## MONTREAL PROTOCOL

ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE

THE OZONE LAYER



# UNEP

R EPORT OF THE


## T ECHNOLOGY AND 

## E CONOMIC 

## A SSESSMENT 

## P ANEL



## M AY 

## 2008

V OLUME 

## 1

P ROGRESS 

## R EPORTMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### iii 

## UNEP

M AY 

## 2008 R EPORT OF THE



## T ECHNOLOGY AND 

## E CONOMIC


## A SSESSMENT 

## P ANEL



## V OLUME 

## 1

P ROGRESS 

## R EPORTMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### iv Montreal Protocol On Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer



## Report of the UNEP Technology and Econom ic Assessment Panel

May 2008

V OLUME 

## 1

P ROGRESS 

## R EPORT

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 por table document format from the UNEP Ozone

Secretariat's website:

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

No copyright involved. This publication ma y be freely copied, abstracted and cited, with acknowledgement of the source of the material.

ISBN:May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### v UNEP

M AY 

### 2008 R EPORT OF THE



### T ECHNOLOGY AND 

### E CONOMIC


### A SSESSMENT 

### P ANEL



## V OLUME 

## 1

P ROGRESS 

### R EPORTMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### vi DISCLAIMER

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) co-cha irs 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 opti ons discussed. Every industrial operation requires consideration of worker safety a nd 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 memb ers, 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 Assess ment Panel co-chairs and members wish to express thanks to all who contri buted 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 thank s 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 biogra phies (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 USAMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### ix 

## M AY 

## 2008 TEAP P ROGRESS 

## R EPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1 ESSENTIA L USES.......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 E XECUTIVE S UMMARY E SSENTIAL U SE N OMINATIONS FOR M ETERED D OSE I NHALERS .... 1

1.2 E SSENTIAL U SE N OMINATIONS FOR M ETERED D OSE I NHALERS ........................................ 2 1.2.1 Criteria for Review of Esse ntial Use Nominati ons 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 E XECUTIVE S UMMARY ....................................................................................................... 9

2.2 B ACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 11

2.3 P ROGRESS AND CHALLENGES IN CFC MDI MANUFACTURING TRANSITION IN A RTICLE 5

P ARTIES ........................................................................................................................... 13

2.4 E LEMENTS NEEDED FOR SUCCESSFUL TRANSITION IN A RTICLE 5 P ARTIES ....................... 16

2.4.1 National CFC MDI tr ansition stra tegies......................................................................... 16

2.4.2 Global partnerships...................................................................................................... ... 17 2.4.3 Adequate funding and capacity building......................................................................... 18

2.5 E STIMATED CFC REQUIREMENTS TO SUPPLY MDI S IN 2010 AND BEYOND ...................... 19

2.6 P HARMACEUTICAL

- GRADE CFC SUPPLY DURING TRANSITION ......................................... 20 2.6.1 Final campaign produ ction consid erations..................................................................... 21 2.6.2 Production and stockpiling considera tions for final cam paign production .................... 23 2.6.3 Volume justific ation and timing....................................................................................... 24 2.6.4 CFC Sp ecifica tion ........................................................................................................ ... 25

2.7 S TORAGE AND HANDLING OF STOCKPILED PHARMACEUTICAL

- GRADE CFC S ................... 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 stockpile s of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs ...................................... 27 2.7.5 Logi stics ................................................................................................................ .......... 27 2.7.6 Destruction of surplus or out-of-specific ation CFCs ...................................................... 28

2.8 R ECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS TO THE ESSENTIAL USE PROCESS TO ACCOMMODATE
A RTICLE 5 P ARTIES 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 E XECUTIVE S UMMARY ..................................................................................................... 37

3.2 G LOBAL U SE OF CFC S FOR MDI S .................................................................................... 37

3.3 T RANSITION TO ALTERNATIVES TO CFC MDI S ................................................................ 39

3.4 T RANSITION STRATEGIES ................................................................................................. 43 3.4.1 Progress reports on transition strategies under D ecision XII/2...................................... 44

3.5 G LOBAL DATABASE IN RESPONSE TO D ECISION XIV/5..................................................... 44

4 CHEMICALS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE PROGRESS REPORT.. 47

4.1 E XECUTIVE S UMMARY ..................................................................................................... 47

4.2 I NTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 49

4.3 P ROCESS A GENTS ............................................................................................................. 49 4.3.1 Review of information from Israel, Netherland s and China............................................ 50 4.3.2 Attempted review of Ta ble B of Decision X/14................................................................ 51

4.4 F EEDSTOCKS .................................................................................................................... 52May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### x 4.4.1 Important feedst ock applications .................................................................................... 52 4.4.2 Estimated emissions of ODS............................................................................................ 54

4.5 L ABORATORY AND A NALYTICAL U SES ............................................................................ 54 4.5.1 Usag e surveys............................................................................................................ ...... 55

4.5.2 Standard anal ytical methods ........................................................................................... 56 4.5.3 Infrared analyses of hydrocarbon residues ..................................................................... 56

4.5.4 Iodometr ic titra tions.................................................................................................... .... 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 contamina tion of pharmaceutic al products ...................................... 60

4.5.9 Sime ticone ............................................................................................................... ........ 61

4.5.10 Misce llaneous uses...................................................................................................... .... 61

4.5.11 Cement anal ysis......................................................................................................... ...... 61

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

4.6 S OLVENTS ........................................................................................................................ 62 4.6.1 n-Propyl Bromid e (n-PB) Update.................................................................................... 63

4.7 R ECONSIDERATION OF SOURCES OF CTC EMISSIONS ........................................................ 64

4.8 E SSENTIAL U SE E XEMPTIONS OF CFC-113 FOR AEROSPACE APPLICATIONS IN THE
R

USSIAN F EDERATION ..................................................................................................... 65

4.9 R ECOVERY

, R ECYCLING AND D ESTRUCTION .................................................................... 65 4.9.1 Recovery and recycling ................................................................................................... 65

4.9.2 Dest ruction.............................................................................................................. ........ 66

5 HALONS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (HTOC) PROGRESS

REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 6 9

5.1 U PDATE ON D ECISION XIX/16 ......................................................................................... 69

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

5.1.2 Merchant Ship ping ........................................................................................................ .. 71

5.1.3 Asia..................................................................................................................... ............. 71 5.1.4 Europe................................................................................................................... .......... 71 5.1.5 Middle East, No rth & West Africa .................................................................................. 71

5.1.6 South & Ce ntral Africa................................................................................................... . 71

5.1.7 North Americ a & Australia ............................................................................................. 72

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

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

6 CRITICAL MILITARY AND SP ACE USES OF HCFCS........................................ 73

6.1 M ILITARY -U NIQUE AND S PACE -U NIQUE U SES OF HCFC S ............................................... 74

6.2 C ONTINUING I NTERNATIONAL C O

- OPERATION ................................................................ 74

6.3 S UMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 75

7 FOAMS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (FTOC) PROGRESS

REPORT ........................................................................................................................ 7 7

7.1 G ENERAL ......................................................................................................................... 77

7.2 T RANSITION S TATUS

- A RTICLE 5 P ARTIES ...................................................................... 77

7.3 T RANSITION S TATUS

- N ON -A RTICLE 5 P ARTIES ............................................................. 78

7.4 O THER RELEVANT ISSUES ................................................................................................. 78

7.5 T ECHNOLOGY U PDATE ..................................................................................................... 79

7.6 M ETHYL FORMATE ........................................................................................................... 81

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

7.8 H YDROCARBONS FOR SMALL CONSUMERS ....................................................................... 82 7.8.1 Implications on costs.................................................................................................... ... 83

7.9 E XTRUDED POLYSTYRENE TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS ........................................................... 83 7.9.1 Status of transition in non-Article 5 Parties.................................................................... 83 7.9.2 Pace of growth of XPS bo ard manufacture in China ...................................................... 83 7.9.3 Technology options for altern ative blowing agents in China.......................................... 84May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### xi 8 REFRIGERATION, AIR-CONDITIONING AND HEAT PUMPS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (RTOC) PROGRESS REPORT ..................................... 85

8.1 R EFRIGERANT D ATA ........................................................................................................ 85

8.2 D OMESTIC R EFRIGERATION ............................................................................................. 86

8.3 C OMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION ......................................................................................... 86

8.4 L ARGE S IZE R EFRIGERATION (I NDUSTRIAL

, C OLD S TORAGE AND F OOD P ROCESSING ) ... 88

8.5 T RANSPORT R EFRIGERATION ........................................................................................... 88

8.6 U NITARY A IR C ONDITIONING .......................................................................................... 89

8.7 C HILLER A IR C ONDITIONING ........................................................................................... 89

8.8 W ATER -H EATING H EAT P UMPS ....................................................................................... 90

8.9 V EHICLE AIR CONDITIONING ............................................................................................ 90

8.10 C ONSERVATION AND C ONTAINMENT ............................................................................... 91

9 METHYL BROMIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (MBTOC)

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

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

9.1.1 Produc tion trends........................................................................................................ .... 93 9.1.2 Production for QPS purposes.......................................................................................... 94

9.2 G LOBAL CONSUMPTION .................................................................................................... 95 9.2.1 Consumption trends in Non-Article 5 Parties ................................................................. 95 9.2.2 Consumption trends in Ar ticle 5 and CEIT countries...................................................... 98

9.3 A LTERNATIVES FOR SOIL TREATMENTS .......................................................................... 101 9.3.1 Key a lterna tives......................................................................................................... .... 101 9.3.2 Update on registra tion of alter natives........................................................................... 102 9.3.3 Crop spec ific stra tegies................................................................................................. 102 9.3.4 Economic aspects of meth yl bromide alte rnatives ......................................................... 110

9.4 MBTOC QSC P ROGRESS R EPORT AND R EPORT ON A RTICLE 5(1) I SSUES ..................... 111 9.4.1 Update on Registra tion of Altern atives ......................................................................... 111 9.4.2 Adoption of alternatives for trea tment of commodities and structures......................... 112 9.4.3 Quarantine and Pre-Shipment MB Issues ..................................................................... 113 9.4.4 Recapture of me thyl bromide......................................................................................... 115 9.4.5 MBTOC QSC Artic le 5 Issues ....................................................................................... 115

9.5 R EFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 117

10 CURRENT STATUS OF TECHNICAL EFFICACY, COSTS AND ADOPTION

OF METHYL BROMIDE ALTER NATIVES IN FL OUR MILLS...................... 125

10.1 I NTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 125

10.2 E XECUTIVE S UMMARY ................................................................................................... 126

10.3 T ECHNICAL E FFICACY .................................................................................................... 127

10.4 R EGULATORY I SSUES A FFECTING A LTERNATIVE A DOPTION ......................................... 130

10.5 C OSTS OF A LTERNATIVES .............................................................................................. 131

10.6 E NVIRONMENTAL

, H EALTH AND S AFETY I SSUES ........................................................... 132

10.7 A DOPTION OF A LTERNATIVES ........................................................................................ 132

10.8 R EFERENCE L IST AND S UMMARIES OF R EFERENCES U SED ............................................ 134

10.9 A CKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................... 150

11 EVALUATIONS OF 2008 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL

BROMIDE AND RELA TED MATTERS................................................................. 151

11.1 S COPE OF THE R EPORT ................................................................................................... 151

11.2 I SSUES FOR C ONSIDERATION BY P ARTIES ....................................................................... 151

11.3 C RITICAL U SE N OMINATIONS FOR M ETHYL B ROMIDE ................................................... 152

11.3.1 Ma ndate................................................................................................................. ........ 152 11.3.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 ........................................................................................... 15 3 11.3.3 Consideration of Stocks - Decision Ex.1/4 (9f) ............................................................. 153 11.3.4 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use - D ecision XVII/ 9............................... 155 11.3.5 Update on Rates of Adoption of Alternatives (D ecision XIX/9) .................................... 156 11.3.6 Trends in Methyl Bromid e Use for CUEs since 20 05.................................................... 157 11.3.7 Evaluations of CUNs – 2008 ro und for 2009 and 20 10 exemptions ............................. 161

11.3.8 Critical Use No minations Review.................................................................................. 162

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

### xii 11.3.10 Consideration of alternatives ........................................................................................ 16 3

11.3.11 Sustainable Altern atives ............................................................................................... . 164 11.3.12 Frequency of allowed MB use ....................................................................................... 164 11.3.13 Use of disposable canisters of MB ................................................................................ 164

11.4 I NTERIM CUN R EPORT

– I SSUES S PECIFIC TO MBTOC Q UARANTINE

, S TRUCTURES

AND C OMMODITIES ........................................................................................................ 165 11.4.1 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nomi nated quan tities ............................ 165 11.4.2 Adjustments for stan dard dosage rates ......................................................................... 165

11.5 I NTERIM CUN 2008 E VALUATION R EPORT

– I SSUES S PECIFIC TO MBTOC S OILS ......... 173 11.5.1 Summary of outcomes.................................................................................................... 1 73

11.5.2 Issues related to CUN Asse ssment for Preplant Soil Use.............................................. 173 11.5.3 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nomi nated quan tities. ........................... 174

11.5.4 Meta-anal ysis update .................................................................................................... 176 11.5.5 Use/Emission reduction technologies - Low permeability barrier films and dosage

reduc tion...................................................................................................................... .. 177 11.5.6 Adjustments for stan dard dosage rates using MB/Pic formulations ............................. 178

11.6 R EFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 204

APPENDIX I TO CHAPTER 11 ...................................................................................................... 2 10

APPENDIX II TO CHAPTER 11..................................................................................................... 2 11

APPENDIX III TO CHAPTER 11................................................................................................... 21 2

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 I NTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 223

12.2 F OCUS OF THE S TUDY .................................................................................................... 224 12.2.1 Refrigerants for High-ambi ent Temperature Ai r Conditioning..................................... 224 12.2.2 Refrigerants for High-ambi ent Temperature Re frigeration .......................................... 224 12.2.3 Refrigerants for Deep Mines ......................................................................................... 225

12.3 P ROSPECTS FOR P ROMOTION AND A CCEPTANCE OF A LTERNATIVES .............................. 226

12.4 P RIORITIES AND T IME S CHEDULE ................................................................................... 226

13 CLIMATE ASPECTS OF OZ ONE LAYER PROTECTION................................. 227

13.1 B ACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 227

13.2 N EW E MPHASIS ON C LIMATE IN THE M ONTREAL P ROTOCOL ......................................... 227

13.3 P AST C LIMATE P ROTECTION C ONTRIBUTIONS BY A CTIONS U NDER THE M ONTREAL

P ROTOCOL ..................................................................................................................... 228

13.4 F UTURE O PPORTUNITIES FOR THE M ONTREAL P ROTOCOL TO F URTHER P ROTECT THE
C LIMATE ........................................................................................................................ 229

13.5 T ECHNICAL O PTIONS FOR I MPROVING C LIMATE P ROTECTION ....................................... 233

13.6 C ONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 234

14 TEAP/TOC ORGANISA TION ISSUES ................................................................... 235

14.1 B UDGET ......................................................................................................................... 235

14.2 M ETHYL B ROMIDE T ECHNICAL O PTIONS C OMMITTEE ................................................... 235

14.3 L IKELY F UTURE C HANGES IN TEAP O RGANISATION ..................................................... 235

14.4 N OTICE OF P OSITIONS A VAILABLE ON THE TEAP AND ITS TOC S .................................. 235

14.5 C ONFLICT OF I NTEREST .................................................................................................. 236

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

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

### 1 

## 1 Essential Uses

1.1 Executive Summary Essential Use No minations 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 Part ies 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 u se 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 Eu ropean 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 equivalent s, 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. Comp anies 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 im peding 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 tr ansfer may provide some time-saving”. Therefore

it is unclear whether the Russian Federation will re quire CFCs for MDI manufacture in 2010. MTOC recognises the immediate need of the nomination for 200 9, and the quantity of CFC is justified based on consumption trends. Further clarification is need ed 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 flexibilityMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 2 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 essen tial 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 triamci nolone 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 de velopment and approval in non-Article 5 Parties mean that any formulation that is going to be available by 2010 will al ready have to be a final commercial formulation, which has completed clin ical 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 moie ties 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 CF C-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 transiti on to export/import of HFC MDIs or DPIs) to countries where these products are no longer needed. Pa rties 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 pr ovided by all Parties who hold them. Parties may wish to consider the advantages of requiring that plan s 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 a nnually 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 Deci sions 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 Parti es 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 nominati on from the Russian Federation this year, which wasMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 3 reviewed by the entire committee. Further inform ation was requested where necessary. The MTOC considered the assessments, made recommendation d ecisions and prepared a consensus report at its meeting in Tokushima, Japan, 1-4 April 2008. Wher e appropriate, members declared a potential conflict

of interest ahead of the discussion.

Nominations were assessed according to the gui delines 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 assi st in the review and to prepare TEAP recommendations for the Parties.

1.2.3 Summary of Parties’ Essential Use Nomina tions 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 c onsideration 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 documentati on, 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 w ith other companies in such efforts and, with each future request, to report in confidence to the nomi nating 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 develo pment 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 w ill 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 4 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 activiti es to develop alternative products. This is a remaining issue to be dealt with consistently with th e phase-out of CFC MDI in Article 5 Parties.” Parties have a range of suitable CFC-free alternatives for domest ic use. For those Parties that continue to export CFC MDIs to Article 5 Parties, one option would be fo r 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 ma y 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 exceptio nal and unlikely circumstance”. IPAC companies

have also committed not to market CFC MDIs in mark ets 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. Rationa lising 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 moie ties 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 allocat e 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 cr itical for Parties to resolve. MTOC believes that failure to address these issues could adversely a ffect final phase-out. MTOC emphasises that pre-1996 stocks should be used first; the management of stoc kpiles 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 (includi ng 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 allowa ble 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 pr ovided by all Parties who hold them. Parties may wish to consider the advantages of requiring that plan s 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 a nnually to account for destruction

1 The International Pharmaceutical Aero sol Consortium is a group of companie s (Abbott, Astrazeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxos mithkline, Inyx, In c. 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 Eu ropean 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 ma king a commitment that there will be no nominations for 2010 and beyond.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 6 However MTOC does not consider that 65 percent (about 25 tonnes) of the nominated quantities, designated for export to Article 5 Pa rties, meet the requirements of Decision IV/25(b)(ii) (regarding the availability of su fficient quantity of c ontrolled substances from existing stocks) since MTOC believes that th ese nominated quantities could be supplied from the existing CFC stockpiles in the European Community (about 340 tonnes).

The remaining 35 percent (about 13 tonnes) requ ested is for combination MDI products to be used within the European Community. As pr eviously stated, MTOC does not consider these combination CFC MDI products essential under Decision IV/25(a) when the individual components, or equivalents, are ava ilable 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, c ontinuing supply may impede the speed of

transition to CFC-free alternatives in Article 5 Parties. The European Community has not adequately demonstrated that continued s upply 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), cont rary to expectations that Parties should be reducing their stockpiles as the final phase of the tr ansition 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 be lieves that best efforts should be made to facilitate the use of the stockpile for essentia l uses, and to avoid the production of new pharmaceutical-grade CFCs for the European Co mmunity 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. Howe ver, 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 27 th March (after the 31st January deadline) fo r the production of CFCs for MDIs in the

Russian Federation. The nomination is for 248 to nnes 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 developi ng 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 Fe deration 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 nom ination for 2009, and the quantity of CFC is justified based on consumption tr ends. 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 follo wing active ingredients for use solely within the United States: epinephrine, pirbuterol, triamcinolone.

Recommendation: Unable to recommend.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 8 Comments

The nomination from the United States is for 182 tonnes CFCs for use in 2010, for the manufacture of epinephrine, pirbuterol, and tr iamcinolone 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 th e accounting framework and other supporting documentation were received during the MTOC meeting on 2 nd 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 su fficient quantity of c ontrolled substances from existing stocks. At the end of 2007, the Un ited States’ stockpile was 1,489 tonnes of CFCs (including pre- and post-1996 st ocks). 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 fo r these drug moieties are an essential use under Decision IV/25(a). According to the nominati on, for the bronchodilators (pirbuterol and epinephrine CFC MDIs), there are four salbutamol HFC alternatives (MTOC considers

salbutamol to be a suitable alternative bronchodila tor 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 31 st December 2008. Under two proposed rules to amend re gulations, the essential use designation under US law of pirbuterol and triamcinolone CF C MDIs would be removed (and no longer for sale) after 31 st December 2009, and epinephrine CFC MDI after 31 st 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 inhale r 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 th at 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 tonn es 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 comp any 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 manufac turing 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 Par ties, the conversion of locally owned CFC MDI manufacturing is only just commencing.

The mandated phase-out date under the Montreal Pr otocol 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 th at will be required for CFC MDI manufacturing after 2009. However, the economics of CFC pr oduction will make impractical the continued production of small amounts of pharmace utical-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 Co mmittee (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 Econom ic 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 (und er 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 a lternatives. At a certain point, the economics of CFC production would not be favourable, and woul d make impractical and too unc ertain the continued production of relatively small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CF Cs. At this point, continuity of affordable healthcare would be jeopardised. Overall destru ction 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 fi nal 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 a bout 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 th e large costs of inventory and storage make this option impractical.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 10 MTOC believes that with appropriate planning a nd 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 produc tion. This option assumes that project implementation is not delayed further, and presu mes that China maintains domestic production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and c ontinues annual CFC production, if approved by Parties under the essential use process, until it completes its na tional 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 incentiv e 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 be fore confirming the date of a final campaign production. Based on estimated CFC requirement s, the economics of CFC production should be favourable, firstly in 2010 to allow annual pr oduction (of between 1,200-1,700 tonnes) in that year under an essential use, and then in 2011 fo r 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 whet her India ceases CFC production and import for MDI production at the end of 2009 or not). Cost s 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 31 st January 2009 for

Parties to consider essential use exemptions for CFC production in 2010. In order to anticipate a final campaign production, accurate forward proj ections 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 shoul d accompany and justify each year’s nomination for 2010 and onwards, starting with the nominati ons submitted in 2009. This would allow an accurate global picture to be developed fr om 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 a llow a final campaign production to occur in 2011.

A final campaign production risks exaggerate d and non-essential use of CFCs produced for multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essentia l use production exemption to allow a final campaign production will need to work in paralle l 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-ordinat ed 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 transparen t 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 recogni sing the need to continue to address country specific requirements and country/company-specific project implementation.

Pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to supply CFC re quirements for MDI production after 2009 could also be sourced from remaining surplus CFC stoc kpiles in non-Article 5 Parties. Sourcing CFCs from existing stockpile of pharmaceutical-grade CF Cs in preference to new CFC production is a requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b). A co-ord inated approach to identifying, locating and transferring surplus stockpiles would be an adva ntage for Article 5 Parties, and would avoid

destruction of CFCs that could ot herwise 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 essentia l 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 Pa rties, 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 c onsider 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 ar e currently not applicable to Article 5 Parties but their intended effects are still relevant; ot her 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 Montr eal 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 12 The Parties considered the issue again at th eir 18th Meeting and to ok 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 tim ing of, and recommended quantities for a limited campaign production of chlorofluorocarbons excl usively 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 respon se to Decision XVIII/16 in the April 2007 Progress Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to the 27 th 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 19 th Meeting of the Parties. In the ensuing discussion, one representative stated that her Gove rnment 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, implemen ting 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 Thema tic 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-P rivate Partnership on Phasing Out CFC Metered Dose Inhalers and th e conclusions and recommendations, which are referred to further in this report. The UN EP DTIE OzoneAction Programme wrote to TEAP on

27 th 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 sto ckpile pharmaceutical-grade CFCs and their surrounding issues;

2. Logistics and transfer to destruction fa cilities 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 manufac turing transition in Article 5 Parties

Most Article 5 Parties have their inhalers provide d by importation. As elaborated in section 2.3, progress has been made towards transition in the u se of CFC MDIs in Article 5 Parties for certain key moieties, with a range of technically feasibl e 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 Artic le 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) ha ve 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 y ears 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 54 th 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 M eeting 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/51/39 1

.

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.pdfMay 2004 TEAP Progress Report14Table 2-1 Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturingStatus of transition inArticle 5 Parties with CFCMDI manufacturing Algeria Argentina Bangladesh Brazil China Colombia Cuba Egypt India Indonesia Iran Jordan Mexico Pakistan South Africa Syria Uruguay VenezuelaApproved investmentprojects with MLF funding313233343536Requesting MLF fundingfor MDI investment projector for project preparation ofan MDI investment project3738393103113123131MDI investment project approved (ExCom decision 52/32). Expected completion date 48months after commencement (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom 52/26).2MDI investment project approved. Expected completion date was March 2008 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/51/39), but is now October 2008.3MDI investment project approved.Expected completion date December 2009 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/51/39), but is now about 2010.4MDI investment project approved. Expectedcompletion date is 28 to 30 months after the national transition strategy and the MDI phase-out investmentproject have beenapproved by ExCom (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom 52/36), which is now about 2010-2011.5MDI investment project approved (ExCom/53/67). Expected completion date February 2011 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/53/44).6MDI investment project approved. Expectedcompletion date was July 2007 (ExCom/51/39), but is now at least the 2nd quarter of2008.7Project preparation proposal approved.Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration during 2008.8Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration during 2008.9Project preparation proposal submitted for ExCom consideration in2007, and again in 2008 (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/54/Inf.5). Project preparation proposal approved at 54thMeeting of ExCom.10Project preparation proposal approved under ExCom decision 52/25. MDI investment project proposalexpected to be submitted forExCom consideration at its 55thMeeting in July 2008.11MTOC understands that there may beCFC consumption for medical aerosolsin Indonesia, but not for MDIs.12Project preparation proposal expected to be submitted by UNDP forExCom consideration during its 55thMeeting (UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/54/19).13Not eligible for funding under ExCom decision 35/57.Project proposal expected to besubmitted for ExCom consideration atits 56th Meeting, November 2008.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report15Table 2-1: Status of transition in Article 5 Parties with CFC MDI manufacturing (cont.)Status of transition inArticle 5 Parties with CFCMDI manufacturing Algeria Argentina Bangladesh Brazil China Colombia Cuba Egypt India Indonesia Iran Jordan Mexico Pakistan South Africa Syria Uruguay VenezuelaNot eligible for funding bythe MLF31431531631731814Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57).Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, November 2008.15Not eligible for funding by the MLF. There are two producers inBrazil for which shareholder composition is fully from non-Article 5 Parties, and which are workingwithout assistance from the Multilateral Fund on theconversion of their CFCMDIs to alternatives.16Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57).Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, November 2008. MTOCunderstands that there may be CFC consumption for medical aerosols in Jordan, but not for MDIs.17Not eligible for funding by the MLF. CFCconsumption for MDIs is estimated to be about 71 tonnes,and there are 18 locally owned MDI manufacturers.18Not eligible for funding (ExCom decision 35/57).Project proposal expected to be submitted for ExCom consideration at its 56th Meeting, November 2008.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 16 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 goa ls, with a focus on patient health;

• Global partnerships and co-ope ration: 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 ma nufacturing transition, and to ensure a

framework suited to the circumstances of Ar ticle 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 altern atives need to be developed on a country-bycountry basis with the participation of major st akeholders, such as the relevant environment, health and trade authorities, physician and pa tient groups, pharmaceutical companies, and CFC/HFC importers (where there is local MDI manuf acture). 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 expect s 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. Tr ansition strategies need to ensure adequate supplies of inhaled therapy throughout the transiti on period. Protection of patient health should be the key guiding principle in transition strategies.

In preparing their national transition strategies, Pa rties 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 Phili ppines, 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 im plementation of national strategies.

The slow progress of some countries to develop natio nal 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 fo r CFC MDIs, setting a target and timetable;

• Availability and affordability of CFC-free alte rnatives, 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 alterna tives, and assuring seamless availability of inhaled therapy;

• Serious consideration by relevant authoriti es 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 a nd regulations to ban parallel marketing and imports of CFC MDIs after a certain date;

• Educational activities for patients, doctors a nd 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 givento the development and promotion of an agreed CFC-free logo to be displayed on CFCfree MDIs; and

• The anticipated timelines of any MDI invest ment projects funded by the MLF to assist technology transfer.

Some Parties may also wish to consider appli cation to the Asthma Drug Facility (ADF) of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and L ung Disease for the supply of low cost CFC-free MDIs (www.GlobalADF.org). The ADF provi des 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 th at 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, a nd non-government organisations can facilitate

successful transition in Article 5 Parties.

Regional alliances of Article 5 Parties may facilita te 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 othe r regions, is a prime example of how such

collaborative efforts can be of value in advanc ing common goals in this regard. Future MLFfunded regional meetings that are planned for ot her 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 partne rship model could be propagated to resolve common challenges facing Article 5 Parties that re quire 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 altern atives become available. This can be addressed through co-operation between govern ment and industry (and included in a national transition strategy), including through import bans;May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 18 • Prompt government regulatory actions to approve CFC-free alternatives, through a commitment by governments to industr y 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 pr oduct 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, regul atory 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 developm ent, 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 devi ces 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 essen tial, and needs a co-ordin ated approach by the implementing agencies to minimise delays.

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

needed to overcome some of the technical challe nges. 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-fr ee technology is difficult. The implementing agencies are being asked to undertake very challenging projects with ve ry 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 transparen t 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 recogni sing 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 updat es the data presented in the April 2007 Progress Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel

.

MTOC’s updated analysis includes data provide d by industry and government representatives at the Langkawi South Asia and SEAP Regional Wo rkshop 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 54 th Executive Committee Meeting was also taken into account. In par ticular, Decision 54/35 establishes a CFC production phase-out agreement for India by 1 August 200 8, including limits on CFC production and consumption for MDIs for 2008 and 2009, and w ith no allowance for CFC imports after 2009. However, it is not clear whether this agreemen t 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 MD I 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 ma rket 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 fo r 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 20 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 me dical aerosols, not MDIs. Data was included for Indonesia, although CFC c onsumption may be for medi cal aerosols, not MDIs. Multinational companies operating in Article 5 Partie s 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 assume d that this use will decrease to zero in 2009.

In Table 2-2 it can be onbserved that the project ed 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 rema ining 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 likel y 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 a nd possibly others); and China (Juzhou). The plants in India and China are currently sche duled to cease production in August 2008 and in 2009, respectively, based on agreemen ts 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 pharmaceu tical-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 55 th Executive Committee meeting. This project will cover a number of MDI products including those that deliver traditional Ch inese medicine. It is unlikely that reductions Country 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Countries with an approved project for th e 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 comp lete 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 2005May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 21 in CFC consumption for MDIs due to the implem entation 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 54 th 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 MD I 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, includi ng 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. D espite 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 a nd 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 pr ojects for the phase-out of their CFC MDI manufacturing, some of which may not be comple ted by the end of 2009. Under Decision 54/35, the Executive Committee agreed th at Parties with requests for funding investment projects for

CFC MDI manufacture must come forward for c onsideration 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 possibl e, the need for essentia l-use exemption requests ”. After 2009, Article 5 Parties may be in po tential non-compliance unless CFC production for MDIs is under an essential use exemption.

There is no co-ordinated manufacture of pharma ceutical-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 parame ters, a bulk CFC production facility will produce a certain percentage of CFCs that do not meet the pha rmaceutical-grade specifications required by MDI manufacturers. Although the expectations for pur ity 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 basi c domestic consumption. This will not be possible after 2009 when these non-pharmaceutical-gra de 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 quantityMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 22 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 pr oduction will make impr actical 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 expe ditious 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 polic ies 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 prod uction of CFCs to supply requirements for MDI

manufacture after 2009. MTOC considered issu es such as security of CFC supply, predicted volume requirements, relative costs for productio n, storage and destruction, and recommends a preferred option that can best facilitate the fina l 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 (u nder annual essential use exemptions) does not provide a clear target or timetable fo r ending CFC production, predictability for CFC producers, or incentive for those companies cu rrently 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 to o uncertain the continued production of relatively small amounts of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. At this point, continuity of affordable healthcare would be jeopardised. Ov erall 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 e nvironmental perspectiv e and is consistent with the Protocol phase-out date, the logisti cs 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 nominati on 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’ developm ent 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 mana ge 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 mainta ins 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 agr eed 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 produc tion (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-o f-specification CFCs would be relatively lower than for open-ended annual CFC production.

The logistics of organising a more modest fi nal 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 th an 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 pro cess 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 be yond 2009 will require firm contractual commitments (quantity, cost, timing) from MDI manufacturers to CFC manufacturers for producing, storing and distributing pharmaceuti cal-grade CFCs. Contractual arrangementsMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 24 should aim to avoid opportunistic pricing that ta kes 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 pharmaceuti cal CFC production. Such payment will include costs for the destruction of off-specification materi al. 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 re quirements for MDI production after 2009 could also be sourced from remaining surplus CFC stoc kpiles in non-Article 5 Parties. Sourcing CFCs from existing stockpile of pharmaceutical-grade CF Cs in preference to new CFC production is a requirement of Decision IV/25(1)(b). A co-ord inated approach to identifying, locating and transferring surplus stockpiles would be an adva ntage for Article 5 Parties, and would avoid

destruction of CFCs that could otherw ise 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 s upply 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 pr ocurement, dispatch, maintenance, and destruction of final surplus.

Storage and handling of stockpiled pharmaceutical-g rade CFCs is considered further in section

2.7.

MDI manufacturing companies in CFC MDI produc ing 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 onl y occur under an essential use exemption for Parties including Article 5 Parties. As conc luded 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

31 st 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 onwar ds, 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 exaggerate d and non-essential use of CFCs produced for multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essentia l use production exemption to cover a final campaign production will need to work in paralle l 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 jus tification (for both domestic and export use) to

demonstrate the use to be essential.

Article 5 Parties will need to work closely w ith implementing agencies, industry, and other stakeholders to prepare essential use nominations for 2010, with all necessary multi-year data, by

31 st 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 consider ed 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 ne gotiations. 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. Parti es 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 fina l campaign, however, given the few CFC production facilities remaining, this situation is unlikely.

Of the existing specifications, the British Pharma copoeia (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 u sed 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 u se by another MDI manufacturer would requireMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 26 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 fo r 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 cont amination 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, wh ile a 20 tonne tank will hold sufficient CFC to produce approximately 1,000,000 MDIs.

ISO tanks are another bulk storage option that are bui lt 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 ex pect 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 day 1 . 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 th e losses proportionately. Handling of these cylinders is costly and time-consuming; CFC manufacturer s or suppliers usually demand that they are returned empty after a reasonable amount of time.

Apart from large storage facilities at CFC ma nufacturing plants, there are some storage complexes that have been used by pharmaceu tical 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 stockp iled material is re-circulated and tested periodically. Usually sampling is conducted every si x 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 th e 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 estab lished. 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" pro duct. Should it be necessary to keep the product on-site in ISO tanks then, as described earlier, extr a charges would apply. Quality would need to be ensured through testing procedures.

Sourcing CFCs from existing stockpile of pharma ceutical-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 suita ble stocks. Parties should be encouraged to facilitate intra-company, international CFC transfers. Nominating Parties must confirm that nominated quantities cannot be sourced from existi ng 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, Parti es can transfer CFCs already produced under an essential use exemption and ensure that the D ecisions provide the flexibility and accountability needed to allow the transfer of stockpile. In a ddition, it is not clear whether a stockpile produced before the phase-out date (that is, not produ ced 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" basi s 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/tonne 2 . 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 28 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 fluor inated 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 accordi ng 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 consider ation of the logistics of collection, handling, and transport to a facility with approved destru ction technology. It will be important to use tracking and reporting systems, such as throug h 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 re sponsible 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 mean s for transporting waste CFCs to destruction facilities, and the destruction facility used. N onetheless, TEAP has reported previously in its 2005 Supplement to the IPCC/TEAP Report Special Report " Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System; Is sues related to Hydr ofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons ” that average destruction costs (dest ruction 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 essenti al use process to accommodate Article 5 Parties and final campaign production

MTOC has reviewed the Protocol’s current essentia l 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 Pa rties, the last stages of global transition and final campaign production.

While Decision IV/25 and subsequent related essen tial 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 sugg ested options in making a set of new Decisions that build on the previous essential use Deci sions 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 a pplicable 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 essentia l use nomination requirements and procedures have language that make them specifically a pplicable 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 requi red to develop and implement national transition strategies and report on progress ea ch year, and included as a requirement in making essential use nominations. To date, Artic le 5 Parties have been encouraged but not required to develop nationa l transition strategies (under Decision XII/2(6)). Parties may wish to consider making a national tran sition strategy a requirement for Article 5 Parties nominating for an essential use exemp tion 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 encour aged 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 availa ble 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 informati on is needed about the circumstances in consuming countries, including the availabilit y and affordability of CFC-free alternatives in the intended markets. Adjustments to the Handbook can provide additional guidance to nominating Parties. Parties may also wi sh to consider strengthening Decision VIII/11 to include Article 5 Parties and to request, ra ther than encourage, the promotion of coordination between government authorities to f acilitate the transition and the expeditious review of regulatory approvals and launch of CFC-free alternatives.

• The cost to manufacture CFC and HFC MD Is is now generally comparable, and arguments to justify essentiality will be di fficult 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 prici ng 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 nomin ations will need to justify the volume and timing of a final campaign producti on in accordance with national transition strategies, project timelines, the status of CFC free alternative development and approval,May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 30 and the anticipated timing of introductions. Article 5 Parties will need to work closely with implementing agencies, industry, and ot her 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 pr operly 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/deve lopment and registration of products where there is limited opportunity of alternatives becoming available. Parties may wish to consider strengthening a nd expanding the existing D ecisions 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 co nstitutes ‘active’), and an end-point or trigger point for the conclusion of reformula tion/development efforts that may ultimately prove unsuccessful.

• Despite the fact that the date of CFC pro duction 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 prac tising dual marketing of CFC MDIs and

their CFC-free alternatives fo r the same active ingredient. After an adequate postmarketing period for the CFC-free alternativ e of not more than 12 months, absent compelling circumstances, the company’s corresponding CFC MDI product cannot be considered essential. Parties may wish to cons ider clarifying this in a Decision, that is, absent compelling circumstances, CFCs shoul d 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 alternativ e, 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 regula tions to ban such dual marketing.

• Parties may wish to consider the advantag es of encouraging Parties not manufacturing CFC MDIs to establish bans on the import of CF C 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 feasi ble 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, fi nal 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 forwardMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 31 projections will be needed of annual quan tities 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 nati onal 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 tim e 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 31 st January 2010 at the latest.

• A final campaign production risks exaggerate d, non-essential use of CFCs produced for multiple years. Therefore a multi-year essentia l use exemption to allow a final campaign production will need to work in parallel w ith an exemption process to approve annual quantities to be used from the stockp ile produced under a final campaign , and to signal

the need for destruction of an y 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 n eeded. 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 th en posted on the website of the Ozone Secretariat, and for Parties to take this in formation 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 d eclarations of any MDI products determined

to be non-essential within their own countr y, 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 Artic le 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 a nnually 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 finalMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 32 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 Ar ticle 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 mo re 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 pha rmaceutical-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 identif ication and transfer of suitable stocks. Parties should be encouraged to facilitate in tra-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 alre ady 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 ph ase-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 stockp ile 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 ma nagement 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 u se 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 main tenance 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 framewor k under Decision VIII/9 to require Parties to report the destruction via approved te chnologies of out-of-specification CFCs or surplus essential use pharmaceutical-grade CFCs.

MTOC lists below the Decisions that might be cons idered 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 Par ties in these refinements and modifications (and with subsequent accompanying changes to the Ha ndbook) for which Decisions by Parties will be needed this year (to allow essen tial use nominations to be c onsidered in 2009 for any CFC production in 2010).

2.8.1 Information needed to define quan tities 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 elabor ated 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 an d beyond), and historical three-year consumption data;

• Within the Party, a summary of conversion projects for CFC MDI manufacturing plants, including: timelines; availabilit y of manufacturing equipment, delivery and commissioning dates;

• Availability of CFC-free alternatives from local manufacture and from import, status of CFC-free alternative developm ent 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 considerati on of Basel Convention requirements;

• The date CFC MDI production commenced; and

• Existing stockpile size, CFC type, ava ilability and quality, and demonstrated efforts to acquire CFCs through the transf er 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

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

MTOC has some initial suggestions for chang es to Section 2.5 of the Handbook, relating to information requirements for essential use nomin ations. These suggestions are based on the current Section 2.5, taking into account the r ecommendations 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 20 th MOP and subsequent related changes to and publication of an upda ted Handbook, Parties may wish to consider provisional approval of the suggested changes be low to Section 2.5 of the Handbook to assist Parties planning to submit essential use nominations in early 2009.

The following information is request ed 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 c ontrolled substances that is requested to satisfy the use. Specify whet her 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 exp ected annual future requirements until CFC MDI transition is completed and historic 3-y ear 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 requi red 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 grou p 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 th e 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 Par ties national transition strategy, including national phase-out dates and CFC MDI manufacturing plant conversion timelines (including new manufacturing equi pment 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 equi valent requirement for Article 5 Parties submitting essential use nominations to presen t 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 essen tial 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 ta ken 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 ha ve 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 co mpelling circumstances, for a product where the company has launched the corresponding CFC-free alternative (for any of the intended markets for sale or distribution), afte r 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 develo pment 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, e fforts 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 documenta tion to demonstrate that this product is necessary for health or safety and that ther e 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 includ e 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 )May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 36 16. Explain whether the nomination is being made because national or international regulations require use of the controlled subs tance to achieve compliance. Provide full documentation including the name, address, phone and fax number of the regulatory authority requiring use of the controlled subs tance and provide a full copy or summary of the regulation. Explain what efforts are bei ng made to change such regulations or to achieve acceptance on the basis of alternative m easures 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 distri buted 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 approve d destruction technologies and contingency plans for destruction of surplus stocks, in cluding 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 pos t-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), currentDecision 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-Ar ticle 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 ke y 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 pric ing 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 Partie s 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 accelerati on 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 k eep stocks to one year’s operational supply and highlighting the importance of flexible stockpile management in the final stages of phase-out.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 38 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

Yea r

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 FederationMay 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 mo st non-Article 5 Parties. Transition in nonArticle 5 Parties is achievable by about 2010. Ho wever, the Russian Federation has indicated that lack of financial resources and regulatory pro cesses are causing delays in the conversion of the

local manufacture of affordable salbutamol CFC MD Is. 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 pa rticipate in any global production strategy, such as a final campaign production, along with Ar ticle 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 av oid 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 compan y that has received an essential use allowance can claim that its surplus CFC is pre-1996 stock. Th e only exception could be if the company could prove that the essential use allowance was for a diffe rent 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 MDImanufacture. 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 MD Is 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 alternativ es has been evaluated by comparing the most recent data provided by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC) 1 , on available products manufactured by its constituen t 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 me mber) 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 Consortiu m 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 

### 40 It is clear that progress has continued in the development and registration of HFC MDIs and DPIs, with a number of the IPAC member comp anies 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, tran sition 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 countri es, 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 producer s, with a further 105 countries where a single CFC-free inhaler is on the market. In total, ther e 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 Artic le 5 Parties, more than one CFC-free product is available; for example, there are 33 countri es 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 I ndia 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 va rious 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 fo r 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 Febr uary each year in accordance with Decision XIV/5 to be posted on its website. This will aid in th e 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 Partie s 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 ar e launched, by moiety and company (IPAC companies only)

∗ Includes one launch of sodi um cromoglycate in combin ation 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 ∗ 14May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 42 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 cromoglyc ate 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

Beclo m ethasone DPI 39 16 26

HFC MDI 61 112 23 } 42 } 32

Budesoni d e DPI 76 79 6

HFC MDI 15 25 1 } 63 } 20

Fenoterol DPI - - -

HFC MDI 25 25 1 } 25 } 0

Fenoterol and DPI - - -

I p ratro p ium 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

I p ratro p ium DPI - - -

HFC MDI 40 40 1 } 40 } 0

Nedocromil DPI - - -

HFC MDI 9 9 - } 9 } 0

Salbuta m ol DPI 66 56 32

HFC MDI 112 236 33 } 105 } 64

Sal m eterol 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 } 0May 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. Pursuantto 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 site 2

.

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 0May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 44 According to Executive Committe e 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 demonstra ting 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 45 th 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 shoul d be noted that some transition strategies have been approved under national ODS/CFC phase-out pl ans; 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, Nicara gua, 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 we bsite, 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 Ar ticle 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 pro ducts. Major registered substitutes available on the market include dry powder inhalers (DPI s) and hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) MDIs. Public health care services are progressively phasing out CFC MDIs in favour of CFC-free alternatives, while some multinational pharmaceutical compan ies have discontinued the marketing of a number of CFC MDIs for which direct replacement s have been developed. As a result of these combined actions, there has been a sizeable re duction 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 th e 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 Uruguay 3 . Twenty-two Article 5 Parties have submitted data pursuant to Decision XIV/5 since its incepti on, but in many cases the data have not been updated annually. These Parties are Argentina, Australia, Be lize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, China, Croatia, Cuba, Eritrea, Georgia, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Macedonia, Malaysia, Mauritius, Moldova, Namibia, Oman, Ro mania, Sri Lanka, and Uruguay.

3 http://ozone.unep.org/Exemption_Information/Essential_Use_Nominations/index.shtmlMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 45 It is important that Article 5 Parties collect th eir own basic data on CFC and CFC-free inhaler use annually and provide it to the Secretariat by 28 Fe bruary 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 in to 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 require ment 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 declar ations accompany essential use nominations from Parties manufacturing and exporting CFC MDIs to these countries.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 47 

## 4 Chemicals Technical Option s Committee Progress Report

4.1 Executive Summary

The 2008 CTOC Progress Report covers issues a nd progress on all the sub-sectors for which the CTOC is responsible. It includes chapters on matt ers 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 fro m Israel, Netherlands and China under decision XVII/6(7) and affirmed that the information re ported by Israel and the Netherlands has been included in Table A of Decision XIX/15, listed as #1 (Elimination of NCl 3 in chlor-alkali production) and #8 (Production of aramid pol ymer (PPTA)), respectively. Regarding the information from China, the CTOC assessed that th ree 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 so lvent 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 informati on 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 av ailable. 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 feed stock applications in the TEAP May 2005 Progress Report under the Decision X/12 and no fu rther 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 me tric tonnes or 1,650 ODP tonnes in 2005.

Laboratory and Analytical Uses

Decision XIX/18 requested the TEAP/CTOC to provide, by the 21 st MOP (2009), a list of laboratory and analytical uses of ODSs, indicati ng those for which alternatives exist and which are therefore no longer necessary and describing those alternatives.

The CTOC has produced an interim report this y ear on analytical uses and standard analytical methods such as infrared analyses, iodometric titr ations, 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 48 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 th e 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 thr ee dimensional (3-D) model are consistent with the previous calculations by a two dime nsional (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 pharm aceutical 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 27 th OEWG for the

consideration of the 19 th MOP in 2007 under the Decision XVIII/10, but the CTOC could not complete the task mainly due to difficu lties 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 28 th OEWG in Bangkok in July 2008.

Essential Use Nomination of CFC-113 by the Russian Federation

Decision XIX/14 noted the readiness of the Russi an Federation to receive a small group of experts nominated by the TEAP/CTOC. The arrange ment for their visit to Russia is now under negotiation among the Russian Federation, th e Ozone Secretariat in Nairobi and the

TEAP/CTOC.

The TEAP/CTOC will report the results of the discussion at the upcoming 28 th OEWG in Bangkok in July 2008.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 49 Recovery, Recycling and Destruction

Updated information was obtained from Japan and th e 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 an d 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 refri geration 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 operati on will start by July 2008. The National Ozone Unit of the Department of Environment in Fiji e xported a container containing halons to DASCEM Holdings in Melbourne in Australia for destruc tion 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 Ar ticle 5 Parties (Chile, China, India, Kuwait, Mauritius and Tanzania) and eight from the non-Artic le 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 19 th 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 re view the information submitted in accordance with Decision XVII/6(4) and to report and ma ke recommendations to the Parties at the 20 th 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 fromMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 50 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 Tabl e B, taking into account information and data reported by the Parties and to recommend any re ductions 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 pr evious 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 plan t 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 n itrogen trichloride (NCl3) in the production of chlorine with the capacities of 7.2 metric t onnes 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 prod uction 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 produc tion 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 fo r 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 pro cess 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 applica tions 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 da ta 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 reduc tions to the make-up and maximum emissions regarding the Table B of Decision X/14.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 52 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 feed stock 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 requ ested 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 in termediate in the synthesis of other desired products. Losses can occur during production, storag e, 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 tetrafluoroethyl ene (TFE). TFE forms the building block of many fluoropolymers both by homopolymerizati on and copolymerization. This is a very high volume use.

• Conversion of 1,1,1- trichloroethane as a f eedstock 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 m illion 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 manufact ure 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 54 4.4.2 Estimated emissions of ODS

The IPCC recommends that emissions can be est imated from production facilities at 0.5% for

HFCs and 0.2% for SF 6 . This includes fugitive and transport emissions. If one accepts that 0.5% is an appropriate guidance level for products tr ansported 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 in cluded 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 exempti on and asked Parties to report annually on such uses. At the following Meeting of the Parties (D ecision X/19) this provision was extended to 31 December 2005 and this was subsequently (Deci sion XV/8) extended to 31 December 2007. Two further Decisions (Decision XVI/16 and XVII/13) a ddressed 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 exem ption 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 ma de Decision XIX/17, which included the deferral

until 2010 consideration of the co mpliance status in relation to the control measures for CTC of Parties operating under Article 5, which provide ev idence 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 fo r 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 procedur es 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 Deci sions, 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 tho se 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 21 st
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/pu b/ebook/2003-516.pdf, accessed December 2007). Based on returns of the questionnaire, it was estimated th at 205 laboratories used ODS for oil-in-water assays and 44 other procedures. Alternative so lvents and also gravimetric procedures were reported and so, although a little da ted, the review provides much valuable information. A subsequent report placed more emphasis on a lternatives (TemaNord 2005:580, 'Potential Ozone Depleting Substances. Uses and Alte rnatives 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 a nd 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 Determinati on 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 countri es 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 count ries. 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 spectro scopy. Some TCA was also used in petroleum analyses, while CTC is used also as a standard fo r chemical analysis and as a solvent in student

laboratories. While these uses were identified in Bolivia and Mexico, no qu antitative data were available. Quantitative data for Argentin a and Chile are shown in the Table 4-3.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 56 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 analyti cal methods used in a range of industry sectors. Standard methods are followed because they allo w comparisons over time and between different

laboratories. The use of a standard method is of ten required by a customer as a form of quality assurance for a product, or by a regulatory aut hority. 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 Mont real Protocol can cause new standards to be written. The production of new standards tak es 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 w ith techniques, availability of equipment and comparability of results measured using previous and new methods.

In the case of Article 5 Parties, the use of sta ndard 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 extr emely complex and varies from country to country. Non-Article 5 Parties may also specify specific an alytical 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 dr awing the contaminated air through a filter, which retains the hydrocarbon material, and then disso lving this in the appropriate solvent and performing the infrared assay.

CTC was the solvent of choice for such assay s in methods such as ASTM D-3921 (total hydrocarbons extracted from water, wastewat er and sediments), and in method APHA AWWAWPCF 5520C (IR method) for hydrocarbon extractio n from water and soils. However, concerns with the possible carcinogenicity of CTC, and la ter 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, A STM 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, 20 th edition, Washington, DC. Method 5520C (Partition- infrared), USEPA ( 1978), Method 5520BMay 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 absen ce of C-H infrared absorptions, and which are not controlled substances and are unlikely to beco me 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 Da ikin 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. Furt her information (TemaNord 2005:580, pages 37-39)

is that several isomers of tetrachlorohexafl uorobutane 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 (dichl orohexafluorocyclobutanes) 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 Samp les', 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. Altern ative 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 t hose it is designed to replace, but it is being adopted in developed countries. One laborato ry reported paying US$ 450 for a 1.5 kg bottle (April 2006 data). The method employed was de veloped 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-113in certain applications at the Kennedy Space Center (NASA (1995). In these applications, CFC113 was used to degrease components and then to va lidate their cleanliness by a further treatment with the solvent. Fourier Transform infrared sp ectroscopy was used to measure the amount of hydrocarbon removed in the validation step. Ca libration 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-cleani ng solvent has been sufficient to reassure others that it can be safely used under controlled c onditions. 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 Wate r, with the use of tetrachloroethylene as theMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 58 extraction Solvent', Proceedings of the 9 th International Conference on Environmental Science and Technology , Rhodes Island, Greece, 1-3 Septembe r 2005. Farmaki, E., Kaloudis, T., Dimitrou, K., Thanasoulias, N., Kousouris, L a nd 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 establishe d over the range 0.6 to 50 mg/L.

The isomer of CFC-113, CFC-113a (1,1,1-trichlo ro-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). No twithstanding 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. 14 o and b.p. 46 o C (compare CFC-113 m.p. -35 o , b.p. 48 o C). 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 hydrocarbo ns 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 hydrocar bons 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 th e 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 al so 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 th is 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 disap pearance 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 dissolv ed in an organic liquid (one with no oxygen in the molecule). In such solutions the iodine colo r 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. Occupati onal 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 chlo roform', but in today’s workplace environment chloroform may be discriminated ag ainst 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 ch loroform (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 ass ay. 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 u sed 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, whic h employs a mixture of glacial acetic acid, methanol, sulfuric acid and 1,1,1-tr ichloroethane. 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/o ilpac_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 (Met rohm 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 car bon 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 chem istry, is used for determination of unsaturation in hydrocarbon chains. The Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International (formerly the Association of Official Analytical Chemists) 18 th edition (2005) describes the use of CTC as an organic solvent in the procedure for determinati on 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 w ith 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 altern ative 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 th e IUPAC-AOCS-AOAC Method) and this uses preformed iodine chloride as reagent, and as solven t a mixture of acetic acid and cyclohexane. This

Official Method also includes a table of corre lations 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 (Ame rican Oil Chemists Society) method referred to is #Cd 1-25, which was revised in 1988 and r eapproved in 1989. Imperial Industrial Chemicals (Thailand) (www.iic.co.th/products/iodine.htm acce ssed February 2009) used CTC as co-solvent with acetic acid, but made the following observation:May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 60 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 an d JOQCS 65:745 (1988)), although erratic results may be obtained for oils with iodine va lues 100-120, and especially marine oils. Owing to environmental concerns, CFC-113, is not recommende d. 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 indus try and the environment. For example, Bolivia (see above) reported the use of CTC in de termination of the iodine index.

4.5.7 Extraction of natural products

Some pharmaceutical products are prepared from na tural materials, usually of vegetable origin, and assays are required to determine the proporti on 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 Pharmac opoeia. 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 un til 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 st age in the synthetic sequence that leads to the production of the material. The assay for trace cont amination 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 consump tion 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-trichl oroethane (TCA), dichlo romethane, chloroform, ethanol, bromochloromethane, and propan-1-ol).

Until CTC is no longer used in chemical reac tions 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, lo w toxic potential, and no adequate toxicological data available. In the first of these categor ies are: benzene (carcinogenic), CTC (toxic and environmental hazard), 1,2-dichloroethane (t oxic), 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 me asured). In earlier editions of the British Pharmacopoeia (up to 2004) the recommended solv ent was CTC. Since tolu ene 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 me tal 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, Halo thane (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 me thod for this determination (Kemp, B.G. (1981). 'Investigation of ASTM Paste and Mortar Bleeding Tests'. Published on line atwww.astm.org/cgibib/SoftCart.exe/DIGITAL_LIBRARY/JOUR NALS/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 se ttle 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 syst em 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 si nks 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-May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 62 3600_man.pdf, accessed January 2008.) for th eir 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 th is method has been used in Chile (under the heading Chilean Norm NCh 154 of '69) by the cemen t 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 fo r 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 Ar ticle 5 Parties. The new fluorinated alternatives are hydrofluoroethers (HFEs), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and low ODP HCFCs. With Decision

XIX/6 at the 19 th 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 ove r 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 gui delines. 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 chlori nated aromatics have also been used in niche applications.

Another category of alternative solv ents being explored is that of bio-based materials. Essentially these are compounds formed from bio-organic produc ts such as corn and soy beans. While there is considerable enthusiasm in this area, the like lihood 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 th e supply is depleted a critical situation again arises and stockpiling only delays the in evitable 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 throug h because of a reduced market size, high cost, lengthy and expensive research projects, toxicolo gical testing, and uncertainties associated with the market and regulations. Thus far only the HF Cs, 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 re quested 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 a nd 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 trichloroe thylene, perchloroethylene, methylene chloride and HCFC-141b, in spite of the concern exhibite d 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 latit ude 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 w ith 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 substa nces 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 coati ngs is acceptable subject to a use condition, but for

aerosol solvent and adhesive carri er 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 chemi cal intermediates or feedstock. It is assumed to be produced in Chin a, 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 c ountries, 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 Eur ope 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 uncheckedMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 64 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 ser ious 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 st udies) 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 car bon tetrachloride emi ssions and opportunities for reductions”, the TEAP and CTOC made a co mprehensive review on various sources of CTC emissions, concluding a significant discrepancy between reported emissions and the observed atmospheric concentrations on the order of appr oximately 33 kilo tonnes in 2002, as seen in the TEAP May 2006 Progress Report, pp 78-90.

Following these results, the Parties requested th e TEAP to continue its assessment of global emissions of CTC and to prepare a final report for the 27 th Open-ended Working Group for the

consideration of the 19 th 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 comple te the task, mainly due to difficulties in accessing relevant information.

With these backgrounds, the TEAP organised a sm all Task Force to reconsider any missing estimations of associated emissions of CTC, especi ally in the manufacture of chloromethanes and perchloroethylene other than the considerati on 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 pr oduction and consumption of CTC with particular emphasis on these feedstock uses with the goal to estimate emissions and tr y to reconcile them with values calculated by atmospheri c 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 28 th
OEWG in Bangkok in 2008.

4.8 Essential Use Exemptions of CFC-113 fo r 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 27 th 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-deple ting solvents in the aerospace industry nominated by the TEAP/CTOC with the aim of evaluati ng 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 identifie d 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 ex perts to the Russian Federation by February 2008, but has identified two experts in this fiel d. 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 28 th OEWG in Bangkok, Thailand and the

21 st MOP.

4.9 Recovery, Recycling and Destruction

4.9.1 Recovery and recycling

Recovery and recycling of ODSs continue as re ported in the previous progress report. Recent information has been obtained from Japan and Ru ssia. 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 Fluor ocarbon 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 CO 2 if global warming potential of ODSs such as CFCs is taken into

account.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 66 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 CO 2 eq 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 CO 2 eq 0 0 0.24 0.44 0.62 0.75

Japan Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Industry Associat ion and Japan Industrial Conf erence 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 refri geration 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 or ganisations 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 s ubjected 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 w ith 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 methan e 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 plantMay 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 t echnical 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 Environmen t Management, the Australian Government body

that established the National Halon Bank. Current ly 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 Commi ttee (HTOC) Progress Report

The HTOC met on January 21-23, 2008 in Altrin cham, England. Attending HTOC members were from the following countries: Bahrain, Canada, Ch ina, 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 fo r 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 12 11, 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 assessme nt 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 Tec hnical 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 th e availability of halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 2402 and to investigate and propose mechan isms 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 th e 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 th e 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 th e Parties to consider its results;

5. To encourage Parties which have requir ements 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;May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 70 (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 avia tion 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 Internationa l 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 investiga tive 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 36 th 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 engi ne and auxiliary power units, hand-held extinguishers and lavatories; and investigating additional halon replacements for engines/auxiliary power units, and cargo compar tments. These cargo compartments remain a problem with no alternatives currently available th at meet the regulatory authorities’ minimum performance standards. Cargo compartments are th e largest use of halon on civil aircraft. For example, lavatory halon 1301 systems are in the ra nge of 0.1- 0.5 kg; a uxiliary 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 passe nger 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 compartmen ts 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 Fi re 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 Ch ina (see section 1.1.3) and may be an indication of regional imbalances that need to be addr essed. Nevertheless, alternatives for the primary aircraft use of halon 1211, in cabin portable exti nguishers, 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 st ates 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 futu re with several alternatives systems being used in

new construction and most re trofitted systems going to CO 2 . 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 im plement 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 protecti on 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 2,40 0 MT of halon 1211, manufactured prior to the cessation of production in 2006, has been ware housed. Of this, only approximately 50MT has been used and/or exported in the last year. China’s current lo w 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 in creased by 158 in 2007 – further increases are anticipated annually for at l east 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 Eu ropean 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 read ily 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 fa iled 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 fro m China. The cost of fully recycled halon 1211 is now on a par with costs in other inte rnational markets – a result of China ceasing production of halon 1211. Halon 1211 is reportedly r eadily 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 u ses about 50 kg of halon 1211 annually. It isMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 72 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 ava ilable. 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 mark et forces. About half the needed halon 1301 is currently being imported, but no halon 1211 is be ing 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 destru ction or use in critical applications.

The Australian national halon bank conti nues to collect halon 1211 and 1301 from decommissioned non-critical uses. However, they have not destroyed a ny halon 1211 since 2000 and no halon 1301 has been destroyed at all. Th e 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 us es, with annual reducti ons 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 u sed 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 milita ry, with a small quantity in industrial uses. Approximately 2.6MT is installed and in stor age 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 CO 2 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 additi on, CFCs, halons, and methyl chloroform were used in Space applications, such as the manufactur e 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 e liminating 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 feasi ble retrofit alternatives, or not yet budgeted

or scheduled for retrofit or retirement. CFC refri gerants continue to be used in some Naval vessels (ships and submarines) because: the refrige ration plants were designed specifically to use a particular ODS refrigerant, the refrigeration pl ants 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 fo r 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 applica tions 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 an d space uses see: TEAP, “2006 Assessment Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel,” United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, 2006, pp. 127-137.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 74 6.1 Military-Unique and Space-Unique Uses of HCFCs

Most current use of HCFCs by Military and Space or ganisations is in applications that are not unique or critical. It can be expected that or dinary HCFC uses will be replaced by the same technology that is implemented in civilian sectors.

There are a few low-volume HCFCs uses that ar e 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 sy stems, electro-optical devices, precision navigation systems and similar components wh ere a combination of materials must be compatible with the solvent and the solven t 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 envir onment can be replaced with existing or new no flammable or possibly mildly flammabl e 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 develo pment and operational lifetimes, lasting half a century or longer in both developed and developing countries. The systems are highly integrated, their desi gns 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 S huttle sometime in the next decade.

6.2 Continuing International Co-operation

The Montreal Protocol has benefited from clo se co-operation between de veloped and developing nation military organisations wo rking 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 pr ojects 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 Applications 3

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 Austra lia sponsored a Defence Environmental Workshop

for nations of the Asia Pacific Indian O cean region with a focus on ODS. Virtually all participating countries sent representatives of their mi litary and environmental ministries. In June 1997, the same tri-lateral group sponsored a confer ence 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 Protecti on 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 Environmen t Programme and military and non-government organisations from Asia, Europe, North Amer ica 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 (Ande rsen.stephen@epa.gov; 1-202-343-9069).

6.3 Summary

Military and space organisations have invested si gnificant effort and fund ing, and have made great strides to reduce their dependence on ODS. Modifications to existing systems and practices have been made where technically and economica lly 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 reser ve stocks have been diligent in preventing leakage and ensuring that ODSs are only used fo r approved critical applications. The following

actions will further minimise ODS emissions a nd reduce the need for essential use nominations:

• Collection and recycling of ODS s 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 76 • Flexibility that will enable transnational ship ment necessary to supp ly recycled ODS for military-critical needs.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 77 

## 7 Foams Technical Options Committ ee (FTOC) Progress Report

7.1 General

This update is the first foam sector review pub lished since the 2006 Report of the Flexible and Rigid Foams Technical Options Committee, issu ed 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 ph ase-out needs to be disseminated to assist decision-making in Article 5 Parties

• Hydrocarbon technology is being extensively u sed in the domestic refrigeration sector and, to a limited extent, in other insulation applica tions. 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 trans ition 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 format e) show promise, particularly in integral skin applications, but there is little non-Ar ticle 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 inte rested 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 h as 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 be ing consumed for XPS board products.

• The technology exists to replace HCFCs in th ese XPS board plants up to a level of about 30% using CO 2 . However, it has been reported that there is currently no replacement for HCFCs in totality bearing in mind that HFCs ar e viewed as too expensiv e. Work is currently focusing on CO 2 /ethanol and CO 2 /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 logisti cally (and therefore more costly), particularly in remote regions.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 78 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. Ho wever, where hydrocarbons cannot be used for safety and performance reasons, a new lo w-GWP blowing agent (HBA-1) has been launched by Honeywell, which will be commerc ially 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 require ments. 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 impr ovements 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 CO 2 spray foam technologies have become established in Japan but market penetration is no more than 10%. The technol ogy is yet to make any significant market penetration beyond Japan. The Green Procuremen t Law has also promoted the greater uptake

of CO 2 (water), which is particularly suited to the Japanese market and growth of this technology has exceeded that of super-critical CO 2

.

• North American XPS board producers are still on course to phase-out HCFC use by the end

of 2009. The alternative of choice is lik ely to rely on combinations of HFCs, CO 2 , 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 effi ciency in combating climate ch ange has been highlighted in the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC.

• Although blowing agents can be recovered effi ciently from appliances, the effectiveness of regulation varies substantially by region.

• Significant additional work has been conducte d on evaluating the practicality of blowing agent recovery from building foams. Cost eff ectiveness depends substantially on underlying waste policy and, in particular, segregation of demolition waste. The potential of carbon finance to assist in the bank manage ment 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/pol yolefin and phenolic foam sectors. The strikeout items indicate the likely changes initiated by the implementation of Decision XIX/6.80May 2008 TEAP Progress ReportTable 7-1 FOAMS TOC Update Report 2008 - Technical Options TableSECTOR DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DEVELOPING COUNTRIES COMMENTSCURRENT CURRENT FUTUREPOLYURETHANE RIGIDDomestic refrigerators and freezersHCs (cyclopentane & cyclo/iso pentaneblends), HFCsMajority HCs, balance HCFC-141b orHCFC-141b/22HCFC-141b, HFCs & HCsHFC-134a & HFC-245fa for the NorthAmerican marketOther appliances HCs, HFCs Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141b & HCsHCFC-141b& HCsTransport & reefers HCs, HFCs HCFC-141b, HCFC-141b/22HCFC-141b,HCFC-22HFCs & HCsPotentially HFCs but no known useBoardstock Mainly HCs, minor use of HFCs No known production Art 5.1 NA HFC for stringent product fire standards.Panels – continuous Mainly HCs, some HFCs HCFC-141b & HCsHCFC-141b& HCs HFC for stringent product fire standardsPanels discontinuous Residual HCFC-141b,HFCs, some HC Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141bHCFC-141b& HFCs HFCs, not HCs, for SMEsSprayResidual HCFC-141b, HFCs, CO2,(HC)Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141bHCFC-141b& HFCs Potential use of HCs in North AmericaBlocks Residual HCFC-141b, HCs,HFCs, Residual CFC-11, HCFC-141bHCFC-141b& HFCs HC use increasingPipe-in-pipe Mainly HCs, minor HFC Mainly HCFC-141bHCFC-141b& HCs Cyclopentane is main HCOne Component Foam Mainly HCs, some HFCs HFCs, HCs MainlyHCs, some HFCs HC use driven by cost and legislationPOLYURETHANE FLEXIBLESlabstock & block-foam LCD, EMT, methylene chloride Methylene chloride, LCDMethylene chloride, LCD,(EMT)Regulation limits methylene chloride use insome countriesMoulded Mainly CO2(water), minor LCD Mainly CO2(water), minor LCD CO2(water) CO2(water) is industry standardIntegral Skin CO2(water), HFCs, HCsResidual CFC-11, CO2(water), someHCFCs and HFCsCO2(water),some HCFCsand HFCsHFC-134a is main HFCShoe Soles CO2(water), HFCs CO2(water), HCFCs, HFCs CO2(water),HCFCs, HFCs HFC-134a is main HFCPHENOLICBoard & block HFCs, HCs (particularly in Japan) HCFC-141b HCsHFCs are used to retain fire performance insome marketsEXTRUDED POLYSTYRENESheet HCs Mainly HCsSome safety issues in Art 5.1 countriesBoardstockHCFC-142b/(22), HFC-134a, HFC152a, CO2, CO2/ethanol, (HCs inJapan), blends of CO2/hydrocarbonsMainly HCFC-142b/22 but growingHCFC-22. Some minor use of HCsHCFC-142b/22, HFC-134a,CO2, blends of CO2/ ethanolor CO2/hydrocarbonsHCFC-142b use in North America until 2010.Final choice is end-product specificPOLYOLEFINSheets, planks & tubes HCs (iso-butane & LPG) Mainly HCs Some safety issues in Art 5.1 countriesNOT-IN-KIND INSULATIONDomestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre, cellulose Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technologyNon-domestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technologyFibre insulation is default based on costMarket share reducing on efficiency groundsIndustrial applications Mostly rock fibre, calcium silicate Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technology Choice drivenby operating temperatureMay 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 app lications, bottle coolers and steel-faced panels. In each case the customers require non-ODS/lo w GWP product. In addition, the same producers frequently use HCFC-based systems fo r those customers who have no specific

ozone or climate demand.

What are the product and process implications?

Experience in Brazil shows that product pe rformance 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 cons umption 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 densiti es can be increased. An example is the case of bottle cooler applications, where a 5% increas e 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 th an 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 fi re 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). W ith 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 fi rst’ 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-cont aining 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 CO 2 (water), although other co-blowing agents including hydrocarbons, CO 2 (LCD), CO 2 (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 leve ls of HFCs. This approach also creates the potential to offer families of products with varyin g levels of performance and cost, which in turn allows the end foam manufacturers more op tions to tailor their product offerings.

Energy efficiency versus emissions

In many applications, HFCs are selected as th e blowing agent in order to provide the best available energy efficiency. This can be particul arly important where limited space prevents an

increase in insulation thickness. Su ch applications include domestic refrigerators and freezers, closed cell spray foam insulation for existing bu ilding envelopes, buildi ng 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 app lications that demonstrate that the Life Cycle Climate Performance (LCCP) associat ed 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 ex tent. Most have defaulted to HFC-based technologies despite the higher system costs. Wh ere insulation requirements are less stringent,May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 83 greater use of CO 2 (water) has also occurred. The implicati on 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 impor tant – 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 explosi on 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 ph asing 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 a pplied in an Article 5 context, all would need

verification

7.8.1 Implications on costs

While no experience in the Article 5 context exis ts, 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. cons umption 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, CO 2 , hydrocarbons and water. The significant differences in the pr oducts 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 produc ts. 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 a pproximately 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 ar e 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 50,000m 3 and process recycled polystyrene almost exclusively. Foam densities are typically 33kg/m 3 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 supp liers to modify existing units to introduce CO 2 into the extruder. The cost of this modification is estimated to be around 100,000 RMB. However, where bottled CO 2 cannot be used and additional storage is required, a further cost of 300,000 RMB is currently being b udgeted. These modifications could allow the replacement of HCFCs by up to 30%. However, full replacement is not possible with pure CO 2

.

Total HCFC phase-out will require 100% subs titution, but HFC-134a and/or HFC-152a are viewed as too expensive for the Chinese market. Work is continuing with CO 2 /ethanol and

CO 2 /hydrocarbon blends to achieve high er levels of substitution. There is some belief that a total hydrocarbon solution (n-butane) might be possi ble, but this would require blowing agent evacuation immediately after production to avoi d 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 servici ng due to the adoption of good practices and the retrofitting of refrigeration and Mobile Air-C onditioning (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 continu es 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 give n new impetus to research and development for low GWP refrigerants. Some new non-ozone-deple ting low GWP refrigerants have recently been registered, which are expected to provide climatic benefits.

Research and experimentation is underway on CO 2 (R-744) and on ice slurries as refrigerants for a number of applications. These fluids have benef it 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 flui d such as alcohol, a salt solution or ammonia and are used as a secondary refrigerant. Ice slurri es 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 RT OC 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)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 86 Public review is currently open for the refri gerants indicated as “recommended.” ISO 817 is expected to harmonise with ASHRAE 34 on th ese new designations as well as the associated safety classifications. These new designations reflect commercialisation or increased commercialisation of new refrigerants. The ne xt RTOC progress and/or 2010 assessment report will include consistent physical, safety, a nd 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 poten tial for broader applications. The primarycandidates 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 comp eting technologies and products. Beyond these, no new technologies or alternatives have em erged for energy-efficient, cost-competitive application for these products. Statistics for c onverting 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 depl eting 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 HF C-134a in the USA, including for stand-alone display cases, where the refrigerant charge exceed s 0.5 kg. Some global companies continue transitioning from high-GWP to low-GWP technologies, such as CO 2 and HC-290 (propane).

The CO 2 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 CO 2 in 2007 is estimated at about 90,000. An important advantage of CO 2 is its ability to produce both cold and hot temperatures in the same machine using the same thermodynamic circuit. For smallMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 87 commercial freezers, isobutane is the preferred op tion 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 s till the refrigerant of choice in Article 5 Parties, with HFC-134a and R-404A recently intr oduced 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 numberof 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 do ne 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, excep t 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 s upermarkets, to lower energy consumption and to increase redundancy. HCFC-22 is still the most commonly used refrigerant globally.

The alternative refrigerants for centralised syst ems are the same as those for condensing units. However, these systems are more prone to leakag e 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 temp erature applications in Europe, the refrigerant

CO 2 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 circ uit. This not only allows the use of flammable refrigerants but also reduces the charge of primar y 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 equipmen t 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 th e total charge per year). Refrigerant emissions are lowest in supermarkets and highest in hypermarkets.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 88 8.4 Large Size Refrigeration (Industria l, 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 cascad e 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 CO 2 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 applicati ons, in particular integrated systems that recover heat from refrigeration plants. Th ere is no universally preferred method for doing this; ammonia systems are the most co mmon, with currently a growing number of

CO 2 systems. The uptake of this concept is s till restricted by equipment availability, in particular high pressure ammonia compressors and even higher pressure CO 2
compressors.

Technical options continue to evolve quickly for low temperature applications, with CO 2 entering

the market as both a heat transfer fluid and refri gerant (as was also mentioned under commercial refrigeration). CO 2 is being used in new small- and large-scale systems up to 5 MW cooling capacities in the USA, Japan and Europe. Many new CO 2 systems continue to be installed in The Netherlands due to the support by financial subsid ies. The use of indirect systems is increasing as a way to reduce the quantities needed for the ammoni a refrigerant charge. Research continues in the USA, Japan and Europe on CO 2 as refrigerant and on CO 2 compatible lubricants. New CO 2 compressor designs were already introduced in 2004-2006.

Retrofits are being done from HCFC-22 to CO 2 or brine systems, especi ally in the cold storage sector. The use of equipment with small NH 3 charges is continuously increasing, and is now expanding into industrial refrigeration systems. Th e 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 ch illed or frozen products by reefer ships, refrigerated containers, refrigerate d 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 condi tioning in rail cars. This sector is graduallyshifting 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 traile r business. Carbon dioxide is still only used in prototype transport systems. Hydrocarbon refrige rants might be a future option for trucks and trailers but they will not be an option for cont ainers because these are often transported under deck. Ammonia is gaining more popularity on-boa rd 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 refri geration sector. Current issues in the transport refrigeration sector are (1) refrigerant charge re duction 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 consump tion 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 eq uipment 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 ne wly 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 a bout the applicability of the current options in high temperature environments has resulted in th e need to prepare a special assessment of the acceptability of the existing options for high am bient 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 additi on of the hydrocarbon allegedly allows these blends to work with existing compressor and l ubricant systems. However, there is limited published information on the performance and relia bility 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 primar y options for centrifugal chillers. Conversion of existing CFC chillers to use non-CFC refrigerant s has nearly ended in non-Article 5 Parties because most good candidates for conversion have al ready been covered. As already reported in other sectors, two --beneficial-- trends are conti nuing 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 a nd by new more aggressive energy performance standards or regulations being enacted by a numbe r 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 cu rrent 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 screwcompressors in the range from 140 kW to about 2200 kW. These chillers generally use HFC134a as the refrigerant, but scroll compresso r 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 chille rs. HCFC-22 cannot be used in new chillers manufactured in many non- Article 5 Parties by January, 1, 2010, and newlyMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 90 produced HCFC-22 cannot be used in servicing in Europe by that date. HCFC-22 is still used, primarily in chillers with positive-displaceme nt compressors, which includes reciprocating, screw, and scroll compressors. Manufacturers of these chillers have redesigned their products to use HFC refrigerants. Chillers with cooling cap acities 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 conditioni ng 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, Jap an, 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 45-55 o C range. In the mild climate zones of China and Japan, air-source heat pump chillers ar e widely used for heating and cooling of residential and commercial buildings with fan coil units.

• In Japan, the market for heat pumps continu es 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, CO 2 is used extensively in domestic hot water heat pumps in the residential market, a trend the Japanese government is en couraging through subsidies. However,

CO 2 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 CO 2. 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 th at offer higher hot water temperatures (above 60 o C) or are capable of operating at low outdoor temperatures, e.g., at -20 o 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 CO 2 , HFC-152a, HFC1234yf and hydrocarbons (mainly propane).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 91 Since 1998, the leading potential replacement refrigerant in Europe has been CO 2 . 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, mate rials 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 w ith 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 syst ems (with a secondary heat transfer loop).

German carmakers announced in September 2007 th at 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 refri gerant candidates for future use are expected by

the end of summer 2008.

CO 2 , HFC-152a and probably also HFC-1234yf are co mparable 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 intr oduced in each stationary air-conditioning and refrigeration end-use sector. Many of these altern atives 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 recy cling. 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 kn own or controlled. Further, using incorrect blends can compromise the performance of equipmen t and, in some cases, present safety hazards.

These factors call into the question the potential effec tiveness 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 92 Destruction of excess refrigerants is gaining atten tion, 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 bromid e (MB) production and consumption, and gives progress in the development and adoption of alterna tives. Preliminary information on registration, re-registration and deregistration of in-kind meth yl 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 nationa l level is defined as MB production plus MB imports minus exports, minus QPS, minus feedstoc k; 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 cer tain times, and in consequence official figures and baselines have changed. At the time of writi ng this report, the vast majority of Parties had

submitted data for 2006 and the data base for MB is much more comple te than in the past. In the few cases where data gaps exist, data from th e previous year were assumed to apply.

9.1.1 Production trends

Trends in the reported producti on of MB for all controlled uses (excluding QPS and feedstock) are shown in Figure 9.1. MB production for c ontrolled uses in 2004 was about 24,635 metric tonnes, which represented 37% of the production b aseline (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 conti nued to decrease each year (details can be found in section 9.2).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 94 Figure 9-1 Historical trends in reported gl obal 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

1 9 9 1 1

9 9 2 1

9 9 3 1

9 9 4 1

9 9 5 1

9 9 6 1

9 9 7 1

9 9 8 1

9 9 9 2

0 0 0 2

0 0 1 2

0 0 2 2

0 0 3 2

0 0 4 2

0 0 5 2

0 0 6MB Production for controlled uses(metric tonnes)

Non-Article 5 production

Article 5 production

Non-Article 5 Parties reduced their MB produc tion for controlled uses from about 66,000 tonnes in 1991 (non-A5 baseline) to less than 24,100 to nnes 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 200 6 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 20 00 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 c ontrolled 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 QP S, as reported to the Ozone Secretariat under ** by Parties, rose substantially in 2005 over th e long term and decreasing trend. Data reported for 2006 shows a return to the expected trend (F ig. 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 haveMay 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, wh atever 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 2008Methyl bromide for QPS (metric tonnes)

9.2 Global consumption

On the basis of Ozone Secretariat data, globa l consumption of MB for controlled uses was estimated to be about 64,420 tonnes in 1991 a nd remained above 60-63,000 tonnes until 1998. Global consumption was about 45,527 tonnes in 20 00, 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-Artic le 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 tonn es scheduled for export to Article 5 Parties were not shipped before 31 December of that y ear 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 ha ve been approximately 15,1 44 tonnes, representing 27% ofbaseline. 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 estim ated consumption based on quantities approved orMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 96 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 fu rther reduction to 12% of the baseline.

Figure 9-3 Baselines and trends in MB consum ption 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

19

91

19

92

1993 1994 19

95

1 996 19

97

199 8

199 9

2 000

2 001 200 2

2 003

2 004 200 5

200 6

Years Baseline non-Article 5

Baseline Article 5
MB consumption non-Article 5
MB consumption Article 5

Source: MBTOC estimates calculated from Oz one 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 cons umption 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 baselin es 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 th e 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 1 993 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 7 1999 2001 2003 2 0 0 5 2 0 0 7MB 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 (C UEs). Several Parties have made significant reductions in CUEs. The EC, for example, redu ced 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 fo r 2005 was used in this analysis..

(b) Excluding QPS Source: Ozone Secretariat data of March 20 08; data for 2007-8 were calculated from MB consumption approved or licensed for CUEs.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 98 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

MB consumption, tonnes (percentage of national baseline) Party

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 199 8. 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 deta ils 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) re duced 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) repor ted 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 larg est 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 a lternatives for high moisture dates, which has been approved by the 54 th Executive Committee M eeting. 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 Protoc ol for Article 5 Parties in 2002 forcountries 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

Number of A5 countries

National status

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 143May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 100 Regionally speaking, consumption decrease has be en greatest in CEIT countries, followed by Asia and Africa, while Latin America is the re gion 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, stra wberry 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

1991 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Year Latin America and Caribbean

Africa

Asia, Middle East

CEIT

Source: Ozone Secretariat database, 2008

About 70% of Article 5 Parties reported zero c onsumption in 2006. Only 11 Parties still report consumption between 100 and 500 metric tonnes a nd 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 tMB consumption (tonnes)

No. of A5 Parties 2006

2005

2001

Source: Ozone Secretariat database, March 2008May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 101 9.3 Alternatives for soil treatments

9.3.1 Key alternatives

Major chemical alternatives, 1,3-D/Pic, chloropicr in 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 da ta; 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 includ es 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 app lication 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 a pplication 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 producti on in Australia); other sectors have adopted more diverse types of alternatives including s ubstrates, 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 varie ties, continue to expand in the ornamental and vegetable industries requesting CUNs (C antlifee 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 fo rmulations 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 dram atically 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 p ests, thus controlling pathogens and weeds at reduced MB application rates compared to tho se 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; SantosMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 102 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 re duction 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 fumiga nts 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 prohi bits 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 othe r fumigants under the cluster analysis to ensure guidelines are compatible with other fumigants in cluding 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 expa nding 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 ma in 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 dazome t and non-chemical methods (e.g. substrates, grafting, resistant varieties, biof umigation, solarisation) (Besri, 2004, 2007a, 2007b, Runia, 2006).

MB use has been entirely phased out from all Eu ropean countries as well as Australia and Israel. In northern Europe the main alternative adopted is soilless culture often in association with otherMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 103 alternatives e.g. resistant cultivars and grafting A mo re diverse selection of alternatives is used in Southern Europe and Mediterranean countries incl uding 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. r adicis

- lycopersici and root-knot nematodes ( Meloidogyne spp. ) (Yilmaz, 2006, 2007ab).

Tomato grafting has been reported as a feasible a lternative 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 combinati on 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 (N ishi and Tateya, 2006a).

In Florida, Telone C35 was reported to be as ef fective as MB for controlling root-knot nematode attacking tomatoes (Dickson, 2007). Nutsedge cont rol has been efficiently achieved in the USA

with the herbicide halosulfuron. Acrolein comb ined with other chemicals such as Eptam=EPTC,

halosulforon or dazomet enhanced control of nu tsedge 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 me talized 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 comp ared to the same treatment with VIF (Olson and Kreger, 2007, Bernal, 2007). Telone C35 app lied 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 exam ple, yields of grafted eggplants were shown to increase by 25-30% in comparison to non-grafte d plants. Fruit quality was much improved and although planting density remains largely unchange d. 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 effici ent 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 dazo met under LDPE were tested in Georgia (USA) on bell pepper with results that were fully comp arable to those obtained with MB (Culpepper et al

., 2007)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 104 In Spain, biofumigation has proved successful fo r 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 si gnificantly in Mediterranean countries. When combined with other treatments, grafted plan ts can avoid the need for MB fumigation (De Miguel, 2004b, Beltran et al , 2008). In Italy, for example, grafte d plants are used with alternative fumigants (e.g. 1,3-D or Pic) instead of MB (Spo tti, 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 resu lts, 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. Ho wever 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 applie d 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 alternativ e 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 fo r this use are Israel and the United States. All other Parties previously requesting CUNs (e.g. Po rtugal, Greece, Belgium, France, Italy, Spain and Australia) have not reapplied for 2009 or 201 0. 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 hundred s of flower types, production cycles and cropping systems involved. Shifting to alternatives often requires growers to change production practices substantially and implement integrated pest mana gement programs. This may include transition to soilless systems, at times with increased investme nt, but often with impr oved 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 re gulatory issues (e.g. township caps in USA), and registration. However, alternatives that do not n eed registration such as steam and substrates areMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 105 used by many growers around the world particularly for flowers grown in protected

environments. Effective results have also been obt ained 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 a nd 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 sterilisi ng 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 or namental production include dazomet, metham sodium and 1,3 dichlor opropene, 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 meth am 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 al one, 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, c oncluded that the majority of available MB alternatives provide effective control against most soil-borne diseases and nematodes, as long as appropriate application methods and ra tes 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 a pplying for CUN’s, and replaced at least 60% of the production area treated with methyl bromide/ch loropicrin mixtures. Of the Parties previouslyMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 106 applying for CUN’s, most have completely im plemented 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 iodi de/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 me thyl 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 redu ce 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 capsu les has been developed as well as methyl iodide and methyl iodide/chloropicrin capsules. Initia l results showed that there was no significant different between 1,3-D capsule application with in jection 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 a pproximately 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, Jap an, Italy, New Zealand, UK and China are some of the key producers using substrates for stra wberry 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 runne r 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 ot hers 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 fo r 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, hasMay 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 constrai n 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 strawb erry 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, cu ttings, 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 path ogen control for propagation material is higher than for crops where the product is a fruit or vege table and must be maintained through the entire

crop.

For certified nursery stock, regulations might speci fy 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 market able product for the grower. MB has commonly been used to meet clean propagative material st andards. In some cases, sufficient data and grower experience have allowed growers to tr ansition 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 so me 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 se aling of VIF films is commercially practised.

An alternate approach to the use of soil treatment s 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 u se of MB for the control of soilborne fungal, bacterial and nematode pests of potato, sweet pot ato, and ginger. Present re search 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 Gri ffin, 2007; Larkin and H oneycutt, 2006; OchiaiMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 108 et al., 2007; Snapp and et al., 2007) and one re port 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 plantb ack times necessary durin g 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 metalaxy l during the growing period of ginger plants strengthened the effects of pre-plant soil fumigant s alternative to MB (Tak euchi Shigeharu et al., 2000).

Cyazofamid has been recently registered for rh izome rot disease of ginger in Japan. Propamocarb is also available. These two products are a pplied 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 promisi ng 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 thr eat and challenge to growers. Replant is poorly understood as it is often caused by undefined path ogens. A major factor contributing to this problem is the persistence of old, well deve loped 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 th e 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 appr opriate 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 occu rred 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 effec tive in killing old roots and used in light sandy soils, the dosage needed for the heavy soils exceeds the maximum allowed under CaliforniaMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 109 regulations (Schneider et al., 2005). Metham sodium and dazomet are inconsistent at the depths required although the developmen t of improved application tec hnologies 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 herbicid es, 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 re duce 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 fo r 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 nomin ation 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 th e 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 so il, which are no longer in production such as processing tomato fields in Israel.

Recently, Abanga et. al (2007) have described a commun ity-based integrated management approach for controlling broomrape in seven countries in the Near East and North Africa (NENA) where this weed causes serious proble ms. 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 contro l 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).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 110 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 sodi um were evaluated on peppers. Nutsedge was controlled similarly with MB/Pic, iodometh ane/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 dissemina tion 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 198 1), 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 P 123 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 wo rk 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 (especi ally 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 altern ative chemically-based technologies continues to delay or restrict uptake of technologies identif ied 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, su ch 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 ar ound treated areas to kill escaping pests. These methods may or may not require registration.

Sulfuryl fluoride has emerged as a major alterna tive to methyl bromide for some structural treatments, particularly of flour mills and some other food-processing facilities. Registration of sulfuryl fluoride usuall y 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 c ontact registration for the foods, which may be present in those facilities, becomes apparent and re gistration is then sought for them. The latter registration typically avoids the need to tota lly 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 re gistered 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 flou r or food allowed and a mill must be completely emptied before fumigation. This presents difficulti es 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 preven ting adoption of SF for some mill s 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 expa nding approvals of commodities has contributed strongly to pest control without the use of me thyl 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 112 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 appropr iate 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, re ductions 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 e ffect 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 sin ce the EU is a major market.

9.4.2 Adoption of alternatives for t reatment 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 year s ago. Fumigators and flour mill operators have been trained on IPM. Only one flour m ill 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 track ing MB use. Cylinderised phosphine and ethyl formate formulations are registered and availabl e 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 adop tion 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 Germ any), Bolivia for sesame seed, Greece (for processed packaged rice on pallets), India, for some durab le 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 a nd 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 recognisi ng 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 th e 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 dete rmine the behaviour of mites. Controlling both parameters contribute to the prevention of infestati on 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 c onsiders it essential to maintain high hygiene

standards inside the rooms and in and around th e entire facility, and to empty, clean and spray

facilities and frames before new ha ms are introduced. Additionally, USG may wish to investigateMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 113 the potential for controlled or modified atmosphe re storage for cured pork. Specifically, a low O 2 environment, which does not elevate the CO 2 level, might be effective.

9.4.3 Quarantine and Pre-Shipment MB Issues

The third meeting of the Commission on Phyto sanitary Measures (3CPM) approved a policy document relating to the reduction of methyl br omide use in phytosanitary measures. These are essentially Quarantine measures as defined under Deci sion 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 br omide where possible for QPS treatments covered by IPPC.

There continues to be only limited informa tion 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 id entified the treatment of timber and wooden materials, both import and exports as the major Q PS use, followed by treatment of export hay and grains. In the Asia Pacific region, the predom inant 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 proce dures 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 sta ndard. Some alternatives to the two specified procedures under the current version of the standa rd (methyl bromide or heat treatment) are under consideration by the IPPC. The recent meeti ng of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures

called for further data on these candi date alternatives and did not ap prove 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 treatment s. 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 va riety of heat sources, including hot water systems, electricity, and natural or liquefied petr oleum 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 is othiocyanate mixture and also methyl iodide to confirm each fumigant’s efficacy, the gas concentration obt ained 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 insect s, 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 agro chemicals in Japan. After the completion of public hearings, it is expected that both fumigants will be introduced into the Jap an 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 theMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 114 177.3 tonnes QPS MB used in 2 006. 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 treatme nts 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 progr am 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 (A FAS) seeks to assist fumigators involved in quarantine fumigations to maintain a high sta ndard 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 meth yl 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/m 3 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 suffi cient 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 ve hicles and 40ft containers is operating at New Zealand’s largest port. This unit has replaced th e 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 i ndications that irradiation is being accepted by

consumers.

USDA-APHIS published a rule in 2007 providing ge neric irradiation quarantine treatments. The rule approved irradiation doses of 150 Gy for an y tephritid fruit fly and 400 Gy for all other insects except the pupa and adult stages of Lepido ptera. The generic irradiation treatments apply

to all fresh horticultural commodities. Hawaii h as used generic doses to export tropical fruit sinceMay 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 generi c 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 irradi ated 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 do es 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 sy stems continue to be driven by local pollution control concerns and regulations, not solely pr otection of the ozone layer. There has been substantial increase in adoption of methyl brom ide 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 receive d 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 a ll methyl bromide fumigations there. Typically, these systems are fitted to standard frei ght containers when under fumigation.

A Belgian company, Desclean, has 7 units operati onal 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 re use 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 with in 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 r ecapture 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 repor ted to be negatively affecting trade in goods shipped on MB treated packaging materi als from Sub-Saharan African Parties.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 116 These countries report a serious problem resulting fro m their use of MB to treat wood packaging materials to meet ISPM 15 (IPPC 2006) for inte rnational 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 crat es 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 count ries 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 tran sfer 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 c ountries may have different functionality. Although fumigants and techniques have been extensively tr ialled 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 countr ies 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 re placing methyl bromide with pest control techniques for flour milling and food processing that in clude heat treatments (full site or spot heat with additional pest barrier methods), and w ith the fumigant sulfuryl fluoride (SF).

From experience, flour milling and food pr ocessing 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, t echniques for spot heat treatment of mill and processing equipment can be simpler, once appr opriate equipment and monitoring techniques

have been established and tested.

However neither heat technique has been tria lled and adapted to the needs of developing countries located in tropical zones where high humid ities can affect treatment efficacy.

Although developed countries ar e making good progress adopting sulfuryl fluoride, in flour milling and for food processing facilities, the effi cacy 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 cons titute 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 Sout hern Africa would readily be registered for useMay 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 l ack of interest by commercial suppliers of the

material.

The phase out of MB use in flour mills, grain st orage 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 prom oted and encouraged fo r 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 developi ng 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 par ticipatory 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, Okla homa State University, Dept. of Agricultural Economics, 2007, http://agecon.okstate.e du/faculty/publications_results.asp?page=1 AQIS (2008) Australian Fumigation Accreditation Sc heme. 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 chloro picrin 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 econ omic 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 us es. 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)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 118 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 M eloidogyne 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 toma to in some Mediterranean countries. Proceedings of

the international research conference on me thyl bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29- November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 59-1, 59-5 Besri, M. (2004). Leading Methyl Bromide alterna tives 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 graf ting 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 graf ting and calcium cyanamide as alte rnatives 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 Meth yl 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. Wetzstei n, 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. Univ esrity 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. A nnual International Res earch 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 Intern ational 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 diseas e. Annual International Res earch 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: 247–257May 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 grow ers replace methyl bromide? Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide a lternatives 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 th e 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 Confer ence 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. Ma y 2006. European Community, Brussels.
EC, European Community, (2007). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of the critical uses of Methyl Bromide. Ma y 2007. European Community, Brussels. Elmore, C., J. Roncoroni and S. Tj osvold (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 Alte rnatives 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 Alte rnatives 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. Lo pez-Aranda (2008) Chem ical 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 L 4GeneMediated 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 fl oriculture 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 a pplied 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 – 300May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 120 Gilreath, J.P., T. Motis and M. von Hulten (2004). Retention of 1,3-D and nutsedge control with VIF. Powerpoint presentation. University of Florid a. 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 (2005 b). Soil fumigant and herbicide combinations for

caladium. Annual Intern ational Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov San Diego, California Grafiadellis, I., K. Mattas, I. Tzouramani and K. Ga lanopoulos (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. Ri zzo, 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 Meth yl 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 Co nference on Methyl Brom ide Alternatives and Emission Reductions. October 29- November 1, 2007. San Diego, California. IPPC (2006). ISPM No. 15. Guidelines for regulatin g 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 Brom ide alternatives for use in walnut production systems.Annual International Research Conferen ce 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 pr otected and field pr oduction. 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., Medi na, J.J., Montes, F., Vega, J.M., Páez, J.I., Bascón, J., Martínez-T receño, A., García-Sinov as, 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 Internatio nal Conference on Alte rnatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 121 López-Aranda J.M., L. Miranda, F. Romero, B. De Lo s Santos, C. Soria, R. Pé rez-Jiménez, T. Zea, M. Talavera and J.J. Medina. (2007) Strawberry production in Spain: Alternatives to MB, 2007

results. In: Annual International Research Conf erence on Methyl Brom ide 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 cytoki nin-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. He rnanz, 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. Bre tt 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. Go under, 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 Alte rnatives 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 Meth yl 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. Gu llino (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. Garibald i (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 To mato 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 virt ually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida strawberry. Annual International Research Co nference on Methyl Brom ide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-6 November, Orlando, Florida, USA. Nucifora, S., G. Vasquez and F. Giuffrida (2001). Sp read of soilless cultivation in the area of Ragusa (Italy). Acta Horticulturae 554: 305 – 309. O’Neill, T.M., K.R. Green and T. Ra tcliffe (2005). Evaluation of soil steaming and a formaldehyde drench

for control of fusarium wilt in column stock. Acta Horticulturae 698: 129 - 134May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 122 Ochiai, N., M.L. Powelson, R.P. Dick and F.J. Crow e (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 Inte rnational conference on Met hyl 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 Me thyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. Piedra Buena, A., López-Pérez, J.A., Bello, A., Díez-R ojo, 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). Over view of alternatives to Methyl Bromide fo r cut flower production in industrialized countries. Proceedings of International Conferen ce 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 Re ductions, 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 di fferent geographic regi ons. Proceedings of

International Conference on Alternatives to Me thyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. Porter, I.J. (2005 ) . Review and analysis of international researchof 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 Prepla nt 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. Kolesn ik, 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 contro lling 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 conferen ce 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 di sease resistance in heirloom tomatoes. NCSU –CES Extension Bulletin AG-675. (http://www4.ncsu .edu/~clrivard/TubeGr aftingTechnique.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 Res earch Center, Lelystad. 16pp. Santos, B.M. and Gilreath, J.P. (2 006). Chemical alternatives to me thyl 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 – 1 st and 2 nd 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 (20 02b). Methyl Bromide alternatives for tree, vine, and

rose field nurseries. Annu al International Research Co nference 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 brom ide alternatives for perennial crop field nurseries. Pp:

41-1 – 41-4. Annual International Research Co nference on Methyl Brom ide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, Oct 31 – Nov 3, San Diego, California. Schnitzler and Gruda (2002). Hyrdoponics and produc t 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 Ital y. Proceedings of Inte rnational 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 evaluati on 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: Cucurb itaceae 2006, September 17-21, 2006, Asheville, North Carolina. p. 277-285. Thomas J. E., L.-T. Ou, L.H. Allen, Jr., J.C. Vu an d D.W. Dickson (2007). A 2-year study of wavelength selective plastic mulches in Florida toma to production . Proceed ing of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide a lternatives 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, 177-181May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 124 Tostovrsnik, N.S., A.L. Shanks, I.J. Porter, S.W, Ma ttner 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 Meth yl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov, San Diego California USA. Tsuda S., M. Kirita M. and Y. Watanabe (1997) Ch aracterization of a Pepper Mild Mottle Tobamoviurs Strain Capable of Overcoming the L 3 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 Technology 31,

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.

Y ı lmaz, S., M. Gocmen, A. Ünlü, K. Aydinsakir, O. Baysal, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Celikyurt, B. Say ı n 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. Aydin ş akir, 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 Inte rnational conference on Met hyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 60-1, 60-3

Y ı lmaz, S.,Ünlü, A., Gocmen, M., Mutlu, M., Aydinsakir, K., F ı rat, F. F., Kuzgun, M., Celikyurt, M. A., Say ı n, 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 Effica cy, 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, a doption of alternatives in this sector seemed inexplicably slow, in the face of alternatives al ready 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 d ecrease 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 effe ctiveness, costs and adoption of alternatives in the milling sector, in countries where there are CU Ns, would be useful to Parties. In January 2008, MBTOC QSC sent letters requesting informatio n about the current status of adoption of alternatives in the flour milling sector to Par ties, industry associations and suppliers of alternatives. In response, Canada (7, 11, 18, 19, 21, 29) and the Unit ed States (2,3,4,5) sent several reports and industry correspondence; th e European Commission surveyed 12 countries and provided an extensive report (16); the UK res ponse 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 meeti ng for MBTOC with Israeli fumigators (23). Additionally, MBTOC members supplied informa tion 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 u sed will be made available upon request by any Party. We established evidence rules requiring any do cument 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. Cana da’s CUNs are not public documents and are protected commercial confidential. MBTOC is not cer tain of the confidentiality status of Israel’s

CUNs.

The reference list forms an important part of th is report: summaries of all references were written

and included in the reference list. Cited refere nces are available to Parties on request to UNEP Ozone Secretariat (contact: meg.seki@unep.org)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 126 10.2 Executive Summary

Achieving reliable pest control without using me thyl 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 difficu lties 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, techni cal efficacy of the alternative improved. All alternatives require extensive pl anning and experience before success is achieved (7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 42, 43, 45).

The most likely and most often used alternatives ar e, 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 suppl emental 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 r eal 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 researcher s 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 doi ng so concerns millers. Raising dosage rates may also not be the wisest choice from a total e nvironmental 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 repor ts indicate that alternatives cost about the same as methyl bromide, once tailored to site-specifi c 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 tota l cost of a “pest control system”, which would include costs for improved IPM, plant modifications, sealing, protecting sensitive items fromMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 127 damage, removing or isolating fo od products and ingredients if n ecessary, and downtime. At the same time, there may be savings resulting fro m 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 impact s. Methyl bromide is ozone depleting, but it seems that SF and heat alternatives have highe r 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 signi ficantly increases expense. Although concerns were reported with the use of each alternative, there we re 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 l ack pest efficacy with the alternatives, while achieving the best possible pest kill efficacy fo r 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 recomme ndation 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 require d 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 additiona l 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 join ts, 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 k ill efficacy and may reduce frequency of full site treatments, a major contributor to overall pest control costs (20, 43).

Through reduced dosage rates, fumigation frequenc y with MB and/or adoption of alternatives, plus other factors, CUNs for flour mills in Cana da, Israel and the USA combined have decreased approximately 170 tonnes or about 51% betw een 2005 and 2010 (based on MBTOC’s interim recommendations).

10.3 Technical Efficacy

Achieving successful pest control, without the ab ility to repeatedly fumigate with MB, requires much greater attention to mill sanitation and IPM appr oaches to pest control (7, 9, 11, 16, 40, 44).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 128 A determination to work to find an alternative a nd make it effective in a particular situation was an essential part of the eventual successes reporte d (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 al so 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 fumigati ons were much more successful (9, 10, 11, 15, 17, 30, 34, 37).

At this time in North America, full site fumiga tions 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 ar e 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 structur e or equipment (10, 11, 14, 15). But since mills constantly bring in grains and raw materials, a nd are often located near significant environmental sources of pests, it is difficult to clearly corre late pest rebound with fumigation efficacy (37). Rebound due to pest survival will be likely to o ccur 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 fluor ide 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 l ack pest efficacy with the alternatives, while achieving the best possible pest kill efficacy fo r 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 ass ays, 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 millMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 129 treatments, heat (with additional pest barrier t echniques) 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 te mperature 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 en sure 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 diat omaceous 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). Ther e are heat calculation models available from US university researchers and others to assist mill mana gers 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 circumstan ces, 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 th is reason the use of insulated floor mats, DE and/or insecticidal spraying is needed on these harder-to-heat su rfaces (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 co mpanies 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 sulf uryl 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 fumiga nt management system called the FumiguideTM, which forms part of the registration package in many countries. The Fumiguide calculates dosages and fumigation management targets to achie ve 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 temperatur e 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).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 130 Although some mills have obtained successful SF fu migations without the use of additional heat, weighing the full realm of technical, cost, regulat ory and environmental issues, leads MBTOC to conclude that the best way to use SF for mill treatme nt 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 infest ed 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 w ith CUNs for flour milling, there were, however, regulatory barriers to the use of effective altern atives, 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 authoriti es 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 adequa te footprint for external heater and electrical systems (11).

The real regulatory issues affecting adoption of a lternatives have and will continue to pertain to the chemical fumigants. Recent years have seen th e 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 fluor ide has not been complete enough to satisfy mill

management.

Millers in Canada and the United States report r eal problems in adopting SF because of lack of regulatory approval for food contact (3, 4, 5, 11).

For example, in Canada, no maximum residue leve ls (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 tho se items have to be completely sealed off. These actions are not always possible, and if possible, have an as-yet-undetermin ed 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 establishe d for grains and processed flour, but not for the other commodities used in bakery mixes and cons umer flour mixes (4, 22). One estimate is that over 40% of US flour mills also produce these ite ms and would have them present in largeMay 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 satis fy 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 ba rriers to greater or lesser extents.

Phosphine, CO 2 and heat combination treatment requires approval of regulatory authorities in Canada, but appears to not require separate approva l in the US. (Note that the use of phosphine alone is already approved in both countries.) Th e combination treatment of phosphine, heat, and

CO 2 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 a pproved and no application has been received for its use. Phosphine is allowed to be used, and is used for spot treatme nts in the majority of Israel’s mills. As with any treatment that allows some pest survival, MBTO C 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 repor ts indicate that alternatives cost about the same as methyl bromide, once tailored to site-specific c onditions (12, 20, 26 27, 37). In more temperate environments such as in Canada and the UK, repor ts 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 IP M improvements has reduced costs for some mills (20, 27).

The relevant cost consideration should be the to tal cost of a “pest control system” which would include costs for improved IPM, plant modifications, sealing, protecting sensitive items from damage, removing or isolating fo od products and ingredients if n ecessary, and downtime. At the same time, there may be savings resulting fro m 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 compara tive costs of alternatives in the milling sector. Furthermore, there is not ever likely to be adequa te 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 informati on 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 highe r (1, 5, 8, 11, 17, 21, 28 ) or sometimes, roughlyMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 132 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 switc h to it. Perhaps the millers who have switched

to alternatives found an alternative that co st less in their specific circumstance.

10.6 Environmental, Health and Safety Issues

From a policy perspective, the lik ely increased costs of alternatives should also be viewed in a total environmental perspective. That perspectiv e would evaluate the environmental impacts of continued MB use (and ozone deple tion), evaluated next to other environmental issues such as the GWP of alternatives. However, business finan ces 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 dete rmined effort to switch to alternatives that are not ozone depleting and/or not cont ributing to global warming (4).

Governments take environmental, health and saf ety 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, h ealth 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 fro m 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 considerab ly 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 exch ange 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 ca ses the adoption of MBTOC’s standard dosage rateMay 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 alterna tives, 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, includi ng 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 re quested further information). MBTOC has

commented that no more than one annual fumi gation with MB, (and hopefully fewer) can be likely be justified at this time. MBTOC believ es that Canadian environmental conditions would result in less pest pressure in Canadian mills (c ompared 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 t echniques 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 mi xes 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

YearsMethyl Bromide (Tonnes) Israel

0 0.5

1 1.5

2 2.5

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

YearsMethyl Bromide (Tonnes)

USA

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

YearsMethyl Bromide (Tonnes)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 134 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 22.878 1

Israel 2.14 1.49 1.04 0.312 0.3 2

USA 302.704 289.39 274.65 240.765 212.352 144.789 3

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 incl uded 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 we re 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: Me g Seki, UNEP Senior Scientific Affairs Officer (meg.seki@unep.org)

1. Adam. B. 2008. Cost comparison of meth yl bromide and ProFume for fumigating a food processing facility. A report to National Pest Ma nagement Association and Dow AgroSciences. Economic Consulting LLC.

This economic analysis covers both food pro cessing and cocoa bean SF economics. The summary here only includes the food processing issues. Speci fically, the author examined fumigation costs for a food processing facility of size 1 Million ft 3 . 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’ wo uld allow for egg survival and would result in dissatisfied customers. All fumigations were a ssumed to be 24 hours (plus set up and aeration times). Data for this study was gathered from in terviews 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 ft 3 and the MB use rate was 1.5 lb/K ft 3 . Adams reported the cost of MB was US$7.00/lb
and the cost of SF was US$5.00 – 7.00/lb. An anal ysis of chemical costs relative to insect speciesMay 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 f aster aeration time. The author presented tables which showed the impact on total fumigation cost s 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 ft 3, 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 Associa tion. Email to Michelle Marcotte concerning the number of flour mills in the United States.

Bair reports that the number of flour mills in th e US is slightly fewer than 200, spread across 38

states.

3. Bair J. 2008. North American Millers Associ ation. Email to Michelle Marcotte. March 12.

Provided clarification that obtaining data on SF use in mills was difficu lt 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 Associ ation. Notes of conversation with Michelle

Marcotte. March 12

Conversation was held to clarify label and othe r 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 assess ment 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 fu migated and says that if a food is not listed it may not be fumigated (standard pesticide regulator y 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 ‘impra ctical’. Pet Food Industry received a letter from EPA clarifying that incidental should be defi ned 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 unliste d foods as long as those foods are not the actual target of fumigation. Millers are concerned a bout that interpretation because EPA, or the State Dept., which does the enforcement, may decide th e use was illegal (after it was used or food distributed). There are very large legal and mark et repercussions arising from the illegal use of pesticides on foods (US mill sector can point to so me 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 corpora tions, 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 thenMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 136 described the increase in SF required to be used at various fumigation temperatures, but to provide more detail, later sent an SF Fumi guide printout to illustrate.

5. Bair J. 2008. North American Millers Associa tion. Email to Michelle Marcotte and attached sample SF Fumiguide printout showing dosages at various temperatures. March 12.

NAMA submitted four more documents for this st udy (all of which were reviewed, summarized and included as references): EPA letter from Ha zen 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 review ed 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-Gro wn 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 3078m 3 and one 6600m 3 and discussed heat treatment methods. The report recommends that a temperature of 50°C be ach ieved 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 conc rete 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 trea tments 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. Furt her it reviews pest control methods but places more extensive emphasis on heat treatment. Mo st 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 presen ce of insects or insect fragments. Further, buyers may also impose major penalties for insect infestation. St ructural 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 hour s 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 requir es 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 pest s and life stages. The authors note that better targeted treatments and predictive models may r esult 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 am ounts 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 ha ve 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 vers us full site treatments were compared; in flour mills for example, spot heat treatment could be c onsidered 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 sprinkle rs and mill equipment is rated to withstand 95°C. (MBTOC notes that this setting may cause c oncern to fire prevention officials since the usual sprinkler setting is 165°F or 76°C.) Nevert heless 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 ma y 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 th e 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 combina tion with diatomaceous ear th (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 treat ments, 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 pa id to the problem of achieving adequate temperature on cement floors, floor-wall joints and other difficult to heat surfaces. The use ofMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 138 heaters, fans and heated floor mats were all ob served 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 s hould 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 – 700m 3 of space depending on mill size and temperature will be n eeded. On upper floors, perforated polyethylene ducts can be used to target hot air on floor-w all 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 ai r. 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 Ma nager, Brighton Mills. Letter to Dow AgroSciences.

This company expressed their satisfaction with th e 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 thei r fumigator to improve conditions in the mill to make further fumigations more successful, and sin ce then they have been pleased with the results. They formerly measured the success of methyl br omide 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 resu lt, 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 intens ive 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 fari ne de ble.) Ottawa Canada.

This report summarizes a joint project of the Cana dian National Millers Association, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), and fumigation companies who conducted tests at several mill facilities in Canada. Science aspects were mana ged 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 t echnical efficacy data resulting from: five heat trials (in three mills); four SF trials (four m ills); one benchmark MB trial; and one phosphine,

CO 2 and heat combination trial (one mill). Some of the trials were conducted prior to pesticide registration under agreement of the Pest Manage ment 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 si zes 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 fr ee trade environment). Millers and fumigators have trialled phosphine (combina tion method), sulfuryl fluoride and heat. The low dose ofMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 139 phosphine needed to avoid equipment damage requir es that the temperature be raised in the mill; this combination treatment requires regulatory appr oval 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 h as to be completely emptied of all grain and finished product, or with bins sealed off. Th e lack of MRLs for fluoride residues has made adoption of this alternative difficult. Three supplie rs of heat equipment are present in Canada and

trials have been conducted on a ll equipment types (as reported in the 2004 report). The main difficulties in using heat include lack of boiler capacity (resulting in the n eed for either purchased or rented heaters), inadequate electrical capac ity for the heat equipment, and fire protection systems that are incompatible with the heat tr eatments. 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 populati ons 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 fumiga nt 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 conduc ted many successful fumigations with SF, in terms of pest control efficacy and because th e 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 th e 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 increase s fumigation costs. Gas loss results from leaks through cracks, crevices and other build ing 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 predic t 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 sta tistically indistinguishable. Wind conditions in California and Texas, the location of the commercia l 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 140 14. Dow AgroSciences. 2006. Comments of Dow AgroSciences LLC on protection of stratospheric ozone” The 2008 critical use exemp tion 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 f 3 , whereas the commercial use rate for SF is 2

lbs/1000 ft 3 . 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 w ith 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 fumigant s and that SF fumigations have been conducted all year round in various US regions. They i ndicate 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 ot her flour milling companies are available to assist the not-adopting compani es (pages 7-8).

15. Dow AgroSciences. Undated (likely 2004). Op timizing Operations: Six year study at rice facility demonstrates value of precision fumi gation practices. Dow AgroSciences brochure.

This paper discusses the knowledge gained from si x 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 failu re, 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 revi ewed the improvements made to sealing and to reduce fumigant concentration variability through out 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 Pr oFume. 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 th eir 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 ru nning 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, provi ding a very extensive re port. 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 surveyMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 141 responses, which will be attached to this refere nce 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; su lfuryl fluoride (sometimes with supplemental heat); phosphine (sometimes with supplemental heat); phosphine heat and CO 2 (in combination); hydrogen cyanide; insecticides; heat; cold (in fo rm of dry ice); and mechanical treatment of finished products. Mills were asked to report th eir 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. Severa l 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 re gistered 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 La boratory (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 Interna tional 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 describ ed 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). A lthough 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 el ectronic equipment may have to be removed or enclosed with cool air. Some plastics may wa rp with the heat. Fire extinguishers should be

removed before the heat treatment. As with fu migation, 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 th e 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 cond itions. The author responded that even in Central Ontario in November with outside temperatures as low as 0°C, temperatures in an operating millMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 142 are still above 20°C. In cold conditions the difficu lties with a heat treatme nt include extra time and extra costs to reach sufficient temps, especia lly on outside walls. One solution is to preheat the facility to 25°C, while the facility is operati ng 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 tr eatment took too long and was stopped early because the facility needed to resume operations. To lear n 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 struct ures 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 sa tisfied with the efficacy. Costs to the customers of sulfuryl fluoride were similar; six commerc ial 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 th e 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 af ter 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 Nationa l Millers Association. Co sts 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 consider ation. 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 la ter 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 Step hen Payne, Vice President Pet Food Institute.

November 8.

Clarifies that pet foods are not listed among the f oods 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 fu migation of negligible amounts of a commodityMay 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 targ eted 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 fu migation.” (Page 1). The letter further clarifies that (pertaining to pet foods and other unlisted f oods), “You are correct in your interpretation that the label would require all finished product and th e 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 sp aces 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 mi nute quantities and these will receive incidental fumigation. To be conservative in assessing the hea lth 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 h eat 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/nat ural gas heaters to positively pressurize the structure to be heat treated. Monitoring is eff ected with wireless temperature transmitters and proprietary software. In the United States they ha ve 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 Ai r 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 sometim es 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 par tial heat treatments; no extensive sealing of structure; ability to detect pockets of infest ation during the heat treatment and allowing for corrective action (such as crack and crevice treatme nt). 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 144 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 CO 2 (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 fumiga tors and they have substituted several hundred thousand pounds of methyl bromide with alternativ es. 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 co sts are amortized over more fumigations and become insignificant. Furthermore, using SF according to the supplier’s required methods improves safety and provides improved observati ons 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 fumiga tions 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 on e 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 whic h is undated but covers work done in 2005. Pest Control in the Italian food in dustry: 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 En glish. 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 m 3 mill now uses sulfuryl fluoride. The owner considers it as effective as methyl br omide. Annual SF fumigation is supplemented by the use of phosphine in the grain silo and by c ontact 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 el ements 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 deci sion. 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 CO 2 . 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. Glo bal 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 fumiga tions reported in this pa per, 85 wheat mills and warehouses were fumigated in 81 fumigations. Th is 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 es timated 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 highe r 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 environmen tal 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 a nd 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 stru ctures of 426 structures known to date have not met customer expectations. When considering this re ported 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 146 32. ProFume. Applicator Manual. Dow AgroSciences.

This label is the legal document upon which the u se 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 ingr edients commonly used in bakery mixes such as dried eggs, shortenings, leavenings, additives et c. Under Facility Fumigation Restrictions the following is written, “Special care should be ta ken 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. Howe ver 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 Fed eral Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry and Institute for Stored Product Protection. Germany.

Emailed comments on effect of heat treatm ent in large structures, and efficacy problems associated with sulfuryl fluoride treatment. [C.Reichmuth@BBA.DE].

Structures of volumes greater than 5000 m 3 are difficult to treat with heat, so SF has taken over the fumigation of larger buildings. Problems w ith 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 ask ed if, in time, pest resistance might result from using the dosage which allows egg survival. Anot her 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 treatmen t 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 unde restimated. But heat treatment companies and fumigation companies were improving their understanding and the results. Advises against making a treatment choice based on cost comparis on because the treatment should be selected for its appropriateness for the situation and one treatme nt 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 hiri ng of new staff devoted to hygiene. Also, in heat treatment trials in Spain, surviving pests we re 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 fl uoride 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 me thyl 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, temper ature during fumigation ranged from 24-35°C and 30°C in the two mills. Dosage was 571-1326 g h/m 3 in one fumigation and 678 -822 g h/m 3 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/m 3 and 274.0 – 476.5 g h/m 3
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 th e 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 fi rst 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 incons istencies in reported costs for SF fumigation. For example, without having had the actual fumigation e xperience, 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 cons idered 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 fu migation, following a 20.5 h fumigation, plus 3 hr aeration at 25.6 °C (78°F), 100% of red flour bee tle adults were killed (e gg results not reported), IMM egg kill was 98.3% + 1.7% and egg mortality of ware house beetle was 95.3%+ 2.6%. The author reports that in the US alone 130 co mmercial SF fumigations took place between 2004 and 2006, including a total of 53 wheat mills. Concer ning 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 rebo und 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 pe r hour per cubic foot of the area being treated

based on his research and the use of the Heat Tr eatment Calculator of Kansas State University.

This Calculator and heat mode ls should be used to decrease the cost and time and increase the efficacy of facility heat treatments.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 148 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 mi nutes 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 achiev ed at all humidity levels tested when 50°C was achieved for 50 minutes or more. Since the prem ise 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 conduc ted 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 r esults 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 me thyl 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 p ests outside the mills indicate significant pest pressure both before and after the fumigations, w ith 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 popul ations dropped to zero in the first week and only 3 were trapped by the 4 th week after fumigation.

Following the MB fumigation, IMM indoor populati on rebounded to pre-fumi gation 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 6 th week post fumigation for one facility but in another MB tr eated facility remained low (<25 per two week period).

Both fumigants resulted in 100% mortality of larv al and adult stages of both species. Mortality of fumigant-exposed pest eggs was measured pos t fumigation in the lab. Egg mortality was measured in two ways, depending on egg hatch c ounts, and whether hatched eggs survived butMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 149 failed to live to adulthood. SF fu migated 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 RF B 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 hatche d 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 di fficult to control. However at higher SF CT (606 oz/Mcf) there was no problem to control all life stages.

Populations in all facilities rebounde d 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 Ce nsus 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 Ji m 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 Ma naging 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 temperat e climates when using CTP in range of 700ghr it is essential to maintain temperatures of 30°C pl us 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 versu s 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 co st 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.)May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 150 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 regul atory 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, St afford County Flour Mills Co. Letter to Dow AgroScience.

The quality control director of this flour mill re ported 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 brom ide. 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 E fficacy, Costs and Adoption of Methyl Bromide Alternatives in Flour Mills” was written by the Methyl Bromide TOC, Subcommittee on Quarantine, Structures and Commodities (QSC); th is 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. Especi ally 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 resu lts of their work provided the backbone of the

treatment recommendations made here.

ProFumeTM and FumiguideTM are trademarks of Do w 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 Us e Nominations for Methyl Bromide

and Related Matters

11.1 Scope of the Report

This 2008 interim report provides initial evaluati ons by MBTOC of CUNs submitted for methyl bromide in 2009 and 2010 by Parties in accord ance with Decision IX/6 (Appendix II). CUNs were submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by the Pa rties, 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 fo r 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 in clude 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

19 th 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 brom ide 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 appropria te 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 la ck of financial and expert resources, institutional capacity, and information. Non-Article 5 Parties must demonstrate that research programmes are in place to develop and depl oy alternatives and substitutes. Article 5 Parties must demonstrate that feasible alter natives 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 iden tifying, evalua ting, adapting and demonstrating such options; ”May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 152 TEAP considers that some nominations are not de monstrating appropriate effort to evaluate,

commercialise and secure national regulatory approval of alterna tives and substitutes, as required by Decision IX/6. In relation to this Decisi on, TEAP considers required effort to include:

• conduct and report on trials, and report effo rts 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 crite ria, 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 Bromid e: 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 appropr iate action (e.g. nominate for cri tical 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 ra pidly, often within 3 years of local availability. In many sectors complete phase out is now possibl e, but transition rates are slowed by specific regulatory and commercial barriers (registration and associated data gathering, commercial constraints to registration for minor uses, certifica tion regulations, buffer zones, lack of MRLs for food commodities) and slow registration of key alte rnatives preventing transition. It is recognised that legitimate environmental and public health concerns contribute to regulatory limits on

alternatives and are a matter of national sove reignty. 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 decl ared 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) a lternatives 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 expor ts) 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 aMay 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 Pr otocol, which all such uses need to meet in order to be granted an exemption. MBTOC provid es 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 D ecision 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 nomin ation 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, MB TOC 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 lo sses presented in some nominations differ markedly from those reported in a large number of studies in similar

circumstances and are not substan tiated by modern references.

Now that alternatives have been identified for mo st applications, regulations on the use of these alternatives and comparative information on th e 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 coul d 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 crite ria of Decision IX/6, MBTOC’s report should explicitly state the central basis for the Part y’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 fro m existing stocks of banked or recycled methyl bromide” (para. 1 (b) (ii)). Parties nomina ting 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 ne gotiation 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 cert ain level of “pipeline” stocks and additional stocks to respond to emergencies. Additionally, st ocks may be held on beha lf of other Parties or for exempt uses (feedstock and QPS uses). The corr ect 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 154

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 companie s: 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 200 5 (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 4 5

. 832 4 5

. 832 4 5

. 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 17 th 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). No t 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) a nd (b) above is thus incomplete.

Tables and figures in this report (Table 11-4, Fi gures 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 156 Table 11-4 in particular shows the amounts nominat ed 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 adopt ed by the same sectors throughout a number of countries, although the rate of adoption has va ried depending on regulations on their use, differences in registration between countries and ot her 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 alte rnatives are presented in previous Assessment Reports (MBTOC 2007). Figures 11-1 and 11-2 in th is 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 ch ange 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 th e 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 recognise d that time is needed to effect phase-in of alternatives and has accepted this as a reasonable technical argument fo r 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 availa ble alternatives. However, whilst some showed a significant reduction in nominated quantity compar ed 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 adopt ion 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 paragr aph 35 of Annex I referred to in Decision XVI/4 states that, “In situations where MBTOC r ecommends a nomination on grounds that it is necessary to have a period for adoption of alte rnatives, 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, estimate d 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 industr ies 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 a lternative 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 A ppendix IV. These regions have similar pests complexes to those requesting CUNs, but may ha ve different regulatory issues. The European Commission also surveyed 12 countries about thei r 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 expect ed 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 tr ends 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 am ounts approved/nominated by Parties for ‘Critical Use’ from 2005 to 2010 for some key uses. The co mplete trends in phase out of MB by country, as indicated by change in CUE, are shown in appendix VMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 158

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

Yearmetric tonnes France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Japan

USA Cutflowers

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Yearmetric 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

Yearmetric tonnes

France

USA Peppers and Eggplant

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

200

5 20 06 200 7 20 08 200 9 20 10

Yearsmetric tonnes Belgium

France

Italy

Japan

Spain

USA Strawberry Fruit

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Yearmetric 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

Yearmetric tonnes Belgiu m

Greece

Italy

USAMay 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 in dicate 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

Yearmetric tonnes Belgium

Canada

France

Germany

Greece

Israel

Italy

UK

USA160May 2008 TEAP Progress ReportTable 11-4 Summary of Critical Use Nomination (2005 – 2010 inpart) and Exemption (2005 – 2009 in part) Amounts of MB GrantedbyParties under the CUN/CUE Process. (Note: A breakdown of CUN and CUE amounts by sector is given in Appendix V)QUANTITIES NOMINATEDQUANTITIES APPROVEDQuantitiesRecommendedPARTY2005 2006 2007 2008200920102005(1ExMOPand16MOP)2006(16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)2007(17MOP+18MOP)2008(18MOP+19MOP)2009(19MOP)20092010Australia 206.950 81.250 52.145 52.900 38.990 37.61 146.600 75.100 48.517 48.45 37.61 29.79Canada 61.992 53.897 46.745 42.241 34.375 36.41 61.792 53.897 52.874 36.112 34.38 2 7.462EuropeanCommunity15754.361 4213.47 1239.873 245.00 0 0 4392.812 3536.755 689.142245.1460 0Israel 1117.156 1081.506 1236.517 952.845 716.877 * 1089.306 880.295 966.715 591.93 0 610.854Japan 748.000 741.400 651.700 589.600 508.90 288.500 748.000 741.400 636.172 443.775 305.38 219.970New Zealand 53.085 53.085 32.573 0 0 0 50.000 42.000 18.234 0 0 0Switzerland 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 0 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 0USA 10753.997 9386.229 7417.999 6415.153 4958.034 3999.473 9552.879 8081.753 6749.060 5355.976 4261.974 3147.274TOTALS 18704.241 15617.837 10677.552 8297.739 6257.176 4361.993 16050.089 13418.200 9160.714 6721.3894639.344 612.854 3404.496* Not yet available.:1Members 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 Kingdom2008 – Poland, SpainMay 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 conc urrently April 14-18, 2008 in Tel Aviv, Israel. This meeting was held as required by the tim e schedule for considerations of CUNs given in Annex I referred to in Decision XVI/4. If required, fu rther meetings to consider further input from nominating Parties on their various CUNs will be he ld 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, Is rael, Japan, USA) submitted nomina tions for either 2009 or 2010. These Parties have submitted nominations in pr evious 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 s ubmitted 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 4 042.582 metric tonnes respectively. In its interim assessment, MBTOC has b een able to recommend a total of 608.454 for 2009 and 3167.335

tonnes for 2010.

MBTOC QSC assessed two new or additional cr itical use nominations for 2009 and seven nominations for 2010, totalling 7.719 and 313.341 metric tonnes resp ectively. 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 recommenda tions 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 pl aced in the ‘unable to assess’ category because

information was insufficient to make an evaluati on, as required under para graph 10 of Annex 1 of the final report of 16 MOP.

In paragraph 20 of Annex 1 referred to in Decisi on XVI/4, Parties, among other things, specifically requested that MBTOC explicitly state the speci fic basis for the Party’s economic statement relating to CUNs. Table 2 provides this informa tion for each CUN. This information was prepared by MBTOC economists.

In general, CUNs resulted mainly from the followi ng 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 tw o years of CUNs. For the most part, technical alternatives exist. Additionally, MBTOC notes th at some Parties continue to struggle with theMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 162 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 re port of 16MOP, and, where relevant, the standard presumptions given below (Table 11-5). In par ticular 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 la rge 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 requ ested by the Parties in Decision XV/4.

For commodity and structural applications, it was assumed that technically and economically feasible alternatives would provide disinfestati on 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 pr ovide superior pest control results than are achieved in practice by MB; economically feasibl e 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 nomin ating Party. Assessments were independent of the size of the nominated quantity. Specific ci rcumstances 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 Di sclosure 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 t hose 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 guidan ce given in the Annex I referred to in Decision XVI/4 where ‘alternatives’ were defined as any prac tice or treatment that can be used in place of methyl bromide. ‘Existing alternatives’ are t hose alternatives in present or past use in some regions; and ‘potential alternatives’ are those a lternatives 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 nom inated for CUNs. Also, adoption in regions with similar climatic zone and cropping practi ces was used as an indication of the feasibility (technical and economic) of an alternative in a simi lar 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 la rge 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 requ ested 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 c onsidered for one or two years in the future. In post-harvest applications, where research is mi nimal, but commercial adoption trials are more common, MBTOC needs Parties and the affected i ndustries 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 disinfestati on 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 pr ovide superior pest control results than are achieved in practice by MB; economically feasibl e alternatives do not necessarily cost the same as

MB.

MBTOC has to be knowledgeable about regulator y 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 importi ng 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 fo r fluoride in several foods, or only in imported

foods as in the case of Canada. Given the newn ess of these announcements, the impact of these publications on actual MB use for 2007 and 2008 was difficult to predict.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 164 11.3.11 Sustainable Alternatives

In a large proportion of CUNs, the most currently appropriate alternatives are chemical fumigant alternatives, which themselves, lik e MB, have issues related to their long term suitability for use. In both the EC and US, MB and most other fumiga nts are involved in rigorous reviews that could affect future regulations over their use for prepla nt 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 ot her 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 restri ctions 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 su stainability 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 th is 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 bo th 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 fu migation, some growers continue to experiment with fumigating every 2 nd or 3 rd year. In some production systems, methyl bromide is already used only every 3 rd or 4 th 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 resu lt 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 dispo sable canisters (i.e. 500 to 750g canisters) for application of MB for preplant soil use under pl astic films under strict worker health guidelines. Canister applications have been eliminated in a ll remaining non-Article 5 Parties as this application

is considered to be less efficient for the contro l of soil-borne pathogens than other methods. The treatment is considered more dangerous to work ers than injection methods, because and generally

treatment does not involve use of trained contractor s. 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 ben eath 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 17 th MOP.

Table 11-5 Standard presumptions used in a ssessment 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 appropria te 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 u sed 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, Cr oatia, 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 r ecommendations for the CUNs submitted in 2008.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report166Table 11-6 Interim evaluations of CUNs for commodity orstructural treatments, submitted in 2008 for 2009 or 2010Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)AustraliaRice6.150 6.150 9.205 9.200 7.820 None - 7.820 NRNot recommended – MBTOC does not recommend the Party’s nomination of 7.820 tonnes for packaged rice. The Party has not adoptedalternatives andaccording to the CUN does not plan to adopt any alternatives until after having had 3 years of high harvests. The CUN indicatesthe rice milling industry isunlikely to begin adopting alternatives until possibly 2013. MBTOC recognises that drought has resulted in severe economic hardship for the applicant,however, alternatives for this MB use include phosphine and controlled atmospheres; they are registered and commercially available for this application.Alternatives to MB are technically and economically feasible andin use in many other countries for this product. Phosphine treatment could be completed undertarps or in containers in the yard without the construction ofnew silos. Controlled atmosphere is used for packaged rice in Greece and Thailand. These facilitiesare 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. Estimated costs for up to 100silos would be $Aus47 million. CUN states itwould involve three years of transition,potentially complete in 2013. However, CUN does not provide annual costof this capital expenditure. Even if borrowing or raising external capital is not feasible, thecalculations of the annual costhave to be based on the amortisedcapital cost over the economic life of the investmentCUN describes trials of alternatives, two of which, namely colddisinfestation and ‘packaging alteration with oxygen scavenging’ are regarded as economicallyinfeasible. In the former case, party expects costs to exceed $Aus100 million plus an unknown cost for electricity. In the latter case, party argues that operatingcosts increase from $Aus34 per tonne to over $Aus119 per ton.CanadaMills47(includedmills andpasta)34.774 30.167(includedmills only)28.650 26.913 None - 22.878 UMBTOC is unable to assess the nomination of 22.878 tonnes for treatment of particular flour mills in Canada in 2010. The amountrequested in 2010 representsa 15.3% decrease over the amount granted bythe Parties for 2009, but in this sector,trials of alternatives can replace a methyl bromide treatment. Sulfurylfluoride as an alternative fumigant to methyl bromide has only recently become available for use in mills in Canada, and it issubject to ongoing trials. Its use isconstrained by lack of tolerances for residues in foodstuffs thatmay be present in mills, and noteasily removed. Heat systemscontinue to be used and tested,both as whole-site treatments and as part ofIPM systems. In order to allow an assessment, additional data are requested on number of mills involved in thisnomination and the frequency of fumigations with MB in them. MBTOC will reassess this nomination and requests the Party to provide an MB volume adjustedto permit frequency for MB fumigation not exceeding once per yearand demonstrating adoption of available alternatives. Only one MB fumigation per yearshould be necessary in Canada where pest pressure from sourcesexternal to the mills is expected to be less than that experienced in regions with longerperiods of warmth and humidity conducive to pest activity. Infestation is managed, both in Canada and elsewhere, by other approaches so as to avoid the needfor additional treatments.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report167Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN statesthe use of alternatives and associated building modifications would add 2 to 4 percent to manufacturingcosts that would be passed to Canadian consumers whose use accounts for 80% of annual shipments of milled grain products. Alsostated that there is noprogram for government financial assistance to millers. MBTOCnotes that lack of government financial assistance programs hasnot been a consideration inassessments of economic feasibility. CUN did not provide detaileddata on estimation of the 2%-4% cost increase. Regardless ofexact amount, the CUNsuggests milled grain product market relationships are such thatadded costs would be borne in large part by consumers. In turn, this suggests that if technicaland regulatory barriers to adoption of alternatives can be overcome, the Party will have no basis to then assert economic infeasibility.CanadaPasta(seeCanadamills)10.457 6.757 6.067 None5.3192MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 2.0 tonnes for pasta mills in Canada for 2009. This provision is to allow treatment of any one of the three pasta mills inthis CUN with methyl bromide, as part of orderly transition to alternatives. This volume of methyl bromide is recommended for use, if it should happen that analternative treatment failed, or if MB isrequired for food storage areas ifno other alternative is suitable or available. Interim reports submitted concerning SFtrials done late in 2007 have demonstrated some effectiveness inthese facilities. It is clear that additional experience withthis fumigant is required in thesepremises to optimise efficacy. It may be that moderate supplemental heating will be required to improve effectiveness of the SFtreatments against the eggstage of pests. Further SF trials are scheduled in 2008. In thissector, trials of alternatives can replace a MB treatment. Useof sulfuryl fluoride is only permittedin areas that do not contain raw commodity or foodstuffs, as there is currently no residue tolerance in Canada for fluorine inthese materials arising from SFtreatments. In this recommendation, it isassumed that pest control in parts of the premises containing product and raw materials (e.g. finished product stores)can be carried out to an appropriate standard without resort tofumigation and the areas can be isolated from the SF fumigationof the main processing areas.Heat treatments, either as full site or spot heat treatments may also be considered for these facilities as part of their IPM program. Heat has proven technicallyfeasible in pasta facilities elsewhere (e.g. Italy) (Nomisma 2006).(Nomisma. 2006 plus executive summary which is undated but coverswork done in 2005. Pest Control in the Italian food industry:Selected case studies.)Summarized in the flour milling report of the 2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report. The Party is referred to the flour milling review report published in the2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report for technical information onthe conduct of spot heat treatments and recommendations toimprove technicalefficacy of SF treatments.MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The Economicfeasibility section is marked N/A. Elsewhere it is asserted that heat is roughly twice the cost of MB.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report168Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)IsraelDates3.444 2.755 2.200 1.800None 2.100 2.100MBTOC recommends a CUE of 2.1 tonnes for dates in 2009 associatedwith rapid treatment of fresh dates at time of harvest. Thisrepresents an increase of 0.3tonnes over the amount of MB granted by the Parties for 2008. The increase in methyl bromide is due to projected increase in harvest of date varieties for whichheat or other treatments have not yet been developed. Israel continues an active research programme to resolve technical, logistical and economic difficultiesand adapt heat treatment for the non-Medjool varieties. If upcoming research on either heat or ethyl formate and carbon dioxide result in effective methods,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 feasibility studies still have to becarried out to determine the efficacy of thermal treatment on other varieties. No economic data is provided.IsraelFlour mills2.140 1.490 1.040 0.312 None 0.300 0.300MBTOC recommends a CUE of 0.3 tonnes for flourmills in 2009 as a one year transitionto spot heat treatment or expanded use ofphosphine. This representsa decrease of 0.012 tonnes over the amount ofMB granted by the Parties for 2008. Mills in Israel are not considered suitable for full site treatments due to ageand condition. Spot heat treatmenthas been determined to be effective for older mills in Israel. Techniques have been developed to assure its efficacy. Portableheat equipment has been purchased by a pestcontrol operator and is in commercial use inthe circumstances of this nomination.More equipment has alreadybeen ordered for import. For this reason MBTOC sees a need for oneyear to transition to heat. Additionally, phosphine is in use in most mills and its use couldbe expanded. Improvements in IPM and sanitation would improve pestcontrol in Israel mills. MBTOC sees no reason for continuedMB use in Israel flour millsafter the transition to heat or phosphine is made by 2010. TheParty is referred to the flour milling review report published in the 2008 MBTOC/TEAP SpringProgress Report for technical information on the conduct of spotheat treatments and recommendations to improve technical efficacy of alternatives.MBTOC comments on economics: CUN argues thatthe alternative used in North America andNorthern Europe of heating the entire mills is not economicallyfeasible in Israel because most of the millsare more than 20 years old, with poor structural upkeep of the mills and so thermal insulation is not possible.Furthermore, heating equipment is not available because of the small size of the market. However, the CUN argues that new spotheat techniques have becomeavailable from Canada, and thatthese are economically feasible. No economic data is provided.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report169Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)JapanChestnuts7.100 6.800 6.500 6.300 5.800 None - 5.400 5.400MBTOC recommends a CUE of 5.4 tonnes, the amount nominated for fresh chestnuts for 2010.This represents a 0.4 tonne decrease in MB nomination over theamount granted by the Parties for 2009. An extensive research program has resulted in the findingthat methyl iodide treatmentis technically effective for thisuse, and registration has been applied for. The registration process is progressing appropriately. Japan has set an acceptabledaily intake of methyl iodide of0.0034 mg/kg body weight. Progress has been made in improving the logistics of treatment to ensurethe use of MB is minimised while awaiting registrationresults. MBTOC knows of no other effective alternative treatment for fresh chestnuts.MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN statesthat, for economic feasibility evaluation,it is prerequisite for economic evaluation that a technically feasiblealternative exists. In fact there is no technically feasible alternative, and accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out.UnitedStatesCommodities89.166 87.719 78.983 58.921 45.623 None -43.007 1.984, U,U,NRMBTOC is unable to assess this nomination in total for treatmentof dry commodities, but can give recommendations for some parts of it. The Party nominated43.007 tonnes for the four subsectors included in this CUN. At this time, MBTOC recommends a CUE of 1.984 tonnes for 2010 for the component of thisnomination relating to pest control treatmentof (1) dried beans directly after harvest. It is unable to assess the componentsconcerned with rapid treatment of (2)walnuts and (3) dry dates at harvest. MBTOC does not recommend the component relating to postharvest protection of (4) dried plums (prunes). (1) Concerningbeans, there are no alternatives immediatelyavailable for rapid disinfestation of dried beans under the circumstances of the nomination, specifically the currenttreatment logistics. Fumigation with phosphine, while registered and effective, requiresa treatment time that is too long to meet current shipping and handlingschedules; and sulfuryl fluoride lacks appropriate registration.There appears to be scope for further reduction in this component of the nomination throughadoption of phosphine fumigation under revised logistics which MBTOC recommends be incorporated in any future CUN. (2) Methyl bromide is used for rapiddisinfestion of in-shell walnuts immediately post-harvest to meet timing requirements of particular export markets in advance of holiday sales periods. However,sulfuryl fluoride can provide treatment in the same length of time. As a result of recent EU decisions, (EU 149/2008 as of September 2008) reducing bromidetolerances and adding fluorine tolerances, there are uncertaintiesthat prevent a firm recommendation on the CUN at this time.The EU is a major market for inshell walnuts. It is likely that the reduced residue tolerancesfor bromide in the main walnut export market may prevent effective use of methyl bromide forwalnuts prior to 2010 and the increased fluoride tolerance may favourthe use of sulfuryl fluoride. The Party is asked to assess the impact of this EU regulatorychange, possibly providing a revised nomination for walnuts. (3)Further information is sought on the need for methyl bromidefor rapid disinfestation of drydates at time of harvest and the applicability of phosphine and sulphuryl fluoride fumigation, and other pest management options, under the circumstances ofthis nomination. The CUN indicates SF trials were conducted inApril 2008. These trials may have demonstrated the applicabilityof SF as a rapid disinfestant fordry dates. Furthermore, part of the crop may be treatable with phosphine at time of harvest. In a reassessment, MBTOC expects to recommend only that portionof the nomination that is involved in rapid treatment immediately after harvest, and that is not replaceable by SF, controlledatmospheres or other processes. (4)In the case of dried plum treatments, theinitial processing (drying) involves exposure to temperatures (>60°C) sufficient to achieve disinfestation. The productmay become infested subsequently during storage and handling. In the absence of need for very rapid disinfestations, this reinfestation (mainly of moths) can bemanaged by currently available systems, particularly phosphine fumigation. Phosphine fumigation is the main technology used inthe dried vine fruit industry withsimilar circumstances to the dried plum industry involved in this nomination. Controlled atmosphere storage and treatment is used by many EU countries for thesame commodities included in this CUN.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report170Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008: CUN provides economic data onalternatives for walnuts and dried fruit other than dates. Phosphine fumigation costsmore because it takes longer to accomplish, leading to increased labor costs, it corrodes equipment and its use means sellers do not meet December holidayexport market window. CUN states walnuts and dried fruit all require substantial additional treatment time and subsequent lostrevenues if phosphine is used.Net revenues for alternatives are negative.CUN states that profit margin decreasesfrom 13.3% to –7.5% for walnuts and from 5%to -16.8% for dried fruits. Aneconomic analysis was not done for dates. In the case of driedbeans, response to MBTOC question states that cost of an additional facility would be $1.2m perunit, but annual costs were not provided.UnitedStatesNPMA foodprocessingstructures(cocoabeansremoved)83.344 69.118 82.771 69.208 54.606 None - 37.778 37.778MBTOC recommends a CUE of 37.778 tonnes, the amount nominated for food processing facilities in 2010. This nomination represents a 30.82% decrease(excluding cocoa beans) over the amount granted by the Parties for 2009. The CUN now includes three sectors, after cocoa bean sector fully transitioned toalternatives in 2009. (1) MBTOC recommends 1.812 tonnes, the nominated amount, for cheese in storage. Cheese stores are only fumigated if USDAinspectors find mites in the cheese. If cheese stores were held at 7 ̊C instead of 10 ̊C, mites would not develop, but it isunknown what effect lowering storagetemperature would have on cheese maturation and quality. MBTOC knows of no effective chemical alternative for this use, but wenote that USG is conductingresearch on the effect of sulfuryl fluoride on mites in cheese. (2) MBTOC recommends 2.439 tonnes, the nominated amount for herb and spice processingfacilities. According to the CUN, 2010 is the final year of a four year transition inherb and spice processing sector. Spot heat treatment of processing machinerywith additional use of barrier methods to prevent pest escape would seem to be a good alternative for this sector. (3) MBTOC recommends 33.527 tonnes, theamount nominated for the processed food sector. This nomination represents a 45% reduction over the amount granted by the Parties for 2009. According to theCUN 2010 is the last year of a 4 year transition to alternativesin processed foods sector. This sector is expecting a registration of methoprene for use inpackaging materials which will assist in achieving post-processing pestcontrol.MBTOC comments on economics 2008: An economicanalysis was not conducted because theCUN reports the sector did not have an alternative registered.For food-processing facilities listed in the NPMA CUN, economic feasibility of such alternatives was not assessed due to the lack of revenue information, whichis necessary to quantify the economic impactsto food-processing facilities. There is a major change to this 2010 nomination from NPMA. An economic studyfound that sulfuryl fluoride is economicallyfeasible for cocoa beans (Adam 2007). Therefore NPMA has not requested methyl bromide for use on cocoa beansfor 2010. Sulfuryl fluoride is not always economically feasiblein all food processing facilities (Adam 2007), therefore that portion of NPMA’s request remains.Adam (2007) conducted a cost comparison of methyl bromide andsulfuryl fluoride in the fumigation of cocoa beans. It is an economic-engineering approach,which estimates of costs that “typical” firms would face under different scenarios (Adam 2007). Adam (2007) found that with regards to cocoa beans, if themethyl bromide and sulfuryl fluoride are the same price per pound,then a sulfuryl fluoride fumigation costs 1% less than a methyl bromide. Sulfuryl fluoride ismore 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 maynot be the product of choicebecause of increased heating costs. Also sulfuryl fluoride requires higher dosages for egg kill, and in many facilities killing eggs is paramount; this also maylead to higher costs. Cheese does not have a technically and economically feasible alternative to methyl bromide at this time.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report171Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)UnitedStatesMills andprocessors483.000 461.758 401.889 348.237 291.418 None - 191.993 187.534MBTOC recommends a CUE of 187.534 tonnes in total for use in USfood processing structures (rice mills, dry pet food producersand flour mills) 2010. TheCUN nominated 191.993 tonnes for the three sectors. The CUN represented a 35.6% decrease in MB requested over the amount granted by the Parties for2009. In part this large percent decrease resulted from the bakery sector (formerly included in this category), which will complete its transition to alternatives in2009 and did not request MB for 2010. Bakery sector is commended for its work to adopt alternatives. In addition, rice mill sector also decreased 70% in oneyear, for which it is also commended. (1) For rice mills, MBTOC recommends the nominated amount of 14.511 tonnes. The remainingMB use is for rice millsthat contain food mixes for which contact with SF, the alternative largely adopted bythis sector, is not registered. (2) For pet food facilities, MBTOCrecommends 13.722 tonnes, the nominated amount. The sector has decreased its MB nomination 37.5% over 2009 levels. Since the registration for SFtreatment of pet food facilities does not include pet food commodity and ingredients, there is a registration barrier to the use of SF in some circumstances. Petfood facilities could, however, expand use of full site or spotheat treatment, utilising appropriate pest barrier methods to prevent pest escape from spot heattreatments. (3) For flour mills, MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of144.789 tonnes. The sector nominated a 23% decrease, as partof its orderly transition toalternatives. MBTOC further decreased the nomination because the CUN included an averageof 2.5 MB fumigations per mill, including those 58% of mills thatUSG believes can transition to alternatives, because they do notproduce food mixes. MBTOC believes the frequency of fumigationcan be reduced. Theregistration for SF treatment of flour millsdoes not include treatment of some food mixes and ingredients that may be held inside the treated structure.Consequently, there is a registration barrier tothe use of SF in 42% of mills according to the CUN. During this time when suchprocessed foods are notregistered for SF treatment, mills could increase their adoption ofheat treatment. MBTOC notes that US researchers have considerable information available toassist millers to accomplish successful heat and IPM treatments. The quantity recommended for this sector, 144.790 tonnes, wascalculated assuming 42% ofthe nomination (68.79 tonnes) was unable totransition at this time and needed thenominated frequency of treatment, while the58% of treatments that couldtransition could reduce their treatment frequency with MB from 2.5 to 2x a year(95.0*2/2.5 tonnes). The three sectors includedin this CUN are expected to workto improve treatment logistics that improve product segregation so that more adoptionof alternatives can be accomplished evenif regulatory barriers to the useof SF persist. When conducting SF fumigations where food mixesare present, the applicant could test covering the food with a tarp under positive pressure orremoving food ingredients and mixes to non-fumigated areas or sealing off stored product warehouses to allow SF treatment of facility while ensuring that foodis not exposed. The Party is referred to the flour milling reviewreport published in the 2008 MBTOC/TEAP Spring Progress Report for technical information onthe conduct of heat treatments and recommendations to improve technical efficacy of SF treatments.MBTOC comments on economics: The CUN reportsheat will cost 1.5 times and sulfuryl fluoride costs 1.3 times the cost of MB treatment. Heat treatment isreported to result in lost operating days and thus lower throughput and gross revenues. Where sulfuryl fluoride is technicallyfeasible it results in loss of netrevenue of 57% (rice millers), but only 4% (bakeries) and 2% (pet food manufacturers and NorthAmerican Millers Association). Profit margins were added to theeconomic assessment. Sulfuryl fluoride is highly dependent upon temperature, so should a facility need fumigation during cold temperatures, it may not be theproduct of choice because of the increase in costs. Also sulfuryl fluoride requires higher dosages for egg kill, but in some facilities killing eggs is paramount,again contributing to higher costs. The CUN cites a new study that compares methyl bromide structural fumigation to an alternative. This paper uses aneconomic-engineering approach to estimate costs that “typical”firms would incur under alternative scenarios, as opposed to specific firms and situations (Adam2007).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report172Industry Quantityapprovedfor 2005(ExMOP1andMOP16Quantity approvedfor 2006 (MOP 16+ExMOP2+MOP17)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for2009(additionalor new)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for2010 (new)UnitedStatesCured pork67.907 40.854 18.998 19.66918.998 None - 4.465 4.465MBTOC recommends a CUE of 4.465 tonnes for specific cured (air-dried) pork products in 2010. This CUN has decreased by 14.533 tonnes over the amountgranted by the Parties for 2009. The USG is in the second of athree year multi-disciplinary research program to try to find non-MB methods to control mites inthis traditional cured pork product and associated storage houses. No chemical alternatives are registered for pest control inthese products. Although MBTOCdoes not know of methods that have been published as effective forthis situation. In the interestof contributing to researchideas, we can suggest: low oxygencontrolled atmosphere; or dipping the hams in oil and lardat 90oC as practised in Spain with a similar product.MBTOC comments on economics: No economic datagiven. This is a minor use and there is little economic incentive to develop alternatives.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/m 2 )) 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 174 Unusually large buffer zone restrictions on fumigant alternatives, particularly limit their adoption, especially in Israel. MBTOC urges Parties to cons ider 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 alterna tives for propagation materi als 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 th ese 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 ad dition to registration of iodomethane in the US, recent permits for methyl iodide use for tria ls in Australia look promising for commercial registration.

MBTOC also notes that a large proportion of MB h as 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 impo sed on the use of barrier films, which can reduce MB dosage. Also regulations on alternatives are pr eventing their uptake for a substantial proportion of the remaining CUNs for preplant soil use. MB TOC urges the Parties to align their local policies and regulations with inte rnationally 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 ar e 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 17 th MOP. They were revised for some sectors after acceptance by the Parties at the 19 th 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 ra te of MB in MB/Pic formulations is shown in

Table 11-9 below.

As in the evaluations in previous years, MBTO C considered reductions to quantities of MB in particular nominations to a standard rate per tr eated 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/m 2 ), in conjunction with low barrier permeability films (e.g., VIF or equivalent), combined with extended expos ure periods. Several Parties indicated that 250 kg/ha (25g/m 2 ) of 98:2 were effectively used in standa rd 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 ra tes of either 150 or 17 5 kg MB/ha (15.0 - 17.5 g/m 2 ) where nutgrass is the key pest a nd 125 or 150 kg/ha (12.5 - 15 g/m 2 ) 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 ma ximum rate of 200 kg/ ha (20 g/m 2 ) for certified nursery production. However, several Parties indicated that rates of 200 kg/ha (20g/m 2 ) or less (Appendix IV) of MB: Pic 50:50 were effective with barri er films for production of ‘certified’ nursery

material.

The indicative rates used by MBTOC were maximu m 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 guidelin e rates for MB:Pic 98:2 25 to 35 g/m 2 with barrier films (VIF or equivalent);

for mixtures of MB/Pic 12.5 to 17.5 g MB/m 2 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

materialMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 176 Table 11-9 Maximum dosage rates for preplant soil use of MB by sector used in the 2008 round.

Maximum MB Dosa g e Rate ( g /m 2 ) 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 certif ication specifies otherwise

Table 11-10 Actual dosage rates applied during preplant fumigation when different rates and formulations of methyl bromide/chloropicrin mixt ures are applied with and without barrier films. Rates of application reflect standard commercial applications rates.

MB/Pic formulation (dose of MB in g/m 2 ) 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 (Appe ndix VI) show that a dosage of 10g/m 2 (e.g. MB/Pic 50:50 at 200kg/ha with LP Barrier Films) is technica lly feasible for many situations and equi valent to the standard dosage of >20g/m 2 using standard films

11.5.4 Meta-analysis update

In response to Decision XVI/5, which provided fi nancial 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 alte rnatives for pre-plant fumigation (Porter et al, 2006).

This report provides the Parties with a techni cal 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 pa thogen 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 regist ered 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 th e outcomes for these other crops. The meta-analysisMay 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 barri er 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 es timated 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-d ichloropropene/ chloropicrin), TC35 and TC35ECMNa (TC35 EC combined with metham s odium) 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 we re 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 ava ilable anymore, most treatments did not contain this particular product. Several treatments, PicM Na (chloropicrin combined with metham sodium), 1,3D/Pic in combination with a range of herb icides and MI60 (methyl iodide/chloropicrin) (not registered), provided results similar to MB/Pic 67:33.

Decision XIX/9 reads “ To note the importance of trans parency 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 cha nges 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 ma ny alternatives, together with many others obtained from scientific journals, conference pr oceedings, published re ports and others, to substantiate and support its recommendations. No cha nge 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 meth yl bromide is authorized for critical-use exemptions, the use of emission minimization tec hniques 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 technol ogies, such as use of LPBF, including VIF, or other appropriate sealing and emission control tec hniques including deep injection of MB, use of formulations with a lower proportion of MB a nd/ 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 h as occurred, e.g. Israel and SE USA. In Florida, the use of barrier films in vegetable crops e xpanded to over 30,000 acres in 06/07 and continued expansion has been reported throughout SE USA si nce 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 th e alternatives. This regulationMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 178 has been set over concerns of possible worker expos ure 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 contro lling 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 form ulations 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/m 2 ) of 30:70 or 100 kg/ha (10 g/m 2 ) of 50:50 MB/Pic in conjunction with barrier films as these have show n 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/m 2 ) of MB 98% using standard polyethylene.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report179Table 11-11 Final evaluations of CUNs for preplant soil use submitted in 2007 for 2008 or 2009Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)AustraliaStrawberryrunners35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 None - 29.790 29.790MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 29.790 tonnes for this use in 2010. Thekey pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungi(Phytophthora, Pythium, Rhizoctonia, Verticillium) and weeds (S. arvensis, Agrostis tenuis, Raphanusspp, Poa annua, Cyperusspp). The CUN states thatMB/Pic 50:50 at a MB dose of 25 g/m2is required to meet certificationstandards. The Party’s request exceedsMBTOC’s standard presumption of 20 g/m2butthis rate is not currently registered. The Party is conductingfield scale testing to confirm earlier small scale plot trials,which demonstrated no reduction in efficacyat a MB rate of 12.5 g/m2. If successful, adoption could occur in 2010. The Party statesthat the most promising alternative, methyl iodide/chloropicrin has beendemonstrated in small scale trials to compare with the efficacy to MB/Pic. Commercial scale-up trials are in progress and couldlead to registration in 2009/2010.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 g/m2with barrier films and (2) toexpedite the registration of the iodomethane/Pic (MI/Pic), and(3) to continue the pilot testing of soilless production of thefoundation generation of runners withcommercial adoption possible in 2011.MBTOC comments on economics 2008: The nomination was not based oneconomic arguments. Economic statements provided in CUN.CUN statesthat the Victoria Strawberry Industry Certification Authority is developing a two-yearresearch program to investigate the feasibility of moving to soilless productionof foundation generation runners, but notes that, while this may be feasiblefor the tens of thousandsof runners for the foundation generation, it will not befeasible for the scaled up production of millions of certified runners required for the industry as a whole. Research on alternatives in this latter respect iscontinuing. No economic arguments or data are provided.CanadaStrawberryrunners (PEI)6.840 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.462 None - 7.462 7.462MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a CUE of 7.462 tonnes for 2010. The nomination states that MB/Pic 67:33 ata dose of 500 kg/ha (50 g/m2) isrequired to meet the certification standards for strawberry runners, which exceeds MBTOC’s standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2); however the lower rateis not currently registered. PMRA requiresdata that demonstrates thatthe reduced rate is efficacious with LPBF before registering the lower rate. MBTOC notesthat no progress has been made in more than three years on testing with LPBF and expects that future nominations will show reports of trials in order to satisfythe criteria of Decision IX/6. The Partyhas attempted to replace MB with 1,3-D,but 1,3-D was banned in January 2003 due to groundwater contamination. Thepermit for Chloropicrin 100 is still pending approval at PEI, eventhough Canada registered Pic in 2007. No studies on other potential alternative fumigants, suchas Pic, DMDS, MI/Pic have taken place . MBTOC expects that futurenominations will also demonstrate significant progress with key alternatives. MBTOCencourages the Party (1) to finalize the permits necessary for use of chloropicrin and dazomet, (2) implement the use of LPBF,which are currently usedworldwide and (3) in the absence of an effective alternative becoming available, conduct the necessary trials to support a lower application rate of MB to conformwith MBTOC’s standard presumption, (4) provide assessment on the suitability of soillesscultures for at least part of the production cycle.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:No economic arguments or data providedMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report180Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Israel Broomrape None None 250.000250.000 None125.000 125.000MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 125 tonnes for 2009, which represents 50% ofthe requested amount . The Party has informed MBTOC, that theproject 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 insequence with metham sodium arepromising and that registration is expected in 2009. If 1,3-D is registered, MBTOC anticipates that there will be uptake of this alternative and appropriate reductionin the use of MB. The nomination is eradication of broomrape and land rehabilitation of 500 ha in the Golan Heights. The recommended CUE is based on a doseof 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of MB:Pic 98:2 using LPBF. MB will be used only once in thisregion and the treatment is expected to bring the weed population below thedisease threshold allowing for adoption of other alternatives. The Party has identified some alternatives for controlling low infestations ofOrobanche(e.g.solarization) but they are considered not adequate for controlling severe infestations ofO. aegyptiaca. In 2007, five field trials werecarried out with sulfosulfuron,imazapic, and imazomox. MBTOC acknowledges that a registration for chloropicrin is being considered in Israel and that this would possibly allow for lowerdosages 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 provided in CUN:CUN argues thatbroomrape infestation is being aggravated bythe phase out of MB, as all crop-specificregistered MB alternatives have a narrower range of activity and lowercrop-specific efficacy than MB. This is also true for agrotechnical means and long-term fallow cropping which in practice and in economic terms do not cope withthe long-term vitality of broomrape seeds and their gradual germination mechanism. CUN also statesthat biological control of broomrape with either the aid of aparasitic fly or with Fusaria do not provide economicanswers for the problem. No economic data are provided.IsraelCut flowersbulbsprotected303.000 240.000 220.185 114.450 None 113.821 85 .431MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 85.431 tonnes for this use in2009.The nomination is for a variety of cut flowers producedunder cover, which are mainly affected by weeds (Cyperusin particular), nematodes (root-knot but also ectoparasites such asLongidorus) and fungi. MBTOCdoes not consider MB essential for the control of ectoparasitic nematodes. MBTOC does not recommend the use of 1.64 t for fumigating substrates used in roseproduction as alternatives such as steam are efficient for this use. Overall, there is very little change from nominations submitted in previous years, particularly in2007. Phase-out efforts are still based on transitional measures -LPBF barrier films with reduced rates. In spite of this, registration of certain alternatives, such asmetham sodium and 1,3-D, has now expanded to include additional flower types. More expansion of registration is expected this year. Substrate productionprotocols are now available for many of the flowers presently treated with MB (Bar-Yosefet al, 2001; Gullinoet al, 2003; Savvas and Passan, 2002; Urrestarazu,2004; Urrestarazu, 2005). The recommended amount is based on a 25% transition rate applied for adoption of chemical alternatives in those species where thenomination states these are nowregistered. In keeping with the 2007 recommendation a further 25% transition rate has been applied to those flowers wheresubstrate production is possible (lilium, calla lilies, gerberasand carnations outside the Ghazaarea). Additionally, MBTOC has adjusted MB dosages used forcarnations grown in Ghaza(from the requested 50 g/m2to the standard presumption of 35 g/m2). MBTOC is aware that carnationcultivars resistant to fusariumwilt are available, commercially used and accepted byinternational markets (Gullino and Garibaldi, 2007)).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report181Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:CUN argues that nutsedge causes heavy economic losses notonly under outdoor conditionsbut in greenhouses aswell, despite the fact that shade reduces its activity. No economic data are provided.IsraelCut flowersopen field77.000 67.000 74.540 44.750None 42.777 34.698MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 34.698 tonnes for this use in2009. Overall, there is very little change from nominationssubmitted in previous years, particularlyin 2007. Phase-out efforts are still basedon transitional measures - barrier films with reduced rates of fumigants. Thenomination is for open field production of cut flowers, which are mainly affected by weeds (Cyperusspp in particular) and nematodes (root-knot but alsoectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fungi. MBTOC does not consider MB necessaryfor controlling ectoparasitic nematodes. Lackof registration of keyalternatives on flowers such as 1,3-D+Pic, dazomet and methamsodium, continue to be the major constraints affecting substitution of MB at this time. MBformulations with higher chloropicrin content are also not registered. In spite of this, registration of metham sodium and 1,3-D has expanded and now includesadditional flower types. More expansion of registration is expected this year. In keeping with the 2007 recommendation, a 25% transition rate has been applied tothe nominated amount to allow for adoptionof alternatives, including chemicals and solarization, which is being adopted successfully. The reduction has not beenapplied to the 10.462 t requested for nurseriesof geophytes where high health plant material needs to be produced, although nocertification issues are involved.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:CUN states that nutsedge is a major problem of the flower industry on outdoor crops and on geophytes, specifically. Itcauses heavy economic losses under outdoor conditions. CUN also argues that MB substitution and phase out brought about the appearance of new and minorpests e.g. the free-living nematode Longidorus spp. became a major economic problemof Aster, Solidago and Lilly. No economic data are provided.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report182Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)IsraelMelon -protected andfield125.650 99.400 105.000 87.500None 87.500 87.500MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 87.5 tonnes for this use in 2009. Monosporascus cannonballus is the key pathogen in the Arava Valley. Therequested amount at a rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of 98:2 MB under barrier films (LDPF) complieswith MBTOC ́s standard presumptions. However, MBTOCnotes that 70:30 MB/PIC mixtures are registered for strawberry, potatoes, cucumber, eggplant, peppers, tomatoes, gerbera, gladiola, roses, and avocado, but notfor melon. MBTOC understands that formulations with more chloropicrin (MB/Pic 67:33, 50:50) could be as effective as the currently used and urges the Party tomake the necessary efforts to assess thissituation under the criteria of Dec.IX/6.MBTOC notes that alternatives are alreadyused for 100% of the fall melons grown in the Arava valley including Telodrip, methamsodium, dazomet, solarization,Formaldehyde+MS, Telopic (only in the southern Arava). The CUN is solely for the spring crop as the alternatives seem not feasible because the plant back timeis short (2-4 weeks). MBTOC visited the area and was shown experiments testing a strategy based on fumigation and solarizationin the summer before the fallcrop, followed by sanitation with MS at the end of fall crop. The third component is repeated application of the fungicide, azoxystrobin (still not registered) as a soildrench during the spring crop. Results are promising so far. Another material tested to prevent possible accelerated degradation in soil is the application of thefungicide prochloras. The Party is requested to submitinformation regarding progress in future nominations.MBTOC notes that Pic and MB/Pic mixturesand the fungicide, fludioxonil, are effectively used for Monosporascus in other countries under similar conditions (e.g.Stangheliniet al. 2003; Martyn 2002).MBTOC comments on economics 2008:CUN concludes that presently Basamid isnot feasible economically because the price of Basamid has increased, andbecause of waiting period constraints. Economic data provided show that the price of Basamid is lower than that of MB, but thatthe gross margin with Basamid300kg 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 ofMonosporascus was developed in the area. It consists of MS applied at lower rates at cropend to kill off the roots of the harvestedfall melons and subsequently the resting structures of Monosporascus. This practiceis effective at infestation levels of upto 20% and became a routine practice applied on the harvested fall crop prior to the spring crop. It is cost effective since the rate is low (150l/ha) and the returnhigh.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report183Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Israel Potato 239.000 165.000 137.50093.750 None 75.000 75.000MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a CUE for 75 tonnes for this use in 2009. Potatoesare produced in a small cultivable area of the Sharon and inthe Negev regions. The nomination is only in the Sharon (10% oftotal cultivated area) where tuber yield and quality are impacted byRhizocotnia solani,Verticillium dahliae,Streptomyces scabies(common scab),Spongospora subterranea(powdery scab),Orobanchespp. (broomrape),Cyperus rotundus(purplenutsedge), and volunteer plants that carry viral diseases (PVY).The Party has made a 20% reduction with respect to the amountapproved by the MOP for 2008.The dosage rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of MB 98:2 is in accordance with the standard presumptionsfor hot gas under barrier films in sandy soil. The Partyidentified that 300 of 15,000 ha are located in highly populatedareas where winter production occurs and pathogens are high and regulatory constraints are inplace for feasible alternatives such as 1,3-D + Pic (61:35), which as a result of buffer zones prohibit their use. The Party indicates that effective controlalternatives are in development for the pest complexes and thatthey are transitioning to these. The CUN indicates that development of new injection machine isunderway in the Sharon. MBTOC notes that there are effective alternatives but that their use is affected by buffer zones, whichare larger than in other countries.MBTOC urges that Party to consider review of thesebuffers 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 spectrum activity of MB, thus given thehigh pathogen populations of the area, their application would require the addition of complementary compounds, with self-explanatory environmental andeconomic implications. Noeconomic data are providedIsraelSeedProduction56.000 28.000 None None None 22.400 NRMBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC does not recommend any MB for this use in 2009. The application is similar to the nominations presented in 2004 and 2005for 2005 and 2006 use: same area, same constraints and almost the same requested quantity in 2009 (22.4t) as the approved quantity in 2006 (28t). No progresshas been made during these last 4 years. The same experiments and results are presented. In the 2004 nomination, Israel reported the formation of a task forceto draw up a new strategy for the industry. No results have been obtained by this task force. The Party states that seeds must meet certification standards butmany specified pathogens, which are the targetsof MB fumigation are not carried on seeds (e.g.Verticillium dahliae, Rhizoctonia, Pythium, etc.). Due to lack of aresearch program, the Party has not provided an explanation for the lack of control with chemical alternatives such as chloropicrin , 1,3-D, formalin or MITCgenerating compounds or non chemical alternatives e.g. grafting (which is considered by the Party only for water melon but adopted in many other countries forother vegetables particularly tomato), resistant varieties and steam. In addition, soil less culture is considered by the Party to be a suitable alternative and is inuse for 20% of the crop. The Party considers soilless culture economically feasible only for solanaceous crops, although no clarification is given as to why. Noinformation is given on the acreages covered by the solanaceouscrops and also on the areas fumigated from 2002 to 2007. The Party reports that thequantitative crop losses caused by soil-bornepests are not the main problem, but theseed quality is the main issue. In the nomination, no results on the seedhealth have been reported. The Party identifies economic constraints as the barrier to adoption of the non-chemical alternative, but no economic analysis isprovided. In all other Mediterranean countries with similar climate, vegetable seeds are producedwithout MB. In the Europeancountries, e.g. Holland, someseed companies are producing vegetable seeds without MB by the adoption of alternatives.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report184Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:CUN argues that growing vegetable seeds requires that theseeds be completely clean, much as has been argued inthe case of strawberry runners. CUN arguesthat this is a declining industry in Israelbecause of lower costs of labor in countries such as Thailand and China butdoes not state whether MB is used in those countries for this purpose. CUN argues that moving to soilless culture is not economically feasible. No economic dataare providedIsraelStrawberryfruit -protected(Sharon andGhaza)196.000 196.000 93.000 105.960 None52.250(Sharon only)77.750(Sharon andGaza)MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 42.75 tonnes for Sharon anda reduced amount of 35 tonnesfor Ghaza, totalling 77.75tonnes for these uses in 2009. MBTOC has adjusted the nominationfor Sharon based on information from the Party that out of thetotal of 380 ha, 25% (i.e. 95ha) is grown on new land (not requiring MB) and an additional 30% (i.e. 114 ha) of the cultivatedarea is expected to apply MBalternatives. This leaves 171 hafor MB use totalling 42.75 t. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination to theGhaza strip to conform withits standard presumption of350 kg/ha used with barrierfilms. The key pests affecting strawberry fruit in Israel are fungi (Rhizoctonia solani, Colletotrichum acutatum, Macrophomina phaseolina, Verticillium dahliae,Fusariumspp.), nematodes (Meloidogyne hapla), and weeds (Cyperus rotundus, purple nutsedge). The Party states thatbuffer zones (250 m) restrict the use ofkey alternatives 1,3-D/Pic and MB/PIC 70:30.The Party confirmed that the existingbuffers were 250 m for PIC,100 m for 1,3-Dand 100 m for metam sodium.MBTOC urges the Party to consider whether the widespread use of LPBF might reduce the buffers on these alternatives. MBTOC would also like to see data onthe technical feasibility of MI/Pic and DMDS on strawberries.MBTOC also urges the Party to consider registration of other alternatives to MB (metham sodium1,3-D) as well as other formulations of MB/Pic (e.g. 50:50) toassist further reductions in theuse of MB. The CUN states thatmetham sodium showed promisingresults in the control ofMacrophomina phaseolina, but these trials did not lead to a registration of metham sodium on strawberries. Substrates have been usedon a small area in this CUN, but the Party states that further uptake is limited bycost, and commercial scale testing are expected in 2010. Detailed economicinformation on the suitability of such systems is necessary. MBTOC encourages the applicant toconsider evaluation and adoption of low-cost substrate systemswhich are used in similar circumstances in other regions, including warm climates (Mutituet al. 2006; Vos and Bridge, 2006; MBTOC, 2007; Sonneveld, 2004;Lieten, 2004).MBTOC comments on economics 2008:CUN states that Dazomet is not registered, and that Teloneis not available because the supplier has not put it on themarket. CUN provides a Table that shows that these alternatives deliver a higher net farm income than MB.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report185Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)IsraelStrawberryrunners(Sharon andGhaza)None None 0.000 31.900 None15.800(Sharon only)28.075(Sharon andGaza)MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 28.075 tonnes for this use in2009 (12.25 t for Ghaza Strip and 15.825 t for Sharon, Israel).The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungi (Rhizotonia solani, Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium, Phytophthora, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum,Macrophomina phasoeolina), root knot nematodes and purple nutsedge. The Party stated that MB 98:2 at a rate of 500 kg/ha (50 g/m2) with standardpolyethylene films and 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) with barrier films are necessary to meet certificationstandards. The requested amountfor the Ghaza region has beenadjusted to MBTOC’s standard presumption of 35 g/m2for 98:2 MB. The Party stated that1,3-D + Pic mixture has been the leading alternative; however, adoptionof this alternative is limited by the required 250 m buffer which significantly limits its use inthe Sharon strawberry nurserygrowing area, which is heavilypopulated. Hot gas application method is usedin the Ghaza Strip growing area because the plots are small, adjacent to houses and there are no injection tools orqualified applicators in the area. 10% ofthe treated area in the Ghazastrip will be tested with barrier films with a reducedapplication rate. MBTOC encouragesfaster adoption of LPBF in the Ghaza Strip. 100% of the treated area inSharon uses barrier films (VIF).MBTOC comments on economics 2008:No economic data providedIsraelStrawberryrunners andFruit (Ghazaonly)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 vital. Without MB growers will notbe able to grow the crop and might lose their main source of income, which, it is argued, constitutes ‘a genuine case of economic disruption’. No economic dataare provided, as there are insufficient dataon the use of MB alternatives in Ghaza.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report186Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)IsraelSweetPotatoesNone none None 111.500 None 95.000 95.000MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 95 tonnes for this use in 2009. Sweet potatois a new crop in Israel that is rapidly expanding in productionarea.The pest complexes are just being identified and studies to identify alternatives have just commenced. The applicant indicatesthat MB is currently the onlyregistered chemical for sweet potato production in Israel. The Party however, also states thatthe expected primary registration of MB alternatives by 2008 andthat adoption of these alternatives by 2009 was the basis for the reduced quantity applied for in 2009. Although not clearly stated the Party indicates that 1,3-D/Pic and 1,3-D + metham sodium were effective control alternatives, but registrationof 1,3-D has been discontinued by the companies and thus thesealternatives are not likely to materialize. Formalin, which is registered for control of common scab on potatoes, is being tested alone and in combination with otherchemicals for scab on sweet potatoes. Onceefficacy trials are completed registration for formalin will be pursued. By 2009, MBwill be applied on 80 ha ofnurseries and on not more than 25% of the production area, viz.300 ha. The MB rates stated in the CUN are consistent with MBTOC’s standard presumptionsand barrier film use. MBTOC recommends that the Party explore the use of nematode resistant varieties of sweet potato as theseare available and widely usedin countries where nematodesare the primary pest problem.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:Semi-commercial application of 1,3-D on a total area of100 ha in the Central Coastal area in 2005 lead tounsatisfactory results and economic losses.Party suggests that Cadusafos is not a front-line nematicide in Israel and it cannot cope with the economic lossesinflicted by root-knot nematodes in the Sharon region.CUN argues that the use of 1,3-D 200+MS400 l/ha will increase the farmers’ net marginby 53%, but 1,3-D is not yet registered.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report187Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.40051.450 34.300 None - 34.100 23.000MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 23 tonnes for this use in2010. The recommended quantity represents a reduction of 33%from the nominated amount under the same adoption rate criteria already discussedwith the Party. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based onthe need to control particular viruses of cucumber, since 2005. Globally, such viruses are not considered as soilborne pathogens but can survive in crop debris forseveral years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated program including cultural practices e.g. sanitation, rotation with a nonhost, removal and destruction of crop debris, cleaning and sanitation of the greenhouse and thesurrounded area, and pathogen free seeds has proven veryeffective in similar situations around the world. The Party hasindicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effectiveway to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). As a transition strategy, MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption ofLPBF which allow for reducingMB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC has assumed that since the lastnomination 1,3-D/Pic mixtures havebecome registered, however further clarification isrequired.MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for cucumber in Japan that has been in place for many years. However, in many countries cucumberproduction has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soilborneplant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widelyused in around the world. (Leoniand Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkayaet al, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). The Party is encouraged to consider substrate production,which implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB(MBTOC, 2002, 2007; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted inJapan support soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing insubstrates there is a critical need fora high degree of sanitation and for the use ofpathogen free transplants. Large numbersof growers can be trained to usesubstrates systems in a short period of time as experienced inmany MLF projects (TEAP, 2004).The CUN states that the Aichi Agricultural Research Centre(2005) identified the effectiveness of KGMMV control by methyliodide in pot tests. MBTOC encourages the Party to continue to pursue the registration of methyliodide for soil uses (methyl iodide was registered for importedtimber in Japan in 2004, under JMAFF registration No. 21407).MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The Party states that the nominated amount is nearly halfthe nominated amount for 2009and that it is 200 kg belowthe amount recommended by MBTOC and approved by MOP 19. Further key information provided by the Party is that “Technically andeconomically feasiblealternative technology has not been developed yet.” “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is prerequisite that technically feasible alternative is existed. In factthere is no technically feasible alternative, and accordingly economic evaluation hasnot been carried out at all.” This CUN shares the same information as CUNfor peppers and watermelon. A reference (45) comparescosts of soilless systems to MB treatment of soils.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report188Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Japan Ginger (Field) 119.400 119.400 109.701 84.075 63.056 None - 53.400 53.400MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 53.4 tonnes for this use in2010. The nomination is for control ofPythiumspp. (Pythium ultimum var. ultimum,Pythium zingiberium) in open field cultivated ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the difficulties that growers have inadopting some alternatives and the time required to introducealternatives and new disease management strategies. The CUN states that the fungidie,cyazofamid, controlsPythiumefficiently but application rates and methods need to be investigated in more detail. The use of fungicides specific to Oomycetes,such as phosphonates, has been tested but data as to efficacy isnot provided. Reduced emission technologies such as LPBF filmsare now being used andshould allow for much reduced dosage rates (e.g. 250 kg/ha (25g/m2) for 98:2 with LPBF). This current nominationprovides hope that alternative treatments toMB 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: “Unavailability of technically andeconomically feasible alternative technology to methyl bromide at present, but reduction and phase-out shall be targeted by combining the existing alternativetechniques 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 alternatives.JapanGinger(protected)22.900 22.900 14.471 11.100 8.325 None - 8.300 8.300MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 8.3 tonnes for this use in 2010.The nomination is for control of Pythium spp. (Pythium ultimumvar.ultimum,Pythium zingiberium) in protected ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the difficulties that growers have in adopting somealternatives and the time required to introduce alternatives and new disease management strategies. The CUN states that Cyazofamid controls pythium efficientlybut application rates and methods need to be investigated in more detail. The use of fungicides specific to Oomycetes, such asphosphonates, has been testedbut data as to efficacy is not provided. Reduced emission technologies such as LPBF films are now being used and should allow for much reduced dosage rates(e.g. 25g/m2for 98:2 with LPBF). This current nomination provides hope that alternative treatments to MB are now applicable to Japanese production systems forginger.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:Methyl iodide is not registered and there are concernsabout phytotoxicity. Economic section compared MB systemwith untreated, 1,3-D-Pic, and hot water treatment. Negative revenues result from untreated and 1,3-D-Pic. Hot water results inhigher gross revenue but netrevenue is 25% of that for MB. This is the same finding as lastyear. This net revenue decreasedemonstrates hot water is not economically feasible.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report189Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200136.650 91.100 None - 90.800 61.000MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 61.0 tonnes for thisuse in 2010. The recommended quantity represents a 33% reductionfrom the CUN amount based on transition toavailable alternatives, e.g. steam, soilless culture, grafting, pathogen free seedsand cultural practices such asrotation and sanitation. MBTOC has considered this nomination,which is based on the need to control a particular virus of melons since 2005. Globally, this virusis not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in cropdebris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. Anintegrated program including cultural practices has been proven tobe effective in many other countries. The Party has indicated that rotation to non-susceptiblehosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective wayto reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). MBTOC urges theParty to increase adoption ofLPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for melons in Japan that has been in place for manyyears. However, in many countries some melon production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely usedtechnique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) areavailable for this kind of productionand are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Ledda, 2004;Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002;Akkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrateproduction, when implemented correctly can produce higher yieldsthan MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studiesconducted in Japan support soil less culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC noteshowever that even whengrowing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trainedto use substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). Resistant root stocks are now available in Japan.However, according to the party, the root stocks are not resistant to all the pathogen races. High yieldingvarieties resistantto the PMMoV, to bacterial wilt and toPhytophthora are also available. Steam has also been foundto control the virus, particularly in the upper soil layer.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:Methyl iodide is not registered and there are concerns aboutphytotoxicity that call for field trials before adoption. Somesuccess has been achieved with resistant varieties. Economic information is brief. Shows significantly lower gross and net revenue for resistant varieties than withMB. “According to the data of Chiba Chosei district, melon resistant variety to MNSV shows only 73.8% for gross income and 30.8% for net revenue comparedwith those treated with MB. As mentioned above, fruits of resistant melon to MNSV are not in favor of market evaluation with poorer taste and shape.Furthermore, its yield is not necessarily competitive to the yield of product treated with methyl bromide. So melon of resistant variety is not economically feasibleto replace methyl bromide treatment.” Furthermore the CUN showsthat the market price of the resistant varieties is significantly lower (about 50%) than theconventional variety.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report190Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Japan Pepper (green& hot)187.200 200.700 156.700 121.725 81.149 None - 81.100 54.370MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 54.37 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended quantity represents a 33% reductionfrom the CUN based on transition to available alternatives, e.g. steam, soilless culture, resistant varieties, grafting, pathogen free seeds and cultural practicessuch as rotation and sanitation. MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on the need to control a particular virus of peppers (PMMoV) since2005. Globally, this virus is not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuousmonoculture. Avoidance is the best means of control. Only seedthat has been tested and determined to be free of the virus should be planted. Infected seed canbe treated with heat, acid, or trisodium phosphate. In addition tousing certified or treated seeds, follow rigid sanitation procedures. All workers that handle theplants, especially smokers, should wash their hands, fingernails,and forearms thoroughly with70% alcohol or strong soap before handling plants.(Demski 1981,Watter 1984). Some cultivars are resistant toPMMoV. This virus does not affect tomato, eggplant or tobacco, which are in the same family (Solanaceae).Therefore these plants can be introduced ina crop rotation. Cultural practices, resistant varieties, biological control with attenuated virus, soilless culture, soildisinfection by hot water or steam, addition of the organic substance material (Tsuda 2006) should be included in an IPM program. This integrated program hasbeen proven to be effective in many other countries (Demski 1981, Watter 1984, Tsuda 2006). MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF, which allowfor reducing MB doses by up to 50%. In many countries some pepper production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become themost widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets,bags, etc.) are available for thiskind of production and are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkayaet al, 2004; Engindeniz,2004). Substrate production, when implementedcorrectly can produce higher yields thanMB (MBTOC, 2002, 2007; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam2002). Studies conducted in Japan supportsoil less culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). Resistant root stocks arenow available in Japan. However, according to the Party, the root stocks are not resistant to allthe pathogen races.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The CUN states that there are no technically feasible alternatives and thus no economic evaluation was carried out.See page 9: “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is a prerequisite that technically feasible alternatives exist. In fact there is no technically feasible alternative,and accordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out at all.” The CUN notes (page 4 under iii): “Technically and economically feasible alternativetechnology has not been developed yet. However, farmers might takeinto consideration the change to another crop. That is one of the reasons why the volume ofmethyl bromide critical use nomination for 2010 is shown lessthan for 2009.” CUN notes on page 5 that substrates involve highcosts for facility construction anddifficulty mastering cultivation skill. Economic and technical potential for hydroponic cultivation of several crops is discussed in broad terms. CUN refers toReference 45, a MAFF document on economics ofsoilless culture. Reference 45 comparesthe annualized (1/10 of capital cost fora soilless system) to athreshold limit based on the Agricultural Economics Task Force calculation of $14.4/kg of MB. Assuming 40 kg of MB at $14.4 each and converting to yen, resultsin a limit of 68,008 yen for any alternativeto compete with MB. The annual cost for a soilless facility is 550,000 yen, meaning the AETF value placed on the MB tobe replaced (68,008 yen) is far lower than the cost of the alternative soilless facility. The AETF value of $14.4 kg representsa value that A5 governments werewilling to accept to phase out MB use in MLF projects. The 550,000 yen for soilless facilities is the estimated annual cost togrowers in non-A5 countries to remainin production without MB. Reference 45 goes on to present abudget table comparing soilless culture with MB based production.The conclusion is that netrevenue with soilless production is about 80% less than MB net revenue. If the capital cost for a soilless facility is anywherenear the assumed 5,500,000 yen, theimpact on grower net revenue will be so large that the soillessalternative should be deemed not economically feasible. Note—Reference 45 conducts similaranalyses for soilless production of cucumber and watermelon.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report191Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)Japan Watermelon 129.000 98.900 94.20032.475 21.650 None - 15.400 14.500MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 14.5 tonnes for thisuse in 2010. The recommended quantity represents a 33% reductionfrom the amount approved atthe 19th MOP and a further reduction based on transition to available alternatives, e.g. steam, soil less culture, grafting, pathogenfree seeds and cultural practices such as rotation and sanitation.MBTOC has considered this nomination, which is based on theneed to control a particular virusof watermelons since 2005. Globally, this virus is not considered as a soil-borne pathogen but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainlyarises from continuous monoculture. Anintegrated program including cultural practices has been proven to be effective in manyother countries. The Party hasindicated that rotation to non-susceptiblehosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993).MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF, which allowfor reducing MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC recognises the uniquefarming system used forwatermelons in Japan that has been in place for many years. However,in many countries some watermelon production has already shifted to substrates ingreenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soil-borne plant pathogens.Inexpensive and simplesystems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widely used in around the world (Leoni and Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas andPassam 2002; Akkayaet al, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrate production, when implementedcorrectly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002,2007; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soil less culture as a feasible option(Fukuda and Anami 2002,Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree ofsanitation and for the use ofpathogen free transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trained to use substratessystems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects(TEAP, 2004). Resistant root stocks are now available in Japan. However, according to the Party, the root stocks are not resistant to all the pathogen races. Highyielding varieties resistant to the PMMoV, to bacterial wiltand to Phytophthora are also available. Steam has also been foundto control the virus, particularly inthe upper soil layer.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:Key information Page 3: “Technically and economically feasible alternative technology has not been developed yet.”Page 8: “For economic feasibility evaluation, it is a prerequisitethat technically feasible alternatives exist. In fact thereis no technically feasible alternative, andaccordingly economic evaluation has not been carried out at all.”This CUN shares the same information as CUN for peppers and cucumbers. Refers readers toReference 45 where costs of soilless systems are compared to MB system.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report192Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesCurcurbits 1187.800 747.839 592.891486.757 407.091 None - 340.405 266.199MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 266.199 tonnes for this use in2010. From this amount, 89.698 t are for Georgia cucurbits,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 reported by the Party in the BUNNIE werenot in accordance with the MBTOC rates (125 kg/ha for pathogens and 150 kg/ha for nutsedge, both with barrier films) so they were adjusted. MBTOCacknowledged the reductions made by the Party, however further reductions were made for adoption ofalternatives of 25.0% in Maryland/Delaware, 17.0% southeast region and 3% for Georgia cucurbits. The Party is urgedto further adopt grafting for commercial use in melon and watermelon.MBTOC urges the Party to disaggregate this nomination by majortypes of cucurbits comprised (melons, watermelons, cucumbers andsquash) specifying the keypests in each case; submitting specific updated technical references (when pathogens are the issue); stating the limitations tothe adoption of MB alternatives ineach case; and indicating specific R&D efforts. In a similar way the Party has submitted, for example the economic informationin the CUN. MBTOC notes theeffort of the Party in gathering detailedinformation and understands that only limited information may be information. However, it is difficult for MBTOC tounderstand and assess the specific circumstances that prevent the use of MB alternatives in each of the crops, when separate data for each different sector is notprovided. Since the key pest in the southeast and Georgia is nutsedge, in future nominations the Party is requested to provideup to date from recent trials offumigants and herbicides trialed for nutsedge control for each specific crop included in the nomination in order to satify therequirements of Decision IX/6. MBTOCnotes the absence of specific trial data and technical references on cucurbits inthe U.S. If trial datafrom other crops (tomato, pepper) is considered, thenalternatives are available for both karst and non-karst areas in Georgia (Nolinget al2006; Rosskopfet al,2005; Gilreath and Santos 2004a; Gilreathet al2003a,2005a; Gilreath 1999, Santoset al2006; Chellemiet al 2004; Chellemi 2006) and can be adopted at least onareas of moderate pest pressure. The Party showedreferences which supported use of alternatives in combination with LDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effectivealternatives are available(Ristaino and Johnson, 1999, Babadost and Islam 2002, Johnstonet al2002, Driver and Lows 2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with chloropicrin+ herbicides (Trifluralin, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Floridafor nutsedge control. The Partyreported that research conducted at the University of Georgia examined the use of a3 way combination of alternative fumigants,1,3-D followed by chloropicrinfollowed by metham sodium and this combination was effective.Hausbeck and Lamour (2004) and others have reported many efficient management strategies tocontrol Phytophthora on pepper, including crop rotation withnon susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa), cultural control (watermanagement, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch, raised beds etc.) and use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide +Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph).Seed treatment with Mephenoxan or metalaxyl control Phytophthora during seed germination. MBTOC notes thatuptake of alternatives for peppers in regions with similar pestshas occurred within 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia (Leoni and Leda,2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsniket al2005; Minutoet al, 2003). The use of grafting and resistant varieties are considered as alternatives for long lasting crops inmany Mediterranean countries (Bello,et al., 2001).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report193Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination is based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in CUN.CUN states that thenext best alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrinwith expected yield losses of 6% in Michigan, Maryland and Delaware and 29% in SoutheasternStates and Georgia. CUN states 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible in Michigan. However, CUN noted thatfor Michigan in addition to theyield loss, delayed planting and harvest with the alternatives results in lower average price received from missed market windows and negative net revenue. Inremaining regions yield losses significantly reduce net revenues.CUN notes other regions may also experience lower prices because of missed market windows.The 3 way research conducted at the University of Georgia is feasible and the CUN was adjusted to reflect this reduction in southern states inareas that do notface Karst geology issues as a replacement of a MB+ Pic spring time application.UnitedStatesEggplant(field)76.721 82.167 85.363 66.018 48.691 None - 34.732 26.149MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 26.149 tonnes for this use in 2010. From this amount 11.860 t is for Georgia, 12.036 t for Florida and 2.25 tforMichigan. A reduction of 4.574 t has been made to account forimplementation of MBTOC’s standard presumptions. Overall the Party’s request of 34.732 trepresents a reduction of 29% from the amount approved by the Parties in 2009 due to asignificant reduction to alternatives inGeorgia which is acknowledged byMBTOC, however there is little transition in Michigan and an increase in MB use in Florida. As alternatives are available fora portion of the nomination in Florida,a reduction of 28% of the nominatedamount was made to account for uptake of alternatives. MBTOC notes that this recommended amount exceeds thatapproved for this region at the 19th MOP by1.07 t and also that the area of usage had increased by 28%. In Michigan, the key pests arePhytophthora capsici.According to the Party,P.capsicihas been found in the irrigation water in Michigan and occurredafter soil treatment with 1,3-D/Pic and metham sodium; howeverMBTOC considers reinfestation can occur with any fumigants, including MB. MBTOC recognizes the Party’s statementthat 1,3-D/Picmay be an effectivealternative, but growers will miss the optimalmarket window due to longer plant back times with this alternative. According tothe Party, this treatment cannot beapplied in autumn because of climatic conditions. In addition,a fall application of methyl bromide is not feasible because over the fall and winter months deer andother animals damage the plastic and irrigation tape. In Florida,the key pests are yellow and purple nutsedge, Phytophthora, nematodes, Pythium andSclerotinia. In Georgia the key pests are yellow and purple nutsedge, Phytophthora,nematodes, southern blight, Pythium and Sclerotinia. Karst topography limitsthe use of alternatives which include 1,3- D that are the best alternatives forthese pests on 40% of the growing acreage in Florida and 8% of the acreage inGeorgia. A soil treatment recently developed by the University of Georgia is emerging as a promising methyl bromide replacementfor Georgia’s solanaceousspring crops, although not for the summer or fall crops. This treatment, known as UGA-3-WAY, consists of three successive soilfumigations, beginning with a1,3-D (Telone II) application, followed by a chloropicrin application,followed by a metham application. Hausbeck and Lamour (2004)and others have reported manyother efficient management strategies tocontrol Phytophthora on pepper in Michigan including 3-4 years crop rotation with nonsusceptible hosts (carrots, beans,onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa), cultural control (watermanagement, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch andraised beds) and use ofregistered fungicides in Michigan (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide+ Mancozeb). The use of grafting is considered an alternative in many Mediterraneancountries (Belloet al., 2001). It is important to report that MB is not used any more in the European Community on eggplant.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report194Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination is based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in CUN.This treatment, knownas UGA-3-WAY, consists of three successive soil fumigations, beginning with a1,3-D (Telone II) application, followed by a chloropicrin application, followed by ametam application. Further small plot and large-scale, on-farmresearch on various aspects is underway. In addition, the economics of transitioning to thisalternative, including the cost and durability of films and the modification of fumigation equipment, still needs to be workedout. CUN states next best alternative inall regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin with expected yield lossesof 6% in Michigan and 29% in Georgia and Florida. CUN states1,3-D with chloropicrin isconsidered technically feasible in Michigan. In Michigan, since the fall crop is dependent upon timely planting, the required waiting period would cost growers halfthe harvest season, thereby missing the higher market windows.UnitedStatesForestrynursery192.515 157.694 122.032 131.208 122.060 None - 120.853 117.826MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 117.826tonnes for this use in 2010, which includes 66.3 t for Southern Forest Nursery,4.94 t for International Paper, 13.78 t for Weyerhauser (SE), 15.19 t for Weyerhauser (NW), 12.096 t for NE Forest & Conservation Nursery, and 5.52 t forMichigan Seedling Assoc. The nominated amounthas been adjusted to 260 kg/ha (26 g/m2) for nutsedge control and 200 kg/ha (20g/m2) for pathogen to conformto the standard presumption for dosage rate ofMB/Pic formulation under HDPE. MBTOC notes that key pests are nutsedge, nematodes and fungi and thatpropagative material requires a very high level of pathogen control in order to avoid their widespread distribution from the nursery to the production fields. TheCUN is for nurseries with moderate or high pest pressure where alternatives are not effective. Nutsedge has no effect on certification but the Party states that itdoes affect yield by 3-5%. MBTOC requests that further nominations clearly show thetrend in yield loss caused by nutsedge, nematodes or fungal pathogensover the number of seasons following fumigation with MB and alternatives and a breakdown of the economic comparisons to methylbromide treatment. For theNortheast Forest and Conservation Nursery,only 40% is for nutsedge control and 60% ofthe nomination was adjusted to conform to standard presumptions of 20g/m2. For Michigan Seedlings only 50% is for nutsedge control, so 50% of the nomination was adjusted to 20 g/m2. The nomination is for certified forest seedlingsproduced in 6 forest nursery regions. The CUN is based on economicinfeasibility of use of substrates and the lack of effectivealternatives for control of nutsedgeand a range of fungal pathogens and nematodes. The key alternativesare 1,3-D/Pic, 1,3-D /Pic/metham sodium and metham sodium+ Pic. The Partyacknowledged that Pic and metham when used in conjunction with LPBF, may provide an effective technical alternative and avoid crop injury. Enebaket al.(2007) found that with LPBF, use rates ofMB can be significantly reduced. Party states that glueing of LPBF that is necessaryfor broadacre fumigation ofnursery stock is not commercially available. LPBF will be adopted when the effective gluing technologies are locally, commercially available. MBTOC observeda demonstration of an effective heat welding technique used withbarrier films (VIF) that was initially described for use withHDPE for solarization trials in Israel(Grinstein and Hetzroni, 1991; Grinstein,1992). MBTOC urges the Party to evaluate these technologies in future nominations. MBTOC considers that glyphosatecan be used as a pre-treatment to reduce pressure from nutsedge. However, this herbicide has been shown to cause phytotoxicityunder nursery conditions.MBTOC acknowledges the initiation of large- scale demonstration trials for this sector by the Party. A report from this trialon the first year of the 5 year trial,indicates that seedling counts similar to MB were achieved byseveral other treatments, but no indication of pathogen or weed pressure was given (Quickeet al.,2007). Limited substrate production ofthese crops is economical for small niche markets. Frequency of fumigation is once intwo to four years, depending on thecrop. Rotation and cover crops are not fumigated. Research ison-going to reduce rates from 98:2 MB/Pic commonly used where nutsedge populations aresevere to using reduced rates of 67:33 MB/Pic. This transition hasalready been made in 70 % of the forest nurseries in the south where nutsedge populations arenot severe.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report195Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination is based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in CUN.Alternatives have 3-5%decrease in yield and higher costs resultingin estimated decreases in net revenue thatvaried from 11 percent to 53 percent with the next best alternative. CUNstates numerical analysis does not include additional impact ofquality losses and indirect yield losses resulting from lengthening of the production cycle. Whiledirect yield losses, in terms of seedlings/hectare, may not belarge on average, intensive seedling production relies on the ability of nursery managers to meetquality, as well as yield, goals.Converting the large volume of seedlings to containerized production would require significant investment and much higher costsboth at the production stage andfor end users planting the seedlings.Economic issues such as increased application costs (e.g., costs associated with application of metam-sodium and a separate chloropicrin application) may havean impact on overall feasibility of these alternatives for the forest seedlings sector.UnitedStatesNurseriesstock (fruit,nut, flower)45.800 64.528 28.275 51.102 25.326 None - 17.954 17.363MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a total of 17.363 tonnes for this use in 2010.This comprises 9.408 t for raspberries, 0.955 t for roses, and7.0 tfor fruit and nut trees. This nomination is for propagation materials that need to be certifiedas free of pests and diseases,even if certification is voluntary in thisstate. MBTOC accepted therates of 191 kg/ha (19.1 g/m2) for rose nursery and 196 kg/ha (19.6 g/m2) for raspberry nursery, and reduces the rate to 200 kg/ha(20.0 g/m2) for fruit and nut tree nursery to conform to MBTOC’s standard presumptions. MBTOC recognises that propagative material requires a very high levelof soilborne pest and pathogen control in order to avoid theirwide spread distribution and notes the difficulty in protectingraspberry roots to a 1.5 m depth.MBTOC acknowledges the Party’s adoption of MB/Pic formulationsof 67:33 and 50:50 as is used in other countries. MBTOC acknowledges the federalregistration 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 givenMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report196Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesOrchardreplant706.176 527.600 405.400 393.720 292.756 None - 226.021 215.800MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 215.800tonnes for this use in 2010. This includes reduced amounts of 150.400 t for stonefruit, 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/vineyard replant disorder of unknownetiology; heavy soils or soils, which cannot be treated to a sufficient depth to effectively use the reduced rates of 1,3-D nowallowed in California. Regulatoryconstraints (maximum labeled rate) preventthe use of 1,3-D at the rates needed foreffective kill of old roots and the associated pathogens in deeper soil layersfor heavier (fine-textured) soils. Three alternatives, 1,3-D alone and 1,3-D combined withchloropicrin or metham sodium, are available technical alternativesaccording to the CUN for treatment in light soils. Although atwo year fallow was found to be effective under Mediterranean conditions by Bello,et al, 2004,Schneider,et al.2004 found that a four year fallow did not sufficiently eliminate the causative nematodes. Recentpromising results with a oneyear fallowcombined with non-Nemaguard rootstock have been reported by McKenry (2006). The Party confirms that MB/Pic 67:33 formulation isused for California Stonefruit, Raisin grapes and Wine grapes and now as well for Almond and Walnut. Commercial adoption of 67:33 formulation and otherscontaining lower amounts ofMB (eg 50:50) were used predominantly for orchard replant treatment in other countriesbefore switching to alternatives. The recommended reduced amount isbased on application of MBTOC’s standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) for control of pests and pathogens withoutthe use of LPBF. This represents areduction of 10.221 tonnes or 4.5%of the nominated amount. MBTOC recognizes thatregulatory restraints prevent the use of LPBF barrier films with methylbromide in California but urges the Party to consider continuedevaluation of their use to improve the performance of alternatives. MBTOC acknowledges thefederal registration of iodomethane for use in orchard replant, butalso recognizes that it is not yet registered in California.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was not based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in CUN:In experimentalplots, spot treatments (individual holes) rates of 0.2 to 0.5 kg chloropicrin per holewere at least as effective as methyl bromide. Technical issues remain withindividual treatments including high labor costs. An economic analysis was not done for this sector because most of the lossescannot be quantified. Factors thatcontribute to losses include delayed planting, fallow, additionaluse of herbicides, tree loss, replant costs to replace tree losses, loss of trees replanted, yield lossof fruit or nuts, delayed achievement of full yield potential, earlier loss of productivity of whole orchard. McKenry 1999, suggests that in some cases tree lossesare likely to be greater than 20 %. An economic assessment for1,3-dichloropropene, 1,3-dichloropropene + chloropicrin, and 1,3-dichloropropene + metamsodium, which were alternatives that wereassessed as conditionally technically feasible, was made. The economic assessment offeasibility for pre-plant uses ofmethyl bromide, such as for orchard replant, included an evaluation of economic losses from three basic sources: (1) yield losses, referring to reductions in thequantity produced, (2) quality losses, which generally affect the price received for the goods, and (3) increased production costs, which may be due to the highercost of using an alternative, additional pest control requirements, and/or resulting shifts inother production or harvesting practices. In responseto further MBTOCquestions, the Party responded: “The lowest cost alternative to methyl bromide was 1,3-dichloropropene and ranged from a savings of US$8 to US$1,700/ha,including the cost of application. We assumed that this alternative is associated with the higher yield losses and replacementrate since it provides narrowercontrol than when it is used in conjunction with chloropicrinor metam-sodium ... Economic losses in this scenario arise primarily from higher establishment costscaused by the necessity of replacing trees that succumb to thereplant disorder. Additional losses occur due to the delay in establishing the orchard and in yieldlosses suffered by trees that are weakened, but not killed, bythe pest complex comprising the replant problem. Despite reductions in fumigation costs, economiclosses 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 represent between 15 and 93 percentof value of the orchard.”May 2008 TEAP Progress Report197Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesOrnamentals154.000 148.483 137.835 138.538 107.136 None - 111.391 92.912MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 92.912 tonnes for this usein 2010. This includes 57.963 t for California, 2.299 t forMichigan, 0.130 t for New York and 32.520 t for Florida. The nomination is for a large number ofspecies, mostly grown in thefield. In Florida, the main speciesusing MB are gladioli, lilies and snapdragon. Additional species using MB in California include calla lily, delphinium, dianthus, eustoma, freesia, helianthus,hypericum, iris, larkspur, liatris, matthiola, and ranunculus. InMichigan, flower crops needing methyl bromide are herbaceousperennials grown from seed or rootdivisions. A new application was submitted for production ofAnemone coronariacut flowers in New York. MB is needed to control diseases (e.g.,Fusariumspp.,Pythiumspp.,Phytophthoraspp., andRhizoctoniaspp.), plant parasitic nematodes (e.g., root knot, root lesion, stunt and dagger), weeds (e.g.Cyperusspp.Portulacca, Ambrosiaand others), and previous crop propagules. MBTOC adjusted the California portion of the nomination to standard dosage rates from 211kg/ha (21.1 g/m2) to 200kg/ha (20 g/m2) with standard polyethylene films. Similarly, the Florida and New York portions ofthe nomination have been adjusted from224 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 adoption rate of 10% for phase in ofalternatives proved to be effective for some flower types: inCalifornia for example 1,3-D/Pic, MS and combinations (Kloseet al, 2007) and in Florida, for example1,3-D/Pic and solarisation sometimes combined with chemicals (McSorleyet al, 2006 ab). In Michigan, the recommended amount includes a 15% reduction toaccount for uptake of a newly registered alternative, methyl iodide, which has been shown to be effective (i.e. Uhlig et al, 2007) plus other registered andvalidated options such as 1,3-D, Pic and MS. MBTOC considers alternatives are available and are in use for anemone cut flower production particularlysubstrates (Reaet al, 2008). In future nominations MBTOC requires specific informationas to areas that cannot be treated with MB using injection machinery.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was not based on economic arguments.Economic arguments provided in the CUN:The economicanalysis shows decreases in yield in California of 20% to 25% result in negative net revenues. In Florida net revenues decrease65% to 81% because of yieldlosses with alternatives. In Michigan herbaceous perennials, yield losses of 25% lead to net revenue declines of 37%. Althoughcontainer production may bepossible in higher value cut flower crops, it is not generallyfeasible, especially for deeper rooted crops and on large acreage. Soilless systems are not a feasiblealternative for the crops in the nomination due to high costsand the risks involved. High fuel oil costs also affect the economic feasibility of steamsterilization. InNew York, there are additional costs due toa state requirement for an on-site operating engineer for high pressure steam. Generally, for most crops, there isn't anoffsetting yield or quality increase to defer the costs associated with substrate production. Costs include a large increase ininputs, capital expenditures for thesystems coupled with high costs of potting mix or substrates, plusthe labor to move crates orinstall the system. Alternativesgenerally require more labor, whichis often unavailable.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report198Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesPeppers(field)1094.782 1,243.542 1,106.753 756.339 548.984 None - 658.952 457.299MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 457.299 tonnes for thisnomination. This represents 23.850 tonnes for the SE, 63.600tonnes for Georgia, 361.348 tonnes for Florida and 8.500 tonnes for Michigan. MBTOC acknowledged the reductions made by the Party. Reductions represent afurther transition rate of 18.04% Floridafor adoption of alternatives in Karst and non-Karst areas of Florida only, a reduction of 12.2% in Georgia and 25% inMichigan based on adoption of iodomethane and a reduction to meetMBTOC standard presumptions. Inthe SE, the Party’s nomination demonstrated significanttransition to alternatives and the nominatedamount was only adjusted to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions (125 kg/ha (12.5g/m) for pathogens and 150Kg/ha (15 g/m) for nutsedge). The Party did not request MB forCalifornia or for research. The key pests of peppers in Michigan arePhytophthora capsiciand inthe Southeastern United States, including Florida and Georgia, nutsedge andP. capsici. In Michigan,P. capsicihas been found in the irrigation water in Michiganand occurred after soil treatment with Telone C35 and metham sodium. However MBTOC considers reinfestation can occur with any fumigants, including methylbromide. 1,3-D/chloropicrin may be an effective alternative but the Party states growers will miss the optimal market window. According to the Party, thistreatment cannot be applied in autumn becauseof climatic conditions. In Florida andGeorgia the Party states that karst topography limits the use of alternativeswhich include 1,3-dichloropropene, which are considered the best alternatives for these pests, on 70% of the growing acreage inFlorida and 8% of the acreage inGeorgia. The Party has stated that metham sodium and metham potassium are promising alternatives. MBTOC, however, considers that alternatives areavailable for both karst and non-karst areas in Florida and Georgia (Nolinget al2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Gilreath and Santos 2004a; Gilreathet al2003a,2005a; Gilreath 1999, Santoset al2006; Chellemiet al2004; Chellemi 2006) and can be adopted at least onareas of moderate pest pressure. The Party showedreferences which supported use of alternatives in combination with LDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effectivealternatives are available(Ristaino and Johnson, 1999, Babadost and Islam 2002, Johnston et al 2002, Driver and Lows 2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with chloropicrin+ herbicides (Trifluralin, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy in Floridafor the nutsedge control. The Partyreported that research conducted at the University of Georgia examined the use of a3 way combination of alternative fumigants,1,3-D followed by chloropicrinfollowed by metham sodium and this combination was effective.Hausbeck and Lamour (2004) and others have reported many efficient management strategies tocontrol Phytophthora on pepper, including crop rotation withnon susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa), cultural control (watermanagement, plant density, soil amendments, protective mulch, raised beds etc.) and use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide +Mancozeb, Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph).Seed treatment with Mephenoxan or metalaxyl control Phytophthora during seed germination. MBTOC notes thatuptake of alternatives for this crop in regions with similar pestshas occurred within 4 years or less in many countries e.g. Spain, Italy, Australia (Leoni and Leda,2004; Spotti, 2004; Tostovrsnik et al 2005;Minuto et al, 2003). The use of graftingand resistant varieties are considered asalternatives for long lasting crops (atleast 6 months) in many Mediterranean countries (Belloet al, 2001).MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was based on economic arguments. Economic arguments provided in the CUN:CUN states nextbest alternative in all regions is 1,3-D with chloropicrin withexpected yield losses of 6 percent in Michigan and California and 29 percent in other regions. CUNstates 1,3-D with chloropicrin is considered technically feasible in Michigan. In Michigan, delayed planting and harvest with the alternatives results in loweraverage price (7.5%) received from missed market windows, and negative net revenue. In remaining regions yield losses significantly reduce net revenues. Insouthern states USG has reduced the request for MB to reflect the apparent feasibility of a 3 way combination (1,3 D followed by chloropicrin followed by metamsodium) as a replacement for spring time application of MB andpic in the non-karst geographical areas. A transition rate was applied based on the best estimateof yield losses and feasibility associated with likely methyl bromide alternatives and use of high barrier films that could bemade by USG biologists andeconomists.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report199Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesStrawberry(field)2,052.846 1,730.8281,476.019 1,349.5751,269.321 None - 1,191.815 998.063MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 998.063 tonnes for this usein 2010. This comprises 855.736 t for California, 37.306 t forEastern USA and 105.020 t for Florida. For California, the Party nominated 952.543t, and increased the area of usage comparedto that requested for 2009. Thenomination is based on the grounds that township caps limit further adoption of 1,3-D and countyregulations affect use of highrates of Pic in some counties. TheBUNNIE assumed a yield loss of 14%, however data in the nomination showed that specific alternative treatments provide equal orhigher yields compared to MB.Alternatives based on 1,3-D, Pic and metham sodium have been adopted. In the areas affected by township caps, trials with alternatives that do not contain 1,3-D(such as Pic, Pic EC, Pic + metham, Pic + dazomet, often with LPBF) provide yields that are statistically comparable with MB (Ajwa et al., 2002, 2003, 2004,2005, 2006; Nelson et al., 2001ab; Shem-Tov et al., 2005, 2006ab).Pic EC provided an average 99% yield compared to MB, with low variance (TEAP, 2006).For California, based on 2009 projected data provided by the Partyin 2008 and the BUNNIE, MBTOC assumes that neither 1,3-D norPic can be used on an areaof 4366 ha, which is equivalent to 855.736 t (196 kg/ha). This calculation assumes that Pic based alternatives can be used on50% of the area in countiessubjected to Pic regulations. LPBF cannot be used with MB in California, but these films can be used with alternatives and canreduce the dosage rates requiredfor effective pathogen and weed control.MBTOC encourages the Party to consider regulations which allow adoption of LPBF and other techniques that result inimproved efficacy at lower application rates and/or reduced emissions that would result in more use of alternatives under township cap, VOC regulations andcounty commissioner constraints on Pic.For Eastern states the Party nominated75.832 tonnes. The nomination is based on moderate to severe pest pressure (Meloidogyne spp., Pythium, Rhizoctonia,Phytophthora cactorum, Cyperusesculentus, C. rotundus, Loliumspp.) affecting 37% of the crop area, and small farm buffer zones on 40% of the area whichaffects use of 1,3-D formulations. MBTOCconsiders that alternatives are available for part of the CUN area (on both buffer andnon buffer areas) by use ofcombinations of 1,3-D, Pic and/or methamwith herbicides (Ferguson et al. 2001; Sydorovich et al. 2004, 2006; Driver et al. 2005; López-Aranda et al. 2005;Norton et al. 2002; Gilreath et al. 2003c; studies cited in TEAP 2006). MBTOC accordingly reduced the nomination to allow fortransition to alternatives and MBdose adjustment to 125 kg/ha (12.5 g/m2) forthe areas of low nutsedge pressure affected by buffer zones (allowing 150 kg/ha (15.0 g/m2)) for the high pestpressure areas). In addition, MI/Pic is currently registeredand technically feasible for thetotal nomination, and a furtherreduction has been made for its uptake.For Florida, the Party nominated 163.440 t. The nomination is based on the grounds that currently available alternatives are not able to control moderate-severenutsedge (37% of area), 1,3-D is restrictedin karst/seepage areas (63%), and economicissues. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for part of theCUN area on both karst and non karst areas by use of combinations of1,3-D, Pic, metham with herbicides and LPBF as studies provide evidence for yields thatare statistically similar to MB (Gilreathet al. 2003bc; Norton et al. 2002; Ajwaet al. 2003, 2004, 2005,2006; López-Aranda etal. 2005; studies in TEAP 2006).Accordingly the nomination was reduced to 105.020 t to allow fortransition to alternatives and dose adjustments to 12.5 kg/haon areas of low nutsedge pressureor 150 kg/ha (15.0 g/m2) for high pest pressure areas with use ofbarrier films to conform to MBTOC's standard presumptions.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report200Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was not based on economic arguments.Economic comments provided in the CUN:CUN reportscosts for three next best alternatives for California, Florida,and Eastern United States. 1,3-D with chloropicrin is reportedto reduce yield by 10% to 14%.Resulting lower production leads to large losses of net revenue.Planting and harvesting delays with alternatives are reportedto lead to lower average pricesreceived in all regions, but are only shown in the revenue analysisfor California. In the eastern U.S. strawberry production areas a transition to high barrier filmsshould be feasible also, although possibly at a slower rate compared to Florida, primarily due to economic issues and diversityof the growing conditions. Inaddition, according to the California Strawberry Commission, thelimitation in use of the primary alternative, 1,3-D/chloropicrin, is further limited by higherproduction costs due to longer production timeline for drip-appliedfumigation. Economic analysis indicates that alternatives to methyl bromide can beeconomically feasible, but wide variability of efficacy and costs exist depending on the area within the region (Sydorovych, etal., 2006)UnitedStatesStrawberryrunners54.988 56.291 4.483 8.8387.944 None - 7.381 4.690MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends 4.69 tonnes for California, but does not recommend amounts for the south east. The CUN comprises 4.69tonnes for California and 2.691 tonnes for SE. The key pests affecting strawberry runners are weeds (purple and yellow nutsedge), fungi (RhizoctoniaandPythium sppin SE,Phytophthora,Verticillium in California), nematodes (root-knot, sting in CA). The CUN isfor MB use on 28 ha of 2172ha, however a largeproportion of hectares are exempted under QPS. MBTOC does not recommend use of MB for North Carolina and Tennesee, as MI/Pic formulations areregistered and are technically suitable (TEAP, 2006). MBTOC believes distribution of MI/Pic across 11 ha should be very rapidand training is possible within thetwo year period for total adoption. For California, MBTOC recommends the nomination, but expects that future nominations willshow reports of trials with keyover the last few years in order to satisfy the criteria of Decision IX/6. In addition, MBTOC requests that locations receivingrunners be specified in the nomination.The 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 for strawberry runners. The Party'srequest exceeds MBTOC's standard presumptionof 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) of MB which is considered effective for production of 'highhealth' strawberry runnersusing LPBF and other emissioncontrol technologies (TEAP 2005);however, California’scertification requirements specify minimum amounts of MB that must beapplied. Furthermore, California regulationsprohibit the use of LPBF with MB. The Party indicates that key alternatives include 1,3-D + PIC followed by dazomet,PIC followed by dazomet and MI/Pic, but that these have not beensufficiently tested on a commercial scale. MBTOC encourages the Party to expedite thecommercial scale testing of these alternatives as well as the registration of MI in CA and to consider changes to there certification regulations in CA.MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was not based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in CUN:CUN identifies1,3-D with chloropicrin as the next best alternative with a 10-percent yield loss in California and the Southeastern States. Operating costs with 1,3-D pluschloropicrin are marginally higher in the Southeast and marginallylower in California. In both regions the alternative is predicted to result in a 46 percent decreasein net revenues. Certification requirements for strawberry nurseries (e.g., CDFA, 2003; TDA, 1999; NCDA, 1985) associated withthe requesting states are strict—zero tolerance for any damaging diseases and plant-parasitic nematodes. Since there are no markets for plants that do not meetthe certification standards,losses up to 100% are possible when inadequate pest control occurs. Failure to adequately manage pests in transplants will jeopardize the viability of thetransplant and fruit production industries in the U.S., as wellas the viability of fruit production in countries that purchaseU.S. plants (e.g., Canada, Mexico, Spain,countries in South America, and others).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report201Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesSweetPotatoes slipsNone 0.000 0.000 18.144 18.144 None - 18.144 14.515MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 14.515 tonnes for this usein 2010. 1,3-D, the alternative to MB, cannot be used in DecJan and township caps are exceeded in Nov, which is the fumigation window for slips. MBTOC recognizes the importance of producing pest free seed stock. Testof reduced rates of 1,3-D are being carried out as this is the preferred fumigant of growers. Growers also will have availablea desirable nematode resistantcultivar (Bienville) that will be available in California overthe next two years should be useful in managing nematode pests.Uptake of such varieties by growersand new alternatives such as non host cover crops followed by application of registered nematicides (ethoprop, aldicarb, metamsodium) is expected to reducethe 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 alternatives given. Factors thatcontribute to losses include delayed planting due to use of alternatives; fallow; additional use of herbicides; losses due to weeds, insects and diseases resulting insmaller, less attractive produce (quality loss).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report202Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)UnitedStatesTomatoes(field)2,876.046 2,476.365 2,065.246 1,406.484 1,003.876None - 994.582 704.715MBTOC comments 2008:MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 704.715 tonnes for this use in 2010. This represents 12.315 t for Michigan, 6.75 t forMaryland, 128.960 t for SE, 32.072 t for Georgia and 530.691 t for Florida. MBTOC acknowledged the reductions made by the Party. Reductions represent afurther transition rate for adoption of alternatives in Karstand non-Karst areas, a reduction of up to 25% for adoption of iodomethane and a reduction to meetMBTOC standard presumptions(125 kg/ha (12.5 g/m2) for pathogens and 150 kg/ha for nutsedge). In Michigan and the SE, the Party’s nomination demonstratedsignificant transition to alternatives and the nominated amountwas adjusted to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions. In Georgia and Maryland, thenominated amount was adjusted by 22.66 and 25% for uptake of alternatives and to agree to MBTOC standard presumptions. In Florida, the nominated amountwas adjusted to agree with the standard presumptions and adjusted by 18.04% for transition to alternatives, such as 1,3-D/Pic and metham sodium combinations.Further reductions of 18.71% for Michigan, 24.51% for SE and 25.0% for Georgia were made for transition to iodomethane/Pic combinations, which wereregistered in these states in 2008. The key pest of tomatoes in the southeastern United States, includingFlorida and Georgia are nutsedge, nematodes and P.capsici. In Florida and Georgia, karst topography limits the use of 1,3-dichloropropene, which is considered as one of the bestalternatives for these pests, on55% of the growing acreage in Florida, 11% in Georgia and 6% ofthe acreage in SE. The Party stated that metham sodium and metham potassium are promisingalternatives. MBTOC considers that alternatives are available for both karst and non-karst areas in SE, Florida and Georgia, which can be adopted at least inareas of moderate pest pressure (Nolinget al.2006; Santoset al. 2006; Noling and Gilreath 2004; Gilreath and Santos 2004bc; Gilreathet al. 2002, 2003, 2004,2005bc, 2006; Rosskopf et al, 2005; Chellemi and Browne, 2006;McMillan and Bryan 1998, 1999, 2002; Rich and Olson 2003). The Party provided references,which supported use of alternatives in combination with LPBF(Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effective alternatives are available (Ristaino andJohnson (1999), Babadost and Islam (2002), Johnstonet al (2002), Driver and Lows (2003). A combination of1,3-D or metham sodium with chloropicrin +herbicides (Trifluralin, Devrinol, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-metalochlor) is considered as the best alternative strategy inFlorida. Hausbeck and Lamour (2004)and others have reported many efficient management strategies tocontrol Phytophthora on vegetables, including crop rotation with non susceptible hosts(carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa) , culturalcontrol (water management, plantdensity, soil amendments, protective mulch, raised beds etc.)and use of registered fungicides(Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide + Mancozeb,Copper hydroxide+dimethomorph) and seed treatment with Mephenoxan ormetalaxyl. MBTOC considers that further reductions in MB amountis possible with changes to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic or less (e.g. to 30:70) used incombination with barrier films, however the reduction in the nominated amount was not based on use of these formulations. Theuse of grafting and resistantvarieties are considered as alternatives in many Mediterranean countries (Belloet al., 2001).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report203Country IndustryQuantityapprovedfor 2005(1ExMOPand16MOPQuantityapproved for2006 (16MOP+2ExMOP+17MOP)Quantityapprovedfor 2007(MOP17+MOP18)Quantityapprovedfor 2008(MOP18+MOP19)Quantityapprovedfor 2009(MOP19)Quantitynominatedfor 2009(additionalor new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2009(additional ornew)Quantitynominatedfor 2010(new)MBTOCrecommendation for 2010(new)MBTOC comments on economics 2008:The nomination was based on economic arguments.Economic statements provided in the CUN:CUN reports yieldlosses for 1,3-D with chloropicrin as the next best alternative ranging from 1.75% to 6%. Net revenue declines reported for allregions. Changes in pest controlcosts are less than 4 percent of total variable costs so have little impact on economic measures. Missed market window in Michigan cited as main reason. Recentresearch by Gilreath and Santos (2008) hasdemonstrated that metam sodium fumigantsystem resulted in reduced root galls, nutsedge stands, and an increasein tomato yield. Assuming that an herbicide is used that is aseffective as pebulate, growers using a 1,3-D + chloropicrin + herbicide mixture may suffer anaverage of 0 to 27% yield losses (Santos et al, 2006; Chellemiet al., 2006). As the United States has consistentlystated, our experience in that a 20% yield losswill force growers to no longer produce a crop. However, in areasof low to moderate pest pressure, information if given a reasonable time frame for the transition.The assessment of need was adjusted to account for this. In areaswhere karst features are not present it appears that tomato growers can use a combination ofthree pesticides applied sequentially (1,3-D, pic, and metam) and achieve yields that are comparable to those produced by usingmethyl bromide for spring cropsonly.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 204 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. Du niway, G. Browne, T. Trout, A. Kahn and O. Daugovish, (2004). Strawberry yield with chloropicrin an d inline in combination with metam sodium and

VIF. In: Annual International Research C onference 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 Br omide 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 ec onomic 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 Co mmunities: Luxembourg. pp. 35-39. Batchelor, T.A. (ed.) (2000). Case Studies on Altern atives 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. Ro s, 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 greenhous e 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 An nual International Re search Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissi ons Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. Chellemi, D.O., J. Mirusso and J. Nance. (2004). Eval uation 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 th e southeast. Proceedings of A nnual 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. Ma y 2006. European Community, Brussels. Enebak, S., T. Starkey, and D. Mc Craw. (2006). Tree seedling quality an d weed control with Basimid, MBR and methyl iodide. Annual Internationa l Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives, Orlando, FL, USA. Engindeniz, S. (2004). The economic analysis of gr owing 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 Un ited 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). Effi cacy 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.Gilreat h, 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.No ling, 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. Proceed ings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Altern atives 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 206 Gilreath, J.P., B.M. Santos, T.N. Motis, J.W. Noling, an d 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 a nd 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., Nolin g, J.W. and Gilreath, P. R. (2002b). Efficacy of

broadcast Telone C-35 in toma to. Proceedings of Annual Intern ational Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emi ssions 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 P ublications, 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 Zimmerma n 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). P acific area-wide MB alternativ es program for cut flower and bulb crops. Proceedings of Annual Interna tional 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 Lo s Santos, B., Montes, F., Vega, J. M., Paez, J. I., Bascon, J., Medina, J. J. (2003). Alternativ es to MB for Strawberry Production in Huelva (Spain). 2003 Results. Annual Internatio nal 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 Me thyl Bromide Technical Op tions Committee. UNEP, Nairobi. 468pp. MBTOC, (2007). 2006 Assessment Report of the Me thyl 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 Br omide 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 a lternative to methyl bromide for south Florida tomato growers. Proceedings of Annual Internationa l 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. Pr oceedings of Annual Interna tional 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 Br omide 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 Internatio nal 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-Be ringola, A. Martinez-Treceno, E. Bardon, J. Palacios, M. Becerril, J.J. Medina, J., Galvez and J.M. Lo pez-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. Gu llino, 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, Nu rsery 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%2048 a%20.1210.html Nelson M. et al. (2001a). Marketab le 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 vi rtually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida strawberry. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Br omide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, November 3-6, 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. pp. 1-1.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 208 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 i ndustry: 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 Prepla nt 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 alternativ es 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. Mi randa, 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: An nual 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). St rawberry yield and weed control with alternative fumigants applied in combination with metam under various tarps. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Altern atives 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 Internatio nal Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. Shem-Tov, S., H.A. Ajwa and S.A. Fennimore. (2005). E ffect 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 solutio n. 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 Ital y. Proceedings of Inte rnational 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 evaluati on 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 Br omide 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 Grower s and Dealers. Ch apter 0080-6-2. http://state.tn.us/sos/rules/0 080/0080-06/0080-06-02.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, Ma ttner 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 Br omide 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 br omide alternatives used in commercial practice. CAB

International. Wetter, C. (1984)

. Serological identification of four tobamovirues infecting pepper. Plant Disease 68: 597-

599.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 210 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 Techni cal 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 CompoundMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 211 APPENDIX II TO CHAPTER 11



## Decision IX/6

1. To apply the following criteria and proce dure 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 qua lify 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 economica lly 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 consum ption, if any, of methyl bromide for critical uses should be permitted only if:

(i) All technically and economically feasib le steps have been ta ken 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 brom ide, also bearing in mind the developing countries’ need for methyl bromide;

(iii) It is demonstrated that an appropria te effort is being made to evaluate,

commercialise and secure natio nal 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. Artic le 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 th at 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 establis hed in paragraphs 1 (a) (ii) and 1 (b) of the present decision;

3. That the present decision will apply to Par ties 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 Optio ns 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 envir onment 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).May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 212 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 transpar ency 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 th e 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 prev ious 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 Report213APPENDIX IV TO CHAPTER 11Methyl bromide reduction trends, based on historical rates of adoption in the EC (EC Management Strategy 2007)Major MBCUEsin 20061991MB useestimate1(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2005MB use2(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2006MB licensed(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)Short-listed existing MBalternatives3Historical rates of adoptionin individual MSsfrom Table 4.3, Annex 7.A(ha/year per MS)Predicted adoptiontrend, from 20064Fumigants: 1,3-D, Pic, MetamSodium, Dazometup to 838 ha/year/MSGrafting on resistant root stock up to 1000 ha/year/MSTomato > 4980 t> 7000 ha> 12 MS733 t2423 ha4 MS532 t1772 ha2 MSSubstrates up to 1570 ha/year/MSRate of up to 838 to 1000plus 1570 ha/year/MS1 year adoption timeStrawberryfruit~ 3420 t 497 t 265 t2075 ha (900Fumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin,Metam Sodiumup to 1627 – 2000ha/year/MSRate of up to 1627 to2000 plus 60 – 801Refer to Section 3 for data.2Use data from Accounting Framework. Hectares calculated on doses stated in CUNs andCUNAs. If not stated, estimated based onmean dosage of MB forthis use (tomato: 300 kg/ha; strawberry runners: 300 – 470 kg/ha; strawberry fruit: 100 – 300 kg/ha; cutflowers: 200 – 500 kg/ha; peppers: 150 – 300 kg/ha;mills and food processors: 20 g/m3)3Further details and alternatives in Annex 4.C.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report214Major MBCUEsin 20061991MB useestimate1(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2005MB use2(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2006MB licensed(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)Short-listed existing MBalternatives3Historical rates of adoptionin individual MSsfrom Table 4.3, Annex 7.A(ha/year per MS)Predicted adoptiontrend, from 20064Substrates up to 60 – 80 ha / year/MS~ 5200 ha(>8000 hain yr 2000)> 12 MS3879 ha4 MSha in 2007)2 MSResistant varieties ?ha/year/MS1 year adoption timeFumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin,Metam Sodium, Dazometup to 313 ha/year/MSSubstrates up to 60 ha/year/MSSteam up to 917 ha/year/MSCut flowers ~ 1610 t~ 1,800 ha> 12 MS259 t855 ha6 MS140 t540 ha3 MSResistant varieties ?Rate of up to 313 plus 60plus 917 ha/year/MS1 year adoption timeFumigants: 1,3-D, MetamSodium, Dazometup to 400 ha/year/MSPepper ~ 2410 t~ 3,000 ha> 11 MSs250 t1336 ha3 MSs123 t577 ha2 MSsSubstrates 175 ha / year/MSRate of up to 400 plus175 ha/year/MS1 year adoption timeFumigants: 1,3-D, Chloropicrin,Metam Sodiumup to 870 ha/year/MSStrawberryrunners~ 740 t~ 930 ha~ 5 MSs346 t~ 1500 ha4 MSs353 t~ 1500 ha4 MSsPlug plants ?Rate of up to 870 plus ?ha/year/MS2 years adoption timeMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report215Major MBCUEsin 20061991MB useestimate1(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2005MB use2(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)2006MB licensed(tonnes)(ha)(No. MSs)Short-listed existing MBalternatives3Historical rates of adoptionin individual MSsfrom Table 4.3, Annex 7.A(ha/year per MS)Predicted adoptiontrend, from 20064Heat + IPMSulfuryl fluorideup to 3,500,000 – 4,600,000m3 / year/ MSPhosphine ?Controlled atmosphere ??Mills andfoodprocessingstructures640t12,800,000m35~ 15 MSs150 t~7,500,000m365 MSs91 t4,536,000m36 MSsModified atmosphere(structures)200.000 m3/ yearRate of up to 3.5 to 4.6plus ? plus ?? plus 0.2million m3/year/MS1 year adoption time5Assuming average dose was about 50 g/m3in 19916Assuming dose of about 20 g/m3May 2008 TEAP Progress Report216APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11– Part A: Preplant Soil ApplicationsList of nominated (2005 – 2010 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2009 in part) amounts of methyl bromide granted by Parties under the CUEprocess for each crop or commodity.Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Australia Cut Flowers – field 40.000 22.350 18.375 22.350Australia Cut flowers – protected 20.000 10.425Australia Cut flowers, bulbs – protected Vic 7.000 7.000 6.170 6.150 7.000 7.000 3.598 3.500Australia Strawberry Fruit 90.000 67.000Australia Strawberry runners 35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.79029.79035.750 37.500 35.750 35.75029.790Belgium Asparagus 0.630 0.225 0.630 0.225Belgium Chicory 0.600 0.180 0.180 0.180Belgium Chrysanthemums 1.800 0.720 1.120Belgium Cucumber 0.610 0.545 0.610 0.545Belgium Cut flowers – other 6.110 1.956 4.000 1.956Belgium Cut flowers – roses 1.640Belgium Endive (sep from lettuce) 1.650 1.650Belgium Leek & onion seeds 1.220 0.155 0.660Belgium Lettuce(& endive) 42.250 22.425 25.190Belgium Nursery Not Predictable 0.384 0.900 0.384Belgium Orchard pome & berry 1.350 0.621 1.350 0.621Belgium Ornamental plants 5.660 0.000Belgium Pepper & egg plant 5.270 1.350 3.000 1.350Belgium Strawberry runners 3.400 0.900 3.400 0.900Belgium Tomato (protected) 17.170 4.500 5.700 4.500Belgium Tree nursery 0.230 0.155 0.230 0.155Canada Strawberry runners (PEI) 14.792 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.4627.462(a)14.792 6.840 7.995 7.4627.462Canada Strawberry runners (Quebec) 1.826 1.826 (a) 1.826 1.826Canada Strawberry runners (Ontario) 6.129 6.129May 2008 TEAP Progress Report217Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009France Carrots 10.000 8.000 5.000 8.000 8.000 1.400France Cucumber 85 revised to 60 60.000 15.000 60.000 60.000 12.500France Cut-flowers 75.000 60.250 12.000 60.000 52.000 9.600France Forest tree nursery 10.000 10.000 1.500 10.000 10.000 1.500France Melon 10.000 10.000 7.500 6.000France Nursery: orchard, raspberry 5.000 5.000 2.000 5.000 5.000 2.000France Orchard replant 25.000 25.000 7.500 25.000 25.000 7.000France Pepper Incl in.tomato cun 27.500 6.000 27.500 6.000France Strawberry fruit 90.000 86.000 34.000 90.000 86.000France Strawberry runners 40.000 4.000 35.000 40.000 40.000 28.000France Tomato (and eggplant for 2005 only) 150(allsolanaceous)60.500 33.250 125.000 48.400France Eggplant 27.500 33.250 48.400Greece Cucurbits 30.000 19.20030.000 19.200Greece Cut flowers 14.000 6.00014.000 6.000Greece Tomatoes 180.000 73.600156.000 73.600Israel Broomrape 250.000 250.000250.000250.000Israel Cucumber - protected new 2007 25.000 18.750 25.000Israel Cut flowers – open field 77.000 67.000 80.755 53.34542.77777.000 67.000 74.54044.750Israel Cut flowers – protected 303.000 303.000 321.330 163.400113.821303.000 240.000 220.185114.450Israel Fruit tree nurseries 50.000 45.000 10.000 50.000 45.000 7.500Israel Melon – protected & field 148.000 142.000 140.000 87.50087.500125.650 99.400 105.00087.500Israel Potato 239.000 231.000 137.500 93.75075.000239.000 165.000 137.50093.750Israel Seed production 56.000 50.00022.40056.000 28.000Israel Strawberries – fruit 196.000 196.000 176.200 64.12552.250196.000 196.000 93.000105.960Israel Strawberry runners 35.000 35.000 2015.80035.000 35.000 28.00031.900Israel Strawberry runners and fruit Ghaza 87.87567.500Israel Tomatoes 90.00022.750Israel Sweet potato95.000111.500Italy Cut flowers (protected) 250.000 250.000 30.000 250.000 187.000 30.000May 2008 TEAP Progress Report218Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Italy Eggplant (protected) 280.000 200.000 15.000 194.000 156.000Italy Melon (protected) 180.000 135.000 10.000 131.000 131.000 10.000Italy Pepper (protected) 220.000 160.000 67.000 160.000 130.000 67.000Italy Strawberry Fruit (Protected) 510.000 400.000 35.000 407.000 320.000Italy Strawberry Runners 100.000 120.000 35.000 120.000 120.000 35.000Italy Tomato (protected) 1300.000 1030.000 418.000 871.000 697.000 80.000Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 68.600 61.40034.10088.300 88.800 72.4 51.45034.300Japan Ginger – field 119.400 119.400 112.200 112.100 102.20053.400119.400 119.400 109.701 84.07563.056Japan Ginger – protected 22.900 22.900 14.800 14.800 12.9008.30022.900 22.900 14.471 11.1008.325Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 182.200 168.00090.800194.100 203.900 182.2 136.65091.100Japan Peppers (green and hot) 189.900 200.700 169.400 162.300 134.40081.100187.200 200.700 156.700 121.72581.149Japan Watermelon 126.300 96.200 94.200 43.300 23.70015.400129.000 98.900 94.2 32.47521.650Malta Cucumber 0.096 0.127Malta Eggplant 0.128 0.170Malta Strawberry 0.160 0.212Malta Tomatoes 0.475 0.594New Zealand Nursery material 1.085 1.085 0.000New Zealand Strawberry fruit 42.000 42.000 24.780 42.000 34.000 12.000New Zealand Strawberry runners 10.000 10.000 5.720 8.000 8.000 6.234Poland Strawberry Runners 40.000 40.000 25.000 12.000 40.000 40.000 24.500Portugal Cut flowers 130.000 8.750 50.000 8.750Spain Cut Flowers – Cadiz 53.000 53.000 35.000 53.000 42.000Spain Cut Flowers – Catalonia 20.000 18.600 12.840 17.000(+Andalucia)20.000 15.000 43.490(+Andalucia)Spain Pepper 200.000 155.000 45.000 200.000 155.000 45.000Spain Strawberry Fruit 556.000 499.290 80.000 556.000 499.290 0.0796Spain Strawberry Runners 230.000 230.000 230.000 215.000 230.000 230.000 230.000UK Cut flowers 7.560 6.050UK Ornamental tree nursery 12.000 6.000 6.000 6.000May 2008 TEAP Progress Report219Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009UK Strawberry (& raspberry in 2005) 80.000 63.600 68.000 54.500UK Raspberry nursery 4.400 4.400USA Chrys. Cuttings/roses 29.412 29.412 0.000USA Cucurbits – field 1187.800 747.839 598.927 588.949 411.757340.4051187.800 747.839 592.891 486.757407.091USA Eggplant – field 76.761 101.245 96.480 79.546 62.78934.73276.721 82.167 85.363 66.01848.691USA Forest nursery seedlings 192.515 157.694 152.629 133.140 125.758120.853192.515 157.694 122.032 131.208122.060USA Ginger 9.2009.200 0.000USA Orchard replant 706.176 827.994 405.415 405.666 314.007226.021706.176 527.600 405.400 393.720292.756USA Ornamentals 210.949 162.817 149.965 138.538 137.776111.391154.000 148.483 137.835 138.538107.136USA Nursery stock - fruit trees,raspberries, roses45.789 64.528 12.684 51.102 27.66317.95445.800 64.528 28.275 51.10225.326USA Peppers – field 1094.782 1498.530 1151.751 919.006 783.821658.9521094.782 1243.542 1106.753 756.339548.984USA Strawberry fruit – field 2468.873 1918.400 1733.901 1604.669 1336.7541191.8152052.846 1730.828 1476.019 1349.5751269.321USA Strawberry runners 54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 8.8377.38154.988 56.291 4.483 8.8387.944USA Tomato – field 2876.046 2844.985 2334.047 1840.100 1406.484994.5822876.046 2476.365 2065.246 1406.4841003.876USA Turfgrass 352.194 131.600 78.040 52.189 0206.827 131.600 78.04 0USA Sweet potato 224.528 18.144 18.14418.14418.14418.144May 2008 TEAP Progress Report220APPENDIX V TO CHAPTER 11– Part B: Post-harvest Structuraland Commodity ApplicationsList of nominated (2005 – 2010 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2009 in part) amounts of methyl bromide granted by Parties under the CUEprocess for each crop or commodity.Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Australia Almonds 1.900 2.100 1.900 2.100Australia Rice consumer packs 12.300 12.300 10.225 9.200+1.89.2007.8206.150 6.150 9.205 7.4007.820Belgium Artefacts and structures 0.600 0.307 0.590 0.307Belgium Antique structure & furniture 0.750 0.199 0.319 0.199Belgium Churches, monuments and ships'quarters0.150 0.059 0.150 0.059Belgium Electronic equipment 0.100 0.035 0.100 0.035Belgium Empty silo 0.050 0.043 0.050 0.043Belgium Flour mill see mills below 0.125 0.072 See millsbelow0.072Belgium Flour mills 10.000 4.170 9.515 4.170Belgium Mills 0.200 0.2000.200 0.200Belgium Food processing facilities0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300Belgium Food Processing premises 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030Belgium Food storage (dry) structure 0.120 0.120 0.120 0.000Belgium Old buildings 7.000 0 .306 1.150 0.306Belgium Old buildings and objects 0.450 0.282 0.000 0.282Belgium Woodworking premises 0.300 0.101 0.300 0.101Canada Flour mills47.200 34.774 30.167 28.650 26.91322.878(a)47 34.774 30.167 28.65026.913Canada Pasta manufacturingfacilities (a) 10.457 6.757 6.0675.319(a) 10.457 6.7576.067Canada Commodities 0.068France Seeds sold by PLAN-SPG company 0.135 0.135 0.100 0.135 0.135 0.096France Mills 55.000 40.000 8.00040.000 35.000 8.000May 2008 TEAP Progress Report221Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009France Rice consumer packs 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000France Chestnuts 2.000 2.000 1.800 2.000 2.000 1.800Germany Artefacts 0.250 0.100 0.250 0.100Germany Mills and Processors45.000 19.350 45.000 19.350Greece Dried fruit 4.280 3.081 0.9004.280 3.081 0.45Greece Mills and Processors 23.00016.000 1.340 23.000 15.445 1.340Greece Rice and legumes 2.355 2.355Ireland Mills 0.888 0.611 0.888Israel Artefacts 0.650 0.650 0.600 0.650 0.650Israel Dates (post harvest) 3.444 3.444 2.200 1.8002.1003.444 2.755 2.2001.800Israel Flour mills (machinery& storage) 2.140 1.490 1.490 0.8000.3002.140 1.490 1.0400.312Israel Furniture– imported 1.422 1.422 2.042 1.422 0.000Italy Artefacts 5.500 5.500 5.000 5.225 0.000 5.000Italy Mills and Processors 160.000130.000 25.000 160.000 65.000 25.000Japan Chestnuts 7.100 6.500 6.500 6.300 5.8005.4007.100 6.800 6.500 6.3005.800Latvia Grains 2.502 2.502Netherlands Strawberry runners post harvest 0.120 0.120 0.120 0 0.120Poland Medicinal herbs & dried mushroomsas dry commodities4.000 3.560 1.800 0.500 4.100 3.560 1.800 1.800Poland Coffee, cocoa beans (a) 2.160 2.000 0.500 2.160 1.420 1.420Spain Rice 50.000 42.065Switzerland Mills & Processors8.700 7.000 8.700 7.000UK Aircraft 0.165 0.165UK Mills and Processors 47.130 10.195 4.509 47.130 10.195 4.509UK Cereal processing plants 8.131 3.480 (a) 8.131 3.480UK Cheese stores 1.640 1.248 1.248 1.640 1.248 1.248UK Dried commodities (rice, fruits andnuts) Whitworths2.400 1.256 2.400 1.256UK Herbs and spices 0.035 0.037 0.030 0.035 0.037UK Mills and Processors (biscuits)2.525 1.787 0.4792.525 1.787UK Spices structural equip. 1.728 1.728 0.000 0.479May 2008 TEAP Progress Report222Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB QuantitiesParty Industry2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009UK Spices stored 0.030 0.030 0.000UK Structures buildings (herbs andspices)3.000 1.872 0.908 3.000 1.872 0.908UK Structures, processors and storage(Whitworths)1.100 0.880 0.257 1.100 0.880 0.257UK Tobacco equipment 0.523 0.050UK Woven baskets 0.770 0.770USA Dried fruit and nuts (walnuts,pistachios, dried fruit and dates anddried beans)89.166 87.719 91.299 67.699 58.91243.00789.166 87.719 78.983 58.92145.623USA Dry commodities/ structures (cocoabeans)61.519 61.519 64.028 52.256 51.00261.519 55.367 64.082 53.188USA Dry commodities/ structures(processed foods, herbs and spices,dried milk and cheese processingfacilities) NPMA83.344 83.344 85.801 72.693 66.77737.77883.344 69.118 82.771 69.20854.606USA Smokehouse hams (Dry cure porkproducts) (building and product)136.304 135.742 40.854 19.669 19.6994.46567.907 81.708 18.998 19.69918.998USA Mills and Processors 536.328 505.982 401.889 362.952 291.418191.993483.000 461.758 401.889 348.237291.418May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 223 

## 12 Decision XIX/8: Scoping Stud y on Alternatives to HCFC Refrigerants under High Am bient Temperature Conditions

12.1 Introduction

At MOP-19 in Montreal, the Parties took Deci sion 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 a cceptance of alternatives to HCFCs in the refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors in Article 5 Parties, with specific reference to specific

climatic conditions and un ique 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 As sessment Panel to provide a summary of the outcome of the study referred to in the preced ing 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, th e 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 Parti es as needed, specifically those engaged in air conditioning design in warm climates and deep mi ne air conditioning. A summary of the scoping study as requested in XIX/8 can not yet be presen ted 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 58 o C (136 o F) measured at El Azizia, Libya on 13 September 1922. This is a pproximately 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, 49.4 o C (121 o F).

HCFC-22 is the most widely used refrigerant in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. It is being phased out gl obally, 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 compr ession cycle the condensing temperature is kept well below the critical temperature, because thermodynamic principles result in declining capacity and efficiency as heat-rejection (refri gerant condensing) temperatures increase and approach the critical temperature. One of the important parameters in the study is thereforeMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 224 related to the critical temperature of HCFC-22 refri gerant 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-ambie nt Temperature Air Conditioning

The driving concern here is the impact of refri gerant 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, e quipment in common usage world-wide employsHCFC-22 as a refrigerant. The primary global replacement, especially for the dominant aircooled designs, is R-410A, a blend of hydrofluor ocarbon (HFC) refrigerants. One component of this blend, HFC-125, has a comparatively low critical point temperature (66 o C), resulting in rapidly declining capacity and efficiency as c ondensing 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) a nd 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 ve ry 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 characteris tics 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-ambie nt Temperature Refrigeration

The focal concern is the impact of refrigerant replacements for commercial, transport, and industrial use for food preparation, storage, a nd 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, a nd will soon be phased out in Article 5 Parties. The primary replacement for commercial refrige ration 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 comp ression systems show a rapidly declining capacity and efficiency as condensing temperatures appro ach 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 refrigera tion 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, meat s, and prepared foods), and high temperature (for dairy products and typical beverages) – ar e 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 l eakage. The scoping study examines the suitability of R-404A, as well as the suitability of a num ber of other, possible candidate HCFC-22 alternatives for very hot climates such as en countered in the identified regions. While the application conditions and system options diffe r, 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 adva ntage in this regard, since they typically are dryer and have greater wet-bulb depression. Conve rsely, 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 temperat ures often are lower for chillers for deep mines, to minimise pumping burdens since equipment genera lly 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 equipm ent sizes are quite large, resulting in significant energy requirements and heightened concerne d 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. Ho wever, some older and some small mines use

HCFC-22 and some newer installations use HCFC -123 to attain high efficiencies; both areHCFCs. Some recent systems use water (R-718) as a refrigerant in a vacuum, vapourcompression flash cycle to produce ice slurries di rectly. Some proposed systems would use air (R-729) in air-standard Brayton cycles. Older e quipment tends to be retired more quickly, than with systems for comfort conditioning, based on su stained versus intermitte nt operation. While the technologies are in place to deal with the ODS issue for deep mines, refrigerant questions remain with respect to future acc eptability 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 need s; the group then will investigate those issues.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 226 12.3 Prospects for Promotion and Acceptance of Alternatives

This approach for this topic (as explicitly menti oned 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 prioriti es 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 exchange rs and compressors) properties.

Additional considerations for the three sectors and for existing equipmen t conversions will be deferred for the next RTOC assessment report, publ ication 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 stud y on air conditioning and refrigeration, the initial analyses for these two topics are being circulated w ithin 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 Sout h 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 in cludes 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 earlyimplementation 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 t echnical 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 Safegua rding 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 Partie s to the Montreal Protocol have sought to harness the potential climate benefits arisi ng 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 ‘pr actical measures’ identified in the SROC, including assessing the ozone, climate and other be nefits 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 Sc iences about the importance of the Montreal Protocol in protecting the climate, and pape rs contained in a book commissioned by UNEP celebrating ozone and climate protection. 2

1 TEAP, “Report Of The Task Force On HCFC Issues (W ith Particular Focus On The Impact Of The Clean Development Mechanism) And Emissions Reduction Bene fits Arising From Earlier HCFC Phase-Out And Other Practical Measures—Respons e 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,May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 228 Following these reports, Parties agreed in Deci sion XIX/6at the MOP-19 in 2007, to make additional efforts to protect the climate as ODS s are phased out. They added the principle of climate protection in Decision XIX/6 to the aspect s to be considered when taking actions to comply with the Montreal Protocol. Parti es 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 fo cus on, inter alia: ...substitutes and alternatives that minimise other impacts on the environmen t, 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, c onsumption 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 insu lating 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 pro cesses. 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 HC FCs still have significant GWPs themselves. In some instances the climate impact of these chemical s can be offset in full or in part by chemical containment practices and end-of-life recovery, r ecycle and disposal practices. More importantly, making the right choice of alternative substan ces 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 alterna tive 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. Wi se substitution strategies may also require continued use of HFC technologies in applica tions where HFC phase-out could have unwanted climate consequences, because of th e 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 cu rrent 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 us es (process agents, feedstocks, laboratory and analytical uses, and essential uses;

4) Practical measures to contain, recove r, 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 at mospheric interactions of ozone depletion and climate change.

Decision XIX/6 clearly directed that efforts and i nvestments 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 Prot ocol 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 4 th MOP, and taking into consideration the most cost-effective technologi es (as defined by the Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund) to phase out ODS, calculated th rough the application of established “costeffectiveness” factors. The preferences of so me of the enterprises in Article 5 Parties for conversions to well established technologies al so played a part in choosing non-optimal technologies from a climate perspectiv e. Therefore, ways and means need to be found to address these new directions in the future, if other envi ronmental aspects, including climate, are to be

taken into account.

The recent Adjustment to the Protocol and th e associated Decision XIX/6 have directed the

Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund to c onsider 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 exam ple, supplementing the funds under the (MLF) with available funds from other sources, if n eeded. 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 singleMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 230 organisation. The current guidelines and cost-effe ctiveness thresholds of the MLF may then also have to be adjusted to optimise ozone protec tion 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 effectiven ess factors that have been used historically to fund projects to phase out non-HCFC ODS cannot be applied direc tly and meaningfully compared to HCFCs and other high-GWP alternatives. Cost effec tiveness 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 th e 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 HC FC conversion was many times lower than the

conversion of another ODS.

Alternative approaches can be adopted to cal culate 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-eff ectiveness metric for HCFCs and other high-GWP alternatives. These techniques estimate the tota l 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 refrigerati on, 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 ther e may be high-GWP alternatives that offer significantly higher energy efficiency such that th e LCCP is superior despite the direct chemical emissions and there may be low-ODP options th at offer such high energy efficiency that continued use is environmentally justified e ither within the allowed ODS use or under an essential use exemption.

For example, high-GWP HFC foam is thermally supe rior in many applications to alternatives and HCFC-123 building air conditioners achieve signifi cantly higher energy efficiency in many applications. Each case is quite different, and requires careful technical evaluation and choice. For example, high GWP HFC thermal insulati ng 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 a lternative 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 br omide, but is the proper choice for the overall environment because its use protects the ozone la yer and does not expose farm workers and local residents to toxic pesticides. Where steam pa steurisation 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 envi ronmentally superior alternatives are not yetMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 231 under development. Examples of such inv estments 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 refri gerants 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 th e Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund in case of Article 5 Parties) could be to delay investme nt, still consistent with compliance obligations under the Protocol, and deprioritise any projects or activities where available alternatives have significant climate and other environmental impacts.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 232 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 me asure the life-cycle energy use of alternative building air conditioning systems installed in speci fic buildings and climates. Results from this LCCP analyses can easily be translated into gr eenhouse 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 Safeguard ing the Ozone Layer and Climate have identified, by sector, technically and economica lly 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 (H Cs) used as halocarbon substitutes have a negligible direct effect on global climate. Provi ded concerns on toxicity, flammability etc. can be addressed, they can be applied in a range of prod ucts 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 comparab le LCCP to other low GWP refrigerants such

as CO 2 (ODP=0; GWP=1) and HFC-152a (ODP=0; GWP=140). Time will tell whether CO 2 or HFC-152a will become next generation refrigerants. CO 2 equipment is newly designed and so far

has difficulties under normal conditions in achievi ng efficiencies comparable to the other alternatives. [Please note that HFC-1234yf is al so 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 w ith low-GWP options although in these cases, assumptions about end-of-life disposition of the bl owing 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 di rect 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 234 The successful policy measures adopted by many Parties include:

• Regulations (e.g., non-essential product ba ns, performance standards, certification, restrictions, end-of-life HFC recovery, in some cases paid by product manufacturers and importers);

• Economic instruments (e.g., taxation, emi ssions trading, carbon offsets, financial incentives, and chemical use deposits and refunds);

• Voluntary agreements (e.g., voluntary re ductions in use and emissions, industry partnerships, release of patented technolog y 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 (G EF) 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 a nd economically feasible to implement Decision XIX/6 to: “...give priority to cost effectiv e 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.” Howe ver, Parties may not always

consider these measures to be cost-effective in the terms normally considered by the Montreal Protocol funding mechanisms. Nonetheless, co-ord inated investment to protect both ozone and climate will almost always be more cost-effectiv e than independently pursuing these goals.

Additionally, technological developments underw ay 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 de laying some transitions to await these new products where such delays do not jeopardise Protocol comp liance. It will be important to review and strengthen the existing guidelines and procedures fo llowed by the Parties and the institutions of the Protocol, such as those of the MLF, in orde r to comply with the new climate protection and other environmental priorities as agreed in Decision XIX/6.

Some aspects of the Adjustment and Decision a pply 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 consis tent 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 sustai nable. Success in these efforts will require cooperation by all organisations involved w ith 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 a nd 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$ 100,00 0 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. Mi ndful that Parties have repeatedly rejected requests for financing, indivi dual TEAP and TOC members will continue to seek adequate funding from governments, associations, and co mpanies, while TEAP itself will investigate funding from foundations.

TEAP continues to look for ways to minimi se its costs including: choosing cost-effective locations for meetings; seeking hosts form meeting rooms and di scounts for hotel rooms; using internet for communications and discussions; a nd rationalising membership, as needed. MBTOC and RTOC, which currently has a larger than n eeded 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 strengt hening 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 positi on 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 dimi nish after 2011 as both Article 5 and non-Article

MDI EUEs decrease and that work of the MBTO C will also probably diminish after 2012 when CUEs decrease. At that time, TEAP will furt her consolidate and simplify its organisation.

14.4 Notice of Positions Available on the TEAP and its TOCs

TEAP welcomes nominations of experts for a ll committees at any time. Currently, TEAP is particularly seeking:

• Article 5 Co-Chair for the Halons Technical Options CommitteeMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 236 • Expert in nutsedge control, orchard repl ant, 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 Re frigeration, 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 publishe d research papers in the field of refrigeration and air-conditioning. Dr. Agarwal has no proprietar y interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own any stock in companies produ cing 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 th e 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 Proj ects 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 voluntar y partnerships including accelerated phaseout agreements in food packaging foam, mobile AC, and solvents and he helped organize the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation and the Indust ry Cooperative for Ozone Layer Protection Prior to joining EPA he was a university professor, a consultant, and an employee of environmental,May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 238 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,” (E arthscan 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 Pr otecting 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 Stee ring Committee to the “IPCC/TEAP Special Report Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluor ocarbons” and he participated in the Science Assessment Panel in 2006. Dr. Andersen’s spou se 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 ma kes 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 sustainab ility arenas. He co-chaired the TEAP Task Force on the Supplement Report to the “IPCC/TEAP Sp ecial 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 di rect 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, Fo od 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 ga s emissions reporting by Governments. Other related non-TEAP work is covered under separate contracts from relevant commissioning organisations including international agenci es (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 Fo rce, 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 Resear ch 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 propriet ary 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 contr acts from UNEP, other in stitutions 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 ac tivities 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 Path ology and Integrated Disease Management at the Hassan II Institute of Agr onomy and Veterinary Medicine, Rabat, Morocco (HII IAVM). The HII IAVM has an interest in th e 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 OD Ss. 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 240 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 fund ing 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 Tec hnical Options Committee si nce 2005, is Professor of Chemistry of Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Acad emy 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 chemis try. 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 trav el, 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 Eindhove n, The Netherlands. He co-chaired the TEAP Replenishment Task Forces be tween 1996 and 2005, as well as the latest (2008) TEAP Replenishment Task Force. He served on th e 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 20 06 Task Force on Emissions Discrepancies and the 2007 Task Force on the Re sponse to Decision XV III/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 thedevelopment 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 ce rtain 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 substitu tes to ODS. He occasionally is a consultant to governmental and nongovernmental organisations, such as the Worl d Bank, UNIDO, UNEP DTIE and the Multilateral Fund (e.g. for the 2006 Expert M eeting). 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 refrigera tion, 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 Optio ns 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 ofMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 242 its interest in food processing, food safety and tr ade. 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 cons ulting 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 cons ulting 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), Wash ington 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 Res earch Center (FFRDC) th at 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 ha s contributed to the methyl bromide phaseout programs in nearly twenty Article 5 Parties aroun d 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, communicati on, 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. Spra y 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 proprietar y 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 Spra y 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.May 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 244 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 UNID O in developing programmes to assist China, Mexico and CEIT countries to replace methyl bromid e. 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 Fo ams 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 Te chnical 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 Technica l Options Committee since 2005, is a Honorary

Professorial Fellow at the Univer sity of Melbourne, Australia, and a member of advisory bodies for several Australian government ag encies 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 Co mmittee for the Stockholm Conventio n. 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 infring ement 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 meeti ngs 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 200 0, after nine years as Executive S ecretary, 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 st ate 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 trav el, 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 

### 246 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 (s ince 2007) with whom she is an independent consultant providing strategic, policy and techni cal 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 substitu tes 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 Secretar iat unconditionally by the International

Pharmaceutical Aerosol Cons ortium (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, sa laried 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 intere st 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 servi ces 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 topi cs of the Montreal Protocol because it is trying to phase-out halons but in the interim, continues to rely on halons for purposes of nationalMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 247 security. Dr. Verdonik’s spouse and dependant child ha ve 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. Ver donik’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 Ha lon Recycling Corporation, and the Halon Alternatives Research Corporati on, who in-turn currently receives funding to support these efforts from the following sponsors: BP Exploration, Alaska, ConocoPhillips, Alaska; DuPont; Chemtura; American Pacific; Firetrace; Ha lon Banking Systems; Wesco; Re mtec. 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 Medi cal Technical Options Committee and Member of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, is a Respiratory physician at the South Manchester University Teaching Hospital. Prof. W oodcock 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 unrela ted consulting and educational lectures for pharmaceutical companies, all of which are comp leting 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 Pro cess 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 prod uced CFCs, methyl chloroform, and carbonMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 248 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 co nsults 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 Memb ership List Status April 2008

Co-chairs Affiliation Country Stephen O. Andersen Environmental Protection Agency USA Lambert Kuijpers Technical Univ ersity 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 MauritiusMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 250 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 Bel g iu m 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 ChinaMay 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 In gelheim (Schweiz) Switzerland Ping Wang Chinese Phar macopoeia Commission China Adam Wanner University of Miami USA

Kristine Whorlow National Asthma Council Australia Australia You Yizhong Journal of Aerosol Communication ChinaMay 2008 TEAP Progress Report 

### 252 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 Re search 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 Depa rtment 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 ArgentinaMay 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 Univ ersity 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 /A merican 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 Fachhochs chule 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