 

ozone-depleting substances and their substitutes. He also works for the Japan Industrial 

Conference for Ozone Layer and Climate Protection (JICOP) as a senior advisor. AIST generally 

pays wages, travelling and other expenses, except in some cases where JICOP sponsors travel. 

Prof. Shiqiu Zhang 

(Senior Expert Member) 

College for Environmental Sciences 

Peking University 

Beijing 100871 

The People’s Republic of China 

Telephone: 86 10-627-64974 

Fax: 86 10-627-60755 

Email: zhangshq@pku.edu.cn 

Dr. Shiqiu Zhang, Senior Expert Member for economic issues of the TEAP since 1997, is a 

Professor on Environmental Economics and Policy at the College for Environmental Sciences 

of Peking University. She is a member of the Task Force on the TEAP Legacy and co-chaired 

the 2002 and 2005 Replenishment Task Forces. She is involved in the work to help the 

Chinese government to develop the country program for the phase-out of ODS, and in studies 

of related relevant policies. She occasionally consults for UNEP. Dr. Zhang has no proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor does she own stock in companies producing 

ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Costs of travel, communication, and other 

expenses related to participation in the TEAP and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are 

paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat.
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 249

 ANNEX II: TEAP TOC Membership List Status April 2008 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Stephen O. Andersen Environmental Protection Agency USA 

Lambert Kuijpers Technical University Eindhoven Netherlands 

Jose Pons Pons Spray Quimica Venezuela 

Senior Expert Members Affiliation Country 

Thomas Morehouse Institute for Defense Analyses USA 

K. Madhava Sarma Consultant India 

Shiqiu Zhang Center of Environmental Sciences, Peking University China 

TOC Chairs Affiliation Country 

Radhey S. Agarwal Indian Institute of Technology Delhi India 

Paul Ashford Caleb Management Services UK 

Jonathan Banks Consultant Australia 

Mohamed Besri Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II Morocco 

Biao Jiang Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry China 

David Catchpole Petrotechnical Resources Alaska UK 

Michelle Marcotte Marcotte Consulting LLC and Marcotte Consulting Inc Canada 

Marta Pizano Consultant Colombia 

Ian Porter Department of Primary Industries Australia 

Miguel Quintero Universidad de los Andes Colombia 

Ian Rae University of Melbourne Australia 

Helen Tope EPA, Victoria Australia 

Ashley Woodcock Wythenshawe Hospital UK 

Daniel Verdonik Hughes Associates USA 

Masaaki Yamabe National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and 

Technology 

Japan 

TEAP Chemicals Technical Options Committee (CTOC)

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Biao Jiang Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry China 

Ian Rae University of Melbourne Australia 

Masaaki Yamabe National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and 

Technology 

Japan 

Members Affiliation Country 

D. D. Arora The Energy Research Institute India 

Steven Bernhardt Honeywell USA 

Olga Blinova Russian Scientific Center “Applied Chemistry” Russia 

Nick Campbell Arkema Group France 

Bruno Costes Airbus Industries France 

Jianxin Hu Center of Environmental Sciences, Peking University China 

A.A. Khan Indian Institute of Chemical Technology India 

Michael Kishimba University of Dar-es-Salaam Tanzania 

Abid Merchant Consultant USA 

Koichi Mizuno National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and 

Technology 

Japan 

Claudia Paratori Environmental Consultant Chile 

Hans Porre Teijin Twaron Netherlands 

Shuniti Samejima Asahi Glass Foundation Japan 

John Stemniski Consultant USA 

Fatemah Al-Shatti Kuwait Petroleum Corporation Kuwait 

Peter Verge Boeing Manufacturing USA 

Nee Sun Choong Kwet 

Yive (Robert) 

University of Mauritius Mauritius 
250 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP Flexible and Rigid Foams Technical Options Committee (FTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Paul Ashford Caleb Management Services UK 

Miguel Quintero Dow Europe GmbH / Universidad de Los Andes Switzerland 

Members Affiliation Country 

Kyoshi Hara JUFA Japan 

Mike Hayslett Maytag/AHAM USA 

Mike Jeffs ISOPA Belgium

Shigeru Wakana Dow Japan 

Candido Lomba ABRIPUR Brazil 

Yehia Lotfi Technocom Egypt 

Kirsten Makel Arkema USA 

Christoph Meurer Solvay Germany 

Mudumbai Sarangapani Polyurethane Council of India India 

Ulrich Schmidt Haltermann/Dow Germany 

Bert Veenendaal RAPPA USA 

Mark Weick Dow USA 

Dave Williams Honeywell USA 

Allen Zhang Owens Corning China 

TEAP Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

David V. Catchpole Petrotechnical Resources Alaska UK 

Daniel P. Verdonik Hughes Associates USA 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

Ahmad Al-Khatib Ministry of Environment Jordan 

Fareed I. Bushehri UNEP Bahrain 

Seunghwan (Charles) Choi Hanju Chemical Co., Ltd. South Korea 

Michelle M. Collins Consultant- EECO International USA 

Salomon Gomez Tecnofuego Venezuela 

Andrew Greig Protection Projects Inc. South Africa 

H.S. Kaprwan Consultant – Retired India 

Nikolai P. Kopylov All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection Russia 

David Liddy Ministry of Defence UK 

Bella Maranion US EPA USA 

John J. O’Sullivan Bureau Veriitas UK 

Peter Lim Sin Pang Singapore Civil Defence Force Singapore 

Emma Palumbo Safety Hi-tech srl Italy 

Erik Pedersen Consultant – World Bank Denmark 

Donald Thomson Mantoba Hydro & MOPIA Canada 

Robert Wickham Consultant-Wickham Associates USA 

Mitsuru Yagi Nohmi Bosai Ltd & Fire and Environment Protection 

Netw. 

Japan 

Kaixuan Zhou CAAC-AAD PR China 

 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 251

Consulting Experts Affiliation Country 

Tom Cortina HARC USA 

Matsuo Ishiyama Nohmi Bosai Ltd & Fire and Environment Protection 

Netw. 

Japan 

Sergey Kopylov All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection Russia 

Barbara Kucnerowicz-Polak Consultant-Retired Poland 

Steve McCormick United States Army USA 

Jawad Rida National Concorde Est. Jordan 

Mark L. Robin DuPont USA 

Joseph A. Senecal Kidde-Fenwal USA 

Ronald S. Sheinson Naval Research Laboratory – Department of the Navy USA 

Ronald Sibley Defense Supply Center, Richmond USA 

Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Jose Pons Pons Spray Quimica Venezuela 

Helen Tope Energy International Australia Australia 

Ashley Woodcock University Hospital of South Manchester UK 

Members Affiliation Country 

Emmanual Addo-Yobo Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Ghana 

Paul Atkins Oriel Therapeutics Inc. USA 

Sidney Braman Rhode Island Hospital USA 

Yingyun Cai Zhongshan Hospital China 

Nick Campbell Arkema SA France 

Hisbello Campos Centro de Referencia Prof. Helio Fraga, Ministry of Health Brazil 

Jorge Caneva Favaloro Foundation Argentina 

Christer Carling Private Consultant Sweden 

Guiliang Chen Shanghai Institute for Food and Drug Control China 

Mike Devoy Bayer Schering Pharma AG Germany 

Antoine Haddad Chiesi Farmaceutici Italy 

Charles Hancock Charles O. Hancock Associates USA 

Eamonn Hoxey Johnson & Johnson UK 

Javaid Khan The Aga Khan University Pakistan 

Nasser Mazhari Sina Darou Laboratories Company Iran 

Robert Meyer Merck Incorporated USA 

Hideo Mori Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company Japan 

Tunde Otulana Aradigm Corporation USA 

John Pritchard AstraZeneca UK 

Raj Singh The Chest Centre India 

Roland Stechert Boehringer Ingelheim (Schweiz) Switzerland 

Ping Wang Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission China 

Adam Wanner University of Miami USA 

Kristine Whorlow National Asthma Council Australia Australia 

You Yizhong Journal of Aerosol Communication China 
252 May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Mohamed Besri Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II Morocco 

Jonathan Banks Consultant Australia 

Michelle Marcotte Marcotte Consulting Canada 

Marta Pizano Consultant Colombia 

Ian Porter Department of Primary Industries Australia 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

Marten Barel Consultant Netherlands 

Chris Bell Consultant UK 

Antonio Bello Centro de Ciencias Medioambientales Spain 

Fred Bergwerff Eco2, Netherlands The Netherlands 

Aocheng Cao Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences China 

Peter Caulkins US Environmental Protection Agency USA 

Fabio Chaverri IRET-Universidad Nacional Costa Rica 

Kathy Dalip CABI Jamaica 

Ricardo Deang Consultant Philippines 

Patrick Ducom Ministère de l’Agriculture France 

Abraham Gamliel Agricultural Research Organisation Israel 

Ken Glassey MAFF New Zealand 

Eduardo Gonzalez Fumigator Philippines 

Darka Hamel Inst. For Plant Protection in Ag. And Forestry Croatia 

Saad Hafez University of Idaho USA 

George Lazarovits Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada 

Nahum Marbán Mendoza Universidad Autónoma de Chapingo México 

Andrea Minuto Agroinnova Universitá di Torino Italy 

Takashi Misumi MAFF Japan 

David Okioga Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Kenya 

Christoph Reichmuth BBAGermany Germany 

Jordi Riudavets IRTA – Department of Plant Protection Spain 

Ariane Elmas Saade UNDP Lebanon 

John Sansone SCC Products USA 

Jim Schaub US Department of Agriculture USA 

Sally Schneider US Department of Agriculture USA 

JL Staphorst Plant Protection Research Institute South Africa 

Akio Tateya Japan Fumigation Technology Association Japan 

Robert Taylor Consultant UK 

Alejandro Valeiro Department of Agriculture Argentina 

Ken Vick United States Department of Agriculture USA 

Nick Vink University of Stellenbosch South Africa 

Janny Vos CABI International The Netherlands 

Chris Watson IGROX UK 

Jim Wells Environmental Solutions Group USA 

Eduardo Willink Ministerio de Agricultura Argentina 
May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 253

TEAP Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee (RTOC) 

Co-chair Affiliation Country 

Radhey S. Agarwal Indian Institute of Technology Delhi India 

Lambert Kuijpers Technical University Eindhoven Netherlands 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

James A. Baker Consultant USA 

Julius Banks Environmental Protection Agency USA 

Dariusz Butrymowicz Institute of Fluid Flow Machinery Poland 

James M. Calm Engineering Consultant USA 

Guangming Chen Inst. Refrigeration and Cryogenic Eng., Shanghai China 

Denis Clodic Ecole des Mines France 

Daniel Colbourne Consultant UK 

Jim Crawford Trane /American Standard USA 

Sukumar Devotta National Env. Eng. Research Institute (NEERI) India 

Kenneth E. Hickman Consultant USA 

Takuo Hirahara (temp.) Mitsubushi Electric Corp. Japan 

Martien Janssen Re/gent Netherlands 

Makoto Kaibara Matsushita Electric Industrial Corporation Japan 

Ftouh Kallel Sofrifac Tunisia 

Michael Kauffeld Fachhochschule Karlsruhe Germany 

Fred Keller Consultant USA 

Jürgen Köhler University of Braunschweig Germany 

Holger König Jaeggi / Guentner Germany 

Edward J. McInerney Consultant USA 

Petter Nekså SINTEF Energy Research Norway 

Hezekiah B. Okeyo Ministry of Industrial Development Kenya 

Andy Pearson Star Refrigeration UK 

Per Henrik Pedersen Danish Technological Institute Denmark 

Roberto de A. Peixoto IMT, Maua Technological Institute Brazil 

Frederique Sauer Consultant France 

Adam M. Sebbit Makerere University Uganda 

Arnon Simakulthorn Thai Compressor Manufacturing Thailand 

Aryadi Suwono Thermodynamic Research Lab Bandung University Indonesia 

Peter Tomlein Slovak Refrigeration Association Slovakia 

Pham Van Tho Ministry of Fisheries Vietnam 

Vassily Tselikov ICP "Ozone" Russia 

Paulo Vodianitskaia Multibras Electrodomesticos Brazil 

Jianjun Zhang Zhejian Lantian Env Protection Hi-Tech Co China 

Attila Zoltan Refrigeration Association Hungary