MONTREAL PROTOCOL 

ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE 

THE OZONE LAYER 

UNEP 

REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL

MAY 2009 

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report iii

UNEP 

MAY 2009 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report iv 

Montreal Protocol 

On Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer 

Report of the 

UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

May 2009 

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT

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

Co-ordination: Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

Composition of the report: Lambert Kuijpers (UNEP TEAP) 

 Ozone Secretariat (UNEP) 

Layout: Ozone Secretariat (UNEP), 

 Lambert Kuijpers (UNEP TEAP) 

Reproduction: UNON Nairobi 

Date: May 2009 

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

UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME 

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

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

Ozone Secretariat's website: 

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

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

cited, with acknowledgement of the source of the material.

ISBN: 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report v

UNEP 

MAY 2009 REPORT OF THE

TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC

ASSESSMENT PANEL

VOLUME 1 

PROGRESS REPORT
vi May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

DISCLAIMER 

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

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

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

Task Forces co-chairs and members, and the companies and organisations that 

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

acceptability of any of the technical options discussed. Every industrial 

operation requires consideration of worker safety and proper disposal of 

contaminants and waste products. Moreover, as work continues - including 

additional toxicity evaluation - more information on health, environmental and 

safety effects of alternatives and replacements will become available for use in 

selecting among the options discussed in this document. 

UNEP, the TEAP co-chairs and members, the Technical and Economic 

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

Economic Assessment Panel Task Forces co-chairs and members, in 

furnishing or distributing the information that follows, do not make any 

warranty or representation, either express or implied, with respect to the 

accuracy, completeness, or utility; nor do they assume any liability of any kind 

whatsoever resulting from the use or reliance upon any information, material, 

or procedure contained herein. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

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

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

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

Protocol issues, without whose involvement the assessments and studies 

described in this progress report would not have been possible. 

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

necessarily reflect the reviews of any sponsoring or supporting organisation. 

The TEAP thanks in particular its member Mohamed Besri, MBTOC co-chair, 

for hosting a great TEAP meeting in Agadir, Morocco, 26-30 April 2008, where 

this report was discussed, adopted and finalised for last reviews by email 

circulation to all members. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report vii

Foreword 

The 2009 TEAP Report 

The 2009 TEAP Report consists of three volumes: 

Volume 1: May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Volume 2: May 2009 TEAP Task Force Report on Decision XX/8 

Volume 3: June 2009 TEAP Task Force Interim Report on Decision XX/7 

A more extensive description can be found in chapter 1, “Introduction”. 

The UNEP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel: 

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

Lambert Kuijpers, co-chair NL Ian Porter AUS 

José Pons-Pons, co-chair VEN Miguel Quintero COL 

Paul Ashford UK Ian Rae AUS 

Jonathan Banks AUS K. Madhava Sarma IND 

Mohamed Besri MOR Helen Tope AUS 

David Catchpole UK Dan Verdonik USA 

Biao Jiang PRC Ashley Woodcock UK 

Michelle Marcotte CDN Masaaki Yamabe J 

Thomas Morehouse USA Shiqiu Zhang PRC 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report ix

MAY 2009 TEAP PROGRESS REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1

2 OZONE LAYER PROTECTION IN 2009, A TEAP OVERVIEW..........................................3

3 ESSENTIAL USES..........................................................................................................................7

3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE 

INHALERS .....................................................................................................................................7

3.2 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METERED DOSE INHALERS .................................................9

3.2.1 Criteria for review of Essential Use Nominations for MDIs......................................................9

3.2.2 Review of Nominations ................................................................................................................9

3.2.3 Observations ..............................................................................................................................10

3.2.4 Technically and economically feasible alternatives .................................................................12

3.2.5 Exported products......................................................................................................................14

3.2.6 Other Issues ...............................................................................................................................15

3.2.7 Lessons learned from the phase-out in non-Article 5 Parties ..................................................16

3.2.8 Committee Evaluation and Recommendations..........................................................................16

3.3 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATION FOR FOAM, REFRIGERATION AND AIR 

CONDITIONING USES FROM IRAQ...............................................................................................30

4 RESPONSE TO DECISION XX/4: CAMPAIGN PRODUCTION FOR SOME 

ARTICLE 5 PARTIES MANUFACTURING METERED-DOSE INHALERS 

USING CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS ....................................................................................33

4.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................33

4.2 DEVELOPMENTS RELATING TO CAMPAIGN PRODUCTION ...........................................................34

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

5.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................37

5.2 GLOBAL USE OF CFCS................................................................................................................37

5.3 TRANSITION AWAY FROM THE USE OF CFC MDIS.....................................................................38

5.4 TRANSITION STRATEGIES............................................................................................................40

5.4.1 Progress reports on transition strategies under Decision XII/2 ..............................................41

5.5 GLOBAL DATABASE IN RESPONSE TO DECISION XIV/5..............................................................41

6 RESPONSE TO DECISION XX/3(4): SUGGESTIONS FOR APPROPRIATE 

CHANGES TO THE HANDBOOK ON ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATIONS.....................43

7 CHEMICALS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (CTOC) PROGRESS 

REPORT.........................................................................................................................................47

7.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................47

7.2 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................48

7.3 PROCESS AGENTS .......................................................................................................................48

7.3.1 Reviews of information from Israel, Netherlands and China ...................................................49

7.3.2 Attempted review of Table B of Decision X/14 .........................................................................50

7.4 LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL USES.......................................................................................51

7.4.1 Information table .......................................................................................................................51

7.4.2 Case studies ...............................................................................................................................56

7.4.3 Gulf Region and West Asia........................................................................................................59

7.4.4 Chemical Education...................................................................................................................59

7.5 ESSENTIAL USE NOMINATION OF CFC-113 IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION...............................60

7.6 UPDATE OF N-PROPYL BROMIDE.................................................................................................61

7.7 CARBON TETRACHLORIDE (CTC) EMISSIONS ............................................................................61

APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 7: TEAP/CTOC REPORT ON THE 2008 EXPERT 

MEETING IN MOSCOW ............................................................................................................62

1. OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................62

2. BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................62

3. MEETING OF TEAP EXPERTS WITH RUSSIAN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.....................................62

4. CFC-113 PRODUCTION...............................................................................................................63
x May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

5. CFC-113 APPLICATIONS ............................................................................................................63

6. ALTERNATIVES BEING EVALUATED...........................................................................................64

7. NEW CLEANING EQUIPMENT FOR ALTERNATIVES .....................................................................65

8. CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................................66

9. RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................66

8 FOAMS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (FTOC) PROGRESS 

REPORT.........................................................................................................................................81

8.1 TRANSITIONAL STATUS ..............................................................................................................81

8.1.1 Transition Status – Article 5 Parties .........................................................................................81

8.1.2 Transition Status – Non-Article 5 Parties.................................................................................82

8.2 TECHNOLOGY UPDATE...............................................................................................................82

9 HALONS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (HTOC) PROGRESS 

REPORT.........................................................................................................................................85

9.1 HALON 2401 USES AND SUPPLIES..............................................................................................85

9.2 UPDATE ON HALON 1301 USE AS A FEEDSTOCK........................................................................85

9.3 INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION (ICAO) UPDATE ........................................85

9.4 REGIONAL EMISSIONS OF HALONS.............................................................................................86

10 RESPONSE TO DECISION XIX/16: FOLLOW-UP TO THE 2006 

ASSESSMENT REPORT BY THE HALONS TECHNICAL OPTIONS 

COMMITTEE ...............................................................................................................................89

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................89

10.1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................92

10.1.1 Task ............................................................................................................................................92

10.1.2 Structure of the Study.................................................................................................................93

10.1.3 Data Gathering ..........................................................................................................................93

10.1.4 Study Delivery............................................................................................................................94

10.1.5 Regional Imbalances .................................................................................................................94

10.2 HALON 1211 AND HALON 1301 .................................................................................................94

10.2.1 Summary.....................................................................................................................................94

10.2.2 Introduction................................................................................................................................95

10.2.3 Asia.............................................................................................................................................97

10.2.4 Europe......................................................................................................................................101

10.2.5 Middle East, North and West Africa .......................................................................................104

10.2.6 South and Central Africa.........................................................................................................105

10.2.7 North America and Australia ..................................................................................................107

10.2.8 South America..........................................................................................................................108

10.2.9 Halon Banking in Article 5 Countries.....................................................................................109

10.3 HALON 2402.............................................................................................................................109

10.3.1 Summary...................................................................................................................................109

10.3.2 Introduction..............................................................................................................................110

10.3.3 Parties That Still Use Halon 2402 ..........................................................................................111

10.3.4 Halon 2402 Supply and Demand.............................................................................................111

10.4 ALL HALONS – AVIATION AND MERCHANT SHIPPING.............................................................115

10.4.1 Summary...................................................................................................................................115

10.4.2 Introduction..............................................................................................................................116

10.4.3 Aviation ....................................................................................................................................116

10.4.4 Merchant Shipping...................................................................................................................117

10.5 PREDICTING AND MITIGATING IMBALANCES ...........................................................................118

11 DECISION XIX/8: ALTERNATIVES TO HCFCS AT HIGH AMBIENT 

TEMPERATURES......................................................................................................................121

11.1 GENERAL ..................................................................................................................................121

11.1.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................121

11.1.2 HCFC-22..................................................................................................................................121

11.1.3 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Air Conditioning..............................................122

11.1.4 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Refrigeration ...................................................122

11.1.5 Refrigerants for Deep Mines ...................................................................................................123

11.1.6 Properties of Refrigerants Dealt with in this Report ..............................................................123

11.2 REFRIGERANTS FOR HIGH AMBIENT TEMPERATURE AIR CONDITIONING ...............................125
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report xi

11.2.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................126

11.2.2 Refrigerant Options .................................................................................................................126

11.2.3 Cycle Analysis (Computation Model)......................................................................................126

11.2.4 Cycle Analysis Results .............................................................................................................127

11.2.5 Published Performance Data ..................................................................................................129

11.2.6 Overview ..................................................................................................................................130

11.2.7 Concluding Remarks................................................................................................................132

11.2.8 References ................................................................................................................................133

11.3 REFRIGERANTS FOR HIGH AMBIENT TEMPERATURE COMMERCIAL 

REFRIGERATION .......................................................................................................................134

11.3.1 Introductory Comments ...........................................................................................................134

11.3.2 Refrigerants for Small Commercial Refrigeration Systems in Hot Climates.........................135

11.3.3 Refrigerants for Large Commercial Refrigeration Systems in Hot Climates ........................136

11.3.4 Concluding Remarks................................................................................................................138

11.3.5 References ................................................................................................................................139

11.4 REFRIGERANTS FOR DEEP MINES.............................................................................................139

11.4.1 Background ..............................................................................................................................139

11.4.2 Deep Mines ..............................................................................................................................140

11.4.3 Requirements and Outlook ......................................................................................................141

11.5 CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................................................................141

12 METHYL BROMIDE - INTERIM RESPONSE TO DECISION XX/6. 

REPORT OF THE TEAP QUARANTINE AND PRE-SHIPMENT TASK 

FORCE .........................................................................................................................................145

12.1 MANDATE AND SCOPE OF THE REPORT.....................................................................................146

12.1.1 Background to the report.........................................................................................................147

12.1.2 Fulfilment of Decision XX/6 – Process ...................................................................................148

12.2 AVAILABILITY OF INFORMATION: RESPONSE TO PARAGRAPH 5 OF DECISION XX/6................149

12.2.1 Volumes of MB used for QPS ..................................................................................................149

12.2.2 Overview of QPS production and consumption......................................................................149

12.3 MAJOR QPS USES AND VOLUMES.............................................................................................163

12.3.1 Definitions of 'Quarantine' and 'Pre-shipment' ......................................................................164

12.3.2 Overview of QPS use by category of use.................................................................................166

12.4 EMISSIONS DATA ......................................................................................................................168

12.5 AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES .....................................................................................................169

12.5.1 Manuals and other data sources for approved treatments.....................................................169

12.5.2 Availability of alternatives and technologies for the main methyl bromide uses...................171

12.5.3 Applications for which no alternatives are available.............................................................174

12.6 REGULATIONS THAT DIRECTLY AFFECT THE USE OF MB.............................................................174

12.7 BARRIERS TO ADOPTION, MITIGATION OPTIONS .......................................................................175

12.8 A LIST OF CATEGORIES OF USE IDENTIFIED BY TEAP THAT HAVE BEEN 

CLASSIFIED AS QPS BY SOME PARTIES AND NOT BY OTHERS ..................................................176

12.9 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................179

13 METHYL BROMIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (MBTOC) 

PROGRESS REPORT 2009.......................................................................................................187

13.1 MB PRODUCTION AND CONSUMPTION UPDATE ........................................................................187

13.1.1 Production trends ....................................................................................................................187

13.1.2 Global consumption.................................................................................................................189

13.2 ALTERNATIVES FOR SOIL TREATMENTS ...................................................................................194

13.2.1 Key alternatives .......................................................................................................................194

13.2.2 Update on registration of chemical alternatives: ...................................................................196

13.2.3 Crop specific strategies............................................................................................................199

13.2.4 Economic aspects of methyl bromide alternatives..................................................................209

13.3 MBTOC QSC PROGRESS REPORT ...........................................................................................210

13.3.1 News reports concerning MB alternatives..............................................................................210

13.3.2 Regulations Concerning QPS MB Use....................................................................................211

13.3.3 Issues Surrounding Methyl Bromide Recapture and Regulations Concerning 

QPS MB Use ............................................................................................................................212

13.3.4 Preliminary Report on Progress in Resolving the Problem of Pests in High 

Moisture Dates.........................................................................................................................212
xii May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.3.5 Methyl Bromide Alternatives for Postharvest Uses -- Research Update ...............................214

13.3.6 Research into control of non-quarantine pests in commodities .............................................218

13.3.7 Research about control of quarantine pests in commodities..................................................222

13.4 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................224

ANNEX 1 TO CHAPTER 13 - REGISTRATION STATUS OF ALTERNATIVES TO METHYL 

BROMIDE FOR THE USA...........................................................................................................239

14 EVALUATIONS OF CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL 

BROMIDE AND RELATED MATTERS – INTERIM REPORT........................................243

14.1 SCOPE OF THE REPORT .............................................................................................................243

14.2 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR METHYL BROMIDE............................................................243

14.2.1 Mandate ...................................................................................................................................243

14.2.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 .....................................................................................................244

14.2.3 Consideration of Stocks - Decision Ex.1/4 (9f).......................................................................244

14.2.4 Stocks........................................................................................................................................246

14.2.5 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use - Decision XVII/9 .......................................246

14.2.6 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005.............................................................247

14.2.7 Evaluations of CUNs – 2009 round for 2010 and 2011 exemptions......................................251

14.2.8 Critical Use Nominations Review ...........................................................................................252

14.2.9 Disclosure of Interest...............................................................................................................252

14.3 MBTOC SOILS: FINAL EVALUATIONS OF 2009 CRITICAL USE NOMINATIONS FOR 

METHYL BROMIDE ...................................................................................................................253

14.3.1 Summary of outcomes..............................................................................................................253

14.3.2 Issues related to CUN Assessment for Preplant Soil Use.......................................................255

14.3.3 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities.....................................259

14.3.4 Adjustments for standard dosage rates using MB/Pic formulations ......................................261

14.3.5 Use/Emission reduction technologies - Low permeability barrier films and 

dosage reduction......................................................................................................................262

14.3.6 Use of disposable canisters of MB ..........................................................................................263

14.4 INTERIM CUN REPORT – ISSUES SPECIFIC TO MBTOC QUARANTINE,

STRUCTURES AND COMMODITIES ............................................................................................284

14.4.1 Standard Dosage Presumptions and Adjustments for standard dosage rates .......................285

14.4.2 Details of evaluations ..............................................................................................................285

14.5 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................299

15 TEAP AND TOC ORGANISATION ISSUES.........................................................................325

15.1 CURRENT TEAP AND TOC MEMBERSHIP ................................................................................325

15.2 FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS AND CHALLENGES ENCOUNTERED BY TEAP AND TOC

MEMBERS..................................................................................................................................325

15.3 TECHNOLOGY AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT PANEL (TEAP) .................................................325

15.4 MEDICAL TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (MTOC)............................................................326

15.5 METHYL BROMIDE TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE (MBTOC)..........................................326

15.6 REFRIGERATION, AC AND HEAT PUMPS TECHNICAL OPTIONS COMMITTEE 

(RTOC) ....................................................................................................................................326

16 TEAP MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES ...........................................................................................327

17 TEAP TOC MEMBERSHIP LIST STATUS APRIL 2009....................................................337
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 1 

1 Introduction 

The spring 2009 Report of the TEAP consists of three separate volumes: 

1. The TEAP 2009 Progress Report (this report); 

2. The TEAP Task Force XX/7 report, published the beginning of June 2009; 

3. The TEAP Task Force XX/8 report, published the end of May 2009. 

The latter two volumes will have separate conclusions chapters and Executive Summaries. 

It its 2009 Progress Report TEAP has largely maintained the sequence of chapters as in earlier 

Progress reports, however, now with a first short general chapter on the status of the ODS 

Phase-out, status 2009, from a TEAP point of view (chapter 2). 

This chapter is followed by the chapter composed by the MTOC, which gives 

recommendations for essential use requests for CFC quantities for MDIs. It is for the first 

time that, from a total of 10 nominations, (8) requests for essential uses from Article 5 Parties 

were analysed and recommendations could be given. 

Following the recommendations for CFCs for essential uses for MDIs, the TEAP gives 

recommendations for an essential use request received from Iraq for the use of CFCs in foam, 

refrigeration and AC for the years 2010 and 2011, in the light of the criteria given in Decision 

IV/25. 

Thereafter the report contains a chapter on Campaign Production by the MTOC, in response 

to Decision XX/4. A short chapter follows it, which contains recommendations for changes 

in the Handbook how to deal with essential use requests and procedures in future. This 

chapter was drafted in response to decision XX/3(4). 

These chapters are followed by progress reports by the CTOC, FTOC and HTOC. 

The CTOC briefly reports on the progress in reduction of emissions from process agent 

applications, following XVII/6; since no essential new information has come forward from 

the Parties this report has been kept brief. The CTOC recalls the uses listed in Tables A and 

B in Decision X/14; it elaborates especially on the possible updating of Table B with new 

uses. Following Decision XVII/10, the TEAP and its CTOC should report bi-annually on the 

procedures for laboratory and analytical uses that do not use ODS. This CTOC progress 

report contains extensive information on these uses in a long information table, as well as case 

studies and regional reports. 

The CTOC presents the essential use nomination for CFC-113 by the Russian Federation, 

and, in an appendix to its progress report, elaborates in nine sub-chapters on the expert 

meeting on this issue held in Moscow, in the year 2008. 

The FTOC, in its progress report, specifically deals with the transition status in non-Article 5 

and Article 5 countries. 

The HTOC progress report deals with halon 2401 uses and supplies, an update on ICAO 

procedures and regional emissions of halons as measured in the atmosphere. 

For the RTOC, no progress report has been inserted in the 2009 TEAP Progress Report since 

most of the developments in this sector will be reported in the Task Force Report on Decision 

XX/8. 

After these progress reports, the 2009 TEAP Progress Report presents 

 a report by the HTOC on Decision XIX/16, which asked for a follow-up to the HTOC 

2006 assessment report. The Decision specifically asked to undertake a further study on 

projected regional imbalances in the availability of halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 
2 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

2402 and to investigate and propose mechanisms to better predict and mitigate such 

imbalances in the future; 

 a report by the RTOC on Decision XIX/8, “Alternatives for HCFCs at high ambient 

temperatures”. This report was delayed in the year 2008. In the current version of the 

report the deep mines issue is briefly dealt with, but a full report on this deep mines issue 

will be available for MOP-21; 

 an interim report by the QPS Task Force, following Decision XX/6, in which the TEAP is 

requested to review all relevant, currently available information on the use of methyl 

bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment applications and related emissions, to assess 

trends in the major uses, available alternatives and other mitigation options, and barriers 

to the adoption of alternatives. The relevant Decision also mentioned that, in the interim 

report, areas should be indicated where the information is not sufficient, explaining, 

where appropriate, why the data were inadequate and presenting a practical proposal for 

how best to gather the information required for a satisfactory analysis (in this Decision 

the TEAP was also requested to present the final report to MOP-21). 

Following these three “independent” reports, the 2009 TEAP Progress Report contains two 

chapters, which were composed by the MBTOC: 

- the 2009 MBTOC progress report for both soils and QSC; 

- the interim report on the evaluation of critical use applications for MB and subsequent 

recommendations. 

As last chapters, the 2009 TEAP Progress Report contains a chapter on TEAP and TOC 

organisation issues, a chapter with the biographies of all TEAP members, as well as a number 

of lists with the current compositions of the membership for TEAP and its TOCs.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 3 

2 Ozone Layer Protection in 2009, a TEAP overview 

Since the phase-out of several groups of ODS is nearing completion, the Montreal Protocol 

generally, and the TEAP specifically, face a number of challenging issues. The following 

summarises developments and processes that will likely affect the focus of the TEAP ́s work 

in the short term: 

 The phase-out by Article 5 Parties of CFCs, halons and CTC (Annex A Group I and 

Group II, and Annex B Group II substances) by January 1, 2010. 

 The 2010 65% consumption reduction in HCFCs (Annex C Group I substances) for nonArticle 5 Parties. 

 The 2013 freeze and the 2015 10% consumption reduction in HCFCs (Annex C Group I 

substances) for Article 5 Parties. 

 Continuing Essential Use Nominations and their submission by Article 5 Parties. 

 Continuing methyl bromide (Annex E Group I) Critical Use Nominations for non-Article 

5 Parties. 

In the short term, TEAP also believes the following issues will require more focused efforts to 

improve the quality of its technical advice to Parties: 

 Discrepancies between the observed and the calculated atmospheric concentration of 

CTC. 

 The need for more detailed information about quarantine and pre-shipment (QPS) uses of 

methyl bromide (Annex E Group I). 

 The need to integrate assessments of both ozone and climate effects of ODS projects, 

including ongoing ODS phase-out activities and bank management. 

 Looking further ahead to the medium term, TEAP anticipates that the following issues 

may need to be observed and addressed: 

 Potential Essential Use Nominations from Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties, if needed. 

 The phase-out of 1,1,1-trichloroethane and methyl bromide (Annex B Group III and 

Annex E Group I substances) by Article 5 Parties by January 1, 2015. 

 The possible need for Article 5 Parties to begin using the Critical Use Nomination 

process for methyl bromide. 

 Further reductions in consumption of HCFCs (Annex C Group I substances) by Article 5 

and non-Article 5 Parties. 

 The need for a more complete understanding of emissions resulting from use of ODS as 

feedstock. 

The continuing adoption of new technologies and the need to evaluate their interrelated 

environmental effects, make it likely that TEAP will be asked to conduct increasingly 

complex assessments, and to respond to additional decisions taken by Parties. 

Details of the Short Term Issues: 

Article 5 phase-out of CFCs, Halons and CTC (Annex A Group I and Group II, and Annex B 

Group II substances) by January 1, 2010 

With some stockpiles of CFCs, halons and CTC beginning to run short and important uses 

remaining, there is potential for some Parties to look to Essential Use Nominations to avoid 

the choice between non-compliance and unacceptable risk for some important societal needs. 

While the phase-out date is January 1, 2010, the reporting data necessary to identify instances 

of non-compliance will not be available for analysis until perhaps 2 years later. Although no 

major problems are expected, because suitable alternatives to these substances exist, local 
4 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

issues concerning availability of recycled and stockpiled materials may present difficult 

commercial, technical and policy challenges. 

Consumption reduction of 65% for HCFCs (Annex C Group I substances) by non-Article 5 

Parties 

The 65% consumption reduction in HCFCs has already been achieved in most non-Article 5 

Parties. Local regulations, which often go beyond the Montreal Protocol, have helped 

accelerate the reduction. However, there remains a high potential for alternatives to be 

selected that result in increased greenhouse gas emissions. Alternatives to HCFCs are 

discussed in detail in the TEAP Task Force Report on Decision XX/8. 

The 2013 freeze and the 2015 consumption reduction in HCFCs (Annex C Group I 

substances) for Article 5 Parties. 

Decision XIX/6 requires a freeze in HCFC consumption in 2013 for Article 5 Parties based on 

an average of reported 2009/2010 consumption. If projects are going to be implemented 

before 2013, they will need to be identified in 2010. Review of the outcomes of current pilot 

projects may be a key role for TEAP in the next 12-18 months. 

Decision XIX/6, paragraph 9 also emphasises the need to integrate ozone layer and climate 

protection. While it is technically and economically feasible to phase out HCFCs in Article 5 

Parties, the selection of technologies that will minimise environmental impacts, in particular 

impacts on climate, requires a complex analysis. This will be discussed in the TEAP Task 

Force Report on Decision XX/8 as well as in other studies. 

Continuing Essential Use Nominations and their submission by Article 5 Parties 

The Essential Use procedures are well established. Non-Article 5 Parties have more than ten 

year’s experience in collecting essential data and preparing nomination packages that provide 

the information to the TEAP and its TOCs in order to respond to the criteria established by 

the Parties. This process has allowed Parties to successfully satisfy their essential needs for 

ODS for more than a decade. The TEAP 2009 Progress Report presents the TEAP 

recommendations for Essential Use Nominations from non-Article 5 Parties for 2010 and 

2011. 

It is now important to help Article 5 Parties develop similar expertise and reporting 

infrastructure to enable them to use the Essential Use process as a tool that can help manage 

ODS production and consumption towards a successful phase-out. Availability of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs after 2010 remains uncertain. The 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

presents the TEAP recommendations for Essential Use Nominations from Article 5 Parties for 

asthma and COPD for 2010 and discusses the supply challenges for pharmaceutical-grade 

CFCs. 

It might be expected that the earlier a phase-out date occurred, the less likely that new 

Essential Use Nominations would be required. However, this may not always be the case. 

For example, halon production ceased in 1994 for non-Article 5 Parties, but important uses 

remain, including equipment servicing through recycling and reuse of halons produced before 

the phase-out. Evidence suggests these stocks may be running short. Unless barriers to the 

global movement of halons (produced before the phase-out) from places where they are in 

excess to where they are needed are removed, new production may be needed to satisfy 

important public safety and national security uses. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 5 

The need to effectively use banked ODS to avoid Essential Use Nominations is directly 

connected to the need to resolve challenges related to sound bank management. TEAP has 

received reports that some ODS are being emitted from banks for a variety of commercial, 

technical and policy reasons. The HTOC sub-committee report on Decision XIX/16 discusses 

the regional availability of halons and the ability of existing stocks to meet future needs. The 

2009 MTOC report discusses the management of existing stocks of pharmaceutical-grade 

CFCs for MDIs to minimise or avoid the need for further production. 

Discrepancies between measured and expected atmospheric concentration of CTC 

The discrepancies between the observed and the calculated atmospheric concentration of CTC 

are of concern because of their sizeable magnitude. According to the figures observed from 

atmospheric abundance, CTC emissions would need to be of the order of 70,000 ODP tonnes 

per year, compared to the 20,000 ODP tonnes calculated using a bottom-up methodology. As 

instructed by the Parties at MOP-20 in Doha concerning Decision XVIII/10, TEAP will be 

working with the MLF to better explain this discrepancy. This work is in its early stages, and 

findings will not be part of the 2009 TEAP Progress Report. 

Continuing methyl bromide Critical Use Nominations from non-Article 5 Parties and the need 

for improved information about quarantine and pre-shipment uses (Annex E Group I) 

While Critical Use Nominations for methyl bromide by non-Article 5 Parties continue to 

decrease, the global production of this substance for quarantine and pre-shipment (QPS) 

applications was about 8,000 ODP tones in 2007 and is not declining. Methyl bromide is 

treated differently from other ODS in that its uses have been put into two distinct categories: 

one containing controlled uses with a phase-out schedule; and one for which a global 

exemption applies. In 2009, TEAP has established the Quarantine and Pre-shipment Task 

Force (QPSTF) to respond to Decision XX/6 and provide a more detailed understanding and 

meaningful assessment of trends in methyl bromide uses for QPS applications and alternatives 

in those applications. MBTOC and the QPSTF have indicated a need for more detailed 

information from the Parties on the uses, quantities and applications of methyl bromide for 

QPS. 

The need to integrate assessments of both ozone and climate effects of ODS projects, 

including ongoing ODS phase-out activities and bank management. 

The tasks of assessing potential HCFC alternatives and managing ODS banks present new 

challenges and opportunities to continue protecting the ozone layer while also contributing to 

climate protection. The need to develop and apply life cycle analyses to identify options that 

protect the ozone layer while minimising the climate consequences over the life time of the 

product adds new complexities to the work of the TEAP. The Task Force report on Decision 

XX/7 seeks to address some of these issues in respect to the management of ODS banks. 

Furthermore, in case other alternatives to ODS that are not HFCs or HCFCs, have a 

significant GWP they will likely require similar analyses to integrate ozone and climate 

protection. For example, sulfuryl fluoride, one of the important alternatives to methyl 

bromide, has recently been reported to have a high GWP. A preliminary review can be found 

in the 2009 MBTOC Progress Report. 
6 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Details of the Medium Term Issues: 

Potential Essential Use Nominations from Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties, if needed 

Some Article 5 Parties have indicated that they expect continued Essential Use of CFCs for 

the treatment of asthma and COPD until as late as 2015. Although Article 5 Parties have just 

begun to use the Essential Use process in 2009, it seems unlikely that CFCs for MDIs will be 

needed for the same number of years for Article 5 Parties as they were for non-Article 5 

Parties, given the global progress with transition to CFC-free alternatives. 

The phase-out of 1,1,1-trichloroethane and methyl bromide (Annex B Group III and Annex E 

Group I substances) in Article 5 Parties by January 1, 2015 

TEAP expects little difficulty in the phase-out of 1,1,1-trichloroethane being completed in 

Article 5 Parties by January 1, 2015 as production and use of 1,1,1-trichloroethane are 

currently small and appear on track to achieve phase-out. 

The vast majority of Article 5 countries have complied with the phase-out schedule for methyl 

bromide and a large number have achieved early phase-out through MLF funded projects. 

The provision for Critical Use Exemptions for Article 5 countries does however exist, and it is 

possible that some could arise, but it is still too early in the process to predict with certainty. 

Further reductions in consumption of HCFCs (Annex C Group I substances) by Article 5 and 

non-Article 5 Parties 

The best alternatives for some HCFC uses in Article 5 Parties are often hydrocarbons, but 

because HCFC projects were funded to phase-out CFCs, there may be issues related to the 

funding of second conversions that could delay the adoption of hydrocarbon alternatives; 

particularly in the case of foams. Similarly, if HFCs were used as alternatives in new HCFC 

phase-out projects, the implementation of these projects might create a future need to fund 

further conversions, increasing costs and delaying the adoption of more climate protective 

solutions. 

Newer technologies nearing commercial availability have the potential to protect better both 

ozone and climate; therefore it may be desirable in some cases for Article 5 Parties to wait 

until these alternatives emerge. This is a significant departure from current convention, which 

emphasises adoption of alternatives as soon as possible. TEAP and its Task Force analyse 

these issues in the Report sections dealing with Decision XX/8. 

The need for a more complete understanding of emissions resulting from use of ODS as 

feedstock 

In parallel with the reduction in ODS consumption for dispersive or emissive uses under the 

Montreal Protocol, consumption for some feedstock uses of ODS are growing rapidly; 

particularly those using HCFC-22. As a result of this growth, the emissions arising from 

feedstock uses are taking on greater importance. It will be necessary to understand the 

magnitude of these emissions over time, and to identify options for avoiding them if these 

uses are to continue without harming the ozone layer. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 7 

3 Essential Uses 

3.1 Executive Summary of Essential Use Nominations for Metered Dose 

Inhalers 

MTOC received 10 essential use nominations: 

8 from Article 5 Parties (Argentina, Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Pakistan, and 

Syria); and 2 from non-Article 5 Parties (Russian Federation and United States). 

Table 3-1 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 3-1: Recommendations for essential use nominations 

Party 2010 2011 2012 

Argentina 178 - - 

Bangladesh 156.7 - - 

China 972.2 - - 

Egypt 227.4 - - 

India 343.6 - - 

Iran 105 - - 

Pakistan 34.9 Unable to recommend Unable to recommend 

Russian 

Federation 

212 - - 

Syria 44.68 Unable to recommend - 

United States - Unable to recommend - 

MTOC found it difficult to assess adequately the nominations from Article 5 Parties in 

accordance with the criteria set out in Decision IV/25. In particular, there was a shortage of 

data on the availability and affordability of alternatives to CFC MDIs for the MDI 

manufacturing/ nominating Party and especially for the Article 5 Parties importing their 

products. This has become the most critical information in determining essentiality since 

Parties already have a range of alternatives available. 

There is now a wide range of technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs in most 

Article 5 Parties. MTOC attempted to minimise the requested quantities for each nomination 

based on information that Parties provided or that MTOC was otherwise able to collect on the 

availability of alternatives. However, MTOC was unable to make reductions in quantities 

confidently, without concern that there might not be adequate supplies to meet patient needs. 

Parties have previously taken Decisions intended to provide Parties and MTOC with 

information on CFC MDIs and their alternatives. Decision XIV/5 requested each Party to 

submit available information on CFC and CFC-free MDIs and dry powder inhalers (DPIs) in 

their markets to the Ozone Secretariat by 28 February 2003 with annual updates thereafter, 

and requires TEAP to review this information in making its annual assessments. Some 

Parties have submitted data pursuant to Decision XIV/5, but in many cases data are not 
8 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

provided or have not been updated annually. Parties may wish to consider reminding Parties, 

including Article 5 Parties, to collect data on CFC and CFC-free inhalers and provide it 

annually to the Secretariat to be posted on its website, in accordance with Decision XIV/5. 

Several of the nominations included significant quantities of CFCs to manufacture MDIs for 

export, mainly to other Article 5 Parties. None of the nominations demonstrated that these 

CFC MDIs were essential in the designated export markets where in most cases it appeared 

that an adequate range of technically feasible alternatives was available. In future years, 

MTOC is unlikely to recommend quantities of CFCs for MDIs intended for export that exceed 

those recommended for 2010, in the absence of compelling evidence. In subsequent years 

MTOC would expect to see reductions annually. 

Decision XII/2(3) requests Parties, including Article 5 Parties, to notify the Ozone Secretariat 

of any MDI products determined to be non-essential, and for nominating Parties to take this 

information into consideration. The Ozone Secretariat website has information pursuant to 

Decision XII/2(3) only from the European Community. Parties may wish to consider 

reminding all Parties to notify the Ozone Secretariat of any MDI products determined to be 

non-essential. Information posted on the Ozone Secretariat website can then be used by 

nominating Parties and MTOC in the essential use process. 

Decisions XV/5, par. 2, and XX/3 par. 1(a) request nominating Parties to provide information 

on 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. Decision XVI/12, par. 2 further states that when more specific data are not available, 

data aggregated by region and product group may be submitted for CFC MDIs intended for 

sale in Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5. MTOC found it difficult to assess 

accurately the essentiality of quantities of CFCs intended for export when country-specific 

information was not provided in the nominations on the quantity of CFCs required for each 

active ingredient in each market. In future years, in the absence of country-specific 

information on CFC quantities intended for export, MTOC will consider the alternatives 

available in intended export markets and make recommendations for a quantity of essential 

use CFCs for the manufacture of MDIs which specifically excludes any countries considered 

to have an adequate range of alternatives. For the year 2010, Parties may wish to consider 

qualifying any approval of essential use exemptions with the condition that any Party 

exporting CFC MDIs will get prior informed consent of the Government of the importing 

country for such exports to that country. 

Some importing Article 5 Parties have already introduced import controls or bans on CFC 

MDIs (e.g. Thailand and Fiji). Other importing countries listed in the essential use 

nominations as intended export markets already have a complete range of CFC-free 

alternatives (e.g. Costa Rica). Parties may wish to consider the advantages of encouraging 

Parties to establish controls on the import of CFC MDIs, and to introduce import bans at a 

certain date when adequate alternatives to CFC MDIs are available. Parties may also wish to 

consider the advantages of informing the Ozone Secretariat of any controls, and in turn the 

Ozone Secretariat informing Parties. For example, the Ozone Secretariat’s website list of 

used ODS products not wanted by Parties could include any CFC MDI products not wanted 

by Parties. In addition, given the complexity and fluidity of export markets, Parties may wish 

to consider the advantages of all importing Parties, including Article 5 Parties, making annual 

declarations stating the reasons why the imported CFC MDI products are considered 

necessary and requiring that these declarations accompany nominations from Parties 

manufacturing and exporting CFC MDIs. 

MTOC has suggested changes to the information requirements of the Handbook on Essential 

Use Nominations 2005 (the Handbook) for consideration by Parties this year (see Chapter 6), 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 9 

to seek more and better quality information on the availability and affordability of CFC-free 

alternatives in intended markets and to enable a more accurate assessment of nominations in 

2010. 

If approved by Parties, it is estimated that up to about 2,000 tonnes of essential use CFCs for 

MDIs may be needed for 2010. The European Commission has regulated to stop production 

of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs from the 1st January 2010, which would otherwise have 

supplied many Article 5 Party producers of CFC MDIs. With this development, it is 

impossible to predict where essential use CFCs might be sourced for 2010. Some MDI 

manufacturing companies will have to find new sources of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to 

supply any essential use exemptions approved by Parties for 2010. CFCs could be sourced 

from existing plants in China, India or the United States although this would require changes 

to CFC production phase-out agreements or to regulations. Remaining stockpiles in nonArticle 5 Parties could be another potential source. A change in CFC supply would have a 

number of implications, including the need to validate the suitability of newly sourced CFCs 

with relevant health authorities, possible disruptions to the normal flow of MDI production, 

risks to patient health, and delays in the transition from CFC MDIs (see Chapter 4). 

3.2 Essential Use Nominations for Metered Dose Inhalers 

3.2.1 Criteria for review of Essential Use Nominations for MDIs 

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

XII/2, XIV/5, XV/5, XVI/12, XVIII/16 and XX/3 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 and Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 of the Protocol. Other 

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

3.2.2 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. Further information was requested of nominating Parties where necessary. The 

MTOC considered the assessments, made recommendation decisions and prepared a 

consensus report at its meeting in Montreal, Canada, 22-25 March 2009. Members disclosed 

any potential conflict of interests ahead of the discussion. Where necessary, members were 

recused from the decision-making process of the nomination relevant to any potential conflict 

of interest. Annually listed disclosures of members indicate specific interests and any 

relevant actions taken. 

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

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

Parties listed in section 3.2.1. 

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

provided to the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). The TEAP and its 

TOCs can consult with other individuals or organisations to assist in the review and to prepare 

TEAP recommendations for the Parties. 
10 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

3.2.3 Observations 

MTOC received 10 essential use nominations: 8 from Article 5 Parties (Argentina, 

Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, Iran, Pakistan, and Syria); and 2 from non-Article 5 Parties 

(Russian Federation and United States). 

MTOC found it difficult to adequately assess the nominations from Article 5 Parties in 

accordance with the criteria set out in Decision IV/25. In particular, there was a shortage of 

data on the availability and affordability of alternatives to CFC MDIs for the MDI 

manufacturing/ nominating Party and especially for the Article 5 Parties importing their 

products. This has become the most critical information in determining essentiality since 

Parties already have a range of alternatives available. 

The substantive criteria for essential use exemptions are detailed in Decision IV/25 of the 

Parties. Paragraph 1 (a) of Decision IV/25 states that: 

"Use of a controlled substance should qualify as essential only if: 

(i) it is necessary for health, safety or is critical for the functioning of society 

(encompassing cultural and intellectual aspects); and 

(ii) there are no available technically and economically feasible alternatives or 

substitutes that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and 

health." 

MTOC tried to assess availability and affordability in accordance with Decision IV/25. 

MTOC attempted to minimise the requested quantities for each nomination, based on 

information on the availability of alternatives that Parties provided or that MTOC was 

otherwise able to collect. 

However, MTOC was unable to make reductions in quantities confidently, without concern 

that there might not be adequate supplies to meet patient needs. Furthermore, nominating 

Article 5 Parties are not required to complete an Accounting Framework this year, so 

complete data on usage and stockpiles were not available to MTOC. Accordingly, the 

consensus reached for most nominations from Article 5 Parties was to recommend them as 

proposed, with the exceptions of the nominations from China, India, and Pakistan, which 

were recommended with reductions in quantities. 

MTOC has suggested changes to the information requirements of the Handbook on Essential 

Use Nominations 2005 (the Handbook) for consideration by Parties this year, to seek more 

and better quality information on availability and affordability of CFC-free alternatives in 

intended markets to enable a more accurate assessment of nominations in 2010. It should be 

recognised that a recommendation this year does not guarantee that MTOC would reach a 

similar conclusion when reviewing future nominations. 

The increasing prevalence of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the 

morbidity of these conditions, and the high costs they impose on patients and health systems 

around the world are some of the reasons why MDIs are the last application where CFCs are 

being phased-out. Other reasons include the slow rate of transition in Article 5 Parties due to 

barriers in technology transfer, the high cost of investment and complexity associated with 

conversion projects, proprietary interests, government pricing policies, and physician and 

patient preferences. 

Economic aspects, in particular those related to affordability, are important criteria for 

essential uses in Decision IV/25. In their nominations, most Article 5 Parties report price 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 11 

differences between locally produced and imported MDIs. A similar situation was reported 

several years ago in non-Article 5 Parties where the price difference between generic CFC 

MDIs and branded hyydrofluorocarbon (HFC) MDIs was identified as a reason to continue 

the use of CFC MDIs, although CFC-free alternatives were available. 

These price differences vary over time and depend strongly on the scale of production. 

Currently, MDIs produced locally in Article 5 Parties are usually cheaper than imported 

products because of a combination of some of the following factors: 

• Tariffs, subsidies or policies that protect local industry; 

• Government price controls; 

• Lower regulatory costs; 

• Lower manufacturing costs such as labour, energy, etc; 

• Use of equipment that is already depreciated; 

• Lower costs of locally produced packaging and raw materials; 

• Availability of canisters with higher numbers of doses, which reduce price per dose; 

• Availability of refills where the actuator can be reused; 

• Lower transportation and distribution costs. 

The relative importance of these factors varies depending on the specific circumstances for 

each Party. Some of these factors may affect the costs of locally produced HFC MDIs. The 

intervention of the MLF through phase-out projects has given a unique opportunity to avoid 

the need to recover high investment costs. As a result, local producers that transition to HFC 

MDIs should be able to provide affordable medication at prices similar to those of CFC 

MDIs. 

Due to the high prevalence of asthma and COPD, many countries consider local production of 

MDIs strategically important. Production in some Parties is carried out by several MDI 

manufacturers, some with varying degrees of foreign ownership. Imported products provide 

additional technically satisfactory alternatives, although in many cases at higher prices. 

CFC MDIs will cease to be essential either when local production of CFC-free alternatives 

increases to meet demand or when the price of imported CFC-free products decreases. In 

summary, CFC MDIs in a given Article 5 Party will not be essential when both of the 

following conditions are met: 

• There are several CFC-free therapeutically equivalent therapies. 

• The price difference between CFC and CFC-free therapeutic equivalent alternatives is 

narrow. 

In those countries where the MLF is funding phase-out projects for different companies, it is 

likely that these conditions could be met before all the projects have been completed. 

Therefore essentiality should not be linked necessarily to the completion of all phase-out 

projects, but rather to the satisfaction of the essential use criteria. 
12 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Furthermore, it is worthwhile to remember that the concept of therapeutic equivalence (such 

as within the group of inhaled corticosteroids where one corticosteroid has similar therapeutic 

benefits to another) implies that not all moieties that were formulated as CFC MDIs need to 

be reformulated as HFC MDIs to complete the CFC phase-out process. The experience with 

phase-out in non-Article 5 Parties shows that in some cases reformulation may not be possible 

at all, while in other cases it was possible to reformulate a moiety as a DPI, but not as an 

MDI. 

3.2.4 Technically and economically feasible alternatives 

There is now a wide range of technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs in most 

Article 5 Parties. 

3.2.4.1 Dry Powder Inhalers 

DPIs are a suitable alternative for almost all patients, except for children under the age of 4 

years. There are 3 different types of DPIs: 

Single dose capsules are made by local manufacturers, are inexpensive and comparable in 

price to CFC MDIs dose-for-dose. They have the advantage that poorer patients can buy a 

small number at one time, with a smaller package cost than a 200 dose MDI. 

Multi-dose reservoir DPIs: the drug is metered from the reservoir at the time of dosing. 

Although the manufacturing cost is similar to that of MDIs, reservoir DPIs produced by 

multinationals are generally more costly to the patient than MDIs locally-produced in an 

Article 5 Party. 

Multi-dose individually-metered DPIs: the multiple individual doses are foil wrapped within 

the device, and sequentially accessed by the patient as required. 

Both types of multi-dose DPIs are predominantly made by multinationals, and, except for 

salbutamol (which is more expensive in multi-dose DPIs), generally have a similar price to 

the equivalent dose of drug in an MDI produced by multinationals. 

In some cases DPIs are the preferred alternative, depending on local circumstances. For 

example, Japan has phased out CFC MDIs and switched to a predominantly multi-dose DPI 

market. In India, single-dose capsule DPIs have overtaken MDIs as the predominant dosage 

form. In contrast, some countries, such as China, have no tradition for DPI use; this seems to 

be based mainly on physician or patient preference. 

Studies 1

have shown that for many patients single and multi-dose DPIs are easier to use 

correctly than MDIs. In some studies as many as 50 per cent of patients cannot use an MDI 

 

1

 Atkins, P.J., Dry powder inhalers: an overview, Respir. Care. 2005; 50; 1304-12. 

Timsina MP, Martin SP et al., Drug delivery to the respiratory tract using dry powder inhalers. 

Int J of Pharmaceutics. 1994, Vol 101, pp 1-13. 

Singh M and Kumar L., Randomized Comparison of a Dry Powder Inhaler and Metered Dose 

Inhaler with Spacer in Management of Children with Asthma, Indian Paediatrics. 2001; 38: 24-28. 

Zeng X Macritchie H B Marriott C Martin G P., Humidity-induced changes of the aerodynamic 

properties of dry powder aerosol formulations containing different carriers. International Journal 

of Pharmaceutics. 2007; 333: 45-55. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 13 

efficiently. DPIs are activated by inspiration, and do not require as much patient coordination. 

Humidity is often cited as a reason for DPIs not being suitable for use in hot and humid 

developing countries. Older reservoir multi-dose DPIs did have significant loss of 

pharmaceutical performance, but there are no studies to show loss of clinical performance 

with multi-dose DPIs in humid and hot climates. Efficiency of patient inhalation has a much 

greater impact on the efficacy of a drug than humidity. Some HFC MDIs also have water 

ingress problems, and need to be foil-wrapped for prolonged storage. Small differences 

caused by water ingress in inhalers are likely to make little difference to efficacy because 

inhalers provide supra-maximal doses of active ingredients. 

Market data show that DPI use is increasing world-wide, reflecting the suitability of DPIs as a 

satisfactory alternative to MDIs. Transition strategies could include patient and physician 

education to encourage the use of DPIs as an alternative to CFC MDIs. 

3.2.4.2 HFC MDIs 

Conversion projects in Article 5 Parties are mainly aimed at reformulating CFC MDIs to HFC 

MDIs. In non-Article 5 Parties, it proved economically or technically impossible to 

reformulate many CFC MDI products, and similarly many CFC MDI products in Article 5 

Parties may also fail to be reformulated, even if funding is received for conversion projects. 

CFCs will not be recommended ad infinitum for MDIs that show signs they cannot be 

reformulated. 

Pricing policies, tariffs, import taxes and restrictions have been implemented by some Article 

5 Parties to protect local industry. These policies favour locally made pharmaceuticals, 

including CFC MDIs, and discourage use of imported pharmaceuticals, including CFC-free 

alternatives. Based on an MTOC review of data provided by Article 5 Parties, the price of 

locally manufactured HFC MDIs is generally lower than imported HFC MDIs. This means 

there are fewer economically feasible alternatives available in Article 5 Parties. 

Locally made HFC MDIs are marginally more expensive (~10 per cent) than locally made 

CFC MDIs. However, this is determined by commercial and/or government policies, since 

the cost of manufacture (of propellant, valves etc) is very similar, once the capital and product 

development costs have been taken into account. 

Regulatory approvals have been cited as one reason that there have been delays in the 

introduction of CFC-free alternatives. Given the phase-out of CFCs, Parties are encouraged 

now to fast-track approvals of CFC-free alternatives. 

The question of essentiality needs to be considered separately from MLF projects for phaseout. There may be an adequate range of suitable CFC-free alternatives in a Party in which an 

MLF project is underway. A funded project does not in itself demonstrate that CFCs are 

essential. 

MTOC notes that some companies have been successful in transition. Other companies 

continue to manufacture CFC MDIs, undermining the progress in transition. Market leaders 

in HFC MDIs ought not be penalised for fast transition by competing against lower priced 

CFC MDIs in the same markets. These circumstances also arose in non-Article 5 Parties, and 

this was an important factor in delaying salbutamol CFC MDI transition in some countries. 
14 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

3.2.5 Exported products 

Several of the nominations included significant CFC volumes to manufacture MDIs for 

export, mainly to other Article 5 Parties. For example, about three quarters of the nomination 

for India was intended for export of CFC MDIs. None of the nominations demonstrated that 

these CFC MDIs were essential in the designated export markets (i.e. there was inadequate 

evidence that satisfactory alternatives were not available) where in most cases it appeared that 

an adequate range of technically feasible alternatives was available. 

MTOC reviewed the available data about alternatives from the nomination and other sources. 

The only comprehensive dataset has been supplied by IPAC. Decision XIV/5 requested each 

Party to submit available information on CFC and CFC-free MDIs and DPIs in their markets 

to the Ozone Secretariat by 28 February 2003 with annual updates thereafter, and requires 

TEAP to review this information in making its annual assessments. Some Parties have 

submitted data pursuant to Decision XIV/5 since its inception, but in many cases, data are not 

provided or have not been updated annually. It is important that Article 5 Parties collect their 

own data on CFC and CFC-free inhalers and provide it annually to the Secretariat by 

February each year to be posted on its website, in accordance with Decision XIV/5. 

The availability of comprehensive export data would greatly facilitate future essential use 

assessments. MTOC has suggested changes to the Handbook that would request this data to 

be provided by nominating Parties. 

Decision XII/2(3) also requests Parties, including Article 5 Parties, to notify the Ozone 

Secretariat of any MDI products determined to be non-essential, and for nominating Parties to 

take this information into consideration. The Ozone Secretariat website only has information 

pursuant to Decision XII/2(3) from the European Community. In the future, MTOC would 

like to receive information in the nominations about both exporting and importing countries, 

including the data required under Decision XIV/5. 

Some importing countries listed in the nominations have already declared CFC MDIs to be 

non-essential or have banned their import (e.g. Thailand and Fiji), although these are not 

listed on the Ozone Secretariat’s website. Other importing countries listed in the essential use 

nominations as intended export markets already have a complete range of CFC-free 

alternatives (e.g. Costa Rica). Parties may wish to consider the advantages of encouraging 

Parties to establish controls on the import of CFC MDIs, and to introduce import bans at a 

certain date when adequate alternatives to CFC MDIs are available. Parties may also wish to 

consider the advantages of informing the Ozone Secretariat of any controls, and in turn the 

Ozone Secretariat could inform Parties. 

 

Given the complexity and fluidity of export markets, Parties may wish to consider the 

advantages of all importing Parties, including Article 5 Parties, making annual declarations 

stating the reasons why the imported CFC MDI products are considered necessary and 

requiring that these declarations accompany nominations from Parties manufacturing and 

exporting CFC MDIs. 

Decisions XV/5, par. 2 and XX/3 par. 1(a) request nominating Parties to provide information 

on 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. Decision XVI/12, par. 2 further states that when more specific data are not available, 

data aggregated by region and product group may be submitted for CFC MDIs intended for 

sale in Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5. MTOC found it difficult to assess 

accurately the essentiality of quantities of CFCs intended for export when country-specific 

information was not provided in the nominations on the quantity of CFCs required for each 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 15 

active ingredient in each market. In future years, in the absence of country-specific 

information on CFC quantities intended for export, MTOC will consider the alternatives 

available in intended export markets and make recommendations for a quantity of essential 

use CFCs for the manufacture of MDIs which specifically excludes any countries considered 

to have an adequate range of alternatives. For the year 2010, Parties may wish to consider 

qualifying any approval of essential use exemptions with the condition that any Party 

exporting CFC MDIs will get prior informed consent of the Government of the importing 

country for such exports to that country. 

Furthermore, MTOC has maintained that companies engaging in dual marketing of CFC and 

CFC-free MDIs should discontinue this practice after an adequate period of post-marketing 

for the CFC-free MDI of not more than 12 months. Exporting countries with significant 

domestic HFC MDI manufacturing capacity would be expected to justify continued export of 

CFC MDIs for companies that are marketing both types of inhalers. 

In future years, MTOC is unlikely to recommend CFC volumes for MDIs intended for export 

that exceed those recommended for 2010, in the absence of compelling evidence. In 

subsequent years MTOC would expect to see reductions annually. 

3.2.6 Other Issues 

Salbutamol (~65 per cent) and beclomethasone (~15 per cent) CFC MDIs constitute more 

than 80 per cent of the nominated essential uses for 2010. Decision XX/3 requests Parties to 

prepare preliminary plans of action by mid-2009 for the phase-out of salbutamol CFC MDIs. 

These will be critical to facilitate priority phase-out of this product. Of the commonly used 

active ingredients, salbutamol MDIs generally have the greatest price differential between 

locally made and imported inhalers, so transition to inexpensive locally made HFC MDIs or 

single dose DPIs will expedite phase-out of a substantial quantity of CFC. 

There are increasing numbers of combination products becoming available in Article 5 Party 

markets. In previous years, MTOC has indicated that it does not consider combination 

products to be essential where there are the same active ingredients available in the separate 

CFC-free inhalers. However, recent evidence has suggested that the combination of active 

ingredients in a single inhaler is beneficial, with improved compliance and clinical benefit, 

sometimes combined with a decrease in cost for patients compared to the drugs delivered in 

separate inhalers. As a result of this evidence, MTOC considers the CFCs requested for 

combination products to be essential for the nominations received from Article 5 Parties for 

2010. However, MTOC is aware that it has proved difficult in non-Article 5 Parties to 

reformulate and gain regulatory approval for some combination products despite a decade of 

effort. MTOC will continue to review the essentiality of combination products against the 

availability of alternatives, including the relevant moieties in separate inhalers, and in future 

may not recommend as essential combination CFC MDIs just because they are difficult to 

reformulate. 

MTOC is also very unlikely to recommend as essential any new CFC MDIs not in the 

marketplace in 2009. A ciclesonide CFC MDI (an inhaled steroid) is proceeding through 

regulatory approval processes in China during 2009, for which CFCs are requested in China’s 

essential use nomination for 2010. All inhaled steroids have very similar characteristics. 

MTOC does not believe that ciclesonide provides substantial additional health benefits. A 

new product in the approval process in 2009, without significant additional health benefits, 

cannot be considered essential in 2010 under Decision IV/25. 

A number of countries (e.g. China and India) have a very wide array of active ingredients, 

often using only small volumes of CFC. It may not be economically viable to reformulate all 
16 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

of these, and some may never be reformulated. This year, MTOC has recommended CFCs 

requested for these products as essential, but questions the essentiality of a long list of 

products with similar therapeutic value that may never be reformulated successfully. The 

essentiality of these moieties will be reviewed again in 2010, taking into consideration 

transition plans and reasonable efforts to demonstrate research and development towards 

conversion. 

3.2.7 Lessons learned from the phase-out in non-Article 5 Parties 

There are some key lessons from the phase-out of CFC MDIs in non-Article 5 Parties: 

• Phase-out does not occur without a plan; 

• There is no incentive to transition while there are lower priced CFC MDIs; and 

• The pace of transition is largely determined by the commercial strategies of companies to 

phase out CFC MDIs. 

In the later stages of phase-out, transition can be driven by importing countries having 

policies to remove barriers, such as import duties for CFC-free inhalers, to favour the 

introduction of HFC MDIs, including government procurement, and to restrict the import of 

CFC MDIs. Exporting companies can implement commercial policies that favour transition 

and discourage reliance on CFC MDIs. 

It should be emphasised that CFCs approved by the Parties under essential exemptions do not 

necessarily need to be produced if they are not required. For example, under domestic 

processes the United States allocated 27 tonnes in 2008 from an essential use exemption 

approved by Parties of 385 tonnes of CFCs, based on a review of domestic needs and 

available stockpile. Similarly, Article 5 Parties could manage carefully and minimise any 

allocation of CFCs approved by Parties under an essential use exemption and further protect 

the ozone layer. 

3.2.8 Committee Evaluation and Recommendations 

Quantities are expressed in metric tonnes. 

Argentina 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 178 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 17 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Beclomethasone Argentina and Latin America 

Budesonide Argentina and Latin America 

Fenoterol Argentina 

Fluticasone Argentina and Latin America 

Ipratropium Argentina and Latin America 

Salbutamol Argentina and Latin America 

Salbutamol and 

Beclomethasone 

Argentina and Latin America 

Salbutamol and 

Ipratropium 

Argentina and Latin America 

Salmeterol Argentina 

Salmeterol and 

Fluticasone 

Argentina and Latin America 

Recommendation: Recommend 178 tonnes (125.5 tonnes for Argentina and 52.5 

tonnes for export to Latin America). 

Comments 

The nomination from Argentina requests 125.5 tonnes for domestic market use 

(split between seven active ingredients and some combinations) and 52.5 tonnes 

for export to a number of Latin American markets. The nomination states that of 

the 178 tonnes requested, 120 tonnes are for two active ingredients, salbutamol 

(108.5 tonnes) and beclomethasone, alone or in combination with salbutamol. 

The volumes of CFCs requested appear to be consistent with historical trends for 

CFC MDI production in Argentina. MTOC notes that Argentina has received 

funding to support the reformulation efforts of a number of companies. The 

leading producer of salbutamol (Laboratory Pablo Cassara) is exploring the use of 

iso-butane as an alternative propellant for MDIs. Although this may be 

technically feasible, research and development efforts in both Germany and 

China over the past 12 years did not successfully develop a clinically acceptable 

iso-butane MDI for salbutamol. It may be challenging to successfully complete 

this project and MTOC would like to see further documentation on the progress 

of this development effort in support of any future essential use nomination. 

It appears that exports of salbutamol CFC MDIs to some Latin American markets 

may be occurring even when there is a wide range of CFC-free alternatives in 

those markets. In addition, there is a range of locally made and imported 

salbutamol and other active ingredient CFC-free inhalers in the Argentina market. 

MTOC recommends the nominated quantity of CFCs for 2010 since it lacked 

information to make reductions to account for these alternatives. MTOC wanted 

to avoid the risk of harming patients, and will carefully review essentiality in 

future years. 
18 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Bangladesh 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 156.7 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active 

Ingredients 

Intended market 

Salbutamol Bangladesh 

Budesonide Bangladesh 

Salmeterol, Fluticasone Bangladesh 

Ipratropium Bromide Bangladesh 

Salbutamol, Ipratropium Bromide Bangladesh 

Tiotropium Bromide Bangladesh 

Levosalbutamol Bangladesh 

Ciclesonide Bangladesh 

Beclomethasone Bangladesh 

Recommendation: Recommend 156.7 tonnes for use in Bangladesh. 

Comments 

The nomination from Bangladesh requests 156.7 tonnes for domestic market use 

(split between nine active ingredients and one combination). Of the 156.7 tonnes 

requested, 125.8 tonnes are for two active ingredients, salbutamol (119 tonnes) 

and beclomethasone, alone or in combination with salbutamol. 

The nomination explains that around 9 million people suffer from asthma and 

COPD. Hospital sources indicate that asthma morbidity and mortality have 

sharply increased in recent years, both in urban and rural areas of Bangladesh. 

Historically, asthma treatment had been primarily dependent on orally 

administered drugs. Before 1997, the inhaler market was totally dependent on 

import and very few patients could afford them due to the high price of imported 

inhalers. Since that date, local companies commenced manufacturing MDIs at a 

lower price, with consequent increase in use. However, it is estimated that there 

is still less than 10 per cent of patients who are treated with MDIs. 

There are three domestic companies that have manufacturing plants, although one 

company dominates with around 70 per cent of production. Currently, this is the 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 19 

only manufacturer that supplies any HFC MDIs (salbutamol and 

beclomethasone). 

Data for 2004-2008 show an annual growth for inhaled therapy of around 13 per 

cent including HFC usage. HFC MDIs containing salbutamol and 

beclomethasone will have achieved less than 10 per cent share of the market by 

2009, despite these two moieties representing over 80 per cent of the total market. 

While there is considerable detail in the nomination concerning transition 

activities, this is a disappointing rate of progress, which appears strongly linked 

to cheaper pricing of the CFC MDIs. 

Through the MLF, there are funded projects to convert most of the remaining 

CFC products to HFC, with a planned completion date of July 2011. However, 

against this background, the nomination for 2010 for a total of 156.7 ODP tonnes 

implies a growth that is much higher than the historical values. The 60 per cent 

increase in CFC consumption over 2008 (27 per cent annually) compared to the 

historic growth of 13 per cent is surprising, especially in view of the imminent 

replacement of some CFC products. This increase is largely a result of the 

quantities requested by the two companies that still do not have HFC alternatives. 

MTOC does not consider that there is sufficient justification in the nomination for 

this growth. Indeed, increased availability of CFC MDIs might inhibit transition 

to the CFC-free alternatives that are already available at only marginally higher 

cost. 

A more reasonable request would have been if the nominations for these two 

companies for salbutamol had reflected the underlying growth of 13 per cent. 

This would have reduced the total quantity of CFCs for salbutamol from the 

requested 119 tonnes to 71.2 tonnes. However MTOC did not have adequate 

evidence to be certain that this reduction would not adversely affect patient 

health. 

The project funded by the MLF to convert CFC MDIs to HFC MDIs does not 

include conversion of budesonide, salmeterol, tiotropium and levosalbutamol. 

The nomination indicates that these four moieties may not transition until 2016. 

MTOC notes that it will carefully review the essentiality of these moieties in 

future nominations because there are already equally effective therapeutic CFCfree alternatives in Bangladesh. 
20 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

The People’s Republic of China 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 977.2 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma, COPD, and acute pulmonary oedema 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol China, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, 

Costa Rica, Dominica, El Salvador, Ghana, 

Honduras, Jordan, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, 

Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines

Sri Lanka, Sudan, Venezuela 

Terbutaline China 

Clorprenaline China 

Clenbuterol China 

Beclomethasone China, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, 

Costa Rica, Dominica, El Salvador, Ghana, 

Honduras, Jordan, Mali, Mexico, Moldova, 

Myanmar, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines

Sri Lanka, Sudan, Venezuela 

Ciclesonide China 

Budesonide China 

Sodium Cromoglycate China, Cuba 

Salmeterol China 

Isoprenaline China 

Ipratropium China 

Isoprenaline+ Guaifenesin China 

Ipratropium+ Salbutamol China 

Beclomethasone + Clenbuterol+ 

Ipratropium 

China 

Datura flower extract+ Clenbuterol China 

Radix Salviae Miltiorrhiae extract China 

Radix Physochlainae extract China 

Dimethicone China 

Recommendation: Recommend 972.2 tonnes (847.8 tonnes for China and 124.4 

for export markets). 

Comments 

The nomination from People’s Republic of China requests 847.8 tonnes for 

domestic market use (split between fifteen active ingredients and some 

combinations) and 124.4 tonnes for export to a number of countries. The 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 21 

nomination states that of the 972.2 tonnes requested, 832.6 tonnes are for two 

active ingredients, salbutamol (626 tonnes) and beclomethasone. 

The transition strategy is in the process of being formulated and is planned to be 

submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by 31 January 2010. There is an approved 

MLF project for CFC phase-out in China’s MDI sector, which is due for 

completion in 2015. The first product planned for phase-out is salbutamol CFC 

MDI by the end of 2011, representing about 64 per cent of the total CFC quantity 

requested. The second largest quantity requested (accounting for another 21 per 

cent) is for beclomethasone, which will be phased out in the year 2014. The 

remainder of active ingredients will be phased out in 2015. About 12 per cent of 

the requested quantity is for export, mainly for salbutamol, beclomethasone and 

sodium cromoglycate. 

There are imported HFC MDIs available (e.g. salbutamol). The current prices of 

locally produced CFC MDIs are generally 10 to 20 per cent of the prices of 

imported CFC-free inhalers. Therefore pricing is an important reason for the lack 

of market penetration of CFC-free inhalers in China. 

The CFC consumption between 2004 and 2008 had an annual growth rate of up 

to 21 per cent. The nomination for 2010 reflects a predicted growth rate of 49 per 

cent per year from 2008, which is justified by China because of increased 

treatment of patients with CFC MDI therapy. It reflects the reform and 

enlargement of medical insurance, basic medicine and the special support of 

chronic diseases including asthma and COPD. 

There are no data on stocks currently available, and these will be required in 

future nominations. According to the nomination from China, there will be a 

licence management process in place. 

MTOC was unable to recommend the quantities requested for ciclesonide. This 

is an inhaled steroid, which is undergoing regulatory review in 2009 and not yet 

in the market. There is no evidence that this product will have any additional 

clinical advantages compared to other locally produced available steroids such as 

beclomethasone, fluticasone or budesonide. For the small amount needed for 

dimethicone and traditional Chinese medicine, MTOC requests published 

scientific evidence (translated into English) as well as a reformulation schedule 

for any future nomination. 

It appears that exports of CFC MDIs to some markets may be occurring even 

when there is a wide range of CFC-free alternatives in those markets (e.g. Costa 

Rica, Cuba, Philippines). MTOC is concerned that the continued export of CFC 

MDIs to Parties that have a number of suitable CFC-free alternatives will slow 

transition in those countries. However, MTOC recommends the nomination for 

2010 since it lacked information to make specific reductions in volumes with the 

certainty that these reductions might not harm patients. MTOC will carefully 

review essentiality of export volumes in future years. 
22 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Egypt 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 227.4 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Egypt, Africa, and Middle East 

Beclomethasone Egypt, Africa, and Middle East 

Salmeterol Egypt, Africa, and Middle East 

Beclomethasone/Salbutamol Egypt, Africa, and Middle East 

Recommendation: Recommend 227.4 tonnes (200 tonnes for Egypt and 27.4 

tonnes for export markets). 

Comments 

The nomination from Egypt requests 150 tonnes for domestic market use (split 

between three active ingredients and one combination), 50 tonnes for stockpile, 

and 27.4 tonnes for export to a number of African and Middle East markets. The 

nomination states that of the 227.4 tonnes requested, 214.4 tonnes are for two 

active ingredients, salbutamol (188.4 tonnes) and beclomethasone, alone or in 

combination with salbutamol. The Government of Egypt voluntarily reduced an 

initial nomination of 264 tonnes and deferred an amount to a possible 2011 

nomination. The nominated volume for use in 2010 seems in line with historical 

consumption. 

MLF-funded reformulation project activities have recently started. They involve 

the two local producers and cover all five locally produced CFC MDI products. 

MTOC commends its ambitious, although very challenging, timeline, which is 

the basis for Egypt’s intention to complete its CFC MDI phase-out by the first 

half of 2011. 

India 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 350.60 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 23 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

Active 

ingredients

Intended market

Domestic 

Market

Non-A5 

Parties

Article 5 Parties

Salbutamol India None Algeria, Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, 

Burkina Faso, Burundi, 

Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, 

Republic of Congo, Costa Rica, 

Ethiopia, Guatemala, Guyana, 

Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Liberia, 

Libya, Macau, Madagascar, 

Malaysia, Malawi, Mali, 

Mauritius, Mexico, 

Mozambique, Myanmar, 

Nigeria, Oman, Peru, Puerto 

Rico, Singapore, Sri Lanka, 

Thailand, U.A.E., Venezuela, 

West Indies2

, Yemen, Zambia

Beclomethas

one

India United 

Kingdom

Algeria, Bahrain, Bolivia, 

Brunei, Brazil, Colombia, 

Ethiopia, Guatemala, Guyana, 

Hong Kong, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, 

Kenya, Libya, Maldives, 

Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, 

Oman, Palestine, Peru, Puerto 

Rico, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, 

Suriname, U.A.E., Uganda, 

Venezuela, West Indies, Yemen, 

Zaire (DRC)

Beclomethas

one + 

Salbutamol

India None Benin, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, 

Colombia, Jamaica, Libya, Peru, 

Singapore,Somaliland, 

Venezuela, West Indies, Yemen, 

Zambia, 

Budesonide India None Algeria, Benin, Chile, 

Colombia, Kenya, Mauritius, 

Peru, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, 

Thailand, U.A.E., Yemen

Budesonide + 

Formoterol

India None Bolivia, Kenya, Libya, 

Mauritius, Sri Lanka, U.A.E, 

Formoterol India None Guatemala, Jordan, Puerto Rico, 

U.A.E., Venezuela

 

2

 As stated in the nomination, although not a Party. 
24 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Active 

ingredients

Intended market

Fluticasone India None Chile, Colombia, Guatemala, 

Iran,Libya, Oman, Peru, Sri 

Lanka U.A.E.,

Ipratropium 

Bromide

India None Colombia, U.A.E., Jamaica, 

Suriname, Singapore, Uganda, 

Peru, Iran, Panama, South 

Africa, Sri Lanka

Ipratropium + 

Salbutamol

India None Colombia, Iran, Peru, 

Philippines, U.A.E., Venezuela, 

Levasalbutam

ol

India None Peru

Salmeterol India None Oman, Sri Lanka, U.A.E., 

Yemen

Salmeterol + 

Fluticasone 

India None Chile, Guatemala, Kenya, 

Mauritius, Morocco, Peru, Sri 

Lanka, U.A.E.

Tiotropium 

Bromide 

India None Colombia, Panama, Peru, Puerto 

Rico, Sri Lanka 

Tiotropium + 

Formoterol

India None Colombia, Panama, Peru, Puerto 

Rico, Sri Lanka

Beclomethas

one + 

Formoterol

India None None

Formoterol 

Fumarate + 

Fluticasone

India None None

Recommendation: Recommend 343.6 tonnes (87 tonnes for India, and 256.6 

tonnes for export markets). 

Comments 

The Indian nomination requests 350.6 tonnes of CFCs for MDIs. Of this, 87 

tonnes are for domestic use and 263.6 tonnes are for CFC MDI products intended 

for export to mostly Article 5 Parties (except one product intended for the United 

Kingdom). The total nominated amount was for nine active ingredients for a total 

of seventeen entities (alone or in combination). The nomination states that for 8 

entities (either alone or in combination) an equivalent HFC MDI had already 

been developed, some dating back to 2006. 

Furthermore, MTOC noted that a single company (Cipla) produces a wide range 

of HFC and CFC MDIs (in approximately equal quantities) and DPIs, and had 

provided MTOC with information that it intended to transition its CFC MDI 

manufacture to existing reformulated HFC products during 2009. There are at 

least two other manufacturers of HFC MDIs in India. 

As transition is progressing well and MLF-funded projects are expected to deliver 

reformulated products in 2010 and 2011, MTOC believes that the CFC amount 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 25 

recommended should be sufficient in 2010 to support CFC MDI manufacturers 

that have not yet launched reformulated products. The range of reformulated 

MDIs plus the existing single dose dry powder inhalers provide an adequate 

range of alternatives. Despite the range of alternatives available, MTOC 

recommends the nomination for 2010 because it lacked sufficient information to 

make specific reductions to account for these alternatives without potentially 

risking harm to patients. MTOC will carefully review essentiality in future years. 

The nominated volume for export is substantial and the nomination contains no 

information on the essentiality of the products designated for export to those 

markets. Indeed, there is a single product (beclomethasone) for the United 

Kingdom for which MTOC understands there is a new regulation that will ban the 

import of CFC MDIs into the European Union from 1 January 2010. Therefore 

the recommended CFC quantity has been reduced to reflect this. 

The nomination contained information that was not consistent with information 

available to the MTOC. For example, Saudi Arabia and Thailand prohibit the 

import of CFC MDIs but they are included in the intended export markets for 

India. Furthermore, MTOC is concerned that the continued export of CFC MDIs 

to Parties that have a number of suitable CFC-free alternatives will slow 

transition in those countries. It is also concerned that some companies with HFC 

MDIs and DPIs launched on the local market are simultaneously exporting the 

equivalent CFC MDI to importing countries. However, MTOC recommends the 

nominated quantities intended for export for 2010 since it lacked information to 

make specific reductions in quantities with the certainty that these reductions 

might not harm patients. MTOC will carefully review essentiality of export 

volumes in future years. 

Islamic Republic of Iran 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 105 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD. 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Islamic Republic of Iran 

Beclomethasone Islamic Republic of Iran 

Salmeterol Islamic Republic of Iran 

Sodium Cromoglycate Islamic Republic of Iran 

Recommendation: Recommend 105 tonnes for use in Iran. 

Comments 

The nomination from Iran requests 105 tonnes for domestic market use (split 

between four active ingredients). Of the 105 tonnes requested, 89.5 tonnes are 

for two active ingredients, salbutamol (75.5 tonnes) and beclomethasone. 

In recent years Iran has had approved financial assistance from the MLF to 

achieve conversion to produce CFC-free alternatives by the end of 2010. Due to 

complexities with the provision of technology and product formulations, a delay 
26 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

of several months may occur. Therefore Iran has stated a need for CFCs at least 

until the end of 2010. The project includes the first three active ingredients listed 

in the nomination (more than 95 per cent of the total volume). No CFCs will be 

required after completion of the conversion project. 

Consumption was about 100-105 tonnes of CFCs per year for the last 3 years. In 

2009 consumption of 110 tonnes is anticipated. The stockpile is about 25 tonnes 

for CFC 11, CFC 12, which provides a 3-month buffer. 

A national transition strategy was introduced in April 2007 and revised in 2009. 

Pakistan 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 134.9 tonnes 

 2011 158.2 tonnes 

2012 169.7 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Pakistan 

Beclomethasone Pakistan 

Salmeterol Pakistan 

Ipratropium Bromide Pakistan 

Triamcinolone Pakistan 

Fluticasone Pakistan 

Recommendation: Recommend 34.9 tonnes for 2010 for use in Pakistan. Unable 

to recommend for 2011 and 2012. 

Comments 

The nomination for 2010 from Pakistan requests 134.9 tonnes for domestic 

market use (split between six active ingredients). Of the 134.9 tonnes requested 

for 2010, 128.4 tonnes are for two active ingredients, salbutamol (125.5 tonnes) 

and beclomethasone, alone or in combination with salbutamol. Pakistan 

nominated essential uses for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012. MTOC only 

recommends part of the 2010 nomination, and noted a lack of consistency within 

the nomination regarding the quantities nominated for the three years. 

The nomination does not forecast any increase in projected volumes for 2009 and 

2010, but it anticipates a 26 per cent increase in CFC MDI use from 2010 to 

2012. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 27 

Currently, there are three domestic producers of CFC MDIs, the largest of which 

is a multinational with 22 per cent local ownership. Salbutamol production 

accounts for 91 per cent of the CFC use for MDI products in Pakistan. 

VentolinTM, the GSK Pakistan salbutamol CFC brand, holds approximately 90 per 

cent of the market share. MTOC has learned from the Ministry of Environment 

that GSK Pakistan will stop all CFC MDI production in December 2009 while it 

transitions to a CFC- free replacement. In view of this, MTOC is unable to 

recommend the 100 tonnes of CFC requested for this part of the nomination. 

The absence of the GSK Pakistan product in the market place may result in a 

temporary shortfall in salbutamol availability in Pakistan. GSK advises that it 

will hold stock of finished product to cover a substantial part of the demand in 

2010. The availability of alternatives may also depend on imports of CFC-free 

MDIs, which have higher prices than locally manufactured CFC MDIs. This 

makes them less affordable to patients. In 2007, GSK Pakistan launched an 

imported CFC-free salbutamol inhaler with the brand name of AerolinTM. A 

temporary reduction or elimination of the import tax on this product would make 

the product more affordable to patients until domestic products are available. 

However the Government of Pakistan states that it does not wish to depend on 

imports. 

The 56th Executive Committee meeting approved the plan for phase-out of CFCs 

in manufacture of pharmaceutical MDIs in Pakistan and the national strategy for 

transition to CFC-free MDIs, which involved education and information 

dissemination. The two relevant Pakistan enterprises are expected to complete 

this project by June 2012. 

Russian Federation 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 212 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Russian Federation 

Recommendation: Recommend 212 tonnes for use in the Russian Federation. 

Comments 

The nomination from the Russian Federation requests 212 tonnes for domestic 

use only (for two state-owned enterprises) for the manufacture of salbutamol CFC 

MDIs. MTOC is concerned that even this quantity of CFCs may not be sufficient 

to supply patient needs. The recommendation takes into consideration patients’ 

right to have access to affordable inhaled therapy. 

Unfortunately, the time line and feasibility of the Russian Federation transition 

has been repeatedly delayed. The Russian Federation is strongly urged to define 

a new phase-out strategy, either with MDI or DPI industrial conversion, which 

require less initial investment on machinery and reformulation; or taking into 
28 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

account the on-going delays in developing domestic capacity, the Russian 

Federation may need to consider low priced imported CFC-free products as an 

alternative to local manufacture. 

Syria 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 44.68 tonnes 

2011 49.22 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma and COPD. 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Salbutamol Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Armenia, Georgia, 

Mauritania, Sudan 

Beclomethasone Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan 

Salbutamol + Beclomethasone Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan 

Salmeterol Syria 

Salmeterol +Fluticasone Syria 

Fluticasone Syria 

Recommendation: Recommend for 2010. Unable to recommend for 2011. 

Comments 

The nomination from Syria for 44.68 tonnes in 2010 does not provide the split 

between domestic and export market uses, but it mentions exports to a number of 

African and Middle East markets. The manufacture of four active ingredients and 

two combinations is also indicated. Production figures, in numbers of cans filled, 

rather than CFC consumption per brand are given, but as happens in most 

markets before transition, these numbers show that about 70 per cent of CFC 

consumption is for the manufacture of salbutamol MDIs. 

The demand for MDIs in Syria in 2007 was reported to be about 2 million units. 

Continued growth in demand is anticipated. The size of the export market is less 

than 10 per cent of total consumption, and may contract due to changes in 

regulations in some markets that now stipulate the import CFC-free products. 

The historical growth of the sole domestic manufacturer shows an annual increase 

of 10 per cent since 2005-2006. The quantities nominated are consistent with that 

trend. 

There are no CFC MDI imports in Syria. The two DPIs (salbutamol and 

salmeterol/fluticasone) that are approved by Government for import can be 

considered as alternatives. However, since the prices of these DPIs are much 

higher than locally produced CFC MDIs, they cannot be considered as affordable 

alternatives. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 29 

Syria proposed a conversion project that was not approved by the ExCom. The 

local manufacturer has consequently decided to execute the conversion project by 

itself. A timetable for conversion to HFC technology has been provided in the 

nomination. Salbutamol HFC MDIs are expected to be produced by the 

beginning of 2011, other products will be converted later, with final conversion 

expected to be completed by 2013. Available storage facilities are not adequate 

to increase stockpiles. 

MTOC will carefully review essentiality of export volumes in future years. 

United States 

Year Quantity nominated 

2011 67 tonnes 

Specific Use: MDIs for asthma. 

Active ingredients and intended markets for which the nomination applies: 

 

Active Ingredients Intended market 

Epinephrine United States 

Recommendation: Unable to recommend. 

Comments 

The nomination by the United States requests 67 tonnes of CFC to be used in 

2011 for the manufacture of epinephrine MDIs for domestic use only. This is 25 

tonnes or 37 per cent less than the amount authorised for 2010. 

In general, the nomination adequately addresses and responds to the questions of 

the Handbook. Details of the management of the stockpile and any surplus 

(Section III.3.) were provided. 

MTOC is pleased to note that during 2008 the US FDA issued a final rulemaking 

removing the essentiality for CFC MDIs whose active ingredient is epinephrine 

with an effective date for removal from sale of 31st December 2011. 

In its updated 2008 Progress Report MTOC expressed concerns about the slow 

completion of development efforts for epinephrine. However there was reluctant 

consensus agreement that the nomination for 2010 should be recommended on 

the basis of anticipated progress made with reformulation, the claimed 

inaccessibility of available stockpile, and given that 2010 would be the final year 

for CFCs to be allocated to epinephrine MDIs. 

The United States is the only non-Article 5 Party that holds a significant stockpile 

of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. This stockpile amounted to 830 tonnes at the end 

of 2008 despite the destruction of 234 tonnes of CFCs reported in the Accounting 

Framework. 

MTOC does not consider that the 2011 nomination meets the requirement of 

Decision IV/25(b) (ii) regarding the availability of sufficient quantity of 

controlled substances from existing stocks. Although not totally clear, the 
30 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

nomination indicates that a strategic reserve of CFC equal to one year’s need 

would be available for the product at the beginning of 2011. Since the United 

States’ essential use designation for epinephrine will be removed after 31 

December 2011, any production during 2011 should be based on remaining stock 

and not on new CFC production. 

Furthermore MTOC does not consider that CFC MDIs for epinephrine are an 

essential use under Decision IV/25(a). As stated in the nomination four HFC 

salbutamol (and levalbuterol) alternatives are available and, although available on 

prescription only, MTOC considers these products to be suitable alternatives to 

epinephrine. 

3.3 Essential Use Nomination for Foam, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

Uses from Iraq 

Year Quantity nominated 

2010 690 tonnes 

2011 690 tonnes 

Specific Use: Foam manufacturing, domestic refrigeration manufacturing, and refrigeration 

and air conditioning servicing. 

Recommendation: Unable to recommend. 

Comment 

Iraq nominated an essential use exemption for 290 tonnes of CFC-11 for foam manufacturing 

and 400 tonnes of CFC-12 for the manufacture of domestic refrigerators/freezers and small 

commercial stand-alone equipment for each of the years 2010 and 2011. The nomination also 

requests CFC-12 for servicing refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. Iraq reports 

historical annual consumption for these applications of more than 300 tonnes of CFC-11 and 

1,200 tonnes of CFC-12. 

TEAP considered the essential use nomination of Iraq carefully. It is aware of the Iraq’s 

security situation and the factors that delayed its ratification of the Protocol and thus the 

potential assistance from the MLF. However TEAP is also aware that recycled CFC-11 and 

CFC-12 are readily available from foreign sources, and could be imported by Iraq to supply 

its applications for 2010 and 2011, making it unnecessary to produce new CFCs under an 

essential use exemption. 

The Fourth Meeting of the Parties decided in Decision IV/25 to apply the following criteria 

for assessing an essential use, that: 

(a) Use of a controlled substance should qualify as essential only if: 

(i) it is necessary for health, safety or is critical for the functioning of society 

(encompassing cultural and intellectual aspects); and 

(ii) there are no available technically and economically feasible alternatives or 

substitutes that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and 

health; 

(b) That production and consumption, if any, of a controlled substance for essential 

uses should be permitted only if, 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 31 

(i) all economically feasible steps have been taken to minimize the essential 

use and any associated emission of the controlled substance; and 

(ii) the controlled substance is not available in sufficient quantity and quality 

from existing stocks of banked or recycled controlled substances, also 

bearing in mind the developing countries’ need for controlled substances; 

(c) That production, if any, for essential use, will be in addition to production to 

supply the basic domestic needs of the Parties operating under paragraph 1 of 

Article 5 of the Protocol prior to the phase-out of the controlled substances in 

those countries.” 

TEAP finds that the essential use criteria that “there are no available technically and 

economically feasible alternatives or substitutes that are acceptable from the standpoint of 

environment and health” and “the controlled substance is not available in sufficient quantity 

and quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled controlled substances” are not satisfied 

in the case of the Iraq nomination. There are alternatives for the foam and refrigeration and 

air conditioning manufacturing industries that have been proven for the past 13 years. There 

are also adequate global stocks of recycled material that can be imported by Iraq for its 

applications. There are techniques for refrigerant management, such as the use of recycled 

CFCs, and for replacing CFCs with non-CFC blends in existing equipment that avoid 

continued consumption of CFCs. These techniques have been successful world-wide, and no 

country has ever had the need to nominate for an essential use exemption for these uses. 

Therefore TEAP is unable to recommend the nomination of Iraq. There is extensive global 

expertise in CFC recovery and recycling, and sufficiently large stocks of recycled CFCs that 

could be used quickly to help Iraq meet its requirements. Parties may wish to consider Iraq's 

situation as a new Party to the Protocol and its recent domestic circumstances that make 

assistance a priority. A bilateral project with another Party may help to solve quickly any 

problems with recycled CFC supply until the technology transfer projects are completed. 

 

Furthermore, there are two priority measures that TEAP believes could quickly reduce CFC 

demand for servicing requirements and minimise the volume of imports of recycled CFC-11 

and CFC-12; programs to retire installed leaking equipment with new CFC-free equipment, 

and adoption of recovery and recycling. Both of these actions would liberate recycled CFCs 

for servicing equipment that has not yet reached its end-of-life and remains in good working 

order. Equipment replacement can provide additional benefits, including higher energy 

efficiency and better performance. 

According to the nomination, no steps have yet been taken to implement substitutes due to the 

long period of instability faced by Iraq and because Iraq has just recently (2008) joined the 

Montreal Protocol and has not yet started to benefit from its technology transfer mechanisms. 

Iraq, in co-operation with UNEP and UNIDO, is currently preparing a Country Programme 

and National Phase-out Management Plan (CP/NPP), including investment and noninvestment projects to phase out CFC in foam and refrigeration manufacturing as well as in 

the servicing sector. At its 57th Meeting, the Executive Committee approved two investment 

projects in the foam and refrigeration manufacturing sectors: conversion from CFC-11 to 

methylene chloride in the production of flexible slabstock foam; and replacement of CFC-12 

refrigerant and CFC-11 foam-blowing agent with iso-butane and cyclopentane respectively in 

the manufacture of domestic refrigerators/freezers. 

However, due to the very recent joining of Iraq to the Montreal Protocol, the completion of 

these projects may not be feasible until 2011. Recovery and recycling are not yet introduced 

in Iraq because newly produced CFCs have been widely available and projects under the NPP 
32 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

have not yet been started. Iraq stated it would shortly establish regulations and controls on 

the import, export and use of ozone-depleting substances as a part of the project. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 33 

4 Response to Decision XX/4: Campaign Production for Some 

Article 5 Parties Manufacturing Metered-dose Inhalers Using 

Chlorofluorocarbons 

4.1 Background 

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

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

the manufacture of metered dose inhalers (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. 

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

Paragraph 12 of this Decision requested: 

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

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

limited campaign production of chlorofluorocarbons exclusively for metered-dose 

inhalers in both Parties operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 and Parties not 

operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5.” 

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

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

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

maintaining the current system of “just-in-time production”. However, the Working Group 

did not achieve consensus and nor was consensus achieved at the 19th Meeting of the Parties. 

In its 2008 Progress Report, in an updated response to Decision XVIII/16, MTOC reviewed 

new information available from the Multilateral Fund Secretariat, implementing agencies, 

countries, and industry sources and considered not only those Parties manufacturing CFC 

MDIs but also issues surrounding CFC MDI transition in importing Article 5 Parties. 

The Parties considered the issue at the 20th Meeting of the Parties and, in taking Decision 

XX/4, requested TEAP to present a report to the Twenty-First Meeting of the Parties, 

preceded by a preliminary report to the Open-ended Working Group at its twenty-ninth 

meeting, concerning: 

(a) The potential timing for final campaign production, taking into account, among other 

things, the information submitted in the nominations for 2010 and that some Parties 

operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 may prepare essential use nominations for 

the first time for the Twenty-First Meeting of the Parties; 

(b) Options for long-term storage, distribution, and management of produced quantities 

of pharmaceutical-grade chlorofluorocarbons before they are needed by Parties, 

including existing methods used by Parties not operating under paragraph 1 of Article 

5; 

(c) Options for minimizing the potential for too much or too little chlorofluorocarbons 

production as part of a final campaign; 
34 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

(d) Contractual arrangements that may be necessary, considering the models currently 

used by Parties not operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5 that submit essential-use 

nominations consistent with decision IV/25; 

(e) Options for reducing production of non-pharmaceutical-grade chlorofluorocarbons, 

together with options for final disposal of such chlorofluorocarbons. 

4.2 Developments relating to campaign production 

Progress has been made towards phase-out of the use of CFC in MDIs in Article 5 Parties for 

certain key moieties, with a range of technically feasible alternatives now available. 

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

manufacturing is only just commencing (e.g. China, Egypt, Iran). 

The use of CFC MDIs after technical CFC-free alternatives became available has been 

justified over the last several years because they continue to provide affordable medication to 

many patients. This situation could now change as the cost of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs 

becomes higher than that of pharmaceutical-grade hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Therefore the 

price differences between CFC and HFC MDIs are not currently a consequence of propellant 

cost, but rather other factors such as MDI component cost differences (canisters, valves etc), 

development costs, marketing, return on investment of capital costs and, in some cases, due to 

tariffs imposed to protect CFC MDIs that are manufactured locally against imported HFC 

MDIs. The price differential between CFC and HFC MDIs has become progressively 

smaller. 

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

is less than one year away. The Montreal Protocol’s Decision IV/25 allows for the production 

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

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

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

manufacturing after 2009. However, continued production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs 

will only be economically viable for production runs of at least several hundred tonnes. 

MTOC are of the opinion that the decision to fund phase-out projects in Article 5 Parties is 

not necessarily indicative of an essential use. For instance, a country that did not receive 

funding by the MLF might still be granted an essential use exemption by the Parties if its 

requirement for CFCs meets the criteria of Decision IV/25. Conversely, a Party that received 

funding for a phase-out project might not meet, at a certain point in time, the essential use 

criteria even when the project funded by the MLF has not been completed. 

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

CFCs after 2009, 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. 

In its 2007 report, MTOC proposed a final campaign in 2009. However, in 2007 Parties did 

not adopt a decision on a final campaign, deferring consideration until a later date. In its 2008 

Progress Report, the MTOC considered a number of options for the production of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs after 2009 and recommended a preferred option that could best 

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

MDIs. The options considered by MTOC were as follows. 

• Open-ended annual CFC production after 2009 (under essential use exemptions): This 

option was not recommended. It does not provide a clear target or timetable for ending 

CFC production, predictability for CFC producers, or incentive for those companies 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 35 

manufacturing CFC MDIs to switch to CFC-free alternatives. At a certain point, the 

economics of CFC production would not be favourable and would make impractical and 

too uncertain the continued production of relatively small amounts of pharmaceuticalgrade CFCs. Overall destruction costs for out-of-specification CFCs would be relatively 

high with this option. 

• A final campaign production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs: This was the preferred 

option. MTOC believed that, with appropriate planning and co-ordination, this could be 

feasible in 2011 to provide for CFC MDI manufacturing countries that do not have 

domestic CFC production. This option assumed that project implementation was not 

delayed further, and that China maintained domestic production of pharmaceutical-grade 

CFCs for its own use under an essential use exemption, if approved by Parties, until a 

stage of its CFC MDI phase-out where it would have its own final campaign. 

Anticipating a final campaign production at an agreed date provided a clear target for 

ending CFC production, predictability for CFC producers, and an incentive for those 

companies currently manufacturing CFC MDIs to switch to CFC-free alternatives. In 

2008, MTOC expected that the production of essential use CFCs in 2010 would be around 

1,700 tonnes, and that in 2011 it would be possible to run a final campaign of around 

2,000 tonnes to cover MDI production requirements in several countries for multiple 

years. This approach took into consideration the fact that the majority of Article 5 Parties 

obtained their pharmaceutical-grade CFCs from a plant located in the European Union, 

and that China would produce its own pharmaceutical-grade CFCs according to its 

specifications. 

During its meeting in 2009 MTOC became aware that the European Commission has 

regulated to stop production of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs from the 1st January 2010, which 

would otherwise have supplied many remaining Article 5 Party producers of CFC MDIs. 

With this decision, these MDI manufacturing companies will have to find new sources of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs to supply any essential use CFCs approved by Parties for 2010. 

A change of CFC supplier will require that CFC MDI producers validate the suitability of the 

new propellant. Validation takes time to be completed, and in some cases will require the 

approval of the relevant health authorities and could disrupt the normal flow of the MDIs that 

are locally produced in Article 5 Parties, and could risk patient health. Validation efforts 

could also consume valuable technical resources in MDI manufacturing companies that would 

otherwise be devoted to the conversion to CFC-free technologies. These factors could further 

delay the transition from CFC MDIs. 

As a consequence of the European Commission regulation, there are two scenarios to describe 

the possible supply situation of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs once the plant located in the 

European Union is closed: 

• Single Source Supply: Under this scenario the only producer of CFCs would be located in 

China. It is believed that the plant set aside by China to cover its needs of 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs has sufficient capacity to satisfy the demand of all Article 5 

Parties that are requesting essential use nominations, but MTOC understands that the 

phase-out agreement for China does not allow exports of CFCs after 2009. Furthermore, 

it is possible that the CFC produced in China might not meet the registered specifications 

of all those companies that continue to manufacture in Article 5 Parties. Also, the 

supplier would hold a monopoly, creating a potential risk to supply if the plant is forced 

to shut, a lack of competition that could increase the cost, and less storage capacity for 

inventory. 

• Multiple Source Supply: Under this scenario additional producers of CFCs would be 

identified. These producers could include Honeywell in the United States or producers in 

Article 5 Parties, like India, that have swing plants which are currently producing 
36 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

HCFC-22. The need to validate quality and the risk of delays in approval remain. Legal 

aspects, such as their ability to supply for essential use nominations to other Parties, may 

need to be clarified as swing plants in Article 5 Parties have received funding from the 

MLF to stop production of CFCs as part of their production phase-out agreements. 

Remaining stockpiles in non-Article 5 Parties could also be considered as a potential source 

of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs. The significant stockpile in the Unites States may still be 

used domestically to supply CFC MDIs for its essential use exemptions for 2009 and 2010, 

but some could potentially remain at the end of the CFC MDI phase-out. The stockpile that 

remains in the European Community is uncertain, since the accounting framework was not 

reported by the Montreal Protocol deadline of 31st January, or in time for the MTOC meeting, 

but is likely to be of the order of about 100 tonnes. 

The essential use nominations received this year allow a global picture of possible 

pharmaceutical-grade CFC needs to be developed for 2010. If approved by Parties, it is 

estimated that up to about 2,000 tonnes of essential use CFCs for MDIs may be needed. 

However with the current uncertainty of CFC supply, it is impossible to predict where 

essential use CFCs, if approved by Parties, might be sourced for 2010. China, which is the 

Party with the biggest consumption of CFCs for MDIs and the one that will most likely take 

longest to complete its transition from CFC to HFC MDIs, may have a more significant role 

as a supplier of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs as a consequence of the European Commission’s 

decision. However, this will depend on whether Parties allow such a role. If this were the 

case, pharmaceutical-grade CFC supply via China alone could encourage open-ended annual 

CFC production for Parties with essential use exemptions, until a time when China’s demand 

has reduced to a level when a final campaign becomes necessary. As reported in 2008, openended annual CFC production does not provide a clear target for ending CFC production or 

incentive for CFC MDI manufacturers to switch to CFC-free alternatives. Overall destruction 

costs for out-of-specification CFCs could also be relatively high compared with a final 

campaign production. 

MTOC will continue to follow the developments concerning supply of pharmaceutical-grade 

CFCs, but is unable to provide Parties with a response to Decision XX/4 until the supply 

situation becomes clearer. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 37 

5 Medical Technical Options Committee Progress Report 

5.1 Executive Summary 

The Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) thanks the Multilateral Fund Secretariat 

for providing meeting venue and other assistance for the MTOC meeting held in Montreal, 

Canada, 22-25th March 2009. As part of its hospitality, the MLF provided meeting rooms and 

other in-kind support, such as telecommunications and copying, and also beverages. Incurred 

costs were covered under the Montreal Protocol Trust Fund. 

The global use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) to manufacture metered dose inhalers (MDIs) 

continues to decline against a background of steadily increasing global use of inhalation 

therapy. The total use of CFCs in 2008 was estimated to be about 2,700 tonnes. Threequarters of this were used to treat patients in Article 5 Parties, with the majority used by local 

CFC MDI manufacturers. 

Stockpiles of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs outside the United States are minimal. Following 

the decision by the European Commission to ban exports of bulk CFC from 1st January 2010, 

there is now uncertainty over the security of supply of CFC MDIs for some Article 5 Parties. 

Technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs are available for all therapeutic categories 

for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In non-Article 5 Parties, 

complete transition will have occurred by the end of 2009, with the exception of the Russian 

Federation, where there has been no reported progress, and some small volumes of CFC 

associated with moieties of minor use in the United States. In Article 5 Parties, there are 

many acceptable alternatives to salbutamol and beclomethasone CFC MDIs. However, the 

presence of CFC-free products cannot alone lead to phase-out without regulatory action, 

appropriate pricing and a clear national transition strategy.

5.2 Global use of CFCs 

The global use of CFCs to manufacture MDIs in 2008 is estimated to be about 2,700 tonnes, a 

reduction of 700 tonnes from consumption of 3,400 tonnes in 2007. Of this, the Russian 

Federation and the United States used 250 tonnes and 450 tonnes respectively; Article 5 

Parties used the remainder. The total use of CFCs by all Article 5 Parties remained about the 

same between 2007 and 2008, with some countries increasing and others decreasing 

consumption. 

Stockpiles in the European Community member states are now close to 100 tonnes. The 

reported stockpile at the end of 2008 in the United States was 830 tonnes, compared to an 

estimated future annual consumption of less than 100 tonnes. This material may not be 

available for export in its entirety and therefore might be destroyed in part. Without 

accounting frameworks, which are not required to be reported until 31st January 2011, it was 

not possible to accurately assess the stockpile in Article 5 Parties, although many nominations 

indicated that stockpiles were small and substantially less than that required for 12 months 

supply of MDIs. 

Many CFC MDI manufacturers in Article 5 Parties have used CFC supplied from a European 

manufacturer, while others have used CFC supplied from China or India. During the MTOC 

meeting, the European Community declared that from 31st December 2009 all imports of CFC 

MDIs into the member states of the European Community would be banned. The regulation 

also bans the export of bulk CFCs from the European Union from the same date. For a CFC 

MDI manufacturer to source bulk CFC from a new supplier, validation studies and possibly 

also regulatory approval would almost certainly be required before being able to use it in a 
38 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

marketed product. Taken together with small stockpiles, this makes the future continued 

supply of CFC MDIs in Article 5 Parties very uncertain. One immediate option would be to 

expedite the phase-out of CFC MDIs by rapid transition to CFC-free alternatives. 

5.3 Transition away from the use of CFC MDIs 

Technically satisfactory alternatives to CFC MDIs to treat asthma and COPD are available in 

almost all countries world-wide. 

The International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC)1

 has analysed the progress in 

the transition to CFC-free alternatives based on available market data. Using the IMS2

definition of standard units (SU) of dosing3

, global data showing trends in inhaler use are 

shown in Figure 5-1. It should be noted that for dry powder inhalers (DPIs), 1 puff (SU) 

represents 1 dose, whereas in general for MDIs, 2 puffs (2 SU) equals 1 dose. 

Figure 5-1: Trends in global inhaler usage 2002-2007 

Figure 5-1 shows a slight decrease in the total consumption of MDIs, but this decrease is 

smaller than the increased use of DPIs. Therefore, it can be concluded that there has been an 

increased overall use of inhalers, mainly due to the increased use of DPIs, for which growth is 

larger than the decline in use of total MDIs. DPIs now account for around one-third of all 

inhaled medication, based on the assumption that all MDI SUs should be divided by 2 to get 

the equivalent number of doses from a DPI. Worldwide use of CFC MDIs has been declining 

 

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

Ingelheim, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Glaxosmithkline, Teva. and Sepracor.) that manufacture medicines for the treatment of 

respiratory illnesses, such as asthma and COPD. 

2 IMS Health is a company that gathers and analyses pharmaceutical market data. IMS Health granted IPAC permission to 

submit this data to MTOC/TEAP. 

3 IMS definition of SUs: “These are the number of dose units, such as the number of inhalations/puffs, tablets, the number of 

5ml doses, or the number of vials, sold for a particular product”. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 39 

to a point where it is less than either DPI or hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) MDI usage, on the 

basis of equivalent number of doses. 

This global picture can be contrasted with the data shown in Figure 5-2, specific to Asia and 

Africa, which are made up mostly of Article 5 Parties. It is encouraging to note that, at 

around 6 per cent annual growth, the use of inhaled therapy is increasing much faster in Asia 

and Africa than the global average. However, up to 2007, this increase has been 

predominantly driven by the increased use of CFC MDIs. Data from nominations and MLF 

project proposals indicate that around two-thirds of CFC MDI use is for salbutamol and much 

of the remainder is for beclomethasone. 

Figure 5-2: Trends in inhaler usage in Africa and Asia 2002-2007 

Data specific to the nominating Article 5 Parties are shown in Table 5-1. With the exception 

of China, there was an overall flattening of CFC consumption after 2007. In China, there are 

no locally manufactured alternatives to CFC MDIs. The substantial increase in consumption 

in China is attributed to improvements in the healthcare and health insurance system. 

There are several projects funded by the MLF for the conversion of salbutamol CFC MDI to 

HFC MDI in Article 5 Parties that are due to be completed by the end of 2010. Given that 

salbutamol accounts for the majority of CFC usage, MTOC expects that CFC usage in Article 

5 Parties will decline significantly in 2011 and beyond. 
40 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 5-1: Estimated CFC usage for nominating Article 5 Parties 

MTOC has noted previously the wide availability in Article 5 Parties of technically suitable 

alternatives to CFC MDIs from multinational companies. However, as noted elsewhere, this 

has not prompted transition, largely due to affordability of the alternatives. Inhaler products 

sourced from manufacturers in Article 5 Parties are now substantially increasing the range of 

alternatives and may help reduce the price difference. For example, Cipla, an Indian 

pharmaceutical company, now markets 30 different CFC-free inhalers and is committed to 

largely phasing out domestic supply of CFC MDIs by the end of 2009. However, it is clear 

from the essential use nomination from India that there will be an ongoing and substantial 

export of CFC MDIs to Article 5 Parties in 2010. MTOC does not have the information to 

determine whether the continued export of CFC MDIs is driven by commercial considerations 

or whether it is the result of the pace of regulatory approval of the alternatives in importing 

countries. 

There are a number of Article 5 Parties that significantly restrict the import of foreign 

pharmaceutical products, which, in this context, severely limit the availability of alternatives 

to CFC MDIs. Transition is therefore highly dependent on the progress of projects to convert 

domestic manufacture to HFC MDIs. The declining availability of bulk CFC propellant may 

place patient lives in jeopardy if conversion project progress is not closely monitored and 

managed. 

5.4 Transition strategies 

In response to Decision XII/2, transition strategies developed by seven Parties are listed on 

the Ozone Secretariat’s web site. Pursuant to Decision XV/5(4), plans of action regarding the 

phase-out of the domestic use of salbutamol CFC MDIs from the European Community, the 

Russian Federation and the United States are also listed on the Ozone Secretariat’s web site4

. 

Decision XV/5(6) requests non-Article 5 Parties to submit to the Ozone Secretariat specific 

dates by which time they will cease making nominations for essential use nominations for 

CFCs for MDIs where the active ingredient is not solely salbutamol. In 2009 the United 

States submitted advice of the FDA’s final rule regarding the removal of essential-use 

designation for epinephrine as of 31 December 2011. The FDA concluded that there were no 

 

4

 http://ozone.unep.org/Exemption_Information/Essential_Use_Nominations/index.shtml 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Argentina 173.10 195.60 179.95 186.80 178.00

Bangladesh 76.30 71.88 102.83 119.91 156.69

Egypt 148.70 164.00 200.00 230.00 264.00

India 746.70 590.27 507.13 317.87 350.60

Iran 96.40 86.00 105.00 110.00 105.00

Pakistan 84.74 99.57 118.30 134.80 124.20

Syria 30.52 33.57 36.92 40.62 44.68

Sub-total excl. China 1,356.46 1,240.89 1,250.13 1,140.00 1,223.17

China 280.90 341.00 508.10 736.10 977.20

Total 1,637.36 1,581.89 1,758.23 1,876.10 2,200.37
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 41 

technical barriers to formulating epinephrine without the use of CFCs. In the United States, 

epinephrine CFC MDIs cannot be marketed after this date. 

For Article 5 Parties, according to Executive Committee Decision 45/54, Low Volume 

Countries (LVCs) submitting Terminal Phase-Out Management Plans (TPMPs) can obtain up 

to US$30,000 to develop and implement a transition strategy. Some transition strategies have 

been approved under national ODS/CFC phase-out plans, others have been approved as part 

of MLF-funded MDI investment projects; and yet others as stand alone projects. 

5.4.1 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 2009, no reports were received other 

than those contained within a few essential use nominations, such as the United States. 

It is now critical that all Article 5 Parties develop their own national transition strategy and 

provide it to the Secretariat, to be posted on its website, and then to report each year on 

progress in transition, in accordance with Decisions XX/3 and XII/2. This provides the 

background information against which TEAP and MTOC can prepare technical assessments 

of future CFC essential use nominations. For example, Thailand is an importing country 

whose transition strategy states that it has phased out CFC MDIs. However it remains on the 

list of countries to which India in its 2010 CFC nomination states that it exports CFC MDIs. 

As there was no information in the Indian nomination on the volume of export to Thailand, 

MTOC were unable to adjust the recommended volumes for this apparent inconsistency. 

5.5 Global database in response to Decision XIV/5 

Under Decision XIV/5, all Parties are requested to submit information on CFC and CFC-free 

alternatives to the Secretariat by 28 February each year. In 2009, a report was received from 

Canada5

. MTOC also requested and/or received this type of information within some 

essential use nominations. Twenty-two Article 5 Parties have submitted data pursuant to 

Decision XIV/5 since its inception, but in many cases the data have not been updated 

annually. These Parties are Argentina, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, China, Costa 

Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Eritrea, Georgia, Guyana, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Malaysia, 

Mauritius, Namibia, Oman, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Uruguay. 

It is important that Article 5 Parties collect their own data on CFC and CFC-free inhaler use 

annually and provide it to the Secretariat by 28 February each year, to be posted on its 

website, in accordance with Decision XIV/5. Decision XII/2(3) also requests Parties, 

including Article 5 Parties, to notify the Ozone Secretariat of any MDI products determined to 

be non-essential, and for nominating Parties to take this information into consideration. The 

Ozone Secretariat website only has information for the European Community. Collection of 

such data would aid in the development of effective transition plans within each country and 

in the determination of any essential use nominations for Article 5 Parties beyond 2010. 

Given the complexity and fluidity of export markets, Parties may wish to consider the 

advantages of all importing Parties, including Article 5 Parties, making annual declarations 

 

5

 http://ozone.unep.org/Exemption_Information/Essential_Use_Nominations/index.shtml 
42 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

stating the reasons why the imported CFC MDI products are considered necessary and 

requiring that these declarations accompany nominations from Parties manufacturing and 

exporting CFC MDIs
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 43 

6 Response to Decision XX/3(4): Suggestions for Appropriate 

Changes to the Handbook on Essential Use Nominations 

In Decision XX/3 paragraphs 1-3, Parties took decisions to make the essential use exemption 

process and related previous Decisions fully applicable to both non-Article 5 and Article 5 

Parties. 

Decision XX/3 paragraph 4 requested the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to 

reflect paragraphs 1-3 of Decision XX/3 “in a revised version of the handbook on essentialuse nominations and to submit, for consideration by Parties, suggestions for any appropriate 

changes to the handbook and the timing to make such changes.” 

A revised Handbook on Essential Use Nominations (the Handbook) will be completed and 

sent to Parties at least two months prior to the MOP-21 reflecting only the changes brought 

about by paragraphs 1-3 of Decision XX/3. 

In this report, the Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) presents other appropriate 

changes to the Handbook for consideration by Parties at the OEWG-29, as requested in 

Decision XX/3(4). In light of experience obtained during the first year of assessments of 

essential use nominations from Article 5 Parties, changes to the Handbook are suggested to 

clarify the information requirements arising from existing Decisions, including new Decision 

XX/3. Additional changes are suggested that would be necessary for MTOC to assess the 

nominations properly. A few changes are also suggested to allow flexibility for any possible 

future campaign production, if needed. Any Decisions by Parties in relation to these 

suggestions at MOP-21 could be reflected in a subsequent revision to the Handbook in 2010, 

but, regarding the timing, are recommended to take effect immediately for Parties submitting 

their nominations in 2011. 

MTOC has used the existing information requirements for essential use nominations included 

in the Handbook (Section 2.5, page 6) to indicate where changes to the Handbook could be 

made. Changes resulting from Decision XX/3, and suggestions for additional changes, are 

shown in strikeout and underlined text. Explanations relating to the suggested additional 

changes are shown in italicised parentheses. 

The following information is requested for each nomination (see nomination 

forms in Appendix C and, for MDIs only, Appendix D). 

1. Provide a detailed description of the use that is the subject of the nomination. 

(Decision IV/25, pars. 2 and 3) 

2. Provide details of the type, quantity and quality of the controlled substances that is 

requested to satisfy the use. (Decision IV/25, pars. 2 and 3). Specify whether the 

quantity is requested for production or for use from existing stockpile. (This 

information would be needed for a final campaign production, if necessary.)

3. Indicate the period of time and the annual quantities of the controlled substances that 

are requested. (Decision IV/25, pars. 2 and 3). For CFC MDIs, indicate the expected 

annual future requirements until CFC MDI transition is completed and historic 3-year 

consumption data to satisfy the use. (This information would be required to estimate 

needs for a final campaign production, if necessary).

4. 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 
44 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

quantities for intended markets, using available data from requesting companies. 

When more specific data are not available, data aggregated by region and product 

group may be submitted for CFC MDIs intended for sale in Parties operating under 

paragraph 1 of Article 5. (Decisions XV/5, par. 2, and XVI/12, par. 2, and XX/3 

par.1(a)). 

5. For CFC MDIs, state whether each intended market for sale or distribution is subject 

to a transition strategy adopted and submitted to the Secretariat and posted by the 

Secretariat on its website pursuant to Decision XII/2 or Decision IX/19. (Decision 

XV/5, par. 3 and XX/3 par. 1(a)). 

6. 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) 

7. Explain what other alternatives and substitutes have been employed to reduce the 

dependency on the controlled substance for this application use in the intended 

markets subject to the nomination. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 1(b)(i), 2 and 

3(d)). (This change clarifies the information requirements to help ensure adequate 

information about alternatives, including in export markets, is provided.)

8. Explain what alternatives were investigated are available in the intended markets and 

why they were are not considered adequate. Describe the availability and 

affordability of alternatives in the intended markets subject to the nomination, 

including examples of comparative data on CFC MDI versus CFC-free product 

prices. Where a manufacturer’s CFC MDI is available in a market at the same time 

as its equivalent HFC MDI, please explain why the HFC MDI is not a suitable 

alternative. Describe any barriers to the introduction or uptake of alternatives, 

including information on regulatory approval processes, and on pricing policies 

applicable to imported products. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 1(b)(i), 2 and 3(d)). 

(This change clarifies the information requirements to help ensure adequate 

information about alternatives, including in export markets, is provided.) Confirm 

that the global database of CFC MDIs and their alternatives under Decision XIV/5 

has been consulted and taken into account in the nomination. (This additional change 

may help nominating Parties assess whether exported products are essential uses in 

importing countries.) For each intended import market subject to the nomination, 

attach a declaration by the importing country stating the reasons why the imported 

CFC MDI products are considered necessary. (This additional change would provide 

an adequate level of assurance that the products being exported are essential to the 

importing country, and ensure the importing country is actively managing its CFC 

MDI import.) 

9. For CFC MDIs, confirm that each company requesting essential use allocations has 

fully complied with Decision VIII/10.1 to respond to the request to demonstrate 

ongoing research and development of alternatives to CFC MDIs with all due 

diligence and/or collaborate with other companies in such efforts. (Decision VIII/10, 

par. 1 and Decision XX/3, par. 1(a)(i) and (ii)). Describe the status of the 

development of alternatives to CFC MDIs, plans for their approval and expected 

launch dates. (This change clarifies the information requirements to help ensure 

adequate information is provided to demonstrate ongoing research and development.)

10. If the use is for a CFC MDI product approved in non-Article 5 Parties after 31 

December 2000, or approved in Article 5 Parties after 31 December 2008, excluding 

any product in the process of registration and approved by 31 December 2009 for the 

treatment of asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, provide 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 45 

documentation to demonstrate that this product is necessary for health or safety and 

that there are no technically and economically feasible alternatives available. 

(Decision XII/2, par. 2 and Decision XX/3, par. 1(f)). 

11. Describe the measures that are proposed to eliminate all unnecessary emissions. At a 

minimum, this explanation should include design considerations and maintenance 

procedures. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(b)(i), 2 and 3(b); Decision VI/9, par. 4; and

Decision VIII/10, pars. 6 and 7; and Decision XX/3, par. 1(a)(i) and (ii)). 

12. Explain what efforts are being undertaken to employ other measures for this 

application in the future, including, in the case of MDIs, efforts to foster approval of 

alternatives in the domestic and export markets. (Decision IV/25, pars. 1(a)(ii), 3(d) 

and 4; Decision VIII/10, par. 1; Decision VIII/11; and Decision XII/2, par. 4; and 

Decision XX/3 par. 1(a)(i) and (ii)). 

13. Explain whether the nomination is being made because national or international 

regulations require use of the controlled substance to achieve compliance. Provide 

full documentation including the name, address, phone and fax number of the 

regulatory authority requiring use of the controlled substance and provide a full copy 

or summary of the regulation. Explain what efforts are being made to change such 

regulations or to achieve acceptance on the basis of alternative measures that would 

satisfy the intent of the requirement. 

14. For CFC MDIs, confirm that the Secretariat's list of CFC MDI active ingredients 

and/or category of products determined to be non-essential by a Party has been 

consulted and that none of the volumes requested shall be used for items posted on 

that list. (Decision XII/2, par. 3). 

15. For CFC MDIs, beginning with the nomination following the submission of a 

national or regional MDI transition strategy to the Secretariat, briefly summarise the 

nominating Party’s national transition strategy, including phase-out dates and CFC 

MDI manufacturing plant conversion timelines, and describe progress made on the 

transition to CFC-free alternatives under that strategy. (Decision IX/19, pars. 5 and 5 

bis, and Decision XII/2, pars. 5(c) and 6). (This change clarifies the information 

requirements.)

15.bis For CFC MDIs, describe the Party’s plan of action regarding the phase-out of the 

domestic use of CFC MDIs where the sole active ingredient is salbutamol, and 

describe progress towards implementing that plan. (Decision XV/5 pars. 4, 4 bis and 

5, and Decision XX/3 par. 1(a)(iii)). 

16. For CFC MDIs, describe progress made towards determining and submitting a 

specific date by which time the Party will cease making nominations for essential use 

exemptions for CFCs for metered-dose inhalers where the active ingredient(s) is not 

solely salbutamol and the metered-dose inhalers are expected to be sold or distributed 

on the market of any Party not operating under paragraph 1 of Article 5. (Decision 

XV/5, par. 6) 

16.bis For CFC MDIs, for Parties operating under paragraph 1, describe progress made 

towards submitting a specific date by which time a regulation or regulations to 

determine the non-essentiality of the vast majority of CFCs for MDIs where the 

active ingredient is not solely salbutamol will have been proposed. (Decision XVII/5 

par. 3 bis).
46 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

17. 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)). 

18. For CFC MDIs, indicate the existing stock of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs (pre- and 

post-1996-phase-out) 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. Describe how this stockpile will be utilised in coming years. 

(Decision IV/25, par. 1(b)(ii) and Decision XVI/12, par. 3) 

19. For CFC MDIs, confirm that the nominating Party has given due consideration to the 

following. That: 

(a) Each company's existing stock of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs (including 

CFCs the company possesses or has title to, pre- and post- 1996 phaseout) aims not to exceed one year's operational supply (the amount used 

by the company to produce CFC MDIs in the preceding year); 

(b) The Party's aggregate stocks of pharmaceutical-grade CFCs (pre- and 

post-1996 phase-out) aims not to exceed one year's operational supply for 

that Party; 

(c) The Party’s nomination has been reduced, if necessary, with the objective 

of the Party’s aggregate stocks of available pre- and post-1996 phase-out 

pharmaceutical-grade CFCs not exceeding one year’s operational supply; 

and 

(d) All available pre-1996 phase-out stockpiles have been or will be depleted 

by companies before drawing on essential use quantities and thereby 

assure that pre-1996 phase-out stockpiles are taken into account in 

making essential use requests. 

(Decision IV/25, par. 1(b)(ii), and Decision XVI/12, par. 3, Decision XVII/5 par. 2, 

Decision XIX/13 par. 2 and Decision XX/3 par 1(c)). 

20. Briefly state any other barriers encountered in attempts to eliminate the use of the 

controlled substance for this application. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 47 

7 Chemicals Technical Options Committee (CTOC) Progress 

Report 

7.1 Executive Summary 

The CTOC met on March 11-13, 2009 in Sydney, Australia. The agenda of the meeting 

covered issues requested by the Parties, including process agents, laboratory and analytical 

uses, and the essential use nomination of CFC-113 in 2010 for the Russian space and rocket 

industries. All the output on these issues is included in this report. 

Process Agents 

The new Table A in Decision XIX/15 approved 42 uses of controlled substances as process 

agents. In the 2008 CTOC Progress Report, a revision of the Table A and the Table B of 

Decision X/14 was reported according to Decisions XVII/6 (7) and XVII/6 (8), respectively. 

However, at the MOP-20 in Doha, the Parties decided to defer these issues to their next 

meeting in 2009. 

The recommendation by the CTOC is to add three new applications of the ten candidates 

requested by China in Table A of Decision XIX/15, and to delete the process agent use of 

CTC in production of Dicofol (No.6 in Table A of Decision XIX/15), according to a report 

that India no longer uses CTC in the production of Dicofol. 

The CTOC assessed the following three applications to be added in Table A as process agent 

uses. 

(i) CTC as a dispersant or diluting agent in the production of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVdF) 

(ii) CTC as a solvent for esterification in the production of tetrafluorobenzoylethyl acetate 

(iii) CTC as a solvent for bromination and purification in the production of 4-boromophenol 

Regarding Table B of Decision X/14, the CTOC cannot make a recommendation on 

reductions to the make-up and maximum emissions in Table B because not all the necessary 

data are available, except for Japan. The CTOC was informed that there are no more process 

agent uses in Japan and therefore recommends reducing both 300 metric tonnes of the makeup or consumption and 5 metric tonnes of maximum emissions in Japan to zero in Table B. 

Laboratory and Analytical Uses 

Decision XIX/18 requested the TEAP and its Chemicals Technical Options Committee 

provide, by the Twenty-first Meeting of the Parties, a list of laboratory and analytical uses of 

ozone-depleting substances, indicating those for which alternatives exist and which are 

therefore no longer necessary, and describing those alternatives. 

The updated findings by the CTOC are listed in Table 7-3 in the laboratory and analytical 

uses section below. The table shows how ODS, mainly CTC, are used in standard methods of 

analysis and where available lists non-ODS alternatives that can be (in many cases have been) 

used in these methods. The preferred alternatives to ODS include hydrocarbon, aromatics, 

chlorinated chemicals, ketones and alcohols. 

Furthermore, the CTOC developed some case studies to explore how the restrictions on the 

use of CTC for laboratory and analytical purposes were implemented in some 

countries/regions, including Australia, European Community, Japan, USA and some countries 

in Africa. 
48 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Essential Use Exemptions of CFC-113 in the Russian Federation 

At the MOP-20 in Doha, the TEAP/CTOC confirmed the essentiality of the request for 140 

metric tonnes of CFC-113 in 2008 and for 130 metric tonnes in 2009 for use in the Russian 

rocket and space industry. The recommendation was based upon an appraisal of the progress 

to phase-out CFC-113 and of the work still needed to commercialise appropriate alternatives 

in Russia during the expert meeting held in Moscow on October 6-10, 2008. The full report of 

the expert meeting is attached in the Appendix of this report. 

On December 25, 2008, The Ministry of National Resources and Environment of the Russian 

Federation sent the Ozone Secretariat a request for Essential Use Exemption (EUE) of 120 

metric tonnes of CFC-113 in the rocket and space technology production in the Russian 

Federation in 2010.

The TEAP/CTOC assessed this nomination and found it justifiable since the Russian 

Federation was making efforts to find economically and technologically feasible alternatives 

under an authorised time schedule (see Exhibit-C of the Appendix). Thus, the TEAP/CTOC 

recommends an EUE of 120 metric tonnes of CFC-113 in 2010 for the Russian Federation. 

The TEAP/CTOC also recommends that the Russian Federation continues to work with the 

CTOC experts to share successful experiences from other countries. 

Other Issues 

The CTOC has been mandated to report updates on laboratory and analytical uses of methyl 

bromide, on CTC emissions and on n-propyl bromide in 2009 according to the Decisions 

XVII/10 (8), XVIII/10 (1) and XVIII/11 (2), respectively. However, no new information on 

those issues was obtained in the course of CTOC activities during 2008 or the first part of 

2009, so efforts will be made to include any new information in the 2010 CTOC Assessment 

Report. 

7.2 Introduction

The CTOC met on March 11-13, 2009 in Sydney, Australia, where the meeting was hosted by 

the co-chair, Professor Ian D Rae. The extraordinary courtesy of the Government of New 

South Wales was highly appreciated for providing CTOC with a conference facility in the 

building of Department of Environment and Climate Change. Eleven out of twenty CTOC 

members participated in the meeting. Attending members were six from Article 5 Parties 

(Chile, China, India, Kuwait, Mauritius and Tanzania) and five from non-Article 5 Parties 

(Australia, Japan, Russia and USA). 

The agenda of the meeting covered issues requested by the Parties, including process agents, 

laboratory and analytical uses, and essential use nomination of CFC-113 in 2010 by the 

Russian Federation. In addition, the CTOC discussed the importance of Decisions XX/7 and 

XX/8 in terms of management including recovery and destruction of ODSs, and the 

availability of alternatives to HCFCs and HFCs. They also discussed the possible inclusion of 

new gases in the Kyoto Protocol proposed in the website of UNFCCC. 

7.3 Process Agents 

Decision XVII/6(6) asked the TEAP and the ExCom to report to the OEWG on progress 

made in reducing emissions of controlled substances from process-agent uses; the associated 

make-up quantity of controlled substances; on the implementation of and development of 

emissions-reduction techniques and alternatives and products. The CTOC was unable to 

work with the Executive Committee because Parties provided insufficient information on 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 49 

emissions and make-up quantities. If such information is not forthcoming, CTOC will 

nonetheless attempt (for a future report) to provide information about emission reduction 

techniques and alternatives. Some information about alternatives was provided by the 

Process Agents Task Force in 2001. 

The CTOC reported in the May 2008 TEAP Progress Report Volume 1 (pp. 49-52), a revision 

of Table A of Decision X/14, which is revised in the Annex to Decision XIX/15 and Table B 

of Decision X/14 according to Decisions XVII/6 (7) and XVII/6 (8), respectively. 

However, at MOP-20 in Doha, the Parties commented that the list of process agents had been 

updated in 2007 and was normally only updated every two years. Thus the Parties agreed to 

defer further consideration and to take it up at their next meeting in 2009. 

Therefore the CTOC is reporting again the revision of Table A and Table B for consideration 

at the MOP-21 in 2009. 

The new Table A in Decision XIX/15 approved 42 uses of controlled substances as process 

agents. 

At the time of the 2008 CTOC meeting, the Ozone Secretariat in Nairobi and the 

TEAP/CTOC had received new information from Israel and Netherlands, and after the 

meeting also from China. All of the above information had been reviewed by the CTOC, as 

shown in section 7.1. Regarding the emissions listed in Table B, the Ozone Secretariat 

received information only from Brazil, EC, and USA in 2008. The data from Brazil is ‘in 

confidence’ due to the fact that only one plant was reporting in each case. The review by the 

CTOC is described in section 7.2. 

7.3.1 Reviews of information from Israel, Netherlands and China 

The CTOC reviewed the information from Israel. There are two identical installations, which 

use carbon tetrachloride (CTC) for elimination of NCl3 in the production of chlorine with the 

capacities of 7.2 metric tonnes of CTC. The CTC quantities used were 3.5 metric tonnes but 

there were no direct emissions to the atmosphere with some losses of CTC due to an 

entrainment by chlorine gas. This application is already included as No.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 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 of CTC. 

The Party expects to reduce the emissions of CTC below 1.0 metric tonne over 2007 and the 

subsequent years. This application is already included as No.8 in the list of Table A in 

Decision XIX/15. 

Further, India had indicated the process agent use in production of Dicofol (No.6 in Table A 

of Decision XIX/15) would cease by 31 December 2007. In response to a request for 

confirmation by the CTOC, India reported that the process agent use (CTC) in production of 

Dicofol has ceased in India. Therefore the application No.6 could be deleted from Table A of 

Decision XIX/15. Also, information was obtained from UNIDO that the process agent use for 

production of Sultamicillin (No.31 in Table A of Decision XIX/15) in Turkey has ceased but 

the process is still operated in South Africa, so this process agent use needs to remain in Table 

A. 

The CTOC investigated a potential list of process agent applications from China in 2007 (see 

pp27-42 in the April 2007 TEAP Progress Report). The CTOC commented that more 
50 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

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 pages 36-37 in the April 2007 TEAP Progress Report. China 

submitted information on those 10 applications to the Ozone Secretariat on March 4, 2008. 

The CTOC examined this information and its findings are summarised in Table 7-1. 

Table 7-1: Findin gs 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 (water proofing 

formulation) 

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 Aagent 

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. 

7.3.2 Attempted review of Table B of Decision X/14 

Table 7-2 shows an updated Table B of Decision X/14 by adding reported data in 2006. Not 

all the data have been available, but the reported data by the EC and USA are in agreement 

with 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 cannot make any recommendation on reductions to the make-up and 

maximum emissions regarding to Table B of Decision X/14. 

Since the CTOC 2008 Progress Report was completed, new information on Table B was 

obtained only from Japan. No more process agent uses existed in Japan. Therefore 300 metric 

tonnes of the make-up or consumption and 5 metric tonnes of maximum emissions in Japan 

were reduced to zero and the total number was corrected accordingly. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 51 

Table 7-2: Updated Table B of Decision X/14 

 (expressed in metric tonnes per year) 

Countries/Regions 

Maximum 

make-up or 

consumption

Reported makeup or 

consumption 

(2006) 

Maximum 

emissions 

Reported 

emissions 

(2006) 

European Community 1083*** 594* 17.5*** 5* 

United States of America 2300 No data? 181 47** 

Canada 13 No data 0 No data 

Japan 0 No data 0 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 4201 594 216 52 

Updated Table B in metric tonnes; *European Commission DG Environment and CTOC data ** EPA data ***The 

total number is corrected by adding those from Hungary and Poland which have been included in EC as new 

members. 

The CTOC could provide a more complete overview of ODS emissions arising from process 

agent uses, should all Parties submit required information to the Ozone Secretariat.

7.4 Laboratory and analytical uses 

Decision XVII/10 (8) requested the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) to 

report in 2007 and every other year on the development and availability of laboratory and 

analytical procedures that can be performed without using the controlled substances in Annex 

E of the Protocol. The CTOC was unable to obtain new information on the alternative uses of 

Methyl Bromide in laboratory and analytical uses. 

Decision XIX/18 requested the TEAP and its Chemicals Technical Options Committee to 

provide, by the Twenty-first Meeting of the Parties, a list of laboratory and analytical uses of 

ozone-depleting substances, indicating those for which alternatives exist and which are 

therefore no longer necessary and describing those alternatives. 

7.4.1 Information table 

An interim report was produced in 2008 and included in the CTOC section of the May 2008 

TEAP Progress Report (pp. 54-62). The interim report was not discussed at MOP-19 in Doha 

but will not be reproduced in full here. Instead, the updated findings have been included in the 

following table. 

The table shows how ODS, mainly CTC, are used in standard methods of analysis and, where 

possible, lists non-ODS alternatives that can be (and in many cases have been) used in these 

methods. Also listed in the table are some alternative methodologies for performing the 

analysis. 
52 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Table 7-3: Updated findings of feasible alternatives to ODS in analytical procedures 

ODS Methodology Feasible Substitutes 

ODS 

Type 

General use Methodology Substance / 

Methodology 

Methodology 

CCl4 Standard 

method 

Analysis of Cyanocobalamin, 

United States Pharmacopea 

(USP) Method. 

Coulometric 

electrochemical 

and ultraviolet 

detection 

Determination of cyanocobalamin, 

betamethasone, and diclofenac 

sodium in pharmaceutical 

formulations, by high performance 

liquid chromatography. 

L. González, G. Yuln and M. G. 

Volonté 

High-performance liquid 

chromatography method for the 

simultaneous determination of 

thiamine hydrochloride, pyridoxine 

hydrochloride and cyanocobalamin in 

pharmaceutical formulations using 

coulometric electrochemical and 

ultraviolet detection. 

Marcin Leszek Marszałł, Anna 

Lebiedzińska, Wojciech Czarnowski 

and Piotr Szefer. 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Analysis of cascarosides - Dichloro 

methane, 

- Chloroform 

Ttrichloroethylen

e 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Analysis of simethicone by 

Infrared spectroscopy / Cleaning 

of IR cells 

(Valuation of Simethicone in 

finished products, using infrared 

spectroscopy (IR). Method 

"Simethicone Capsules" of Official 

Monographs USP XXIV (p. 1519).)

Chloroform 

Toluene 

ICP-AES Determination of Trace 

Simethicone Levels in 

Biopharmaceutical Products. J. Qiu, 

V. Wong, H. Lee, C. Zhou 

J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2002 Sep 5;30 

(2):273-8 12191712. A RP-LC method 

with evaporative light scattering 

detection for the assay of simethicone 

in pharmaceutical 

formulations. Douglas E Moore, Tina 

X Liu, William G Miao, Alison 

Edwards, Russell Elliss. Faculty of 

Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, 

Sydney 2006, Australia. 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Analysis of Trimethoprim. United 

States Pharmacopea (USP) 

Method 

(Also at: S.Z. Qureshi; M.I.H 

Helaleh; N. Rahman; R.M.A.Q. 

Jamhour; “Spectrometric 

determination of trimethoprim by 

oxidation in drugs formulations; 

Fresenius J Anal Chem (1997) 

357: 1005-1007; Springer-Verlag 

1997) 

- Acetonitrile 

and methanol 

L. K. Sørensen&, T. H. Elbæk; 

“Simultaneous Determination of 

Trimethoprim, Sulfadiazine, 

Florfenicol and Oxolinic Acid in 

Surface Water by Liquid 

Chromatography Tandem Mass 

Spectrometry”; Chromatographia 

2004, 60, September (No. 5/6); p. 

287. 

CCl4 General 

Method 

Analysis of conjugated estrogens 

by gas chromatography 

 No alternatives found. 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Analysis of Furazolidone, United 

States Pharmacopea (USP) 

Method 

- UV detection S. M. Hassan / F. A. Ibrahim* / M. S. 

El-Din / M. M. Hefnawy; “A StabilityIndicating High-Performance Liquid 

Chromatographic Assay for the 

Determination of Some 

Pharmaceutically Important 

Nitrocompounds”; Chromatographia 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 53 

ODS Methodology Feasible Substitutes 

Vol. 30, No. 3/4, August 1990; p. 176. 

CCl4 General 

method 

Analysis of copper gluconate Dichloromethan

e, 

- Chloroform 

-Trichloroethylene 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Gravimetric determination of 

sulfur, Collaborative International 

Pesticides Analytical Council 

CIPAC Method 1

- Gravimetric 

method 

Gravimetric method using nitric acid. 

Reflux with ethanol and titration with 

iodine, according to CIPAC 

(Collaborative International Pesticides 

Analytical Council Limited) 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Determination of specific weight in 

cement samples (National 

standard NCh 154 Of. 69 / ASTM 

C 243-95, Standard test ) 

- Kerosene 

Benzene 

ASTM C 188-44 (Revised in 1967) 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

ASTM D 2821-962, Standard Test 

Method for Measuring the Relative 

Stiffness of Leather by Means of a 

Torsional Wire Apparatus 

Trichloroethylen

e 

 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

ASTM D 3921-85 (re-approved in 

1990), Standard test method for oil 

and grease and petroleum 

hydrocarbons in water 

- Perchloroethyl

ene 

ASTM D7066-04 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Determination of hydrocarbons in 

water ASTM D3921-96 / D3921-97

- Perchloroethyl

ene 

S-316 

(dimer/trimer of 

chlorotrifluoro 

ethylene) 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Determination of the jellification 

point. Method M SAC 10 14 11 

(Own method) 

 No alternatives found 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Iodine index by volumetry in oil 

and greases AOCS CD 1-25 

"Iodine Value (Wijs)" 

- Hexane 

Cyclohexane 

and acetic acid 

Chloroform 

Iso-octane 

Method CD1D-92 

CCl4 Standard 

method 

Iodine3 index by ASTM D1959-97

Standard Test Method for Iodine 

Value of Drying Oils and Fatty 

Acids (Withdrawn 2006) 

ASTM D5554- 95 (2006) Standard 

Test Method for Determination of 

the Iodine Value of Fats and Oils. 

Cyclohexane 

and acetic acid 

and diluted with 

iodine 

monobromide 

solution. 

4

 Hanus 

ISO 3961:1996 

 

1

 Note: The sulphur is converted by refluxing with sodium sulphite to sodium thiosulphate. The 

thiosulphate is then titrated with Standard iodine solution. CIPAC Handbook E. 

2

 Updated by ASTM D2821-00(2005)e1. 

3

 The Iodine value expresses the content of compounds with unsaturated carbon-carbon double 

bonds. It is determined by adding a halogen, e.g. iodine to the simple. 
54 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

ODS Methodology Feasible Substitutes 

CCl4 General 

Method 

Liquid-liquid partitioning method, 

for iodide and bromide analysis 

- Dichlorometha

ne. 

Chloroform 

 

CCl4 Standard 

Method 

Extraction of iodine and its 

derivatives and thyroid extracts 

from semi-solid pharmaceutical 

preparation. United States 

Pharmacopea (USP) method 

- Petroleum 

ether 

Hexane 

Chloroform 

Dichloromethan

e 

Benzene 

Hexane + ethyl 

acetate 

 

TCA Standard 

Method 

Bromine index ASTM D2710-99 

Determination of bromine number 

ASTM 

ASTM D1159-075

- Dichlorometha

ne 

Diethylcarbonat

e 

1-methyl-2-

pirrolidone 

Dichloromethane 

ASTM D 27106

ASTM D 1159-07 

CCl4 General 

Method 

Determination of copper - Chloroform 

Dichloromethan

e 

Perchloroethyle

ne 

Trichloroethylen

e 

Flame Atomic Absorption 

Spectrometric Methods Research and 

Development (2) Page 25. 

CCl4 General 

Method 

Arsenic extraction - Chloroform Atomic Absorption Spectrometry AAE 

with hydride generation 

CCl4 General 

Method 

Analysis of chloride in saline 

solutions 

- Aliphatic 

hydrocarbon 

Chloroform 

Dichloromethan

e 

Perchloroethyle

 

4

 In the determination of the iodine value according to Hanus the sample is dissolved in cyclohexane 

and acetic acid and diluted with iodine monobromide solution. Potassium iodide and water are added, 

and the formed iodine is titrated back with sodium thiosulphate solution. The methods according to 

Wijs and Kauffmann slightly differ from the Hanus method. Information on the accuracy of the 

methods is given in the test methods. Only in the case of some oils with a high iodine value can the 

results deviate from one another. Cyclohexane and acetic acid have generally substituted chloroform 

(trichloromethane, not an ozone depleting substance) and carbon tetrachloride. Also ISO 3961:1996, 

which is similar to the Wijs method, uses cyclohexane and acetic acid. The modified Hofmann and 

Green method allows a shorter reaction time, and is recommended for samples containing hydroxy 

fatty acids because the substitute reactions occurring in this case using the Wijs method do not take 

place. (Ref. TemaNord 2003:516) 

5

 ASTM D 1159 is generally applicable for gasoline, kerosene and distillates in the gas oil range that 

fall in specific distillation and bromine number limits. However, the method is not satisfactory for 

normal alpha-olefins. The method can be used to estimate the percentage of olefins in petroleum 

distillates boiling up to approximately 315oC by using a calculation method described in the standard. 

Dichloromethane is temporarily being allowed as an alternative to 1,1,1-trichloroethane (an ozone 

depleting substance) until a permanent substitute can be identified and adopted by ASTM. A program 

to identify and evaluate candidate solvents is currently underway in the Subcommittee D02.04. (Ref. 

TemaNord 2003:516; “Use of ozone depleting substances in laboratories”; © Nordic Council of 

Ministers, Copenhagen 2003 ISBN 92-893-0884-2). 

6

 This method also mentioned dichloromethane as an alternative to TCA. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 55 

ODS Methodology Feasible Substitutes 

ne. 

In the first 

cleaning stage: 

benzene / ether. 

CCl4 Solvent Washing of NMR (Nuclear 

Magnetic Resonance) tubes 

- Acetone Washing should be followed by ovendrying of inverted tubes to remove 

traces of acetone. 

CCl4 Solvent Grease solvent and cleaning of 

glass materials 

- Acetone A chlorinated solvent such as 

chloroform, trichloroethylene or 

dichloromethane may also be used. 

CCl4 Solvent Organic synthesis - Dichlorometha

ne 

Chloroform 

 

CCl4 Carrier 

(inert); 

analytical 

equipmet 

(Infrared) 

Reaction of phenol and aromatics. 

Oxygen containing functional 

groups - Noncarbonyl Groups, 

Example: The determination of 

hydroxyl values of alcohols, page 

34. 

- Perchloroethyl

ene 

Welcher 6th Edition, p. 1180.7

CCl4 Carrier, 

analytical 

use. 

Solvent in metals analysis by UVVis spectrometry, with ditizone 

(International method). / "Titration 

of cadmium: Photometric Method 

with Ditizone", page 44. 

- Chloroform 

Dichloromethan

e 

Benzene 

Toluene 

Cadmium 

sulfide can be 

extracted from 

solution with 

iodine 

Furman Sixth Edtion pp. 254-2568

CCl4 Solvent Solvent of polymers - Tetrahydrofur

ane. 

Chloroform. 

Dichloromethan

e. 

Dichloro-ethane 

 

CCl4 Carrier 

(inert); 

analytical 

equipmet - 

Infrared 

analysis for 

spectral 

range 4000 

to 50 cm-1 

Spectrophotometry IR (USP XXIII) 

"Standard practice for general 

techniques for qualitative infrared 

analysis E 1252-94", page 26 

- Toluene 

Carbon 

disulphide 

9

 

7 Research and Development (ICE Consulting, "Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) 

by Laboratories in the European Community and ODS-Free Methods to Reduce Further ODS Use - 

Confidential Report Prepared for the European Commission - April 2005".

8 Research and Development (ICE Consulting, "Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) 

by Laboratories in the European Community and ODS-Free Methods to Reduce Further ODS Use - 

Confidential Report Prepared for the European Commission - April 2005".

9 Research and Development (ICE Consulting, "Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS) 

by Laboratories in the European Community and ODS-Free Methods to Reduce Further ODS Use - 

Confidential Report Prepared for the European Commission - April 2005".
56 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

ODS Methodology Feasible Substitutes 

CFC113 Standard 

Method

US EPA Office of Water Method 

418.1, extraction of total petroleum 

hydrocarbons from water samples, 

for analysis by infrared 

spectroscopy "Petroleum 

Hydrocarbons, Total Recoverable 

- Spectrometric, Infrared" 

- S-316 ( 

dimer/trimer of 

chlorotrifluoroet

hylene 

ASTM D 7066-04 "Test Method for 

dimer/trimer of Chlorotrifluoroethylene 

S-316 recoverable oil and grease and 

non polar material by infrared 

determination". 

CCl4 Carrier 

(inert), 

analytical 

equipment, 

GC 

Adsorption Chromatography 

(Welcher 6th edition pp 216-219,10

page 38. 

- Petroleum 

ether 

Cyclohexane 

Carbon disulfide

Diethyl ether 

Benzene 

Esters 

Chloroform 

Dichloroethane

Alcohols 

Water 

Pyridine 

Organic acid 

Inorganic acids 

and bases. 

Welcher Sixth Edition pp. 216-219. 

CCl4 Vapor 

producer 

Test of breakthrough times of gas 

mask cartridges and canisters in 

the National Approval Test of 

Respirators. 

Testing of breathing filters 

(personal safety equipment), 42 

CFR part 84 

- Cyclohexane Mitsuya FURUSE1, Seiichiro KANNO, 

Tsuguo TAKANO and Yoshimi 

MATSU; “Cyclohexane as an 

Alternative Vapor of Carbon 

Tetrachloride for the Assessment of 

Gas Removing Capacities of Gas 

Masks”; National Institute of Industrial 

Health, Kawasaki, Japan; Industrial 

Health 2001, 39, 1–7. 

CCl4 Solvent O- and N- difluoromethylations - Chlorodifluoro

methyl phenyl 

sulfone 

Ji Zhenga, Ya Lia, Laijun Zhanga, 

Jinbo Hu*.a, Gerrit Joost Meuzelaarb, 

and Hans-Jürgen; 

“Chlorodifluoromethyl phenyl sulfone: 

a novel non-ODS based 

difluorocarbene reagent for O- and Ndifluoromethylations”; Supplementary 

Material (ESI) for Chemical 

Communications. This journal is © 

The Royal Society of Chemistry 2007.

7.4.2 Case studies 

Some case studies were also developed to explore how the restrictions on the use of one ODS, 

carbon tetrachloride (CTC) for laboratory and analytical purposes were implemented in some 

jurisdictions. 

Australia

A bottom-up investigation of the use of carbon tetrachloride (CTC) in research laboratories in 

Australia was undertaken. 

 

10 Research and Development (ICE Consulting, "Consumption of Ozone Depleting Substances 

(ODS) by Laboratories in the European Community and ODS-Free Methods to Reduce Further ODS 

Use - Confidential Report Prepared for the European Commission - April 2005".
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 57 

Inquiry at a major research university revealed that, although there were small holdings of 

CTC in some laboratories, resulting from prior usage, no orders for CTC had been placed in 

recent years. 

Purchasers of chemicals at the university were required to consult a listing of chemical 

substances for which purchases required special permission. CTC as well as other listed 

ozone depleting substances were on this list, as were chemicals of security concern (such as 

explosives and toxins and their precursors) and chemicals that might be involved in substance 

abuse or the production of illicit drugs. 

The inquiry was pursued with the major suppliers in Australia of laboratory chemicals, who 

confirmed that no orders had been received for CTC in recent years from any Australian 

laboratory. In fact, none of the major laboratory suppliers in Australia have obtained import 

licenses to import ODS. 

The Ozone and Synthetic Gas Section of the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage 

and the Arts confirmed that importers of all controlled ozone depleting substances (including 

CTC) needed to possess appropriate licenses. The Australian National University was granted 

a license in 2008 to import laboratory grade ODS in 2008 and 2009, but none was imported in 

2008. The National Halon Bank has also previously supplied recovered CTC (removed from 

fire extinguishers) to Sydney University for domestic use in cancer research. 

A license will not be granted unless the applicant can satisfy the essential use criteria under 

the Montreal Protocol. An essential use license may be obtained subject to an application fee 

of Australian $3,000. Under the regulations, the Minister has the option to waive the fee. 

European Community

Under European Community (EC) legislation imports of ODS are subject to licensing, 

including those for laboratory uses. Also the production of ODS for laboratory uses is subject 

to an authorisation, thus enabling the tracking of quantities imported and produced for 

laboratory use for each substance in the EC. 

The actual quantity used may be less than the total imported because (a) not all of the ODS 

imported in a particular year may be used in that year, (b) part of the total is exported, and (c) 

the quantities eventually imported and produced may be lower than licensed. 

The quantity of CTC licensed to be produced in and imported into the European Community 

for laboratory and analytical uses is about 50 ODP tonnes annually; there has been a 

decreasing trend at least since 2002. This CTC accounts for approximately 48% of the total 

laboratory use of ODS. 

EC laboratories need to register with the European Commission, and receive an identification 

number, which they need to present to their supplier. Currently approximately 5,000 

laboratories are registered as users of ODS. A detailed description of the procedure, including 

the conditions applicable for laboratory uses, is available online on the website 

(http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ozone/uses.htm) and in the licensing manual for laboratory 

users (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ozone/pdf/manual_part_x.pdf). As can be seen from 

the manual, for the time being the registration does not include information about the actual 

use, the quantities or the ozone depleting substances involved. However, the corresponding 

legislation is currently under revision. As of March 2009 the revised legislation is being 

finalised and the new text proposes to make reporting of this information mandatory as of 1 

January 2010. 

Although the global exemption for laboratory and analytical uses has been extended to 31 

December 2011 (Decision XIX/18), the ODS may be used only if no alternative is available. 
58 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Certain uses are excluded from the exemption. These include testing of oil, grease and 

petroleum hydrocarbons in water; testing of tar in road-paving materials; forensic fingerprinting; testing of organic matter in coal; laboratory refrigeration equipment; cleaning etc. of 

electronic components and assemblies; preservation of publications and archives; and 

laboratory sterilisation of materials. The size and purity standards described in Annex II of 

the report of MOP-6 also apply. 

Studies of laboratory use of ODS have been prepared in 2003 by ICF and by the Nordic 

Council (http://www.norden.org/pub/ebook/2003-516.pdf) and summarised in earlier 

TEAP/CTOC reports. 

Japan

The Ozone Section of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) has oversight of 

the production and uses of carbon tetrachloride (CTC) in Japan. The quantity of CTC for 

analytical and laboratory use has declined in the 2000s and remained stable at approximately 

26,000 ODP kg (26 ODP tonnes) since 2006. 

The major users of CTC are analytical laboratories in universities and industry, and 

organisations (both government and private) that undertake environmental analyses. The 

major applications, which are likely to be found in laboratories in most countries, are as 

follows: 

 water and waste water quality testing by liquid chromatography and ion; 

 chromatography; 

 solvent for chemical reactions in organic synthesis; 

 solvent for extracting specific substances from plant and animal; 

 organisms and products; 

 standard for comparison in CTC analysis. 

Analytical chemists and researchers may obtain CTC from chemical suppliers, but they are 

required to fill in a form “Carbon tetrachloride use confirmation note” in which the user 

reports the chemical name of the chemical to be used, its quantity, user’s affiliation and 

contact, and purpose of use whether it is for analytical or for others. New users are required to 

submit the form when they intend to use the chemical and for repeated users, they must 

submit the form once a year annually in April as a standard. Two suppliers, when contacted, 

responded that only small quantities were sold and that these were declining. 

USA

With over 40,000 laboratories in the United States of America and numerous suppliers of 

chemicals for laboratory and analytical purposes, the review of individual applications would 

be costly and burdensome. 

The US EPA is responsible for implementation of the Montreal Protocol and has incorporated 

into domestic regulations the criteria agreed by the Parties regarding the quantity (very small), 

quality (very pure) and labelling of exempt ODS for laboratory and analytical use, as found in 

Annex II to Decision VI/9. 

In the mid-1990s when the Parties decided on the global laboratory exemption and criteria, 

EPA conducted educational outreach and training for the companies that supply laboratory 

chemicals. Since then EPA has maintained regular contact with these suppliers through very 

detailed and stringent regulatory reporting and record keeping requirements. The regulations 

make it a violation to use any quantity of exempt laboratory and analytical ODS for any 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 59 

purpose other than for permitted laboratory and analytical uses. Each laboratory supplier 

reports quarterly the amounts it purchases under the exemption and the amount it supplies. 

Suppliers are required to receive from each laboratory a certification that the material being 

purchased will only be used for the exempt laboratory purpose. Through the regulation, the 

EPA has disallowed the production and sale of ODS for the specific uses the Parties have 

"taken off the list". 

Each kilogram of ODS, if produced, sold, or used improperly is a separate violation under the 

regulation with a penalty of up to US$32,500 per violation. The active compliance 

monitoring and enforcement of US regulations acts as a strong deterrent against illegal uses of 

ODSs under the ozone layer protection program, including the exemption for laboratory and 

analytical uses. Under the Protocol, the USA reports quantities of ODS under the global 

laboratory and analytical use exemption, the figure for 2008 being 2 metric tonnes of CTC (a 

notional average of 50 g for each of 40,000 laboratories). 

An inquiry at a research-active university showed that purchase of small quantities of CTC for 

laboratory and analytical use was routine matter that did not require special paperwork but an 

industrial laboratory reported that justification needed to be provided before purchase. 

Africa 

For several years, CTC is no longer being used in university/analytical laboratories of some 

countries of the continent (e.g. Tanzania and Mauritius) because of its toxicity. Being an 

ODS, CTC along with other ODSs has also been included in the list of chemicals 

banned/prohibited in the national legislation of many of the Parties of the region. These 

chemicals can no longer be imported except for specific and justified purposes where a permit 

must be obtained from appropriate authorities before importation. 

In many countries of the region the management of waste solvents is a problem. As far as 

possible solvents are recycled, however a significant volume of waste solvents including CTC 

and other chlorinated solvents (e.g. chloroform, dichloromethane) exist in these countries 

where there is no proper disposal facility. Presently these waste solvents are stored in large 

containers awaiting disposal. 

7.4.3 Gulf Region and West Asia 

The CTOC has begun work to obtain information about laboratory and analytical uses of ODS 

in these regions. The available data are incomplete and difficulty has been experienced in 

obtaining responses to inquiries. Therefore the CTOC recommends a workshop for the region 

for representatives of these countries, to help gather information and alert people to the 

desirability of replacing ODS with non-ozone depleting substances. 

7.4.4 Chemical Education 

An article that appeared in the widely read Journal of Chemical Education in July 2008 (vol. 

85, pages 962-964) described the replacement of carbon tetrachloride – a ‘well-known 

carcinogen’ - as a solvent in an undergraduate experiment by light petroleum spirit. CTOC 

Co-chair, Prof. Ian D Rae, wrote to the journal to draw attention to another reason for 

replacement of carbon tetrachloride and that is its status as a controlled substance under the 

Montreal Protocol. This letter was intended to bring the Protocol to the attention of the 

academic community and their students. Prof. Ian Rae’s letter was published in the June issue 

of the Journal of Chemical Education (2009, Vol. 86 (6), page 698). 
60 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Prof. Rae’s letter is entitled as Banned Solvents and reads as follows: 

“My attention was caught by a detail of some significance in a recent article in this Journal

(1), and I would like to bring it to the attention of the readers. Alluding to the principles of 

green chemistry, the authors note that they have replaced the traditional solvent for the 

iodination reaction – carbon tetrachloride – with light petroleum, justified by the 

carcinogenicity of carbon tetrachloride. 

There is another reason for the removal of carbon tetrachloride from laboratory use: it is a 

controlled substance under the Montreal Protocol – in the same way that chlorofluorocarbons 

and some other substances are banned – because their release in to the atmosphere leads to 

depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer. It is true that there is a general exemption for the 

use of carbon tetrachloride in laboratories, but this is very limited and the solvent has largely 

been eliminated from such uses in developed countries. 

Most academic chemists are unaware of the restrictions on the use of carbon tetrachloride 

(which also apply to methyl bromide and to 1,1,1- trichloroethane). I believe it is important 

that the restrictions be brought to their attention and that academic chemists impart this 

knowledge to students working in their laboratories. It is a “green message” that takes into 

account inter-governmental conventions such as the Montreal Protocol (over 190 signatory 

countries) as well as important local and personal considerations such as health and safety.” 

Details of the Montreal Protocol controls on chemical use may be found on the Web (2). 

 (1) Amiet, R. G.; Urban, S. J. Chem. Educ. 2008, 85, 962-964. 

 (2) United Nations Environment Programme: Ozone Secretariat http://ozone.unep.org 

7.5 Essential Use Nomination of CFC-113 in the Russian Federation 

Decision XVIII/8 of MOP-18 approved an essential use exemption of 150 metric tonnes of 

CFC-113 in 2007 for applications in the aerospace industry in the Russian Federation. 

Further, Decision XIX/14 of MOP-19 authorised 140 metric tonnes for 2008 and 130 metric 

tonnes for 2009, provided the TEAP/CTOC experts ratified essentiality through a meeting and 

consultations with engineers and technicians of the Russian Federation. 

At the MOP-20 in Doha, the TEAP/CTOC confirmed the essentiality of the request for 140 

metric tonnes of CFC-113 in 2008 and for 130 metric tonnes in 2009 for use. The 

recommendation was based upon an appraisal of the progress to phase-out CFC-113 and of 

the work still needed to commercialise appropriate alternatives in Russia during the expert 

meeting held in Moscow on October 6-10, 2008. The full report of the expert meeting is 

attached in the Appendix. 

Further, the Ministry of National Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation sent 

the Ozone Secretariat a new nomination by the Russian Federation for an Essential-Use 

Exemption of 120 metric tonnes of CFC-113 in the rocket and space technology production in 

the Russian Federation for 2010. 

The TEAP/CTOC investigated this nomination and recommends an EUE for 120 metric 

tonnes of CFC-113 for 2010 for the Russian Federation. 

CTOC comments on the Essential Use Nomination of CFC-113 for 2010 by the Russian 

Federation 

The Ministry of National Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation sent the 

Ozone Secretariat the nomination by the Russian Federation for an Essential Use Exemption 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 61 

of 120 metric tonnes of CFC-113 in the rocket and space technology production in the 

Russian Federation for 2010.

As seen in Illustration 2 in the Appendix, between 2000 and 2008 the Russian Federation 

reduced the use of CFC-113 for this application from 300 to 140 metric tonnes. Most of the 

reduction was achieved through improved recovery and recycling of the spent solvent. Also 

some 10-15 metric tonnes of CFC-113 were successfully substituted to an aqueous system, 

mainly in the manufacturing of launch vehicle assemblies and systems. 

With this background, the TEAP/CTOC concludes that further reduction and complete phaseout of CFC-113 in these applications will require introduction of appropriate alternatives, 

adoption of newly designed equipments, and of materials compatible with the alternatives. 

The nomination for 2010 describes and explains in detail, currently available alternatives, 

steps for their introduction, and the factors that affect the time schedule of their introduction 

including regulatory requirements. 

An element that was not discussed in the expert meeting is presented in the request by the 

Russian Federation. This element is the use of CFC-113 to clean and degrease “printedcircuit-boards of electronic equipments”. Difficulties to clean with aqueous technology 

(Detalan) are described, and further discussion will be necessary on this issue with CTOC 

experts. 

Accordingly, progress after 2010 seems rather slow, but this is something that can be 

expected when the necessary transition period required to adopt new alternatives is 

considered. A faster pace is likely afterwards. 

In conclusion, the TEAP/CTOC recommends an EUE for 120 metric tonnes of CFC-113 for 

2010 for the Russian Federation. The TEAP/CTOC also recommends that the Russian 

Federation continues to work with the CTOC experts to share successful experiences from 

other countries. 

7.6 Update of n-propyl bromide 

No new information on n-propyl bromide was obtained in the course of the CTOC activities 

during 2008 or the first part of 2009. The update status of n-propyl bromide will be included 

in the 2010 CTOC Assessment Report. 

7.7 Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC) emissions 

No new information on CTC emission was obtained in the course of the CTOC activities 

during 2008 or the first part of 2009. The update status of CTC emissions will be included in 

the 2010 CTOC Assessment Report. 
62 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Appendix to Chapter 7: TEAP/CTOC Report on the 2008 Expert 

Meeting in Moscow 

Review of the Russian Federation Space Agency 

CFC-113 Uses and Phase-Out Program 

1. Objectives 

This report summarises a visit by the TEAP-designated solvents experts to the Russian 

Federation to review its CFC-113 based cleaning processes, the alternatives test program, and 

planned phase-out of CFC-113 in the space and rocket industries. It also documents 

information provided and discussed on the CFC-113 alternatives being tested and their 

assessments and the substitution schedule. The TEAP assessment and recommendation on the 

Russian phase-out are also provided. 

This report is based on face-to-face discussions and presentation in the conference room 

setting. Russian hosts did not agree to TEAP’s request that experts visit the cleaning facilities, 

laboratories and manufacturing sites.

2. Background 

At the 2007 meeting of the Montreal Protocol in New Delhi, the Russian Federation was 

granted CFC-113 for the calendar years 2007, 2008 and 2009 for a volume of 150, 140 and 

130 metric tonnes, respectively under the essential use exemption ( EUE) for the Russian 

rocket and space industry. The granting of the EUE for the ozone depleting substances (ODS) 

CFC-113 is based on the TEAP finding that there are no available ODS substitutes which 

could be implemented in the Russian rocket and space industry during this period. It is also 

stipulated that there is an active program in place in Russian Federation to find, develop and 

evaluate all available ozone friendly substitutes and technologies for this application. 

3. Meeting of TEAP Experts with Russian Technical Personnel 

On October 6-10, 2008, TEAP solvent experts Mr. Abid N. Merchant and Mr. David A. 

Ferguson met in Moscow with the scientists, engineers and technicians of the Federal Space 

Agency and associated Research Institutes and some of the manufacturers of the space and 

rocket hardware. The meeting was to fulfil the requirement of Decision XIX/14 and was 

aimed to acquaint the experts with the main applications of CFC-113 in the space industry of 

the Russian Federation and results of research performed to find possible ozone-safe 

alternatives for CFC-113. 

A list of the attendees is given in Exhibit –A. 

The following reports and papers were presented and thoroughly discussed: 

− Application of CFC-113 in rocket and space industry, development and 

testing of alternatives and the implementation plan – Mr. V.S. Morozov, Deputy General 

Director, “NII “GHERMES”; 

− Applications of CFC-113 in production of high-precision mechanical 

devices for control systems of the rocket and space products and compatibility issues with the 

alternatives – Mr. A.S. Kosukhin, Production Manager, “Academicien Pilyugin Center” 

− Use of CFC-113 in production of different class of liquid-propellant engines, 

and about results of alternatives tested. – A.A. Borisov, Deputy Chief Engineer, “NPO 

Energomash”; 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 63 

− Sucessful substitution of aqueous detergents in processes of cleaning and degreasing for 

manufacturing of launch vehicle assemblies and systems – Mr. V.V. Nikiforov, DB 

“Salyut”of FSUE “Khrunichev R&P Space Center 

− Supply and allocations of CFC-113 for production of rocket and space products in rocket 

and space industry of the Russian Federation – Mr. Yu. M. Shchemelyov, FSUE “EKHO”. 

 (See Exhibits-B and -C) 

The presentations were discussed in detail and resulting questions were addressed during the 

meeting and in some cases responses were sent by e-mail after the meeting. 

4. CFC-113 Production 

The CFC-113 required by the Russian Federation is currently produced in Russia by a 

chemical manufacturer (Kirovo-Chepetsk) under the essential use exemption granted by the 

MP to the Russian Federal Space Agency. The Federal Space Agency co-ordinates requests 

for CFC-113 from various manufacturers of the space hardware and allocates supply to them. 

The goal of the Russian Federation is to reduce CFC-113 requirement by substituting 

alternatives where possible and meet the remaining CFC-113 need by a combined domestic 

CFC-113 production and purchasing the balance from the global inventories of CFC-113 in 

other countries (such as US and Europe) that is ear marked for an ultimate disposal by 

destruction (such as incineration or other destruction technology). 

5. CFC-113 Applications 

In Russia, CFC-113 is currently used in cleaning and testing of fuel, hydraulic, and 

temperature control, components and for gyro and accelerometer instruments, and other 

similar control systems. 

These applications can be divided conveniently into two groups based on their material 

contents and the resulting sensitivity of materials to the alternatives. 

The first group will be all-metal structural elements made of aluminium and aluminiummagnesium alloys, corrosion- and heat-resistant chromium-nickel alloys, or elements 

containing non-metallic materials resistant to solvents (polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) , 

polyethylene etc.). They include fuel tanks, pipelines, trunk lines, route fittings and automatic 

equipment, assembly units of liquid rocket engines. 

The second group consists of components with both metals and a large number of nonmetallic materials that are not resistant to fluids (rubbers, elastomers, polymers etc.). These 

are float-type gyro instruments, accelerometers, heat-exchange elements of temperature 

control systems. 

The CFC-113 uses are approximately 45% for the first group (all metallic components and 

assemblies), 40% for the second group (metallic and non-metallic) and 15% for all other uses. 

The CFC-113 use has been reduced from 300 to 140 metric tonnes (2000-2008) in this 

application. Exhibit C- page 16 and 17 represent the CFC-113 uses since 2000 including 

forecast through 2014. The most of the CFC-113 reduction has been accomplished by 

reducing emission from the cleaning process, using improved recovery and recycle of the 

spent solvent. Only 10-15 metric tonnes/yr of the CFC-113 reduction was accomplished by 

substitution with an alternative such as aqueous system with Detalan in the manufacturing of 

launch vehicle assemblies and system. It was also mentioned that during this period the 

production of the space hardware had increased by 40% while reducing the CFC-113. 
64 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

6. Alternatives Being Evaluated 

Based on information provided before and during the meeting it is clear that the Russian 

Federation has expertise in all globally available alternatives to CFC-113 currently used in 

various cleaning applications in the aerospace industries. (See Exhibit-B). 

The Russian ODS phase-out program has recognised, like other countries, that there does not 

exist a single alternative that could be substituted for all of the CFC-113 application and is of 

mindful to use various alternatives for specific applications for a optimum cleaning 

performance. Based on their own testing as well as international experience in the field, for 

the group one cleaning application they have focused on replacement chemistries in the 

groups of chlorocarbons, hydrocarbons, aqueous system with detergents and 

hydrochlorofluorocarbons. These chemistries do meet or exceed the cleaning effectiveness in 

most cases but do not meet other considerations or constraint. 

For example, the chlorocarbons such as Trichloroethylene and Perchloroethylene have 

superior cleaning efficiency and are used successfully in other countries but its use is limited 

and restricted to a small size cleaning equipment due to a very restrictively low Russian 

exposure limits of 2 ppm (vs. 25 ppm or higher in other countries). 

Hydrocarbons, such as benzene and petroleum distillate may also be used only in a small 

scale application due to their flammability. The existing large cleaning facilities are not rated 

for flammables and lack the proper explosion rating. Also the new replacement equipment 

with an appropriate explosion rating is significantly more expensive and could discourage 

conversion. The results of the cleaning tests with aqueous chemistry with detergents were also 

similar to the experience of other countries in that it was judged acceptable for the metal 

components with simple geometry. This chemistry is being substituted for CFC-113 in the 

manufacturing of the launch vehicle assemblies and systems. However, similar to experience 

of other countries, in the complex geometry the cleaning performance of the aqueous system 

was judged unacceptable. Only hydrochlorofluorocarbons such as HCFC-141b, HCFC-122 

and HCFC-225 have met most of the criteria such as cleaning efficiency regardless of 

geometry, solubility of the soils and working fluids, low toxicity, and flammability. It should 

also be noted that only Russia is developing the alternative, HCFC-122. 

Because most of the cleaning applications consist of the complex geometry, the current 

program for the CFC-113 phase-out is based on HCFC alternatives such as HCFC-122 and 

HCFC-141b. 

The selection of an alternative(s) for cleaning space equipment in the second group presents 

the most challenge not only to Russia but to other countries. The function of the cleaning 

agent not only includes degreasing performance and the ability to effectively remove 

mechanical contaminations, but good solvency for working fluids used in making gyro 

(fluorinates and silicone fluids), accelerometer, and instruments for control systems. The 

compatibility of the non metallics and corrosion resistance of some metal materials limit use 

of aggressive solvents. Of the list of alternatives that have worked for the group one 

components, only HCFC by itself and with some additives such as HFC, HFE and PFC have 

been used with some success in the USA and 

other countries. Also, the use of polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) as a material of 

construction for the cleaning equipment and the fixtures to hold the parts to be cleaned is 

unique to Russian Federation. Unfortunately, PMMA is also not compatible with HCFC and 

HFC currently used as substitutes for CFC-113. 

Hydrocarbons, such as cyclopentane and propyl alcohol mixture and petroleum distillate with 

other fluorinated compounds such as HFC, HFE, and PFC may also have to be considered. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 65 

Also the new replacement equipment with an appropriate explosion rating should be 

considered along with retrofitting or upgrading the existing facility. Another approach for 

non-metallic cleaning may involve a multiple cleaning steps with one or more alternatives and 

or tailored alternatives blends of the known substitutes. The use of a flammable 

hydrocarbon/alcohol as suggested earlier has been used in other countries 

Although during the meeting the Russian Space Agency did not discuss or present their 

detailed technical and implementation plan for the phase out of CFC –113, as a follow-up 

response to one of our after meeting questions, they sent us a copy of the program. See 

Exhibit E. The review of the program indicates that the Russian Space Agency has a well 

defined step-by-step implementation plan for the HCFC substitution with well-defined 

organisational responsibility. Having each step outlined with dates for start and completion, 

and the responsibilities for the implementation, gives confidence that they can meet their 

forecasted CFC-113 reduction. 

The Russian Federation recognises that HCFCs are transitional substitutes and have to be 

phased out by 2020. 

7. New Cleaning Equipment for Alternatives 

The Federal Space Agency of the Russian Federation, its contractors, and OEMs who provide 

components to the space vehicles have been working cohesively to minimise their 

requirements for ozone depleting solvents. To this end, the Federal Space agency has 

evaluated the cleaning equipment utilising CFC-113 to determine what advancements could 

be made in cleaning improvement and solvent minimisation. 

New systems are designed to utilise sealed cleaning chambers, thus minimising fugitive 

emissions. Carbon adsorption is designed to be used with larger systems to capture and reuse 

solvent vapours that can be evacuated from tanks, piping, and fixtures. Line flushing 

equipment has been tooled to accomplish the necessary task without allowing solvent runoff. 

Liquid propellant fuel tanks need to be cleaned to remove all contaminants that may result in 

premature combustion. Fixtures with rotating nozzles have been incorporated into the 

cleaning matrix so that the task can be accomplished with only a percentage of the solvent 

that would be consumed using conventional flushing techniques. 

At the time of our meeting, it was understood that this equipment had been designed and 

approved, but not yet installed in the facilities of their contractors or OEMs. Therefore it is 

not possible to accurately calculate the improved efficiency of these new systems. The 

timeline for purchase and installation would be affected by contract completion dates, and 

funding. 

In addition, the new equipment may not address all of the material compatibility challenges 

involved in building, assembling and cleaning the various components. Further, there are 

applications for leak testing, pressure testing and other tasks where only marginal 

improvements can be made without jeopardising functionality. Finally, 10-15% of the solvent 

consumption is used in bench-top manual cleaning. It is unclear if advancements in cleaning 

equipment could be applied to some of these processes. 
66 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

8. Conclusions 

1. The Russian Federation has the know-how on all available alternatives to CFC-113. 

2. The HCFC alternatives (HCFC-122 and HCFC-141b) have been identified and qualified by 

the laboratories for substitution in cleaning primarily the group one, metallic components and 

assemblies of the space hardware. 

3. The scaling up of the HCFC alternatives from the successful laboratory evaluation to the 

commercial use still faces significant approval process by various organisations, field trial, 

and contractual obligation delays. 

4. The current forecast for successful substitution by 2010 is possible but will require close 

co-ordination and co-operation between various organisations. 

5. The prototype of the cleaning systems with the HCFC alternatives have been built and 

tested in the laboratory but not yet installed in the facilities of their contractor or OEM. 

6. Approximately 40 % of the cleaning application involves components containing both 

metal and non metallic material. The compatibility of the HCFC alternatives with non 

metallic materials (rubbers, elastomers, polymers etc) is an issue and will limit their use in 

this application. 

7. Although tests with mix solvent have been tried, no substitute(s) have been identified for 

this application. The substitution may involve a multiple cleaning steps with one or more 

alternatives and or tailored alternatives blends of the known substitutes. Also, a proven 

flammable hydrocarbon/alcohol blend (in USA) with appropriately designed explosion rated 

equipment should be tested. 

8. For a total CFC-113 phase-out specially in the control and guidance instrument over the 

next 5 –years will require significant research, testing and bold initiatives by the Russian 

Space Industry. 

9. Future steps to phase-out CFC-113 are depicted in the table of Exhibit-C. 

10. The Russian Federation foresees continued use of CFC-113 even beyond 2014. A 

combination of domestic CFC-113 production and purchases from the global inventories of 

CFC-113 in other countries will satisfy the requirements for this substance. 

(See Illustration 2 in Exhibit-C.) 

9. Recommendations

1. Based on progress made to-date and work remain to commercialise HCFC alternatives, 

(which may take as much as 12 months) the TEAP recommends that 130 metric tonnes of 

CFC-113 for 2009. 

2. Significant quantities of CFC-113 are likely necessary in future years. 

3 For components containing the non-metallic may require multiple steps, a mixture of one or 

more alternatives, and or a flammable hydrocarbon/alcohol blend (in appropriately designed 

explosion rated equipment). 

4 Replacement of the parts made from PMMA with some other compatible material should be 

considered. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 67 

Exibit-A: List of Attendees 

Experts of TEAP UNEP 

MERCHANT Abid Nazaraly 

FERGUSON David Albert 

Federal Space Agency 

YAKUSHIN Nikolay Ivanovich Deputy Head of FSA Department 

SAMBROS Vitaliy Vasilevich Head of Division 

KOZYREV Valentin Ivanovich Head of Division 

SPOSOBIN Vitaliy Ivanovich Main specialist 

JSC “Research Institute “GHERMES” (“NII “GHERMES”) 

MOROZOV Vladimir Sergeevich Deputy General Director 

KOZHEVNIKOV Evgeniy Mikhailovich Head of Section 

BULGAKOVA Nadezhda Vladimirovna Research Engineer 

Federal state Unitary Enterprise “Research and Production Center for Automatics and 

Instrument-Building named after academician N.A.Pilyugin” (“Academician Pilyugin 

Center”) 

KOSUKHIN AJexandr Sergeevich Chief Production Engineer 

ZHAGRIN Valeriy Efimovich Head of Section 

JSC «NPO Energomash named after academician V.P.Glushko» (Energomach) 

BORISOV Andrey Anatolievich Deputy Chief Engineer 

RUSSKIKH Galina Arsenievna Head of Bureau 

VTOROVA Natalia Evgenievna Interpreter 

Central Research Institute for Machine Building (TsNIIMash) 

SHATROV Yakov Timofeevich Main Research Fellow 

Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Cosmic Research and Production Center named 

after M.V.Khrunichev”, Design Bureau “SALYUT” (Khrunichev R&P Space 

Center, DB “SALYUT”) 

NIKIFOROV Vladimir Valentinovich Main specialist 

ZAITSEVA Irina Victorovna Head of Section 

Federal State Unitary Enterprise “EKHO” (FSUE “EKHO”) 

SCHEMELEV Yuriy Mikhailovich Deputy General Director 

Exhibit–B: 

Analytical Note -On the Results of Research and Experimental Work to Find Acceptable 

Alternatives to CFC-113 for Use in Production of Russian Space Technology Products 

In space industry, chlorofluorocarbon CFC-113 (C2F3Сl3) is used in processes of cleaning, 

degreasing, washing and testing the fuel system elements of liquid fuel rockets and spacecraft, 
68 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

hydraulic channels of liquid rocket engines, fittings, automatic equipment, thermal loops of 

temperature control systems, gyro instruments of control systems, and other units. The high 

effect of process application of this solvent is due to the unique combination of its physical 

and chemical properties, its processing and application qualities. 

Exclusion of CFC-113 from process application would lead to significant deterioration of the 

quality of products released, and in some cases, to practical suspension of production. With 

this in view, searching for and exploring alternatives equivalent to CFC-113 and creating new 

ozone-safe processes based on them becomes a problem of current importance. 

Rocket and space industry’s leading enterprises and specialised research centres of the 

Russian Federation have carried out a large amount of work to find and try out ozone-safe 

solvents and aqueous detergents which are alternative to CFC-113, as well as to use them as a 

basis to develop and master techniques of finish cleaning of space equipment elements of 

organic and mechanical contaminations and removing residues of working and process fluids 

from their surfaces. 

In particular, research has been conducted on the following potential ozone-friendly and 

ozone-safe CFC-113 substitutes: 

- high efficiency aqueous detergents; 

- organic solvents; 

- chlorocarbon solvents; 

- hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvents; 

- fluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and other fluorocarbon liquids; 

- mixed compositions based on the above solvents. 

Space equipment structural elements exposed to finish precision cleaning operations with the 

use of CFC-113 can be divided into two groups: 

The first group: all-metal structural elements made of aluminium and aluminium-magnesium 

alloys, corrosion- and heat-resistant chromium-nickel alloys, or elements containing nonmetallic materials resistant to solvents (polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), , polyethylene etc.). 

They include fuel tanks, pipelines, trunk lines, route fittings and automatic equipment, 

assembly units of liquid rocket engines etc.; 

The second group: structural elements containing a large number of non-metallic materials 

that are not resistant to fluids (rubbers, elastomers, polymers etc.). These are float-type gyro 

instruments, accelerometers, heat-exchange elements of temperature control systems etc. 

I. 

The problem of selecting an alternative solvent for cleaning structural elements of the first 

group has been addressed by testing and process tryout of organic, chlorocarbon, 

hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvents, mixed solvents and new high-efficiency aqueous 

detergents. The physicochemical properties and processing qualities of the analysed 

alternative solvents are provided in Appendix 1. The physicochemical properties and 

technical characteristics of aqueous detergents are provided in Appendix 2. 

1.1 Results of Tryout of Finish Cleaning Techniques Using High-Efficiency Aqueous 

Detergents 

Techniques with the use aqueous detergents may be employed both for inter-operation 

product cleaning and during finish cleaning operations to remove grease and mechanical 

contaminations. The main advantages of water cleaning: the cleaning action versatility in 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 69 

relation to various contaminations, operational safety, high efficiency when ultrasound is 

used, low cost of cleaning agents. 

The results of the tests conducted on the aqueous detergents Detalan, Detalan AL, Detalan F, 

VMS-S have shown that the cleaning of components and assembly units with open smooth 

surfaces produces results that are comparable to those obtained with the use of CFC-113 (the 

residual content of grease contaminations on the surfaces is 15 to 30 mg/m2

, the grade of 

mechanical purity as per GOST 17216-2001 is 7...9). On condition that the residues of 

washing agents are thoroughly removed from the surfaces of the washed items and they are 

subsequently dried, no considerable corrosion effect of the agents tested is observed. 

The Detalan, Detalan AL, Detalan F, VMS-S aqueous detergents are recommended for use in 

processes of cleaning and degreasing space equipment components and assembly units of 

unsophisticated design with open smooth surfaces, on which no high tightness requirements 

are imposed. The regulatory guidance document OST 134-1036-2003 Rocket and Space 

Technology Products. General Requirements for Processes of Cleaning and Degreasing 

Components and Assembly Units Using Detalan Aqueous Detergents has been developed, 

which regulates process requirements for methods, conditions and means of removing 

contaminations from the surfaces of space equipment components and assembly units using 

aqueous detergents. 

Cleaning and degreasing processes using aqueous detergents are now introduced at FGUP 

M.V. Khrunichev GKNPC, OAO V.P. Glushko NPO Energomash and other enterprises. 

1.2 Results of Tryout of Application Techniques for Organic Solvents 

Organic solvents: petroleum solvent S2-80/120, ethanol, acetone, white spirit, ethers, ketones 

are traditionally used in processes of manufacture of components and assembly units for 

cleaning, degreasing and removing residues of various process fluids. The tests conducted 

have shown that some organic solvents, specifically petroleum solvent S2-80/120, are 

comparable to CFC-113 in terms of degreasing and cleaning properties and event more 

effective. However, such two significant factors as high fire and explosion hazard and 

insufficient purity of products supplied from manufacturers limit the possibilities for wide use 

of these solvents. Because of this, they are recommended for process application instead of 

CFC-113 mainly in processes of cleaning and degreasing of small-size items (not exceeding 

300 to 350 mm). Before application, the solvent should be additionally purified to the degree 

of residual grease contaminations controlled by the luminescent method (1-10 mg/l), and the 

purity grade as per GOST 1716-2001 of 5...7. 

The process application of organic solvents instead of CFC-113 has been introduced at such 

enterprises as OAO S.P. Korolyov RKK Energiya, FGUP OKB Fakel, FGUP M.V. 

Khrunichev GKNPC, FGUP GNPRKC-Progress and others. 

For more extensive application of organic solvents, special fire- and explosion-proof process 

equipment is required for additional purification and regeneration of solvents, as well as for 

performing cleaning, degreasing and washing operations. 

1.3 Results of Tryout of Application Techniques for Chlorocarbon Solvents 

The potentially high washing and cleaning performance of chlorocarbon solvents: 

dichloromethane CH2Cl2 , trichloroethylene С2НCl3 , perchloroethylene С2Сl4 is testified by 

such physical characteristics as high density (1.34-1.66 g/cm3

), low surface tension coefficient 

(19.6-28.1 mN/m), low viscosity (0.435-0.88 mPa·s). The parameters that characterise the 

dissolving performance of these liquids in comparison with CFC-113, the kauri butanol 

values and the experimentally estimated values of inter-diffusion of molecules of the solvent 
70 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

and the substance being dissolved (a mixture of mineral oils capable of contaminating the 

surfaces of items in the course of manufacturing) are shown in Table 1 below. 

Appendix, Table 1 

Dissolving Solvent 

capacity 

parameter Dichloromethane Trichloroethylene Perchloroethylene CFC-113 

Kauri butanol 

value, KB 135 130 90 31 

Solvent and 

contaminant 

inter-diffusion 

coefficient value, 

cm2

/s 

6.2·10-6 5.8·10-6 3.9·10-6 2.7·10-6 

It follows from the table that the ability of chlorocarbon alternatives to dissolve mineral oils 

and fats is much higher than that of CFC-113. 

In the course of tests and tryout of chlorocarbon solvents in processes of cleaning space 

equipment structural elements, is has been found that in terms of the dissolving and cleaning 

action on organic contaminants and the surface cleaning quality achieved chlorocarbon 

solvents are comparable to and even surpass CFC-113. However, in terms of the set of such 

processing qualities as high toxicity, fire and explosion hazards, low chemical stability, high 

degree of negative effect on structural materials, such solvents are significantly inferior to 

CFC-113. 

Because of the high toxicity of vapours of these solvents (the maximum allowable 

concentration of vapours in the workplace air must not exceed 5-50 mg/m3

, whereas for CFC113 the maximum allowable concentration is 5000 mg/m3

) the practical application of these 

solvents requires radical reconstruction of technological facilities. Specifically, closed 

hermetically sealed process equipment with a recirculation loop of solvent use, contaminated 

solvent regeneration, vapour phase recovery and solvent vapour adsorption from ventilation 

emissions would be required. 

The insufficient chemical stability of chlorocarbon solvents requires additional costly 

stabilisers to be introduced into them. 

Because of the stronger (as compared with CFC-113 --or Freon-113--) negative effect of 

chlorocarbon solvents on structural materials, these solvents may be used mainly for cleaning 

components and assembly units made of corrosion-resistant metals and alloys that do not 

contain rubbers, polymers, elastomers, adhesives. 

Regulatory guidance documents regulating general requirements for cleaning processes using 

chlorocarbon solvents have been developed. Cleaning processes using these solvents are 

introduced at OAO S.P. Korolyov RKK Energiya, FGUP Research Institute of Physical 

Measurements and other enterprises mostly as applied to small-size components and assembly 

units that do not exceed 200-300 mm. 

1.4 Results of Tryout of Application Techniques for Hydrochlorofluorocarbon Solvents 

In terms of their physicochemical properties, hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

(hydrochlorofluorocarbon) solvents are the closest to CFC-113. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 71 

In the world practice, such hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvents as HCFC-141b (С2FCl2H3), 

HCFC-225 (C3F5Cl2H), as well as mixed solvents based on them are used most often as an 

alternative to CFC-113. In addition, Russian chemists have synthesised 

hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvents HCFC-122, and HCFC-122a (С2F2Cl3H). 

The parameters that characterise the dissolving performance of hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

solvents in comparison with CFC-113, the Kauri butanol values and the experimentally 

estimated values of inter-diffusion of molecules of the solvent and the substance being 

dissolved (a mixture of mineral oils capable of contaminating the surfaces of items in the 

course of manufacturing) are shown in Table 2. 

Appendix, Table 2 

Solvent Dissolving capacity 

parameter HCFC-122 HCFC-141b HCFC-225 CFC-113 

Kauri butanol value, 

KB 66 56 31 31 

Solvent and 

contaminant interdiffusion coefficient 

value, cm2

/s 

3.3·10-6 4.64·10-6 3.6·10-6 2.7·10-6

It can be seen from the table that the degreasing performance of hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

solvents, as well as the dissolving and cleaning action on mineral oils, fats and other organic 

contaminants is higher than that of CFC-113. 

In the course of the research, tests and experimental tryout of hydrochlorofluorocarbon 

solvents (HCFC solvents) in processes of cleaning and degreasing components and assembly 

units of space technology products, the following has been found: 

- the surface cleaning quality with the use HCFC solvents complies with the 

requirements established by the design documentation: the residual contents of grease 

contaminations on the surfaces of items do not exceed 5-20 mg/m2

, the grade of 

mechanical purity is 5...8 as per GOST 17216-2001; 

- metallic materials used in space equipment constructions are resistant enough to 

HCFC solvents. Their contact with solvents does not significantly reduce their 

resistance to atmospheric corrosion; 

- the degree of the negative effect of HCFC solvents on non-metallic structural 

materials, specifically rubbers, polymers, plastics, elastomers, adhesives, paint 

coatings etc., is higher that of CFC-113. Because of this, HCFC solvents can be 

recommended mainly for processing all-metal components and assembly units, or 

those made of non-metallic materials resistant to HCFC solvents, such as 

fluoroplastics, polyethylenes, polyamides, phenolic plastics, compounds, anaerobic 

sealants; 

- HCFC solvents are quite compatible with working fluids, including components of 

liquid rocket fuels, heat transfer agents, steering gear fluids etc.; 

- increased volatility of HCFC-141b requires the use of closed-type hermetically sealed 

equipment 
72 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Taking the results obtained into consideration, hydrochlorofluorocarbon solvents: HCFC-122, 

HCFC-122а (С2F2Cl3H), HCFC-141b (С2FCl2H3), HCFC-225 (C3F5Cl2H) are recommended 

as the main alternative to CFC-113 for use in processes of cleaning, degreasing and washing 

space equipment structural elements of the first group. The industry standard OST 134-1041-

2005 Rocket and Space Technology Products. General Requirements for Processes of Using 

Ozone-Friendly Freons has been developed, which sets general requirements for cleaning and 

degreasing processes using ozone-friendly HCFC solvents. The following foreign-made 

solvents are currently recommended to space industry enterprises for use as principal HCFC 

solvents: 141b (HCFC-141b) produced by Zhejiang Sanmei Chem. Industry Co., Ltd (China); 

Forane 141b DGX produced by Atofina (France, USA); AK-225 (HCFC-225) produced by 

Asahi Glass (Japan). 

OAO V.P. Glushko NPO Energomash, OAO KB Khimavtomatiki, FGUP Krasnoyarsk and 

other enterprises have been trying out processes and special equipment designed for cleaning 

and degreasing using HCFC-141b. 

II. 

The problem of selecting an alternative solvent of CFC-113 for cleaning space equipment 

structural elements of the second group presents the most complex challenge. 

Along with high degreasing performance and the ability to effectively remove mechanical 

contaminations, an alternative solvent must produce a strong dissolving action on working 

and process (fluorocarbon, organic and organosilicon) fluids used in making gyro instruments 

and heat-exchange devices of spacecraft temperature control systems. Besides, the structures 

of these items use up to 10 metallic materials that are not corrosion-resistant, and up to 30 

non-metallic materials with low resistance to solvents, specifically: rubbers, polymers, 

elastomers, compounds, adhesives, varnishes, paints etc. Accessories used in the production 

of gyro instruments contain transparent elements made of polymethylmethacrylate, which is 

exceptionally sensitive to solvents. 

The use of HCFC solvents for cleaning space equipment structural elements of the second 

group appears impossible because of a strong negative effect that these solvents produce on 

non-metallic structural materials and total lack of dissolving action on fluorocarbon and 

organosilicon working fluids. Composite solvents based on HCFC-225 (such brands as АK225, АK-225АЕS, АK-225АТЕ, АK-225DH, АK-225FРL supplied by Asahi Glass (Japan)) 

cannot be used because of a strong negative effect they produce on polymethylmethacrylate 

(PMMA). 

2.1. Research and tests 

Research and tests have been conducted on chemically stable and neutral (in terms of their 

effect on non-metallic materials) solvents belonging to the class of fluorocarbon liquids to 

find out possibilities for their use as an alternative to CFC-113 in the production of gyro 

instruments. In particular, the following solvents have been tested: 

- perfluorotriethylamine (С2F5)3N, brand name MD-3F (Russia); 

- perfluorocarbon (perfluoro-4-methyl-pentene) С6F12, brand name FOL-62 (Russia); 

- hydrofluorocarbon C5H2F10, brand name Vertrel XF, HFC43-10mee (DuPont, USA); 

- hydrofluoroether C4F9OCH3, brand name Novec HFE-7100 (3М, USA); 

- mixed compositions based on these solvents. 

In the course of research conducted to assess the effect of the solvents being tested on nonmetallic structural materials it has been found out that the practical effect of these solvents 

with the duration of their contact with the materials being up to one hundred days is 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 73 

comparable, and even weaker in comparison with CFC-113. The exception to this is 

hydrofluorocarbon C5H2F10 (Vertrel XF, HFC43-10mee), which produces a strong negative, 

even destructive effect on polymethylmethacrylate and other non-metallic materials. The 

research has also demonstrated that all solvents from the class of fluorocarbon liquids in their 

pure form practically do not dissolve grease contaminations, as well as polymethylsiloxanebased working fluid. 

Taking the results obtained into consideration, mixed solvents based on MD-3F, FOL-62 and 

Novec HFE-7100 solvents have been subjected to further research and tryout. During the tests 

of the mixed solvent Novec HFE-71DE (C4F9OCH3 – 50 % + C2H2Cl2 – 50 %), a negative 

result has been obtained due to a strong negative effect of this mixed solvent on structural 

materials. That is why neutral additives (in terms of their effect on structural materials) have 

been used in subsequent tryouts of mixed solvents as additional components: solvent naphtha 

nefras S2-80/120, which dissolves grease contaminations, and HCFC solvent Freon 141b, 

which dissolves polymethylsiloxanes. Mixed compositions based on solvents MD-3F, FOL62 and Novec HFE-7100 have been tried out. The tryout of these mixed solvents has 

produced generally positive results. At the same time, the non-azeotropic composition of 

these solvents and associated process-related difficulties of their practical utilisation rule out 

possibilities for introducing these mixed solvents into space equipment production. Possible 

use of solvent НFC-365 (С4F5Н5) as a solvent and component of mixed compositions has not 

been assessed due to its high fire and explosion hazard. 

Despite the significant amount of the research, tests and experimental tryouts performed, no 

alternative solvent that totally equates to CFC-113 in its physicochemical properties and 

processing qualities has been found so far for application in the production of gyro 

instruments and other instruments of precision mechanics. Solvents MD-3F, FOL-62 and 

Novec HFE-7100 may be used to perform specific process operations, in particular, to wash 

residues of working and balancing fluorocarbon fluids (fluorinated polyesters, fluorinated 

hydrocarbons) form gyro instruments. Solvent Vertrel XF, (HFC43-10mee) may only be used 

for removing these contaminations from the surfaces of all-metal assembly units. These 

solvents are included in the industry regulatory standardisation document OST 134-1041-

2005. 

2.2 An experimental try-out 

An experimental try-out has been performed of the process application of solvent naphtha 

nefras S2-80/120 (instead of CFC-113) additionally purified in advance to reduce the content 

of residual grease contaminations to a level not exceeding 1 mg/dm,3

 in cleaning, degreasing 

and washing processes to remove residues of heat-transfer organic liquids in the heat-transfer 

loops of spacecraft temperature control systems. Considering the results of the tryout of 

cleaning processes using solvent naphtha nefras S2-80/120 performed at OAO M.F. 

Reshetnyov Information Satellite Systems, they are recommended for development and 

introduction at other enterprises of the industry. 

Ш. 

For the purpose of the most economical use of volatile ozone-safe solvents in the process 

application, samples of new special equipment have been created and tried out at space 

industry enterprises, including: 

- equipment for preparation and regeneration of ozone-safe solvents; 

- equipment for cleaning, degreasing and washing items using immersion (filling), jet, 

hydrodynamic, and vapour condensate methods, with solvent recirculation, vapour phase 

recovery, which equipment is characterised by the following main characteristics: 
74 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

a) the degree of purity of the solvent being used in the process: 

 the allowable content of grease contaminants controlled by the luminescent method: 5-1 

mg/dm3

; 

 the grade of mechanical purity as per GOST 17216-2001: 8...5; 

b) the degree of purity of items after cleaning and degreasing operations: 

 the allowable content of grease contaminants on the surfaces of the items being 

processed: 3-5 mg/m2

; 

 the grade of purity as per GOST 17216-2001: 8...5; 

c) the allowable losses of the solvent in the process: less than 1 %. 

3.1 Conclusion 

1. The research, tests and experimental tryouts performed make it possible to recommend the 

following ozone-safe and ozone-friendly solvents as an alternative to CFC-113 for 

introduction into processes of cleaning, degreasing and washing components and assembly 

units of the main space equipment assemblies, including fuel tanks, pipelines, trunk lines, 

route fittings and automatic equipment, liquid engines: chlorocarbon solvents – 

dichloromethane, perchloroethylene, trichloroethylene; HCFC solvents – HCFC-141b (Forane 

141b DGX), HCFC-122, HCFC-225 (АK-225) and mixed compositions based on them; highefficiency aqueous detergents – Detalan, Detalan AL, Detalan F, VMS-S and others. The 

regulatory guidance documents have been developed, which gives general guidance for 

process using these solvents and detergents. Ozone-friendly processes using these solvents 

and aqueous detergents are now being introduced at space industry enterprises. 

2. Solvent naphtha nefras S2-80/120 has been tried out and recommended for introduction at 

space industry enterprises to be used, after additional purification, in processes of cleaning, 

degreasing and washing elements of the heat-transfer loops of spacecraft temperature control 

systems. 

3. New samples of special closed hermetically sealed process equipment have been created 

and tried out under production conditions, including: 

 equipment for preparation and regeneration of ozone-safe solvents; 

 equipment with solvent recirculation, solvent vapour recovery to provide possibilities for 

successive application of various cleaning methods: for cleaning, degreasing and washing 

components and assembly units of space technology products. 

4. Despite the significant amount of the research and tryouts performed, the problem of 

selecting an ozone-friendly solvent that could fully replace CFC-113 in the production of 

instruments of precision mechanics, including gyro instruments and float-type accelerometers, 

has not been resolved so far. 

5. The price of the recommended foreign-made solvents HCFC-225, HFE-7100, HFC43-

10mee etc. is 4 to 5 times higher than the price of CFC-113 on the average, which 

significantly limits the possibilities for their extensive use in processes of production of space 

technology products. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 75 

Exhibit-C; Russian Space Agency-Technical Program for CFC-113 Phase-out 

(Approved by General Director of OAO «NII «Germes» I. I. Varavin, 2007 

THE PROGRAM of activities for transfer of the space rocket industry companies to 

technologies that exclude or limit CFC-113 application in technological processes of cleaning, 

degreasing, flushing, preparation for pressure proof tests and leak checks and conducting of 

these tests and checks of space rocket industry product parts and assembly units. 

(The financial source for activities – state contracts with the Federal Space Agency No. 996-Т

413/06 dated March 02, 2006 and No. 996-0709/06 dated March 02, 2006 and also the means 

of the principal business of the space rocket industry companies) 

Description of efforts Subcontractor 

Due Date 

Commencement

Completion 

Prepare proposals for arrangement of 

production capacities for industrial production 

of ozone safe solvents HCFC-122 and HCFC141b (output of 100 tonnes per year of each 

product) for introduction into the targeted 

integrated program “Renovation of scarce, 

strategic, import replacing materials and small 

tonnage chemicals production ...”. 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «RNTs «Applied 

Chemistry», ОАО «Kompozit» 

Jun.-2007

Oct.-2007 

Prepare and submit to FGUP «NPO 

«Tekhmash» and the proper controlling 

agencies a draft project for Design and 

Research Work for verification of performance 

figures, quality and reliability and life time of 

the space industry products for the case that 

ozone safe solvents are applied and ozone safe 

technologies are introduced into the design 

documentation with justifications. 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

Companies developing space 

hardware: 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named 

after academician V.P. Glushko», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

FGUP «GKNPTs named after 

М.V. Khrunichev» 

Jun.-2007

Oct.-2007 

Build and enable facilities for industrial 

production of ozone safe solvents HCFC-122 

and HCFC-141b (output of 100 metric tonnes 

per year of each product) 

FGUP «RNTs «Applied 

Chemistry» 

Jan.-2009

Dec.-2010 

Provide the space industry companies with 

normative methodical documents for developed 

ozone safe technologies and technological 

means for cleaning, degreasing, flushing, 

testing of space rocket industry products. 

 
76 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Description of efforts Subcontractor 

Due Date 

Commencement

Completion 

4.1 Prepare and distribute in accordance with 

companies requests: 

• industrial standard OST 134-1036-2003 

“Space rocket industry products. General 

requirements to technological processes of 

cleaning, degreasing of product parts and 

assembly units with the use of aqueous 

detergents of the “Detalan” series”; 

industrial standard ОSТ-134-1041-2005 “Space 

rocket industry products. General requirements 

to technological processes of ozone safe HCFC 

solvent application in production”. 

ОАО «NII «Germes» Mar.-2006

Dec.-2006 

4.2 Develop and distribute industrial standards 

in accordance with companies requests: 

• ОSТ «Space rocket industry products. 

General requirements to technological 

processes of finish cleaning of parts and 

assembly units with the use of organic and 

organic chloride solvents in replacement of 

CFC-113»; 

• ОSТ «Space rocket industry products. 

Development of technological equipment for 

cleaning, degreasing, flushing, testing of parts 

and assembly units with the use of ozone safe 

solvents. Modification of operating equipment 

for transfer to ozone safe solvent application». 

ОАО «NII «Germes» Jun.-2008

Feb.-2009 

• Perform scientific-research and 

designing -experimental work: 

 

5.1 Search for and try out ozone safe and ozone 

saving solvents and new high effective 

detergents: 

 

- for application in production of main 

components of space rocket industry products 

(the propellant system, pipelines and manifolds, 

fittings and controls, liquid propellant rocket 

engines); 

ОАО «NII «Germes» 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named 

after academician V.P. Glushko», 

FGUP «Krasmash», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

FGUP «GKNPTs named after 

М.V. Khrunichev» 

Jan.-2007

Dec.-2009 

- for application in production of high-precision 

mechanics devices (gyroscopes and 

accelerometers of the floating type), thermal 

loops of the spacecraft thermal control system. 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.А. Pilugin», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

FGUP «RNTs «Applied 

Chemistry», 

ОАО «Astro-Electronics» 

Jan.-2008

Dec.-2010 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 77 

Description of efforts Subcontractor 

Due Date 

Commencement

Completion 

5.2 Conduct field tests of space rockets industry 

product prototypes for verification of 

performance figures, quality and reliability and 

life time for the case that ozone safe solvents 

are applied and ozone safe technologies are 

introduced into the design documentation with 

justification. 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named 

after academician V.P. Glushko», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

FGUP «Krasmash» 

Jan.-2010

Dec.-2012 

5.3 Develop and try out typical prototypes of 

technological equipment for cleaning, 

degreasing, flushing of space rocket industry 

product parts and assembly units with ozone 

safe and ozone saving solvents, equipment 

prototypes, preparation (after purification) and 

regeneration of contaminated solvents with 

assurance of economical mode of operations 

and safety of technological application. 

Rebuild (reconstruct) technological equipment 

available at the companies for its adaptation to 

ozone safe solvent application. 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin», 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named 

after academician V.P. Glushko», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

FGUP «GKNPTs named after 

М.V. Khrunichev» 

FGUP «Krasmash» 

Jun.-2006

Dec.-2009 

5.4 Try out technological processes of cleaning, 

degreasing, flushing, preparation and testing of 

parts and assembly units of space rocket 

industry products with the use of ozone safe 

solvents, effective aqueous detergents in space 

rocket industry companies. 

. 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin», 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named 

after academician V.P. Glushko», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

Sep.-2008

Dec.-2009 

Establish serial production of developed 

technological equipment in accordance with 

requests of space rocket industry companies. 

ОАО «NII «Germes» Jan.-2010

Dec.-2011 

Introduce in FGUP «NPTs АP named after 

acad. N.A.Pilugin» measures for decrease of 

CFC-113 consumption: 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin» 

- develop, try out and implement sealed 

installation 924.46.050 for after purification, 

storage and distribution of solvent CFC-113; 

 Jan.-2007

Dec.-2008 

- develop, try out and implement sealed 

installation 924.78.051 for rectifying cleaning 

of CFC-113 prior to technological application; 

 Jan.-2007

Dec.-2008 

- develop, try out and implement automated 

installation 924.46.101 for cleaning, flushing of 

parts and assembly units of high-precision 

mechanics devices of the leak-proof design; 

 Jan.-2008

Dec.-2009 

- develop, try out and implement methods, 

technologies and equipment for ultrafine 

purification of solvent CFC-113 after its usage 

in processes of working and balancing fluids 

removal. 

 Jan.-2009

Dec.-2010 

Space rocket industry companies transfer to 

ozone safe and ozone saving technologies: 

 

8.1 Implement in ОАО «NPO Energomash 

named after acad. V. P. Glushko»: 

 
78 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Description of efforts Subcontractor 

Due Date 

Commencement

Completion 

- the technologies of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units of liquid propellant 

rocket engines within universal installation 

924.46.087 with the use of HCFC-141b 

(FORANE 141b DGX); 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin» 

Sep.-2008

Dec.-2009 

- the technologies of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units of liquid propellant 

rocket engines by the methods of submerging 

into solvent HCFC-122 (or HCFC-141b). 

 Jan.-2011

Dec.-2012 

8.2 Implement in FGUP «GKNPTs named after 

М.V. Khrunichev»: 

 

- the technology of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units with the use of 

aqueous detergents «Detalant AL»; 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «GKNPTs named after 

М.V. Khrunichev» 

Jan.-2007

Dec.-2008 

- the technology of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units with the use of HCFC141b (or methylene chloride) within installation 

924.46.102; 

 Jan.-2010

Dec.-2011 

- an installation for ultrasonic cleaning of parts 

and assembly units of complicated difficultly 

flushed designs with the use of HCFC-141b (or 

HCFC-122). 

 Jan.-2011

Dec.-2012 

8.3 Implement in company «KB KhA»: ОАО «NII «Germes», 

ОАО «KB KhA» 

- the technology of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units of liquid propellant 

rocket engines with the use of HCFC-141b 

(FORANE 141b DGX) within installation 

924.46.102; 

 Sep.-2008

Dec.-2009 

- the technology of cleaning, degreasing of 

parts and assembly units of liquid propellant 

rocket engines by the method of submerging 

into solvent HCFC-122 (or HCFC-141b). 

 Jan.-2011

Dec.-2012 

8.4 Implement in ОАО «ISS» named after acad. 

М.F. Reshetnev: 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

ОАО «ISS» named after 

academician М.F. Reshetnev 

- the technologies of flushing of thermal loops 

parts and assembly units of the spacecraft 

thermal control system with the use of HCFC141b (FORANE 141b DGX) within an 

installation for ultrasonic cleaning; 

 Jan.-2009

Dec.-2010 

- the technologies of flushing (including, in 

particular, from thermal liquids residue) of 

thermal loops of the spacecraft thermal control 

system with the use of benzene –solvent Nefras 

80/120 

 Jan.-2010

Dec.-2011 

- The technologies of circulating flushing of 

heat pipes of the spacecraft thermal control 

system with the use of HCFC-141b (FORANE 

141b DGX) within an installation for 

hydrodynamic cleaning. 

 Jan.-2009

Dec.-2010 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 79 

Description of efforts Subcontractor 

Due Date 

Commencement

Completion 

8.5 Implement in FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

acad. N.A.Pilugin»: 

ОАО «NII «Germes», 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after 

academician N.A.Pilugin» 

- the technologies of interoperational cleaning 

of parts and assembly units of control system 

devices after machining with the use of mixed 

solvent HCFC-122 + benzene-solvent Nefras 

80/120; 

 Jan.-2011

Dec.-2013 

- the technologies of cleaning, flushing of parts 

and assembly units of control system devices 

within installation of type 924.46.101 with the 

use of alternative solvents. 

 Jan.-2011

Dec.-2013 

This Program is agreed upon with companies - subcontractors: 

FGUP «NPTs AP named after academician N.A.Pilugin», 

ОАО «NPO Energomash named after academician V.P. Glushko», 

ОАО «KB KhA», 

ОАО «ISS» named after academician М.F. Reshetnev, 

FGUP «GKNPTs named after М.V. Khrunichev», 

FGUP «RNTs «Applied Chemistry», 

FGUP «Krasmash» 

(FGUP –federal state unitary enterprise; NPTs – scientific & production center; OAO – open 

joint stock company; NPO - scientific & production association; GKNPTs – state space 

scientific & production center; RNTs – Russian scientific center; KB KhA – design bureau for 

chemical automatic devices) 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 81 

8 Foams Technical Options Committee (FTOC) Progress Report 

The primary challenge for the foams sector is the phase-out of HCFCs in developing countries 

under Decision XIX/6. The blowing agent usage patterns in developed countries are now 

relatively mature, although there is still some limited migration from HFCs to hydrocarbons 

for cost reasons where performance characteristics can be met. There is a possibility that 

further high-GWP HFC substitution in non-Article 5 countries could be precipitated under a 

new Montreal Protocol amendment and this would certainly place challenges on the industry, 

particularly since funding is not available for enterprises in non-Article 5 countries. The 

TEAP response to Decision XX/8 provides an important overview of the technology options. 

Meanwhile the management of ODS banks in the foam sector offers both challenges and 

opportunities to limit the emissions of these greenhouse gases. Funding mechanisms will be a 

key component of solutions in both non-Article 5 and Article 5 countries. 

8.1 Transitional Status 

The 2006 Report of the Flexible and Rigid Foams Technical Options Committee was issued 

in April 2007. Subsequent updates have highlighted changes in technology and resulting 

transitions that have occurred in the intervening years and have particularly focused on the 

impacts of Decision XIX/6 (accelerated phase-out of HCFCs) on the future direction of 

regional foam strategies and technology selections. Decision XIX/6 still remains a key focus 

of the Foams TOC along with the ongoing challenges presented by ODS bank management. 

The following sections list key conclusions from this process as follows: 

8.1.1 Transition Status – Article 5 Parties 

• Decision XIX/6 continues to place pressure on the validation of HCFC alternatives in a 

developing country context. Pilot projects are proving to be particularly important in this 

process, since developed country experience is limited with a number of technologies. 

Two projects have already been approved for methyl formate and one for methylal. 

Hydrocarbon and low-GWP unsaturated HFCs (HFOs) projects are also being considered. 

• Pre-blended or directly injected hydrocarbons may have a significant role to play for 

smaller enterprises, but safety concerns persist. The results of any pilot projects will need 

to be conclusive. 

• The inclusion of ‘second conversions’ is currently a key component for compliance with 

Decision XIX/6 

• Decision XX/8 highlights the interest in avoiding high-GWP alternatives to HCFCs but 

methodologies for evaluating the climate impact of technology transitions are still not in 

widespread use 

• Interest in bank management opportunities continues and there are now some interesting 

pilot projects emerging around the major conurbations – particularly in Latin America 

• Work continues on XPS technology solutions in several developing countries, including 

China and Turkey. This remains important because of the rate of growth of the sector and 

the unique XPS manufacturing equipment in use. 
82 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

8.1.2 Transition Status – Non-Article 5 Parties 

• Transitions to high-GWP HFC solutions are still occurring in the XPS sector in North 

America as the industry strives to meet the 2010 deadline for HCFC phase-out in the 

United States. Although the blowing agent was undisclosed in a recent press 

announcement, it is believed that this will primarily be HFC-134a. 

• HFC use is continuing to decline in the polyurethane sector as hydrocarbon technologies 

continue to mature. An example is the achievement of fire performance requirements with 

hydrocarbon technologies in the steel-faced panel sector. 

• Further optimisation of hydrocarbon technologies has largely closed the gap in thermal 

performance with HFC technologies. This has been partially achieved by improvements 

in cell morphology (size and orientation). 

• The demand for innovative insulation solutions is growing as buildings become a more 

important component of national climate policies. There is a particular need to identify 

solutions for the refurbishment of existing buildings. This is stimulating the insulation 

industry to think creatively on the use of their products and it is clear that a broad range of 

technology options needs to be available. In this context, PU Spray Foam continues to be 

recognised as an efficient means of retrofitting a number of building types because of its 

versatility and low application cost.. 

• A series of low-GWP unsaturated HFCs are emerging as potentially significant alternative 

blowing agents, although the evaluation of performance, toxicity and environmental fate 

needs to be completed. Potential candidates exist in gaseous form at room temperature for 

XPS, one component foam, etc. while liquid blowing agents are potentially available for 

polyurethane foams. Flammability limits vary but there are some options, which might 

well be applicable in key applications currently using high-GWP HFCs for safety reasons 

(e.g. PU Spray Foam). Commercial supply is likely to be, as a minimum, 2 years from 

now for all except HFO-1234ze, which is already commercially available for onecomponent foams in Europe. 

• ODS bank assessment and management is becoming a more pressing agenda item in 

developed countries as attention moves to building insulation as well as foams contained 

in domestic refrigerators. 

• The potential role of carbon finance is being actively considered in both Europe and 

North America, although there is concern that the framework for such funding is 

sufficiently robust to avoid misuse of such mechanisms. There are a number of emerging 

methodologies to address this concern, although an international registry would also be an 

important component of any such plan. 

8.2 Technology Update 

The following table illustrates the main substitute technologies currently considered or 

already used in the polyurethane, extruded polystyrene/polyolefin and phenolic foam sectors. 

Recognising that the technology choices across the world are likely to become more 

homogeneous with time, the future technology choices are now listed as ‘global’. 
 

FOAMS TOC UPDATE REPORT 2009 - TECHNICAL OPTIONS TABLE 

SECTOR DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DEVELOPING COUNTRIES GLOBAL 

 CURRENT CURRENT FUTURE 

POLYURETHANE RIGID 

Domestic refrigerators and freezers 

c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, HFC- 245fa, HFC-134a 

c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, HCFC-141b or HCFC141b/22 c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, low GWP HFCs 

Other appliances 

c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends, Methyl Formate 

HCFC-141b, c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, Methyl Formate 

c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, low GWP HFCs, Methyl Formate 

Transport & reefers c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends HCFC-141b, HCFC-141b/22 c-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, low GWP HFCs PotentialBoardstock 

c-pentane, n-pentane, cyclo/iso pentane blends, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends 

Limited, if any, commercial production in Art 5.1 

c-pentane, n-pentane, low GWP HFCs HFC for 

Panels – continuous c-pentane, n-pentane, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends HCFC-141b & minor use of C- pentane, n-pentane c-pentane, n-pentane, low GWP HFCs HFC for Panels discontinuous HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends, c-pentane, n-pentane HCFC-141b c-pentane, n-pentane, low GWP HFCs, Methyl Formate HFCs, noSpray HFC- 245fa, Supercritical CO2 CO2 (water), HCFC-141b HFC- 245fa, Supercritical CO2, CO2 (water), Blocks c-pentane, n-pentane, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends HCFC-141b c-pentane, n-pentane, low GWP HFCs, Methyl Formate HC use iPipe-in-pipe c-pentane, n-pentane, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends HCFC-141b c-pentane, n-pentane, low GWP HFCs, Methyl Formate One Component Foam Mixtures of propane, butane and dimethyl ether, HFC-134a, HFO-1234ze HCFC-22, HFC-134a Mixtures of propane, butane and dimethyl ether, HFO-1234ze HC use dPOLYURETHANE FLEXIBLE Integral Skin CO2 (water), HFC-134a, HFC- 245fa, HFC-365mfc/227ea blends, n-pentane CO2 (water), HCFC-141b CO2 (water), n-pentane, low GWP HFCs HFC-134Shoe Soles CO2 (water), HFC-134a CO2 (water), HFC-134a CO2 (water), low GWP HFCs HFC-134PHENOLIC Board & block Isopentane, n-pentane, minor use of HFC-365mfc/227ea blends HCFC-141b HCs HFCs are 

some ma

EXTRUDED POLYSTYRENE Boardstock 

HCFC-142b/(22), HFC-134a, HFC-152a, CO2, CO2/ethanol, (HCs in Japan), 

blends of CO2/hydrocarbons 

Mainly HCFC-142b/22 but growing HCFC-22. Some minor use of HCs 

 CO2, blends of CO2/ ethanol or 

CO2/hydrocarbons, low GWP HFCs 

HCFC-14Final cho

NOT-IN-KIND INSULATIONDomestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre, cellulose Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technology Non-domestic Buildings Glass fibre, rock fibre Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technology 

Fibre insMarket s

Industrial applications Mostly rock fibre, calcium silicate Limited NIK insulation types Awaiting new technology Choice d

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 85

9 Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) Progress Report 

The Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) met in Brussels, Belgium on March 9 -11, 

2009. HTOC members in attendance were from Article 5 countries: China, India, Jordan, 

Kuwait, and South Africa; CEIT: Russian Federation; and the non-Article 5 countries: Canada, 

Denmark, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States. The following is the update for 

2009. 

9.1 Halon 2401 Uses and Supplies. 

It was previously reported that significant quantities of halon 2402 that were produced under an 

Essential Use Exemption, were used as a process agent in the Russian pharmaceutical industry. 

As the supply decreased and the price of halon 2402 increased, its use as a process agent 

stopped. 

It is now being reported, however, that halon 2402 is being commercialised in a new specialty 

flame retardant paint, where the halon is encapsulated and only released when it gets hot, 

presumably from exposure to a fire. It is unclear how much halon 2402 may get used in this 

application. 

In addition, Ukraine was reported to have 640 MT of halon 2402 in 2004 but reports from 2008 

now only identify 300-340 MT. It is unclear what has happened to this halon. 

As reported in the response to Decision XIX/16, there is no apparent immediate shortage of 

halon 2402 on a global basis, but there are regional disparities (primarily in defence and 

aviation) where users are having problems meeting their demands for recycled halon 2402 

today. HTOC expects that it is likely that this will continue in the future, with the cost of the 

recycled halon 2402 being a major issue. New uses beyond traditional fire protection or other 

losses as process agents, etc., will make the situation worse. For the short term, excesses in the 

United States and the European Union may provide relief to the regional imbalances. The 

HTOC will continue to monitor the situation and plans to increase information on halon 2401 

supplies, demand and emissions in the 2010 assessment. 

9.2 Update on Halon 1301 Use as a Feedstock 

It has been reported to the HTOC that there are now ten plants in China producing halon 1301 

for use as a feedstock in the manufacture of the pesticide, Fipronil. It appears that their 

significant former capacity to make halon 1301 for fire protection use is now being used to 

support the feedstock requirements. 

9.3 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Update 

Owing to a changeover of personnel at the ICAO, the finalisation of changes to their Annexes 

has taken longer than originally anticipated. As a result, it is expected that the recommended 

dates for mandatory use of halon alternatives in commercial aircraft may slip by one or two 

years. The recommended dates in ICAO resolution, A36-12, adopted in September 2007, were 

as follows: 

• 2011 for lavatories for new production aircraft 

• 2011 for lavatories, hand-held extinguishers, engine nacelles and auxiliary power units 

for aircraft for which a new application for type certification has been submitted 

• 2014 for the replacement of halon in hand-held extinguishers for new production 

aircraft 
86 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

The HTOC anticipates that the 2011 and 2014 dates will likely slip to 2013 and 2015, 

respectively, and are the likely final dates for implementation by ICAO. 

9.4 Regional Emissions of Halons 

Unpublished data on the emissions of halon 1211 and 1301 for NW Europe, using the 

methodology described in Greally, B. R., et al. (2007)1

, have been obtained. The data are 

provided in Table 9-1 below and show that emissions of both halon 1211 and 1301 either 

remained relatively constant or increased during the period when non-critical halon systems had 

to be removed from service and halons properly disposed of in accordance with European 

Regulation (EC) No. 2037/2000. This regulation limited the use of halon to only very specific 

critical uses listed in Annex VII of that regulation. 

Table 9-1: Unpublished Estimated NW European Emissions, Kilotons (metric) / year 

(uncertainty a factor of 2) using methodology described by Greally, B. R., et al. (2007) 

 Halon 1301 

(kt) 

Halon1211 

(kt) 

1999 0.35 ±0.14 0.41 ±0.09

2000 0.36 ±0.08 0.37 ±0.07

2001 0.35 ±0.13 0.36 ±0.08

2002 0.39 ±0.12 0.44 ±0.10

2003 0.56 ±0.14 0.47 ±0.09

2004 0.66 ±0.21 0.47 ±0.08

2005 0.27 ±0.14 0.27 ±0.06

2006 0.23 ±0.13 0.29 ±0.07

2007 0.36 ±0.18 0.43 ±0.08

The installed quantities or bank of halons reported by the European Commission for all Critical 

Uses in all 27 European Union (EU) Member States for the year 2006 total approximately 0.95 

kt of halon 1301, 0.250 kt of halon 1211 and 0.060 kt of halon 2402. Assuming that only these 

Critical Uses of halons remain in the EU, and scaling the NW Europe data in Table 9-1 to all 27 

EU Member States based on Gross Domestic Product (scaling factor of 1.6), the average 

emissions of halon 1301 would be 0.37 kt in 2006 and 0.58 kt in 2007. 

Comparing these with the reported installed quantities gives an average emissions rate for halon 

1301 of 39% in 2006 and 61% in 2007 – both extremely high and unsustainable emission rates. 

Doing the same calculations for halon 1211, reveals that the emissions are higher than the 

reported installed base of Critical Uses for both years. Therefore, it appears that there are 

additional quantities of halons either installed, in storage and/or discarded that are also 

contributing to the measured annual halon emissions. 

It is possible to estimate the smallest size of the bank of halons that would lead to these 

emissions by using the lower end of the emission estimate from Table 9-1 and dividing that 

value by the higher end of the average emission rate previously reported. For halon 1301, the 

highest average emission rate is 3% based on the average of 2% ±1%. For 2006, the lowest 

emission is 0.16 kt (1.6 x(0.23 kt - 0.13 kt)) and for 2007 it is 0.29 kt (1.6x(0.36 kt – 0.18 kt)). 

 

1

 Greally, B. R., et al., (2007) Observations of 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a) at AGAGE and SOGE 

monitoring stations in 1994–2004 and derived global and regional emission estimates, J. Geophys. Res., 

112, D06308, doi:10.1029/2006JD007527, 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 87

The estimated smallest bank of halon 1301 is 5.3 kt and 9.7 kt for 2006 and 2007 respectively 

for all 27 EU countries. This is consistent with the HTOC model estimates of an average of 6 kt 

for 2006 – 2007. Similarly for halon 1211, the highest average emission rate is 6% based on an 

average of 4%±2%. The estimated smallest bank of halon 1211 is 5.9 kt and 9.3 kt for 2006 and 

2007 respectively for all 27 EU countries. 

This is significantly lower than the HTOC model estimate of an average of 15 kt for 2006 – 

2007, which will warrant further evaluation in the future. None-the-less, for both halon 1301 

and halon 1211 the estimated installed base within Europe appears to be much larger than the 

reported quantities contained within the European Union Critical Uses. 

A recent publication in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology provided 2004-

2006 measurements of ODS and their alternatives from the US and Mexico.2

 The results 

indicated that halon 1211 emissions from the U.S. were 0.6 (0.3-0.8) kt/yr (Gg/yr) and Mexico 

were 0.1 (0-0.3) kt/yr. 

The results for the U.S. match well with the HTOC model estimate of 0.6 kt/yr emissions. The 

emissions for Mexico appear to be in line with estimating techniques that calculate usage and 

emissions based on Gross Domestic Product. 

The results for halon 1301, however, are surprising. The emissions in both the U.S. and Mexico 

are listed at Non Detected. However, upon further investigation it was determined that the Non 

Detected was somewhat of a misnomer. The halon 1301 data have more scatter, which lessens 

the ability to correlate measured atmospheric concentrations to annual emissions. The fact that 

the report lists halon 1301 as Non Detected does not mean that its emissions are less than those 

of halon 1211 necessarily. More data on halon 1301 is expected in the near future. None-theless, collectively, these findings may point to the increasing trend of reducing halon emissions 

where halon has its highest market value. This is consistent with the measured very low losses 

in Japan and the potentially higher emissions in Europe where halon in non-critical uses has lost 

its market value and may in fact be a financial liability. 

 

2

 Millet, D. B., et al., (2009) Halocarbon Emissions from the United States and Mexico and Their Global 

Warming Potential, Environ. Sci. Technol., 2009, 43 (4), 1055-1060, Publication Date (Web): 22 January 

2009. 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 89

10 Response to Decision XIX/16: Follow-up to the 2006 Assessment 

Report by the Halons Technical Options Committee 

Executive Summary 

In the Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) 2006 Assessment Report, the HTOC 

predicted potential regional imbalances of the halons 1211, 1301, and 2402, and the HTOC 

expressed concern that these imbalances could affect the availability of these halons to meet the 

future needs of applications that Parties’ may consider critical. 

In Decision XIX/16, the Parties asked the Technology and Economics Assessment Panel 

(TEAP) to further investigate these regional imbalances and to investigate and propose 

mechanisms to better predict and mitigate such imbalances in the future. 

Nineteen Parties, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) secretariat, and the secretariat 

of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) voluntarily provided information used 

in this study. In addition, the contractor for the Multilateral Fund (MLF) "Study on Challenges 

Associated with Halon Banking in Developing Countries" provided summary information, and 

HTOC members contacted several Parties and the European Commission directly for additional 

information. Of concern to the HTOC was the need to ensure that Parties were represented in 

the study that have, or potentially will have, problems with halon availability to meet needs that 

they deem critical. Nevertheless, many Parties did not provide any comment on the availability 

of halon within their country and, more importantly, did not express any concern over their 

ability to get halons to meet their important uses. If information was not available to an HTOC 

member, then no response from a Party was assumed to mean that the Party had enough halon, 

or access to enough, to meet needs they considered critical now and for their foreseeable future. 

In order to understand fully the study findings, it should be noted that the regional variation in 

the distribution of halons does not constitute necessarily a regional imbalance. The term 

“imbalance” relates to the parity of supply with demand not the actual quantities of halons 

present in a region. Also, the study did not judge fully the potential use of alternatives as a 

means to further reduce a Party’s or sector’s demand for halon. Instead the study has used the 

demands as presented by Parties or sectors to assess regional imbalances. 

The results of this study are summarised as follows: 

Halon 1211

Model projections place over 60 percent of the world’s halon 1211 in Article 5 Parties, with the 

clear majority being in handheld extinguishers and unused stocks in China. In China, a large 

production over recent years to support projected requirements, regulations that require the 

decommissioning of handheld extinguishers without a clear pathway for their disposal or reuse, 

and the recent classification of unused halon 1211 as a hazardous waste, appear to be the major 

contributors to the build up of stocks. Although adequate quantities of recycled halon 1211 

appear to exist globally to meet demand at this time, there are strong indications that, outside of 

China, sufficient quantities may not be available to meet the future projected demand. In the 

European Union, Russian Federation, and the United States, there is concern that the future 

needs of uses in the aviation and military sectors may not be met completely without access to 

additional supplies from outside their regions/countries. 

National regulations in China and other countries are limiting the flow of excess halon 1211 to 

uses in other places that are observing a steady demand but reduction in supply, e.g. the United 

States whose tax on imported recycled halon 1211 acts as a “de facto ban” on imports, limiting 

the supply in the United States to the installed base. National regulatory authorities may wish to 
90 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

explore ways to increase the flow of halon 1211 from China to other Parties to mitigate this 

imbalance, although without some action by the Parties, a large stock of newly produced but 

unused halon 1211 would not be able to be exported in bulk, only in equipment such as portable 

extinguishers. 

Halon 1301

In contrast to the halon 1211 situation, the HTOC model projects that Article 5 Parties have less 

than 20 percent of the world’s halon 1301. Although Article 5 Parties were not traditionally 

large users of halon 1301, its future availability is a cause of concern for some Article 5 Parties 

that traditionally imported newly produced halon 1301. In carrying out halon banking projects 

funded by the MLF, some Implementing Agencies interpreted a decision taken at the Eighteen 

Meeting of the Executive Committee of the MLF to require the banning of all imports of halon 

– including recycled. For Parties trying to implement halon banking, the unavailability of 

recycled halon has been problematic. The HTOC has always advocated the free movement of 

recycled halon world-wide in order to enable halon banking to function where needed. Parties 

may wish to consider removing barriers to the free trade in recycled halons. 

China indicated that its stocks of halon 1301 may not meet all the future needs of uses it 

considers critical, and they are considering a nomination for an essential use production 

exemption for halon 1301. This is surprising since although China has been a major producer of 

halon 1301, traditionally they have not been a major consumer. In addition, China may wish to 

consider destroying some of their excess halon 1211 to create ODP credits that could then be 

used for additional production/consumption of halon 1301 without the need for an essential use 

production exemption. 

No non- Article 5 Parties expressed concern about the availability of halon 1301 to meet the 

needs of their uses or of its future availability. This might be due to the market penetration of 

alternatives in areas traditionally served by halon 1301 making the removed halon readily 

available for recycling. Japan, the military, and aviation sectors continue the installation of new 

fire protection systems based on halon 1301. Japan has a single organisation that maintains strict 

reporting requirements for stocks and emissions of halon 1301, and which controls system 

recharge for existing and new installations. Given its preference for manually activated halon 

systems, it is not surprising that Japan has low emissions, an increasing percentage share of 

world-wide halon 1301, and an accurate prediction of its future needs. This type of predictive 

model may not be suitable for all Parties and sectors. However, other sectors or Parties with 

high demand, such as the United States, may wish to consider getting a better understanding of 

existing emissions to enable them to better predict future availability of recycled halons. 

User/supplier sponsored voluntary reporting of system recharges may help accomplish this. 

Halon 2402

National and/or international regulations that inadvertently complicate or prohibit the transfer of 

halons between Parties have less influence on the problem of regional imbalances of halon 2402 

than were initially reported. While there is no apparent shortage of halon 2402 on a global basis, 

there are regional problems in some sectors (primarily in defence and aviation) where users are 

having problems meeting their demands for halon 2402, and will continue to do so in the future, 

with the cost of recycled halon 2402 being a major factor. 

Halon 2402 has had small market penetration outside of the former Soviet Union and Parties 

that purchased military equipment from the Soviet Union. As such, the availability of data 

outside of the major consuming Parties, Russia and the Ukraine, is scarce, and both of these 

report a balance of availability and demand for now and the foreseeable future. Based on the 

small bank of halon 2402 that exists world-wide, Parties or sectors with an ongoing need for 

halon 2402 may wish to consider assessing their requirements and taking advantage of the 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 91

existing and predicted short-term availability of unwanted agent in the United States and the 

European Union before these excesses are considered for destruction. 

Halon Banking in Article 5 Countries 

Halon banking, the recycling of existing halons, and the free movement of supplies to meet 

demands, are crucial to the continued availability of halons for life safety applications without 

the need for an essential use production exemption. The MLF has funded thirty-eight projects 

within the halon banking category whose results have been a mixed. A study done in 2004 for 

UNEP DTIE OzonAction found that 80 percent of decommissioned halon in Africa was too 

contaminated for reusing or recycling with equipment normally supplied with projects funded 

by the MLF. Only about 20 percent of the country/regional halon banks that have been 

established considered themselves capable of recycling halons for reuse within the 

country/region. This will directly impact future halon supply/demand in the affected countries. 

Parties may wish to consider strategies and propositions that will help non-functioning halon 

banking operations to become functional and bank managers to ensure the long-term 

sustainability of their halon banking operations. 

Aviation

Aviation is a sector that has a long term need for all three halons both for in-production and inservice aircraft. Currently, while aircraft manufacturers and operators do not appear to be 

experiencing shortages of recycled halons to meet their needs, there is some evidence that, in 

some regions/countries, their suppliers are finding it more difficult to meet their requirements. 

As a global sector that has a long term need for halons, the aviation industry will likely 

experience shortages of halon 1211 in some regions/countries in the near future. Although 

alternatives are available for lavatory extinguishing systems, hand-held extinguishers, and 

engine nacelle and auxiliary power unit extinguishing systems, in some instances the 

practicalities of using them on the existing fleet of aircraft are very challenging and costly. 

Predicting and Mitigating Imbalances 

This study provides an overview of the availability of halons 1211, 1301, and 2402 in the 

countries that principally rely on them for fire protection purposes. It also highlights the 

disproportionate distribution of the remaining quantities of these halons, areas where supply 

costs are impacting demand, and where future supplies may not be available at any cost. 

The disproportionate distribution of halons does not necessarily equate to an imbalance in 

supply and demand, although in the case of halon 1211 this is what is happening. Parties may 

wish to explore ways to encourage the flow of halon 1211 on the international market to 

mitigate this imbalance. 

The situation with halon 1301 is less clear, with only one Party expressing a serious concern 

about availability. The market penetration of alternatives in areas traditionally served by halon 

1301 is likely making the recovered halon readily available for recycling and the servicing of 

important uses. Parties may wish to explore ways to increase the market penetration of 

alternatives in order to encourage the flow of halon 1301 from applications where there are 

alternatives to those where there are not. 

The world-wide bank of halon 2402 is small and the majority of it is held by the two major 

consuming Parties, who indicate an ongoing need. Nevertheless, currently there is a predicted 

short-term surplus on the international market that may satisfy the needs of Parties with demand 

but no internal supply. Parties may wish to explore ways to assess their needs and ensure that 

halon 2402 is not destroyed before existing demands are met. 
92 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Finally, without significantly more regional and sectoral information, e.g., detailed surveys from 

Parties, there does not appear to be any way to formulate a predictive model to project future or 

pending regional imbalances between supply and demand. Where the costs of recycled halons 

can be tracked, these may be indicative of local imbalances in supply/demand. However costs 

are not the only influencing factor. 

10.1 Introduction 

10.1.1 Task 

This Report responds to the following requests of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol as set out 

in Decision XIX/16: 

Decision XIX/16: Follow-up to the 2006 assessment report by the Halons Technical Options 

Committee 

Welcoming the 2006 assessment report of the Halons Technical Options Committee of the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, 

Welcoming also the continuing reduction in global halon use, 

Noting the concern expressed by the Halons Technical Options Committee about the availability 

of certain halons around the world,

 1. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to undertake a further 

study on projected regional imbalances in the availability of halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 

2402 and to investigate and propose mechanisms to better predict and mitigate such imbalances 

in the future; 

 2. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, when undertaking the 

study, to consult with the Secretariat of the Multilateral Fund on the outcomes of its study on 

the operation of halon banks around the world and to use such information from that study as 

may be relevant to its own review; 

 3. To request the Ozone Secretariat to make available 2004, 2005 and 2006 halon 

consumption figures by type of halon to the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel for its 

study; 

 4. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to submit its study in 

time to allow the Twentieth Meeting of the Parties to consider its results; 

 5. To encourage Parties which have requirements for halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 

2402 to provide the following information to the Ozone Secretariat by 1 April 2008 to assist the 

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel with its study: 

 (a) Projected need for halon 1211, halon 1301 and halon 2402 to support critical or 

essential equipment through the end of its useful life; 

 (b) Any difficulties experienced to date, or foreseen, in accessing adequate halons to 

support critical or essential equipment; 

 6. To encourage Parties, on a regular basis, to inform their critical users of halons, 

including the maritime industries, the aviation sector and the military, of the need to prepare for 

reduced access to halons in the future and to take all actions necessary to reduce their reliance 

on halons; 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 93

 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. 

In responding to the Decision, the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel requested its 

Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) to continue the investigative work begun during 

its 2006 Assessment, which led it to express concern about the availability of certain halons 

around the world. 

10.1.2 Structure of the Study 

The study looked at the availability of halons by considering type of halon, major use sectors, 

and traditional regional marketing/use patterns. Early on it became clear that, because of the 

specialised and world-wide application of all halons in the Aviation and Merchant Shipping 

sectors, these sectors should be considered on a global rather than regional basis. Also, owing to 

the almost exclusive application of halon 2402 to equipment supplied by the former Soviet 

Union, the availability of halon 2402 in the regions was also studied from a world-wide 

perspective. For halon 1211 and halon 1301, the study focused on countries in regions where 

halon marketing and application dependencies had been similar. The study report is thus 

structured as follows: 

Halon 1211 & Halon 1301

Asia; Europe; Middle East, North and West Africa; South and Central America; North America 

and Australia; South America. 

Halon 2402

World-wide 

All Halons 

Aviation; Merchant Shipping. 

10.1.3 Data Gathering 

During December 2007, the HTOC co-chairs assisted the Ozone Secretariat in the preparation 

of required letters to the International Maritime Organization (IMO) secretariat, to the 

secretariat of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and to each Party. The 

HTOC met January 21st to 23rd 2008 in Manchester, U.K. to discuss currently available data, the 

structure of the study and the schedule for the report delivery. The HTOC also met March 9th to 

11th 2009 in Brussels, Belgium to finalise the report and ensure that the most recent data were 

included in it. 

Direct responses to the Ozone Secretariat’s information requests were received from IMO, 

ICAO, and nineteen Parties. In addition, HTOC members contacted several Parties and the 

European Commission directly for additional information. Of concern to the HTOC was the 

need to ensure that Parties having problems with halon availability to meet the needs that they 

deem critical were represented in the study. Nevertheless, many Parties did not provide any 

comment on the availability of halon within their country and, more importantly, did not 

express any concern over their ability to get halons to meet their important uses. If information 

was not available to the HTOC, then no response from a Party was assumed to mean that the 
94 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Party had enough halon, or access to enough, to meet the needs that it considered critical now 

and for the predicted future. 

The MLF "Study on Challenges Associated with Halon Banking in Developing Countries" 

began in October 2008. At the time of writing, the study is not complete and no report has been 

made available for the HTOC’s use. However, the study contractor has made available relevant 

information that was collected during the information gathering stage of the project that has 

been used by this study. 

10.1.4 Study Delivery 

In Decision XIX/16, the Parties to the Montreal Protocol requested that the Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel submit its study in time to allow the Twentieth Meeting of the 

Parties to consider its results. 

In order to meet this deadline it was necessary that information from Parties be available by 

April 1st 2008 and that the MLF “Study on Challenges Associated with Halon Banking in 

Developing Countries" be available during this study’s investigations. Unfortunately, these were 

not available and it was decided to give Parties more time to respond and the MLF more time to 

complete its study. The new schedule called for this report to be available in time for the 

twenty-ninth meeting of the Open Ended Working Group. 

10.1.5 Regional Imbalances 

The regional disparity in the distribution of halons does not constitute necessarily a regional 

imbalance. The term “imbalance” is meant to relate to the parity of supply with demand not the 

actual quantities of halons present in a region. For example, Japan has a large percentage of the 

global bank of halon 1301 but also has a high demand, and therefore this does not represent a 

regional imbalance. Likewise, the United States has a small amount of halon 2402 available but 

an even smaller demand, while Vietnam and India have unfilled demands. This constitutes a 

regional imbalance. 

This study has not judged the potential use of alternatives as a means to further reduce a Party’s 

or sector’s demand for halon. Instead the study has used the demands as presented by Parties or 

sectors to assess regional imbalances. 

10.2 Halon 1211 and Halon 1301 

10.2.1 Summary 

The estimated global inventories of halon 1211 and halon 1301 are essentially unchanged from 

those presented in the HTOC 2006 Assessment. Based on those estimates, the HTOC is still of 

the opinion that adequate stocks of both halons currently exist globally to meet the future 

servicing and replenishment needs of existing fire equipment until the end of their useful lives. 

Nevertheless, in order for this to occur, some rethinking on the part of regulators and users may 

be necessary, particularly in the area of import/export of recycled halons. 

Model projections estimate that over 60 percent of the world’s halon 1211 is in Article 5 

countries, with the majority being in handheld extinguishers and unused stocks in China. A 

large production over recent years to support projected requirements, and recent regulations that 

require the decommissioning of handheld extinguishers without a clear pathway for their 

disposal or reuse, appear to be the major contributors to the build up of stocks. Nevertheless, 

some A5 Parties report that the price of halon 1211 is rising, indicating that past production 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 95

from China is being replaced by more costly recycled halon. In some Article 5 countries, e.g. 

India and parts of Africa, virtually no recycling of halon 1211 is taking place owing to severe 

contamination of the agent with other products such as CFC-12. 

In contrast to the halon 1211 situation, Article 5 Parties have less than 20 percent of the world’s 

halon 1301. Although Article 5 Parties were not traditionally large users of halon 1301, its 

future availability is a cause of concern for some Article 5 Parties, particularly China, where 

additional production capacity has been diverted to feedstock for use in the production of the 

pesticide Fipronil. In addition, some Article 5 Parties that traditionally imported newly 

produced halon 1301 have banned all imports of halon – including recycled – as a condition of 

MLF funding of halon banking projects. For Parties trying to implement halon banking, the 

unavailability of recycled halon has been problematic. The HTOC has always advocated the 

free movement of recycled halon world-wide in order to enable halon banking to function where 

needed. The contamination of halon continues to be a problem for Article 5 Parties trying to 

operate recycling facilities. The results of halon projects funded by the MLF have been a mixed. 

Negatively affected Parties may wish to investigate what additional actions they should take to 

improve their ability to meet their future halon needs. 

In non-Article 5 countries, recycled halon 1211 has recently become more expensive, indicating 

that supplies are lessening. In the European Union there is some concern that the future needs of 

their critical uses in the aviation and military sectors may not be met fully without access to 

additional supplies from outside the region. Similarly, in the United States, a penalising and 

rising tax on the importation of recycled halon 1211 is impeding access to additional supplies 

from outside the country in a tightening market. No non-Article 5 Party expressed concern 

about the availability of halon 1301 to meet the needs of its applications current or future. Japan 

has by far the largest bank of halon 1301, and on a percentage basis this will grow in time. This 

is because Japan is an excellent steward of its halon 1301 bank and its emissions are very low. 

Japan has elected to rely on halon 1301 in systems that some might not consider critical, rather 

than move to alternatives that may bring other environmental problems. Its halon management 

system promotes recovery and recycling of halons, the prevention of unnecessary emissions, 

and the strict reporting of recharging of systems. Halon availability in Japan is considered to be 

well balanced with needs, and no surplus is available for export. 

The United States relies on market forces to determine the criticality of a use and supplements 

domestic recycled halon supplies with imports from other nations. Since there is no central 

reporting, the HTOC cannot confirm existing model predictions. The United States may wish to 

consider the voluntary disclosure of annual system recharge quantities to facilitate this. 

10.2.2 Introduction 

In its 2006 Assessment, the HTOC updated the inventory and emission models of halon 1211 

and halon 1301 taking into account reported data on destruction, inventories and emissions, 

where available, and additional expert opinion on past practices. Additional data received since 

then does not significantly affect the predictions of the 2006 HTOC Assessment Report. The 

2006 Assessment estimated that at the end of 2005 the global halon 1211 bank was 

approximately 90,000 metric tonnes (MT), and the global bank of halon 1301was approximately 

50,000 MT. Based on these estimates, the HTOC is of the opinion that adequate global stocks of 

halon 1211 and halon 1301 currently exist to meet the future service and replenishment needs of 

Parties’ critical or essential halon 1211 and halon 1301 fire equipment until the end of their 

useful lives. 
96 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 10-1: Breakout of Global Inventories (Bank) of Halon 1211 by HTOC Model 

Regions

North America North America North America

Japan

CEIT

A5(1)

A5(1)

A5(1) Western Europe 

and Australia Western Europe 

and Australia Western Europe and 

Australia

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

2005 2015 2025

Year

Metric Tonnes

Figure 10-2: Breakout of Global Inventories (Bank) of Halon 1301 by HTOC Model 

Regions

North America

North America North America

 Western Europe 

and Australia

Western Europe 

and Australia

Japan

Japan

Japan

A5(1)

A5(1)

A5(1)

 Western Europe and Australia

CEIT

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

2005 2015 2025

Year

Metric Tonnes of Halon 1301
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 97

10.2.3 Asia 

It appears that adequate supplies of halon 1211 and halon 1301 should be available on a global 

basis through 2025. Model projections for halon 1211, based on Article 7 reporting of 

production and consumption, estimate over 60 percent of the halon 1211 to be in Article 5 

countries (see Figure 10-1), with the majority being in handheld extinguishers and unused 

stocks in China. Over 35 percent of the global stock of halon 1301 is projected to be in Japan by 

2025 (see Figure 10-2). By 2025 the majority of the bank of halons is likely to be in Asia. 

Two Parties still produce halons in Asia; the Peoples Republic of China and the Republic of 

Korea. However, both will have ceased production for fire protection applications by January 1, 

2010. 

10.2.3.1 Japan 

Following adoption of Decision X/7 at the 10th Meeting of the Parties, Japan developed a 

National Halon Management Strategy. They established a halon management system primarily 

through the Fire and Environment Protection Network and other stakeholders such as the Fire 

Service Authorities and private bodies in the Japanese fire service industry. Japan manages its 

halon by promoting recovery and recycling of halons, preventing unnecessary emissions, and 

ensuring the fire protection and safety of buildings in accordance with the Strategy. 

Halon 1211 is mainly used in portable extinguishers, which are considered essential for the 

safety of life and buildings in Japan, and it is a practice that they intend to continue. 

Halon 1301 is widely used in fire fighting systems in buildings, civil vessels, civil aircraft, 

military and government agency applications, as required by the Japanese Fire Service 

regulations, with new systems still allowed. Currently, 100 to 200 MT of halon 1301, out of 

approximately 17,000 MT installed, are recovered annually from existing fire protection 

systems (0.6 to 1.2 percent) and recycled for new installations. Furthermore, emissions due to 

fire suppression are approximately 10 to 20 MT (0.06 to 0.1 percent) per year. 

The military has secured its own halon supply from the market. Japan has the lowest halon 

emissions rates and manages its halon very well. Although the Government of Japan is pressing 

for fire protection system changes to halon alternatives, the current halon management strategy 

is generally considered by them to be the better option for both the environment and fire 

protection in Japan. There is concern by the Japanese Fire Service that forced changes to 

alternatives will result in a fear of uncertainty amongst halon users, which may lead to illegal 

halon release. According to its 2008 study of halon needs, no surplus for export is predicted nor 

imports required at this time. 

10.2.3.2 China 

By the end of 2005, China had completed the phase-out of halon 1211 production. However, the 

producer had stockpiled approximately 2400 MT halon 1211. Meanwhile, it is estimated that a 

large amount of halon 1211 portable extinguishers are in the hands of end-users, and a lot of 

halon 1211 is coming out of service as these portables reach 5-year servicing dates – recharge is 

not permitted. It is not known what is happening to the halon although it has been reported that 

it is now classified as a hazardous waste. China reported that the stockpiled halon 1211 is in 

excess of its needs and this recent classification as a hazardous waste may restrict its availability 

to the international market. Previously, China reported that it was planning to start recycling of 

halon 1211 from out-of-service portable extinguishers and, if this was successful, China could 

provide recycled halon 1211 to the international market. Exporting halon 1211 from China 
98 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

could alleviate some of the civil aviation industry’s concerns regarding a shortage to meet 

world-wide civil aviation needs. 

Since 2006, the production ceiling for halon 1301 has been 100 MT per year, and production 

will continue until the end of 2009. According to the information provided, China will have a 

need for halon 1301 for applications that it considers critical beyond 2010. The quantity 

required has not yet been calculated. China is planning to start recycling halon 1301, and hopes 

that this recycled material partially will meet the needs of uses that it deems critical. 

Separately from fire protection, China’s halon 1301 production capacity is being used to 

produce halon 1301 for use as a feedstock in the production of the pesticide Fipronil. Over the 

past few years approximately ten plants have started to manufacture Fipronil in China. 

The Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection has indicated that it is highly unlikely that 

stocked and recycled halon 1301 will meet all the future needs of uses that it considers critical, 

and China is considering a future nomination for an essential use production exemption for 

halon 1301. This is surprising since although China has been a major producer of halon 1301, 

traditionally it has not been a major consumer. In addition, China could destroy some of its 

excess halon 1211 to create ODP credits that could then be used for additional 

production/consumption of halon 1301 without the need for an essential use production 

exemption. 

China is an example of a country that has a supply and demand imbalance, with significant 

excess supply of halon 1211 and a potential shortfall in supply of halon 1301. 

10.2.3.3 Republic of Korea 

The Republic of Korea continues to produce both halon 1211 and halon 1301. The most recent 

production figures are shown below in Table 10-2. 

Table 10-2: Republic of Korea Halon Production 

 2006 2007 2008 2009 (Forecast) 

Halon 1211 MT 80 0 246 123 

Halon 1301 MT 123 110 110 147 

Total MT 203 110 356 270 

Korea has not exported any halon for at least two years. For the past five years it has been 

importing bulk halon 1211 and approximately 60 MT per annum of halon 1211 in the form of 

small portable fire extinguishers from China. For the year 2008, it is believed that the amount of 

halon 1211 imported into Korea from China increased to 90 MT. 

There has been no serious shortage of halon in Korea despite a price increase of 20 percent for 

halon 1211 and 30 percent for halon 1301 in 2008. 

10.2.3.4 India 

As reported in 2000-2001, the quantity of halon 1211 installed in portable extinguishers, mobile 

and fixed local flooding systems was 3,000 MT. However, most of this has since leaked away 

owing to poor quality extinguishers and maintenance practices. There is no recovery, recycling 

or refilling of halon 1211 taking place because of the poor quality of the agent, which has been 

mixed with CFC-12 and other contaminants. Surplus extinguishers are disposed of without 

agent recovery. It is estimated that the Indian military will need approximately 100 MT of halon 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 99

1211 over the next 15 to 20 years. The current halon 1211 inventory is approximately 100 MT, 

with users being the military, aviation, and some telecommunications and electronic industries. 

As well as leakage, the reduction in inventory is also partially due to the replacement of halon 

1211in portable extinguishers with carbon dioxide, dry powder, and halocarbon alternatives. 

As reported in 2000-2001, the installed quantity of halon 1301 was 1,000 MT. This has since 

been reduced to approximately 600 MT, with major users being the military, the power, oil, 

telecommunications, and electronic industries. Some decommissioned systems have been 

replaced with carbon dioxide and halocarbon alternatives, but the extent of this is not known. 

Emissions from existing systems are small, and no new systems are being installed in the 

private sector. However, the military continues to use halon 1301 for applications that it 

considers critical. It is estimated that the military needs approximately 100 MT of halon 1301 

over the next 15 to 20 years. 

The National Halon Recycling facility is now operating. Halon is recycled and reclaimed for 

applications that India considers critical on a regular basis and free of charge for the users. No 

technical problems have been found in running the National Halon Recycling facility so far. 

Also, there have been no reported cases in the private sector of Indian users having problems 

finding halon 1211 or halon 1301 for applications that India considers critical. The private 

sector seems to use the halon recycling centres operated on a commercial basis by private fire 

equipment companies in preference to the National Halon Recycling facility. The halon for 

recycling comes primarily from the break-up of decommissioned ships. This material is 

supplemented by imported recycled and virgin halon to meet needs that India considers to be 

critical. The National Halon Recycling facility does not hold an inventory of halon 1211 or 

halon 1301. 

Within the country, consumption of halons has been reduced from 3650 ODP tonnes in 1991 to 

70 ODP tonnes in 2004. Halon 1211 and halon 1301 are still extensively used in the military 

and, although continued use in these applications beyond 2010 is permitted, there is concern 

that availability of supply will be a serious problem in the future. It appears that there is a lack 

of co-ordination between the three military services and the National Halon Recycling facility. 

Each of the three military services is in the process of establishing independent banking 

facilities to support their own service equipment. These banks are spread throughout India with 

more than one facility supporting each individual service. The scope and capability of these 

facilities are not known, nor how much, if any, stockpile is held at these facilities to support the 

equipment. Some within the services also mistakenly believe that recycled halons reduce the 

efficiency of the product and that considerable losses occur during the recycling process. 

Although there is no legislation for mandatory decommissioning of halon systems, no new 

systems will be allowed after 2010, except for certain applications for which alternatives do not 

exist. It is anticipated that these uses may require a total of 100 MT of each of halon 1211 and 

halon 1301 over the next 10-15 years. Much of this will have to be imported, recycled material. 

Difficulties are expected because recycled halon costs four to five times more than past virgin 

halon imports. India does not currently anticipate a future need for an essential use production 

exemption to meet its halon 1211 and halon 1301 requirements. 

10.2.3.5 Pakistan 

Pakistan has reported that it implemented a project funded by the MLF to establish a national 

halon banking facility too late, and that remaining halon users are not utilising the bank due to 

the lack of regulations requiring them to do so. The current installed base of halons is unknown 

as is the potential future needs of Pakistan; however, it is believed there are not many halon 
100 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

systems in service any more. It is reported that many users and organisations switched to halon 

alternatives before the banking facility was established. 

10.2.3.6 South East Asia – Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand 

Basically, there is a plentiful supply of halon 1301 in the region of South East Asia. Most of the 

halon comes from the decommissioning of ship fire protection systems. As a major regional 

ship repair and maintenance centre, Singapore has more than an adequate supply of halon for 

itself from this source. Most of the halon is channelled to aviation use for aircraft that are sent 

there for servicing. There are no buyers from neighbouring countries such as Malaysia, 

Indonesia and Thailand, which implies that these Parties are probably not facing any supply 

problems. 

The Indonesian Halon Bank was officially launched in 2003 and was intended to receive halon 

from uses considered non-critical by them in order to supply recycled halon to uses that they 

consider to be critical. The implementation was assisted by the MLF with project completion in 

2006. The banking operations include storage and recycling/reclamation. The MLF project 

included a survey of halon systems and extinguishers in Indonesia and found a reported 31.5 

MT of installed halon. It is believed that there is as much again in unreported halons currently in 

use. The vast majority of the country’s installed base is halon 1301 with a small remaining 

quantity being halon 1211. The national halon facility has collected 18 MT of halon, which 

remains in storage for uses that they consider to be critical. Indonesian regulations prohibit 

selling or supplying halon from the national bank except to users that they consider have critical 

applications. There are currently only three companies that they list in this category; two oil 

companies and an aviation organisation that services the global aircraft fleet. To date there have 

not been any requests from the military services. The national bank manager believes that they 

have enough halon 1301 for their critical users, but they will need to purchase halon 1211 for 

the aviation sector in the near future. The national halon banking activities are conducted by a 

private company, PT GMF-Aero Asia (a subsidiary of Garuda Indonesia), and it has indicated 

that without additional financial support, the operations are not sustainable for the foreseeable 

future. 

In 1996, Malaysia received assistance from the MLF to establish a halon bank. In 2000, the 

management of the halon bank was assumed by the Fire and Rescue Department. To date they 

have collected approximately 10 MT of halon 1211 and 157 MT of halon 1301 from 

surrendered fire suppression equipment and systems. This halon has been recycled to supply 

uses such as in the aviation sector and the military. Malaysia does not anticipate any need to 

import halon from outside sources. 

Thailand received assistance from the MLF to establish a Halon Management Programme 

including a recycling/recovery and banking facility. It has indicated it will not be implementing 

a physical halon bank and instead has opted for a virtual bank. Thailand anticipates completing 

the implementation of the Halon Management Programme in mid-2009. It has indicated that it 

will need to develop requirements for selling and purchasing halon. However, it is not yet clear 

what exactly will be those needs and whether they can be met by supplies within the country. 

Given the above, the South East Asia region is considered to be currently in balance for 

supply/demand of halon 1211 and halon 1301, but that importation of halon 1211 will likely be 

required in the future. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 101

10.2.4 Europe 

10.2.4.1 European Union 

In the 27 Member States of the European Union, halon 1211 and halon 1301 are controlled 

substances in Group III of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 on substances that deplete 

the ozone layer ("the Regulation"). The Regulation prohibits the production of the halons and 

restricts their use to certain critical uses set out in Annex VII to the Regulation. It also prohibits 

all non-critical (i.e., non-listed) halon uses; those non-critical halon systems must, since 2003, 

be converted to alternatives or be decommissioned. The listed critical uses can be supported 

only by using stocks of recovered and recycled material from decommissioned systems and 

extinguishers, storage facilities or the commercial market. 

The Regulation also controls trade. Imports of halons into the European Union from Parties to 

the Montreal Protocol are permitted for the Annex VII critical uses, subject to quantitative limits 

determined annually and the issue of an import licence by the European Commission. Imports 

of halons, or products that contain them, are not permitted from States that are not Party to the 

Montreal Protocol. 

The export of halons from European Union Member States is permitted until the end of 2009, 

provided that the substances are intended for use in critical uses as defined under the Regulation 

and provided that they come from a storage or recycling facility authorised or operated by the 

competent authority (normally the environment ministry) of a Member State. The exports are 

subject to annual authorisation in advance by the European Commission. After 2009, exports 

will only be permitted when the halons are incorporated in products or equipment that are 

considered to be critical use applications. Thus, export of bulk quantities of recovered halons 

will not be permitted. 

Member States' governments are also required to report annually on their critical uses of halons, 

providing information on the quantities installed, used and emitted, and on the progress being 

made in replacing them with alternatives. 

The Regulation will change at the beginning of 2010. The new Regulation will remove the 

current time limit on export of recovered halons for uses deemed critical. Import and export will 

therefore be allowed, subject to authorisation and licensing in advance. 

The Regulation's Annex VII is also under review because of the increased availability of 

alternatives since the list was last amended. The intent is to reduce the number of permitted uses 

and introduce end-dates for those remaining uses. This will provide a clear incentive to users to 

replace halons wherever feasible. 

Halon uses that are considered to be critical by Member States are found in the defence 

(primarily in ships, submarines, armoured vehicles and military aircraft), civil aviation (aircraft 

and airports), oil and petrochemical and nuclear power sectors. Halons continue to be used also 

in some commercial cargo vessels, military and civilian command and communications 

facilities, and in the Channel Tunnel infrastructure and railway rolling stock. 

The total installed quantities reported by Member States for the year 2006 were approximately 

950 tonnes of halon 1301 and 250 tonnes of halon 1211. Of these totals, approximately 60 

percent is contained in the military applications, mainly in ground combat vehicles (30 percent) 

and surface ships (25 percent). In civilian applications, approximately 15 percent of the total is 

accounted for by commercial aviation. A similar quantity is contained in commercial cargo 

ships, though the industry has made considerable progress in replacing halon machinery space 

and engine room fire protection systems, which are not considered to be critical uses by the 

regulatory authorities. 
102 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Some dedicated stocks of recovered and recycled halons are held by critical user organisations 

or by commercial fire protection or other companies on their behalf. This is particularly the case 

for military users in the larger Member States where dedicated storage and recycling facilities 

exist with sufficient stocks to support their critical use equipment until the projected end of life 

of the equipment concerned. The stocks are maintained by recovery of halons from retiring or 

converted equipment and are carefully managed to minimise losses and emissions. The larger 

defence ministries are, at the moment, not reliant on the commercial market and there would 

seem to be little flow of halons between the government and commercial sectors. However, 

smaller defence ministries may be obtaining the supplies they need from commercial suppliers 

and fire protection companies. 

The larger European commercial airlines have made arrangements with fire protection 

companies to hold and supply stocks of halon 1211 and 1301 to meet current needs. Smaller 

airlines may not have made such arrangements. Other commercial sectors are similarly reliant 

on these companies, but do not seem to have made arrangements to hold stocks for the future. 

Concern was expressed about the difficulty in getting approval for the export of contaminated 

halons for recycling because it is not permitted by the European Union Regulation (EC) No. 

2037/2000. This may therefore hinder supply and re-use of small quantities of halons by some 

Parties unless the halons can be recycled closer to the source. 

Member States report annual usage of halons (in terms of the quantities supplied to refill 

extinguishers and system cylinders) and the quantities that are stored to support critical use 

equipment. This information is more difficult to obtain and so probably less reliable than data 

on installed quantities. However, across all user sectors in all Member States, usage in 2006 was 

reported as being approximately 3 percent of the installed quantity, which would be consistent 

with the 2.5 percent used for halon 1301 and 3.5 percent used for halon 1211 in the 2006 HTOC 

Assessment. 

Across all user sectors in all Member States, the quantities of halon 1211 and halon 1301 

available in 2006 to supply the identified critical uses were reported to be approximately 450 

tonnes. Not all of this would be available to all users, or to the commercial market. At the 

current rate of demand, this represents approximately 10-15 years supply, for both halons. 

However, if the commercial shipping, defence and other sectors continue to make good progress 

in halon replacement, annual demand will continue to fall, and an additional few hundred tonnes 

should become available to supplement stocks over the next 5-10 years. 

A number of Member States have provided additional information in response to the Decision 

XIX/16 request for information. None reported current, or projected, problems with obtaining 

sufficient supplies of halon 1301 to meet demand. Two Member States reported that the cost of 

halon 1211 was increasing, consistent with demand beginning to exceed supply, and expressed 

some concern that difficulties may arise with supplying critical aviation and military uses in the 

future. Some fire protection companies have also indicated that they are finding it increasingly 

difficult to obtain supplies of halon 1211 to meet the projected needs of their customers. 

10.2.4.2 Georgia 

Georgia has implemented a halon project funded by the MLF to develop a national Halon 

Management Programme. It is recovering/recycling and storing halons for uses that it considers 

to be critical. Georgia believes it has accurate information on installed quantities of halon and it 

does not foresee any requirements for selling/purchasing halon in the near future. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 103

10.2.4.3 Moldavia 

Moldavia reported that it has no uses of halons that it considers to be critical and no stocks. 

10.2.4.4 Norway 

In Norway, production, import, export, sale and use of halons are controlled through a national 

regulation entitled “Regulation on ozone depleting substances”, which constitutes Chapter 6 of a 

broader piece of legislation entitled “Regulations relating to restrictions on the manufacture, 

import, export, sale and use on chemicals and other products hazardous for health and the 

environment (Products regulation)”. Although not a Member State of the European Union, 

Chapter 6 of the Products regulation implements the main points of Regulation (EC) No 

2037/2000 on Ozone Depleting Substances. 

With regard to fixed fire-extinguishing equipment and hand-held extinguishers containing 

halon, phase-out is addressed in § 6-10 and §6-11 of the regulation. According to § 6-10, 

installation and possession of such products and equipment has been illegal since 1st January 

2004. However, the regulation allows, through § 6-11, import and sale of halon fire 

extinguishing products and equipment for Norway’s critical uses. These critical use areas of 

halon are presented below. 

Norwegian critical uses of halon 1301 are: 

 in aircraft, for the protection of crew compartments, engine nacelles, cargo bays and dry 

bays and fuel tank inerting, 

 in military vehicles, for the protection of spaces occupied by personnel and engine 

compartments, 

 for the making inert of occupied spaces where flammable liquids and/or gas release could 

occur in the following areas: 

 movable installations in the oil, gas and petrochemical sector, 

 existing cargo ships. 

Norwegian critical uses of halon 1211 are: 

 in military vehicles, for the protection of spaces occupied by personnel and engine 

compartments, 

 in aircraft hand-held fire extinguishers, 

 in aircraft, for the protection of crew compartments, engine nacelles, cargo bays and dry 

bays. 

In 2003 and 2004, the Danish Institute of Fire and Security Technology (DIFT) prepared a 

report on halon in the Nordic countries, on behalf of the so-called Nordic Ozone Group (NOG), 

a sub-group of the Nordic Chemicals Group under the Nordic Council of Ministers. The report 

is entitled: “Halon Critical Uses and Alternatives – A Nordic Perspective”. It gives an overview 

of halon use in the Nordic countries and provides information on current and future alternative 

fire extinguishing systems. As indicated in this report, the only Norwegian sectors that presently 

accommodate critical use of halon are the aviation and military sectors. 
104 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

10.2.4.5 Switzerland 

The in-service installed base of halon 1301 in Switzerland is approximately 176 MT, and the 

stored quantity for servicing either at user premises or equipment manufacturers is 

approximately 40 MT. Apart from applications considered by Switzerland to be critical, e.g., the 

safety of people in aircraft, army vehicles and nuclear power plants, the recharging of halon 

systems has been banned since the end of 2002. Users with other similar applications can apply 

for an exemption to the ban. The projected need for Switzerland’s critical applications is 

estimated to be approximately 0.5 MT per annum for the foreseeable future. 

Halon may be exported from Switzerland for “critical uses” in other countries. The importer has 

to provide written information, that the halon will only be used in installations deemed critical 

in its country. After a large sale of 22 MT to the US military a few years ago, only Israel has 

imported halon from Switzerland over the last few years (about 12 MT). 

Halon 1211 is only used for the recharging of aircraft portable extinguishers and the quantities 

are small. 

10.2.4.6 Other Parties 

No other European Parties reported halon stock quantities or problems meeting the needs of 

their uses. 

10.2.4.7 Supply/Demand Summary 

Given the above, the European region is considered to be in balance for supply/demand of halon 

1301 since any excess halon 1301 has been and continues to be made available to the world 

market. With respect to halon 1211, the European region is currently in supply/demand balance 

but anticipates a shortage of supply in the future. 

10.2.5 Middle East, North and West Africa 

10.2.5.1 Middle East 

In the Middle East, some Parties have successful and operational halon bank projects, e.g., 

Jordan and Syria, developed by projects funded by the MLF, whereas others still face 

administrative or other problems. To date, there are insufficient data on the installed base or 

emissions of halons in the region to determine if an imbalance actually exists. However, there is 

anecdotal information that there is a lack of all types of halons, which would lead to a regional 

imbalance. 

Syria indicates that it is receiving contaminated halons that are taking up valuable storage space 

and represent a financial burden for disposal. The extent of the contamination is unclear and 

therefore whether or not the halon could be reclaimed with appropriate equipment. Syria does 

not foresee any requirement for either selling or purchasing halon in the future as the recovered 

and recycled halon is restricted to the Civil Defence and it reports the quantities available are 

sufficient. 

2003 data indicated that Bahrain had an installed base of 8.2 MT halon 1211 and 86.9 MT of 

halon 1301. Bahrain has not imported halon since 2004 and does not anticipate a need to do so – 

it may be able to export halon 1301 in the future. Bahrain is part of a regional project that 

includes partners Qatar, Lebanon and Yemen. As part of the project, Bahrain received halon 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 105

recycling equipment but the other partners did not. Owing to a lack of funding for halon storage, 

in particular storage tanks, and limitations of the recycling equipment, a fully functional 

regional halon bank is not in operation. 

Whether or not there are sufficient quantities of halons within the Middle East or from alternate 

sources to meet the demands, good management and applicable business plans for any current 

or future banking operations will be needed. Parties in the region may wish to consider 

obtaining additional information on installed quantities and emissions in order to make 

projections of future demand and their ability to meet it. 

10.2.5.2 Nigeria 

Nigeria established a national halon bank with the assistance of the MLF. It has conducted an 

inventory of installed halons and determined, as of 2004, that it has 168.5 MT of halon1211 and 

257.7 MT of halon 1301; however, Nigeria believes it missed over 30 percent of the potential 

users so the installed quantities may be much higher. It is currently in the process of selling 

some of its recycled halon 1301 to a company outside of Africa. Nigeria expects to have 

sufficient halons to meet its country’s needs for the foreseeable future as systems are 

decommissioned. While its halon bank is considered a regional bank, it is not receiving halon 

from other Parties in the region due to the costs of transportation to the user of the halon. In 

addition, the halon users do not want to pay for the recovery, recycling, and storage of their 

halons. The halon bank is solely operated on behalf of the National Ozone Office by a private 

consultant and is not being funded by the State. While the bank may remain viable in the future, 

it may only serve the needs of Nigeria. 

10.2.5.3 Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Congo, Congo DR 

There is no functioning halon bank in Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Congo, or the Congo 

DR and they are not participating in the regional halon bank which is located in Nigeria. If they 

have halon requirements for applications that they consider critical, those needs have not yet 

been circulated to the members of the HTOC.

10.2.6 South and Central Africa 

10.2.6.1 Botswana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Namibia, Tanzania, Zimbabwe 

Botswana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Namibia, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe were assisted by MLF 

to establish a regional halon bank. Eventually the halon bank was established in South Africa 

(SA) and there is no known halon banking occurring in any of these countries. Some use has 

been made by these Parties of the SA Halon Bank. This has been on an informal basis, i.e., via 

end-users decommissioning through SA-based contractors, rather than through Government 

agencies. The HTOC has attempted to ascertain whether these Parties have halon bank 

management plans, halon applications that they consider critical, or any halon inventories. To 

date, no information has been forthcoming. A study was conducted in 2004 on the Eastern and 

Southern African Countries by the project funded by the MLF. Total installed capacity at that 

time was reported as 36 MT ODP and there was consumption of halon indicating the possibility 

of future need for halon. Based on the experiences of a private recycling and reclamation 

facility, the study concluded that over 80 percent of all installed halon in the region is expected 

to be contaminated and not recyclable/reclaimable using equipment normally supplied under 

projects funded by the MLF. 
106 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

10.2.6.2 South Africa 

Management of halon use, recycling and recovery is to a large extent facilitated by the Halon 

Bank of South Africa (SA), with the general co-operation of fire protection installation and 

servicing contractors and vendors. As countries neighbouring South Africa are mostly serviced 

by these SA-based contractors, halon management for the Southern African region is for most 

practical purposes also facilitated by the SA Halon Bank. 

Although there is no local legislation enforcing restrictions on the use of halons, the 

requirements of the Protocol and Amendments are followed and promoted by the SA Halon 

Bank in the various services it provides. 

In addition, the Southern African region is well served by fire protection contractors and 

vendors, many being agents for large international fire protection companies, which has resulted 

in a significant sales effort in replacing halons with alternative extinguishants. 

Halon recovery equipment - provided some years ago by a project funded by the MLF - has 

recently been placed with a SA Halon Bank approved vendor, and is currently in the final stages 

of being commissioned. Once fully operational, this equipment will provide a capable regional 

recovery and reclamation plant that will further facilitate the region’s banking of halon. 

Military requirements for halon appear to be minimal. In previous years, the SA Halon Bank 

was occasionally approached for stock supplies, but no such enquiries have been received since 

2004. 

Inventories of halon are not accurately known, but based on recent transaction records of the SA 

Halon Bank it is estimated that their Bank currently has a useable inventory of 11.8 MT of 

halon 1301. In addition, it is known that the SA Defence Force has at least 20 MT installed, and 

it is estimated that SA commerce has about 10 MT installed. Most of these installations are not 

considered by the SA Halon Bank to be in its critical use category, and could be replaced by 

acceptable alternative extinguishing agents or systems. It is possible that these quantities could 

be returned to the SA Halon Bank in the foreseeable future - thus increasing the stock holding. 

Previous reports have stated that much of the halon 1301 is contaminated. Currently, about 300 

kg is recorded as contaminated at the SA Halon Bank’s vendor site, which amount has been 

excluded from the 11.8 MT figure. Recent returns, particularly those for the 2009 and 2008, 

have not all been assayed for conformance with the ISO standard, and it may be that the usable 

inventory could be some 10 percent less than the above figure. 

The SA Halon Bank anticipates receiving 34 MT of halon 1301 over the next 7 years, including 

20 MT from the military. It is estimated that SA critical use refills – principally for the 

commercial aviation sector - will approximate 1 MT halon 1301 per annum for the foreseeable 

future. This means that the SA Halon Bank will be able to service these critical refills well 

beyond 2030. However, if the military retains its stocks then the SA Halon Bank will be unable 

to meet the needs of SA critical commercial users after 2029. 

The SA Halon Bank currently has a useable inventory of 398 kg of halon 1211. In a recent 

survey by the SA Halon Bank of 50 major portable extinguishing companies servicing this 

Region, the vast majority of respondents stated that halon 1211 was last used or available many 

years ago. However, one respondent stated that 950 kg was in stock for servicing the aviation 

industry. As this respondent did not reveal the company’s name, this stock has not been 

included in the SA Halon Bank’s data. Although the available inventory is very small, it is of 

interest as it is used to service the portable extinguishers of this region’s aviation industry. 

Based on an estimated 30 kg to 70 kg annual usage, it is estimated that the SA Halon Bank’s 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 107

stock of halon 1211 will last until 2015, after which refills for the Regions’ aviation industry 

will not be available. 

For halon 1301, the South and Central Africa region is considered to be in supply and demand 

balance for the foreseeable future. For halon 1211, the region is currently in supply and demand 

balance but will experience difficulties beyond 2015. However, as there is no prohibition on the 

import of recycled halon 1211, the affected Parties may wish to consider the option of importing 

recycled halon 1211 now to avoid future problems. 

10.2.7 North America and Australia 

North America and Australia have been considered as one region because their historic sales, 

installation and use patterns are similar, although their policies on halon use are different. 

10.2.7.1 United States of America 

In the United States (U.S.), halons 1211 and 1301 are available from retiring or 

decommissioned equipment and users are not reporting a shortage. However, suppliers are 

reporting increasing difficulty in securing a steady supply from domestic stocks, and the 

growing importance of imports of recycled halon 1301. Significant increases in prices for 

recovered material have been reported over the past year although this has not affected 

purchases. While U.S. regulations prohibit production, testing with, and unnecessary emissions 

of halons, use of recovered and recycled halons is allowed to continue and the migration of 

halons from applications considered non-critical by one user to those considered critical by 

another user is driven by market forces. U.S. regulations do not specify critical applications. 

There is little centralised knowledge on quantities of halon in installed systems or stockpiles, 

availability or emissions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. 

Customs and Border Patrol maintain records of import petitions for halons and actual imported 

amounts of recycled halons, respectively. EPA also maintains some, although incomplete, 

information on destroyed ozone-depleting substances including halons. For regulatory and 

policy purposes, EPA’s Vintaging Model estimates U.S. consumption by and emissions from 

both halon-based and substitute-based fire protection end-uses. The modelling is based on the 

total consumption of chemical for fire protection in the U.S. and how that consumption changes 

over time in amount (metric tonnes) as well as type of chemical. The model annual loss rate 

accounts for total annual emissions from leakage, accidental discharges, and fire extinguishing, 

in aggregate, and equals a percentage of the total quantity of chemical in operation at a given 

time. A voluntary program that asks suppliers to disclose annual system recharge quantities 

would go a long way towards confirming existing model predictions. 

About half the purchased halon 1301 is currently being imported. No halon 1211 is being 

imported owing to an import tax that is currently US$74 per kilogram, increasing annually by 

US$3 per kilogram. 

The Department of Defense (DoD) maintains a physical halon bank that currently meets the 

requirements for halon use on legacy systems and world-wide operations. The DoD has not 

purchased any halon 1211 for its bank, relying instead on recovered halons from existing 

systems and the adoption of alternatives. The DoD purchased the bulk of its halon 1301 

stockpile in the 1996-7 timeframe, has purchased additional material since then to maintain its 

stockpile for the continued use of legacy systems, and has a strategic reserve in Australia 

through its National Halon Bank. 
108 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

10.2.7.2 Canada 

Canada has indicated that there is enough halon in the country to meet its future needs. 

Presently five of the twelve provinces and territories have mandated elimination of halons 

except for critical uses approved by the Government. As there is no commercially viable halon 

destruction facility in operation in Canada, halons becoming available from decommissioned 

systems and/or end-of-life portable extinguishers are exported for destruction or recycled for 

use in applications that meet their criteria as critical. 

10.2.7.3 Australia 

Australian regulations that became effective in 2005 established a national technician licensing 

system and trading permit system to control the use of ozone-depleting and synthetic 

greenhouse gases used in the fire protection sector. The regulations permit individuals (or 

industry sectors) to apply for a Halon Special Permit to use halon. The Australian National 

Halon Bank (NHB) is administered by the Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the 

Arts and operated by DASCEM. The NHB has been set up on a commercial basis to collect 

halon 1211 and halon 1301 from decommissioned uses that Australia has not deemed critical. 

The NHB supplies halons to replenish military stocks (quantities are classified) and for 

commercial sales only for essential uses, defined as applications necessary for life safety and 

where no alternatives are available at a reasonable cost. Approximately 10 MT of halons are 

collected annually by NHB with the majority (90 percent) consisting of halon 1211 and the 

remainder halon 1301. The NHB is not aware of any use or demand for halon 2402. To date, the 

halon collected by the NHB has been reasonably clean with very little cross-contamination, so 

most can be reclaimed to either MILSPEC or ASTM standard for purity and are labelled 

accordingly. No halon 1211 has been destroyed since 2000 and no halon 1301 has been 

destroyed at all. 

 

Continuing uses of halons in Australia that they consider to be critical include merchant 

shipping and aviation. Approximately 30 Australian-flagged merchant ships continue to use 

halon 1301 in their machinery spaces and pump rooms, but are expected to come out of service 

in the 2012-15 timeframe. State registered vessels over 500 dead weight tons (including ferries 

and tourist vessels) are allowed to use halon in their machinery spaces. Foreign vessels with 

discharged halon systems are provided with halon 1211 or halon 1301 to meet their seaworthy 

requirements (including a fully operating fire protection system). Continued use of halon is 

allowed for aviation only in aircraft systems and not land-based support applications such as fire 

trucks and service vehicles. The major airlines maintain a small stockpile for use by their 

service contractors. 

10.2.7.4 Supply/Demand Summary 

Given the above, for halon 1301 the North America and Australia region appears to be in 

supply/demand balance as it either has enough or imports unneeded agent from other country’s 

surplus. With respect to halon 1211, the region is currently in supply/demand balance but 

anticipates a shortage of supply in the future. 

10.2.8 South America 

South American Parties maintain a close watch on the use, storage, recycling and emissions of 

the controlled halons. Nevertheless, halons are still an important agent for fire protection in 

government controlled areas such as transportation and communications systems, control rooms 

of government-owned factories, e.g. steel mills and aluminium plants, oil refineries and oil 

tanker ships, civil and military aviation. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 109

All South American Parties have laws that do not permit the import or export of halons, and 

most Parties do not allow the installation of new fire protection systems using halon 1301. 

Halon banks are in operation in most South American countries and they are a national resource 

for the delivery / sale of unused halons, and a source for halons for use in priority protection at 

maritime and aviation areas. 

Halon 1211 is not available in most South American countries, and portable fire extinguishers 

are refilled using an HCFC blend or HFC-236fa. 

It has not been possible to get accurate information on the quantities of halons in use and / or in 

storage in each country, as the information provided when asked for changes by large quantities 

without any apparent reason. 

The HTOC believes that while the South American region currently appears to be in 

supply/demand balance for both halon 1211 and halon 1301, in the future demand may exceed 

supply. Affected Parties may wish to consider investigating their long-term needs. 

10.2.9 Halon Banking in Article 5 Countries 

Between 1998 and 2007, thirty-eight projects within the halon banking category were approved 

to receive MLF support; the scope of these projects was to inventory existing halons (primarily 

halon 1211 and halon 1301), to develop halon management plans, and in many cases to provide 

recycling and recovery equipment/facilities. The 52nd meeting of Montreal Protocol's ExCom 

issued Decision GLO/HAL/52/TAS/281, "Study on challenges associated with halon banking in 

developing countries”. This study began in October 2008 and at the time of writing was not yet 

complete and no report had been made available for the HTOC’s use. However, the study 

contractor has made available relevant information that was collected during the information 

gathering stage of the project that has been used by this study. Some of the preceding country 

reports in this section came from this study. From those who responded to the contractor’s 

questionnaires, it appears that only about 20 percent of the country/regional halon banks that 

have been established consider themselves capable of recycling halons for reuse within the 

country/region. Reasons for this vary but include: no business plan; no halon bank management 

plan; no equipment delivered or equipment not suitable for requirements; contaminated halons; 

trading outside of the bank; lack of infrastructure; not scoped for actual needs; lack of standards, 

training, and workshops on halon alternatives; and a requirement to ban all halon imports. 

This low success rate is reason for concern as it will directly affect the balance of halon 

supply/demand within affected Article 5 countries. Also, a study done in 2004 for UNEP DTIE 

OzonAction found that 80 percent of decommissioned halon in Africa was too contaminated for 

reuse or recycle with equipment normally supplied with projects funded by the MLF. After the 

full MLF study report is available and its conclusions/recommendations considered, Parties may 

wish to consider strategies and propositions that will help non-functioning banks to become 

operational and bank managers to ensure the long-term sustainability of their halon banking 

operations. 

10.3 Halon 2402 

10.3.1 Summary 

Halon 2402 had been produced nearly exclusively in the former USSR, and production was 

continued by the Russian Federation after 1991 until the end of 2000. From 1994, production 

was continued under the essential use exemption procedure, approved by the Parties to the 

Montreal Protocol. Use of halon 2402 by the chemical industry as a process agent substantially 

reduced the total inventory of halon 2402 in Russia. 
110 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

The demand for halon 2402 from outside sources ranges from minor demand in some EU 

Member States to an Indian demand estimated at 7 – 9 MT/year. Supply offers from the U.S. 

and Europe have eased the servicing situation in India, as has conversion to alternatives in some 

military vehicles. However, the needs of some Parties for halon 2402 could not be estimated due 

to the unavailability of market information, but it should be assumed that a demand for halon 

2402 for the servicing of operating equipment exists and that halon from outside sources will be 

required. 

Russia and the Ukraine, traditionally recognised as potential sources of halon 2402 for other 

Parties, still have large installed bases of halon 2402, but their markets can be estimated as 

currently well balanced with no surplus available for export. Analysis shows that the U.S. has 

quantities of halon 2402 (over 30 MT) coming out of service over the next few years for which 

it has limited need, and this could be used to support the current needs of other Parties. Further 

analysis would be necessary to determine the status of potential stocks of halon 2402 in the EU, 

but total stocks are likely to be relatively small. 

National and/or international regulations that hinder or prohibit the transfer of halons between 

Parties have less influence on the problem of regional imbalances of halon 2402 than were 

initially reported. In effect, while there is no apparent shortage of halon 2402 on a global basis, 

there are regional problems (primarily in defence and aviation) where users are having problems 

meeting their demands for recycled halon 2402 today and will continue to do so in the future, 

with the cost of the recycled halon 2402 being a major issue. Unless the expected U.S. oversupply of halon 2402 continues, the global demand will exceed supply with regional imbalances 

certain. 

10.3.2 Introduction 

Halon 2402 is a low pressure fluid with a boiling temperature of 47.5 oC, which makes it 

particularly easy to handle. Containers are stored at low pressure and pressurised with nitrogen 

when installed in applications. 

The properties of halon 2402 allow it to be used in: 

• Fixed systems as a local application agent 

• Portable equipment. 

Examples of the main applications of halon 2402 include: 

• Military uses: combat vehicles, armoured vehicles, naval ships, and aircraft. 

• Other uses: nuclear power stations, oil platforms, compressing and pumping gas 

stations, civil aviation, main computer centres in banking facilities, and telecommunication 

facilities, etc. 

In the former USSR, halon 2402 was commonly used for civilian applications and dominated all 

halon fire protection use in the military. All equipment associated with halon 2402 systems was 

manufactured in the USSR until its dissolution in 1991, and in the Russian Federation and the 

Ukraine since. In other countries of the former Eastern Bloc (e.g., Czech Republic, Estonia, 

Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia etc.) use of halon 2402 was associated with the 

use of Russian military equipment and civilian aircraft. Halon 2402 based fire protection 

equipment was also exported to some Asian countries together with Russian products, mostly 

military vehicles, ships and aircraft. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 111

10.3.3 Parties That Still Use Halon 2402 

Parties that still use halon 2402 as a fire protection agent can be grouped as follows: 

• Russian Federation, Ukraine, Belarus; 

• Former USSR and other countries of the former Eastern Bloc; 

• Caucasus: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia; 

• Central Asia: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tadzhikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan; 

• Non-EU states of East-South Europe: e.g., former Yugoslavia etc; 

• EU member states: Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, 

Slovakia; and 

• South-East and East Asia: India, Vietnam, Japan. 

Some military and aviation equipment employing halon 2402 may still be in use in countries 

that purchased equipment from the USSR, and later from Russia, e.g. Afghanistan, Algeria, 

China, Cuba, Egypt, Libya, Mongolia, Peru, and Syria. Fire extinguishers using halon 2402 

purchased from an Italian company were sold in very small quantities in Venezuela and Brazil. 

10.3.4 Halon 2402 Supply and Demand 

10.3.4.1 Russia 

Emissions, transformation and consumption of halon 2402 by the chemical industry as a process 

agent substantially reduced the total inventory of the halon 2402 in Russia. 

According to data obtained in May 2008, the total amount of halon 2402 installed in Russia is 

estimated to be 947 MT. Main users are the military, Gazprom, civil aviation and merchant 

shipping. By 2015, merchant shipping and commercial uses are expected to cease. However, 

military demand is expected to increase. 

About 10 MT of the halon 2402 were available for purchase in 2007 - 10 times less than in 2006 

- and approximately 80 MT of halon 2402 were recycled during 2007. Current prices are still in 

the same range as in 2006 (US$ 23/kg to US$ 25/kg). The cost increases and reduced 

availability of halon 2402 have resulted in the halon no longer being used as a process agent in 

Russia. The market can be estimated as currently well balanced with no surplus available for 

export. According to current forecasts, this situation will continue through 2015 (see Table 

below): 
112 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 10-3: Russian Bank of Halon 2402 Forecast 

*Data obtained May 2008 

As shown in Table 10-3, about 160 MT of halon 2402 will need to be recycled annually through 

2010. It is also expected that during this period no more than 20 MT of halon 2402 will appear 

on the free market annually for purchase. As a result, the spread between the annual availability 

of free agent and possible losses of the agent will not exceed 4 MT in the period 2008 – 2010. 

Four Russian companies offer recycling and banking services, with at least 20 companies 

operating as collecting agencies. In addition, the military sector and Gazprom have banking 

facilities to support their own needs. Maximum recycling capacity is about 800 MT/year. The 

recycling facilities could be used by any company or country. 

Russian national regulations restrict the export of ozone depleting substances, including halons. 

According to a Decision of the Russian Government (No. 1368, adopted 09.12.1999), export 

requires special permission from the Ministry of Natural Resources and only is allowed for uses 

deemed to be critical. Similarly, an application for special critical use permission from the 

Ministry of Natural Resources is required for the installation of halon 2402 in new fire 

suppression systems in the Russian Federation. 

Russia stopped the use of halon 2402 and its blends in their new generation tanks in the mid1990s. For example, the T-90 is now equipped with halon 1301 systems for both in crew and 

engine compartments. Portable extinguishers for armoured fighting vehicles in the former 

Soviet Union used CO2, halon 2402, or halon 2402 and its blends in the 1980s and early 1990s. 

New equipment now uses CO2 or dry chemical portable extinguishers. A similar situation exists 

with military aircraft, both fighters as well as transport, and helicopters. New generation tanks, 

aircraft and ships no longer require halon 2402. 

10.3.4.2 Ukraine and Belarus 

During the preparation of a draft National Halon Management Strategy for the Ukraine for the 

period 2004-2030 (final version of the document was adopted by the Decision of the Ukrainian 

Government No. 256, 04.03.2004), it was concluded that the installed base of halon 2402 in the 

Ukraine ranges from 552 MT to 602 MT. According to some Ukrainian experts, the current 

Ukrainian bank of halon 2402 is estimated at 300-340 MT (1.5 – 2 times lower than in 2003). 

The main users are the military sector, oil and gas industry, transport system and 

 2007* 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 

Necessity 

in 

recycling, 

MT 

80.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 

Annual 

offer of 

free 

agent, 

MT 

10.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 

Possible 

losses, 

MT 

8.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 

Total 

bank, MT 947.0 931.0 915.0 899.0 894.0 889.0 886.0 883.0 880.0 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 113

telecommunication facilities. In contrast to the situation in Russian, there are no signs that halon 

2402 was used as a processing agent in the Ukraine. Fire suppression equipment contains 

approximately 182 MT of halon 2402. As Ukrainian national regulations require a 100 percent 

reserve of halon to support existing fire suppression units, this means that the total bank of 

halon 2402 in the Ukraine is less than is necessary to support uses that it deems to be critical. A 

market price for halon 2402 cannot be estimated because free agent ready for purchase cannot 

be found. Ukrainian experts believe that this situation is not a problem for the country because it 

is accelerating the substitution of halon 2402 with alternatives. 

At least one local company offers recycling and banking services in the Ukraine. Approximately 

6-7 MT of halon 2402 were recycled during 2007. 

Ukrainian national regulations restrict the export of ozone depleting substances, including 

halons. Export is allowed to support the needs of Article 5 Parties, but special permission from 

the Ukrainian government is required for the export. 

According to a Decision of the Belarussian Government (No. 1741, adopted 13.11.1998), 

export/import operations of ozone depleting substances are banned in Belarus. Main users of 

halon 2402 are the military sector, oil - gas industry and civil aviation. At least one local 

company offers recycling and banking services in Belarus. Information on the Belarussian halon 

bank is not available. 

10.3.4.3 European Union 

As with the other halons, in Member States of the European Union (EU), halon 2402 is a 

controlled substance in Group III of Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2037/2000 on substances 

that deplete the ozone layer (see Section 2.4.1 for more details) and permitted critical uses are 

defined in Annex VII of the regulation. In general there is only a small demand for halon 2402 

in the EU: Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. 

The majority of halon 2402 applications have been switched to other agents and technologies, 

but a small sector of industry and the military continue to use halon 2402. In particular, 2.6 MT 

of halon 2402 is used in Poland by the military sector and by some users in industry. Although 

Poland has enough halon 2402 to support its projected needs, the installed capacity of halon 

2402 in the other mentioned countries is not sufficient to support critical uses via recovery and 

recycling. 

The installed quantities of halon 2402 reported by Member States for the year 2006 total 

approximately 60 MT – these would be critical uses only. This halon 2402 tends to be installed 

in older equipment that is more likely to be decommissioned in the short to medium term. Small 

quantities, 2MT – 5MT per annum, may therefore continue to become available to other critical 

users over this period. 

Although the reported usage is small (less than one MT in 2006), little information is available 

to HTOC on the quantities available to support remaining critical uses. Critical users of halon 

2402, especially in commercial and military aviation, may find it increasingly difficult to obtain 

supplies in the near future unless remaining users in the commercial shipping sector, and those 

responsible for military vehicles and naval vessels, continue with conversion and replacement 

programmes and make the recovered material available to other critical users 
114 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

10.3.4.4 United States 

The amount of reclaimed halon 2402 held by U.S. halon recyclers is about 11 MT. The product 

is ready for purchase and can be used to support the needs of any customer. The supplier is 

responsible for all export paperwork and any duties; the buyer is responsible for import 

paperwork, taxes and duties. In addition, a further 10 MT to 15 MT per year of halon 2402 is 

anticipated to become available for recycling during the next few years. 

10.3.4.5 Japan 

In Japan, halon 2402 is mainly used for floating roof tank protection in the petrochemical 

industry. It was also used for explosion suppression systems, but these may have already been 

replaced and the halon 2402 collected and destroyed (about 30 MT). Total installed halon 2402 

in applications other than merchant shipping, aviation and the military was estimated at 198 MT 

at the end of 2007. With respect to merchant shipping, aviation and the military, as of April 

2008 the installed base was about 4 MT. 

Halon 2402 is currently considered critical for the fire safety of oil tanks in Japan and the timing 

of decommission/replacement of halon 2402 fire protection systems is not clear. Therefore it is 

unlikely that halon 2402 would be exported at this time. 

10.3.4.6 India 

As reported in 2000-2001, the installed quantity of halon 2402 was 200 MT. In India, halon 

2402 and its blends, e.g. halon 2402 and ethyl bromide, are only used in military equipment 

purchased from the former Soviet Union, e.g. ships, submarines, aircraft, and ground based T54, T-60, T-70 and T-80 vehicles produced in the 1990s. According to 2008 estimates, the total 

installed base is now about 70 MT. Losses during decommissioning, servicing and a small 

number of fires account for the reduced inventory. 

According to military estimates, the Army needs a total of 50 MT over the next 15 years to 

support ground vehicles, and the navy and military aviation sectors are looking for totals of 60 

MT and 23 MT respectively for their servicing needs over the next 15 – 20 years. Based on this, 

annual demand to support uses that India considers critical can be estimated as 7 – 9 MT/year. 

Licenses are needed to import halon but there are no other barriers apart from agent cost – 

recycled agent is significantly more expensive than virgin agent, which is no longer produced. 

The National Halon Recycling facility is not currently providing a support role for users, and 

there appears to be no awareness of this bank with the representatives of the military services. 

In 2007, India received 9 MT of halon 2402 from the Russian Ministry of Defense. Current 

requests have received some responses in US and Europe, but it is not known if any transactions 

have taken place. To overcome the problems, the Army is looking at conversion to halon 1301 

in the crew/engine compartments of ground vehicles and at halon 1211 pressurised with CO2 for 

portables; other alternatives (e.g., HFC-236fa) are also being tested. The navy is planning to 

replace a few halon 2402 systems with HFC-227ea. These responses and changes have 

somewhat eased the shortage of halon 2402 in India for servicing. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 115

10.3.4.7 Vietnam 

Vietnam has requested an immediate purchase of 3 MT of halon 2402 with an anticipated 

additional 7 MT later this year. This agent is required for non-military applications, e.g. 

petrochemical sector. 

Vietnam also has a demand for halon 2402 to support critical military applications. Information 

on how much they need is unavailable, but it is known that an attempt to find the product from 

the Russian market was unsuccessful. 

10.3.4.8 Kyrgyzstan 

Most automatic fire suppression systems in Kyrgyzstan use halon 2402, however the installed 

capacity and demand is not known. 

Kyrgyzstan has halon recycling equipment capable of removing oil, acid and moisture but not 

any pressurising nitrogen. The equipment was supplied by UNIDO as part of a country project. 

Additional funding would be needed to create a national halon bank. The import of halon 

including recycled has been banned since June 2008. This could curtail Kyrgyzstan’s ability to 

service equipment that uses halon 2402 that it deems critical. 

10.3.4.9 Other Parties 

Information on the installed capacity and demand for halon 2402 in Armenia, Azerbaijan, 

Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Tadzhikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan is not currently 

available. Similarly, data with regard to halon 2402 demand for Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, 

China, Cuba, Mongolia, Libya and Syria is not available. However, based on other countries’ 

experiences, it should be assumed that a demand for halon 2402 for the servicing of operating 

equipment exists and that halon from outside sources will be required. 

10.4 All Halons – Aviation and Merchant Shipping 

10.4.1 Summary 

At this time, the aviation industry is able to meet its world-wide needs for halon 1301, halon 

1211, and halon 2402. 

Key aviation stakeholders are confident that the supply of halon 1301 should be sufficient for 

the next ten years, but none of them are willing to predict beyond that point. 

Concern was expressed about the supply of halon 1211, sources of which are becoming more 

difficult to find, and the legislative barriers that are impeding the world-wide free flow of halon 

1211. 

Based on the small bank of halon 2402 that exists world-wide, the HTOC believes that 

commercial and military aviation outside of Russia and the Ukraine may find it increasingly 

difficult to obtain supplies of halon 2402 in the near future unless remaining uses in other 

sectors, e.g., commercial shipping, naval vessels, military vehicles, retire from service or 

convert to alternatives and make the recovered material available to the aviation sector. 

The merchant shipping sector is fully prepared for a future without halons, with most fire 

protection retrofit going to CO2. Demand for halon is declining and procedures are in place to 
116 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

move ships with a discharged halon system to a port with halon supplies. Discharge rates are 

low owing to manually activated systems. 

10.4.2 Introduction 

Owing to the specialised and world-wide application of all halons in the aviation and merchant 

shipping sectors, they have been considered on a sectoral rather than regional basis. 

10.4.3 Aviation 

As a result of actions to implement Decision XV/11, an ICAO resolution (A36-12) was adopted 

in September 2007 that sets the following timeframes for the replacement of halons in 

commercial aircraft: 

• 2011 for lavatories for new production aircraft 

• 2011 for lavatories, hand-held extinguishers, engine nacelles and auxiliary power units 

for aircraft for which a new application for type certification has been submitted 

• 2014 for the replacement of halon in hand-held extinguishers for new production 

aircraft 

In March 2008, ICAO issued a letter to all 190 Member States urging them to advise their 

aircraft manufacturers, airlines, chemical suppliers and fire-extinguishing companies to move 

forward at a faster rate in implementing halon alternatives in engine and auxiliary power units, 

handheld extinguishers and lavatories; and in investigating additional halon replacements for 

engine nacelles/auxiliary power units, and cargo compartments. This task is included in the 

ICAO Business Plan for 2008-2010. 

Other than lavatory systems, there has been limited development activity necessary to certify 

aircraft with halon alternative fire protection systems. It is estimated that the certification 

process could take as long as six years to complete. The recommended dates as listed above will 

likely slip. 

In response to Decision XIX/16, the HTOC contacted key stakeholders in the civil aviation 

industry to obtain information on their future requirements and the availability of halons. Unlike 

other user sectors, civil aviation continues to be dependent on halons for new designs and new 

production. For example, there were 1046 aircraft in China in 2006 and this number increased 

by 158 in 2007. Further increases are anticipated annually for the next 5-10 years. Most new 

aircraft are old designs that rely totally on halon, e.g., Boeing 737s and Airbus A320s. 

Key stakeholders in the industry indicate that stocks and supplies of halons are available at 

present and are sufficient to support their commercial needs. There is confidence that the supply 

of halon 1301 should be sufficient for the next ten years, but none of them are willing to predict 

beyond that point. Concern was expressed about the supply of halon 1211. At this time supplies 

are available to meet operational needs but it is becoming more difficult to find sources. The tax 

on imports of recycled halon 1211 into the United States acts as a “de facto ban” on imports, 

limiting the supply of halon 1211 in the United States to the installed base. 

A request was made of stakeholders to provide their estimated halon requirements for the next 

5-25 years, but despite assurances and follow-up communications, no clear data on future needs 

was received. Given the 25-30 year lifespan of commercial aircraft, the industry’s dependence 

on halons is likely to continue beyond the time when recycled halon stocks are available to meet 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 117

demand. This is a disturbing fact that may lead to future requests for essential use halon 

production unless addressed. The HTOC’s 2006 estimates of global halon supply are often cited 

by aviation stakeholders as evidence that sufficient stocks of halons will be available to meet 

their long-term needs, but this logic ignores the fact that much of this supply is already held in 

private or government-owned banks and may never be available for them to purchase. 

In Norway, the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT) has contacted representatives of 

the Norwegian airline companies SAS Braathens, Norwegian, and Widerøe requesting 

information on the matter. So far, SFT has received one preliminary piece of information, 

indicating that, currently, Norwegian airline companies do not seem to be experiencing 

difficulties in obtaining halon for their uses. With regard to projected needs and difficulties, 

however, the matter is still under investigation by these companies. 

Halon 2402 was installed in military and civil aircraft built in the former Soviet Union. In 2005, 

it was estimated that the total number of Russian-built commercial aircraft represented 

approximately 13 percent of the world-wide fleet of commercial aircraft. Further, it was 

estimated that these aircraft contained approximately 160 MT of halon 2402. The HTOC has not 

been able to obtain data on any problems that owners of these aircraft may be having with 

servicing of the halon 2402 systems, or to what extent these aircraft may have been retrofitted 

with other halons or alternative fire suppression systems. Based on the small bank of halon 2402 

that exists world-wide, the HTOC believes that commercial and military aviation outside of 

Russia and the Ukraine may find it increasingly difficult to obtain supplies of halon 2402 in the 

near future unless remaining uses in other sectors, e.g., commercial shipping, naval vessels, 

military vehicles, etc., retire from service or convert to alternatives and make the recovered 

material available to the aviation sector. 

On rare occasions, the South African Bank receives a request for halon 2402 - for refill of 

Russian manufactured aircraft. Fulfilling this request by way of importing has not been feasible, 

resulting in the applicant having to send the extinguishing containers to foreign service-facilities 

for refilling. This has resulted in extended grounding of aircraft - not a desirable situation. An 

improvement in the method of bank-to-bank importation of halon 2402 in small quantities is 

thus indicated. 

The HTOC is concerned that the apparent, current aviation strategy puts the industry in the 

precarious position of not being able to predict its world-wide future halon needs and/or 

mitigate potential shortfalls in regional supplies. Parties may wish to consider requiring their 

aviation industry stakeholders to work together to develop a plan that ensures that their own 

stockpiles of halons are adequate to meet the needs of aircraft dependent on halons for the rest 

of their service life. Parties may also wish to consider removing any legislative barriers that 

prevent the stakeholders from achieving that goal. This may require that airlines, aircraft 

manufacturers, and aircraft service companies report and review their available stocks and 

predicted future needs on an annual basis. 

10.4.4 Merchant Shipping 

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has led numerous initiatives within the 

maritime sector to address global environmental challenges regarding ozone depletion, 

including efforts to reduce halon emissions from ships. In this regard, through its Subcommittee 

on Fire Protection, IMO is currently working towards enhancing the standards for the approval 

of equivalent fixed gas fire extinguishing systems, which can be used to approve replacements 

for existing halon systems, so that the maritime sector is well prepared for a future when halons 

for such systems may no longer be available. In addition to the above effort, IMO’s Marine 

Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) has instructed the Subcommittee on Bulk Liquids 

and Gases (its Working Group on Air Pollution, in particular) to develop proposals for the 
118 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

introduction of a record-keeping requirement for the on-board handling of ozone depleting 

substances other than cargoes. 

Annex VI (Regulation for prevention of air pollution from ships) to the 1973/78 MARPOL 

Convention, which references the Montreal Protocol, is presently undergoing a general revision. 

The expected completion date was October 2008, but at this time there is no information on the 

outcome of the review. 

The MEPC, at its fifty-seventh session in April 2008, and the MSC, at its eighty-fourth session 

in May 2008, approved MSC-MEPC.1/Circ.3, which addresses the decreasing availability of 

halons for marine use and, in particular, requests: 

• Ship-owners, ship operators, shipping companies and all other parties concerned, to 

take appropriate action to reduce their reliance on halons; and 

• Member governments to collect data on halons from the maritime sector, in particular to 

collect information on the number of ships equipped with halon systems (e.g. the total amount 

of halons installed for their merchant fleets), and to convey this information directly to the 

Ozone Secretariat. 

This sector is fully prepared for the future with most fire protection retrofit going to CO2. 

Demand for halon is declining and procedures are in place to move ships with a discharged 

halon system to a port with halon supplies. Discharge rates are low owing to manually activated 

systems. 

10.5 Predicting and Mitigating Imbalances 

The previous sections provide an overview of the availability of halons 1211, 1301, and 2402 in 

the countries and sectors that principally rely on them for fire protection purposes. They also 

highlight the disproportionate distribution of the remaining quantities of these halons, areas 

where supply costs are impacting demand, and where future supplies may not be available at 

any cost. 

The disproportionate distribution of halons does not necessarily equate to an imbalance in 

supply/demand, although in the case of halon 1211 this is what is happening. China has a low 

demand for halon 1211 but has stocks far in excess of its needs. National regulations in China 

and other countries are limiting the flow of this excess to uses in other places. Halon 1211 

demand for those uses is steady, but supply is declining. The aviation industry is a good 

example of a world-wide sector that has a long term need for halon 1211 for handheld 

extinguishers but which is beginning to experience shortages in some countries. Although 

alternatives are available, the practicalities of using them on the existing fleet of aircraft are 

very challenging and expensive. Parties may wish to explore ways to increase the flow of halon 

1211 from China to other countries to mitigate this imbalance, although without some action by 

the Parties, a large stock of newly produced but unused halon 1211 would not be able to be 

exported in bulk, only in equipment such as portable extinguishers. 

The situation with halon 1301 is less clear. With the exception of China, no country or sector 

reported problems with the availability of halon 1301 now, or anticipated them in the future. 

This is likely due to the market penetration of alternatives in areas traditionally served by halon 

1301, making the removed halon readily available for recycling. With the exception of Japan 

and military and aviation sectors, the installation of new fire protection systems based on halon 

1301 is not occurring in any significant quantity. Japan has a single organisation that maintains 

strict reporting requirements for stocks and emissions of halon 1301, and which controls system 

recharge for existing and new installations. Given Japan’s preference for manually activated 

halon systems, it is not surprising that Japan has low emissions, an increasing percentage share 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 119

of world-wide halon 1301, and an accurate prediction of its future needs. The type of predictive 

model used by Japan may not be suitable for all Parties and sectors However, other sectors or 

Parties with high demand, e.g., the United States, may wish to consider getting a better 

understanding of existing emissions to enable them to better predict future availability. 

User/supplier sponsored voluntary reporting of system recharges may help accomplish this. 

Halon 2402 has had small market penetration outside of the former Soviet Union and countries 

that purchased military equipment from the Soviet Union. As such, the availability of 

information outside of the major consuming countries, Russia and the Ukraine, is scarce, and 

both of these report a balance of availability and demand for now and the foreseeable future. 

Based on the small bank of halon 2402 that exists world-wide, countries or sectors with an 

ongoing need for halon 2402 may wish to consider assessing their requirements and taking 

advantage of the existing and predicted short-term availability of unneeded agent in the United 

States and the European Union before these excesses are considered for destruction. 

Without significantly more regional and sectoral information, e.g., detailed surveys from 

Parties, there does not appear to be any way to formulate a predictive model to project future or 

pending regional supply/demand imbalances. Where the costs of recycled halons can be tracked, 

these may be indicative of local imbalances in supply/demand but costs are not the only 

influencing factor. 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 121

11 Decision XIX/8: Alternatives to HCFCs at High Ambient 

Temperatures 

11.1 General 

11.1.1 Introduction 

At MOP-19 in Montreal, the Parties took Decision XIX/8 related to HCFC alternatives and 

specific climatic conditions, which reads as follows: 

1. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to conduct a scoping study 

addressing the prospects for the promotion and acceptance of alternatives to HCFCs in the 

refrigeration and air-conditioning sectors in Article 5 Parties, with specific reference to specific 

climatic conditions and unique operating conditions, such as those as in mines that are not open 

pit mines, in some Article 5 Parties; 

2. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to provide a summary of the 

outcome of the study referred to in the preceding paragraph in its 2008 progress report with a 

view to identifying areas requiring more detailed study of the alternatives available and their 

applicability. 

In preparing the response to this Decision, the RTOC Co-Chairs under the auspices of the TEAP 

assembled a Subcommittee with seven RTOC members from India, The Netherlands and the 

USA in the beginning of 2008. If needed, the Subcommittee decided to draw on other 

individuals with specific expertise from Article 5 and non-Article 5 countries as needed, 

specifically those engaged in air conditioning design in warm climates and deep mine air 

conditioning. A summary of the scoping study as requested in XIX/8 could not be presented in 

the 2008 TEAP Progress Report, since the start of the work was delayed until the first quarter of 

2008, owing to a number of logistic and technical difficulties. Difficulties of logistic type also 

prohibited timely publication before the MOP-20 meeting of the Parties. 

In order to prepare the final study for the 2009 TEAP Progress Report, the subcommittee was 

slightly expanded. It consisted of the RTOC members Radhey Agarwal, Jim Calm, Jim 

Crawford, Denis Clodic, Sukumar Devotta and Fred Keller, with Ken Hickman, Martien 

Janssen, Michael Kauffeld, Lambert Kuijpers and Roberto Peixoto as reviewing members. 

The CLAs responsible were Jim Crawford and Fred Keller (unitary air conditioning), Denis 

Clodic (commercial refrigeration) and Jim Calm (air conditioning for mines). Drafts were 

circulated for review, and they were also reviewed by the RTOC meeting at its meeting in 

Montreal, 26-27 March 2009. A final draft was then composed and reviewed by the 

subcommittee, and submitted to the TEAP for final review for inclusion in the 2009 progress 

report. After the TEAP review, 26-30 April 2009, the subcommittee finalised the draft for the 

2009 progress report on the basis of TEAP comments received. 

The study focuses on three topics, which are being elaborated upon below. 

11.1.2 HCFC-22 

HCFC-22 is the most widely used refrigerant in refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment. It 

is being phased out globally, and since recently, under an accelerated phase-out schedule in 

Article 5 Parties, pursuant to Decision XIX/6. Because of this accelerated schedule for Article 5 

Parties, the performance of alternatives and replacements to HCFC-22 under extreme weather 
122 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

conditions has become an important issue for commercial refrigeration and unitary air 

conditioning equipment. 

The critical temperature of a refrigerant is an important parameter in the effectiveness of 

equipment. In the conventional vapour compression cycle the condensing temperature is kept 

well below the critical temperature, because thermodynamic principles result in declining 

capacity and efficiency as heat-rejection (refrigerant condensing) temperatures increase and 

approach the critical temperature. One of the important parameters in the study is therefore 

related to the critical temperature of HCFC-22 refrigerant alternatives, next to a large number of 

other criteria. 

The study focuses on three different issues, which are elaborated upon below. 

11.1.3 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Air Conditioning 

The driving concern here is the impact of refrigerant replacements for air conditioners operating 

at high ambient conditions, such as those operating in equatorial regions, the Middle East, and 

northern Africa. Most small, packaged equipment, in common usage world-wide, employs 

HCFC-22 as a refrigerant. The primary global replacement, especially for the dominant aircooled designs, is R-410A, a blend of hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants. One component 

of this blend, HFC-125, has a comparatively low critical point temperature (66o

C), resulting in 

rapidly declining capacity and efficiency as condensing temperatures approach the critical 

temperature of the blend. Another blend of HFC refrigerants, R-407C, is also used in air 

conditioning equipment; however, one component of this blend is again HFC-125, with 

thermodynamic consequences as described above. The RTOC 2006 Assessment Report 

mentions that, for unitary air conditioning, HFC-134a, HC-290 (propane) and carbon dioxide 

(R-744) may be the only pure fluid replacement options for HCFC-22. 

This study examines the suitability of R-410A, as well as the suitability of a large number of 

other candidate HCFC-22 alternatives for very hot climates such as encountered in the identified 

regions. It pays attention to: 

 Global Warming Potential, 

 capacity at elevated ambient temperatures, 

 input power and related impacts on electricity supplies, 

 efficiency and its implications, 

 availability of the alternatives and suitable equipment. 

11.1.4 Refrigerants for High-ambient Temperature Refrigeration 

The focal concern is the impact of refrigerant replacements for commercial use for food 

preparation, storage, and marketing operating at high ambient conditions, such as those 

operating in equatorial regions, the Middle East, and northern Africa. The fundamental 

concerns are similar to those for unitary air conditioners but for both R-22 and R-502, the latter 

a blend containing HCFC-22 and a chlorofluorocarbon (CFC-115). This blend has already been 

phased out in non-Article 5 Parties, and will soon be phased out in Article 5 Parties. The 

primary global replacement for commercial refrigeration is R-404A, a blend of HFC 

refrigerants. Two components of this blend are HFC-125 and HFC-143a, both having relatively 

low critical temperatures; the result is that compression systems show a rapidly declining 

capacity and efficiency as condensing temperatures approach the critical temperature of the 

blend. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 123

The application conditions for the refrigeration sector differ in several significant ways, among 

them the temperature at which heat is removed – generally categorised as low temperature (for 

frozen foods), medium temperature (for fish, meats, and prepared foods), and high temperature 

(for dairy products and typical beverages) – are colder than for comfort air-conditioning. The 

equipment used is factory designed and assembled, but systems require a much higher degree of 

application engineering and often are based on more diverse component selections with more 

significant piping considerations and burdens. In addition, internal refrigerant volumes and 

charge amounts generally are much higher, based on application and especially store layouts, 

and more prone to system and catastrophic failure leakage. This study examines the suitability 

of R-404A, as well as the suitability of a number of other, possible candidate HCFC-22 

alternatives for very hot climates such as encountered in the identified regions. While the 

application conditions and system options differ, the key examination issues (five preceding 

bulleted items) are the same for refrigeration as for high-ambient temperature air conditioning 

(see section 1.2). 

11.1.5 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, 

high-ambient temperature locations actually have an advantage in this regard, since they 

typically are dryer and have greater wet-bulb depression. Conversely, they often are in regions 

with more-limited water supplies, evaporated to reject heat (by exploiting the latent heat of 

vaporisation of water). In contrast, the heat absorption temperatures often are lower for chillers 

for deep mines, to minimise pumping burdens since equipment generally is installed at the 

surface. Extra cold water, ice slurries, and less commonly brines or other heat transfer fluids are 

used for heat transport to depths currently as low as 3.8 km (2.4 miles) with expected extension 

to depths approach 5 km (3.1 miles) in coming years. The virgin rock temperatures will 

increase from the current 55°C to 59°C, demanding continuous cooling on year-around basis to 

enable miners to survive. The required equipment sizes are quite large, resulting in significant 

energy requirements and heightened concerned with energy-related greenhouse gas emissions. 

Most mine chillers in the last decade have used HFC-134a, or ammonia (R-717); neither is 

considered an ozone-depleting substance. However, some older and some small mines use 

HCFC-22 and some newer installations use HCFC-123 to attain high efficiencies. Some recent 

systems use water (R-718) as a refrigerant in a vacuum, vapour-compression flash cycle to 

produce ice slurries directly. Some proposed systems would use air (R-729) in air-standard 

Brayton cycles. Older equipment tends to be retired more quickly, than with systems for 

comfort conditioning, based on sustained versus intermittent operation. 

While the technologies are in place to deal with the ODS issue for deep mines, refrigerant 

questions remain with respect to future acceptability of options. For deep mines the study has 

not yet been finalised and a next visit is planned to South Africa in May 2009. It is envisaged to 

meet with leading mining companies, the engineering firms supporting them, researchers, and 

possibly government contacts to verify the problems and confirm needs; thereafter the RTOC 

subcommittee should again list the options with a final evaluation. 

11.1.6 Properties of Refrigerants Dealt with in this Report 

The properties of the refrigerants dealt with in this report are given below in Table 11-1. They 

will be referred to in the different chapters. 
124 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

It concerns 

- CFC-12 and R-502 (both refrigerants have been phased out where it concerns consumption 

and production by 1/1/2010 in the developing countries) 

- HCFC-22 (accelerated phase-out is taking place in the developing countries) 

- HFC-134a, HFC-32, R-404A, R-407C, R-410A and R-422B (HFCs) 

- HFC-1234yf (unsaturated HFC with low GWP) 

- HC-290, HC-600a and HC-1270 (hydrocarbons) 

- R-717 (ammonia) 

- R-744 (carbon dioxide) 

Table 11-1: Properties of the different refrigerants dealt with in this report 

 CFC-12 R-502

(1)

HCFC-22 HFC-134a HFC-32

ODP 1 0.25 0.055 0 0

GWP 10900 4700 1780 1430 720

Mol mass (g/mol) 120.9 111.6 86.5 102 52.0

Normal boiling point -29.8 -45.2 -40.8 -26.1 -51.7

Critical pressure 

(MPa) 

4.13 4.02 4.99 4.06 5.79

Critical temperature 112 80.2 96.1 101.1 78.1

 R-404A 

(2) 

R-407C 

(3)

R-410A R-422B HFC1234yf

ODP 0 0 0 0 0

GWP 3900 1800 2100 2500 4

Mol mass (g/mol) 97.6 86.2 72.6 108.5 114

Normal boiling point -46.2 -43.6 -51.4 -41.3 -29

Critical pressure 

(MPa) 

3.73 4.63 4.90 3.96 3.27

Critical temperature 72.0 86.0 71.4 -41.3 95.0

 HC-290 HC-600a HC-1270 R-717 R-744 

(CO2)

ODP 0 0 0 0 0

GWP 20 20 20 0 1

Mol mass (g/mol) 44.1 58.1 42.1 17.0 44.01

Normal boiling point -42 -11.7 -47.7 -33.3 -78.4

Critical pressure 

(MPa) 

4.25 3.64 4.55 11.33 7.38

Critical temperature 96.8 134.7 92.4 132.3 30.98

(1) R-22/115 (49.8/51.2%) (2) R-125/143a/134a (44/52/4%) (3) R-32/125/134a 

(23/25/52%) 

Note: HFC-1234yf is a new refrigerant developed for replacing HFC-134a in mobile air 

conditioning but it might also be used in future as a replacement for HFC-134a in other 

applications. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 125

11.2 Refrigerants for High Ambient Temperature Air Conditioning 

Air conditioning around the world is generally done using either unitary (air-to-air) equipment 

or liquid chillers. Air-to-air systems are the primary focus of this analysis and consist of many 

sub-categories. On a global basis, air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps range in sizes 

from 2.0 kW to 420 kW. For higher capacities, water-cooled chillers tend to be the dominant 

technology. Nearly all air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps manufactured prior to 2000 

used HCFC-22 as the working fluid. 

Air-cooled air conditioners and heat pumps generally fall into four distinct categories, based 

primarily on capacity or application: small self-contained air conditioners (window-mounted 

and through-the-wall air conditioners); non-ducted or duct-free split residential and commercial 

air conditioners; ducted, split residential air conditioners; and ducted commercial split and 

packaged air conditioners. 

The objective of this study is to assess the impact of high ambient conditions (above 40 °C) on 

the performance of the current HCFC-22 replacements for air conditioners. The governing 

thermodynamic principles result in a declining capacity and efficiency for all refrigerants as the 

heat-rejection (refrigerant condensing) temperature increases, even for HCFC-22. However, 

some of the HCFC-22 replacements exhibit greater degradation in capacity and efficiency than 

HCFC-22 under high ambient conditions. The vast majority of the installed base of unitary 

equipment in usage world-wide employs HCFC-22, although some older equipment and niche 

applications utilise other refrigerants /Cal04, UNEP06/. 

Currently, the most widely applied replacements for HCFC-22 in unitary air conditioning 

applications are HFC blends, primarily R-410A and R-407C. However, hydrocarbons are also 

being used in some low refrigerant-charge applications. 

R-410A and R-407C both have lower critical temperatures1

 than R-22. This occurs because 

HFC-125 --a component of both R-407C and R-410A-- has a comparatively low critical point 

temperature of 66.0°C (150 °F). The critical point temperature is important because refrigerants 

having a low critical point temperature will exhibit a steeper decline in capacity with increased 

ambient (outdoor) temperatures than refrigerants having higher critical point temperatures. This 

steeper decline in capacity is of particular importance in geographic regions, which have 

cooling design temperatures approaching the critical point temperature of the refrigerant. 

Table 11-2 shows typical air conditioning design condition data from the ASHRAE Handbook 

of Fundamentals for several cities. These data show that there are many regions globally where 

outdoor design conditions are high enough to result in condenser temperatures near or above the 

critical temperature of HFC-125. 

For example, it can be observed that a high temperature of 50.4o

C is expected once every 5 

years at Kuwait International Airport (Table 11-2). It is difficult to forecast how these 

temperatures will change over the next decades with a increasing radiative forcing of the 

atmosphere (climate change). 

 

1 Critical temperature is the temperature above which a refrigerant cannot be condensed regardless of 

pressure. Being above critical temperature prohibits condensation on the heat rejection side of the 

conventional vapour-compression cycle.
126 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 11-2: n-Year Return Period for Extreme Design Dry Bulb Temperatures 

Source: ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals CD, Chapter 28, 2005 

11.2.1 Methodology 

This analysis has used two methodologies to assess the high ambient performance of HCFC-22 

replacements: 

1. the use of cycle analysis to assess the high ambient performance of the most commonly 

considered HCFC-22 replacements, and 

2. the use of published performance data of commercially available air-conditioners which 

use HFC blends. 

11.2.2 Refrigerant Options 

To limit the scope of the study, the refrigerants compared herein are those already 

commercialised as well as those prominently addressed in prior published studies /Cal04, 

Dom02, Mot00, Pay02/, namely: 

HCFC-22, HFC-32, HFC-134a, HC-290 (propane), R-407C, R-410A, HC-600a (isobutane), 

HC-1270 (propylene), R-32/600 (95.0/5.0), R-32/600a (90.0/10.0) and CO2. 

The analysis of CO2 was based on a simple transcritical cycle analysis, which results in lower 

efficiencies than would be expected with a fully optimised CO2 system since a fully optimised 

CO2 system would likely utilise additional components (a suction line heat exchanger, expander 

or ejector) to partially offset the efficiency losses associated with the transcritical operation. 

Some parameters of selected refrigerants were given in Table 11-1. 

11.2.3 Cycle Analysis (Computation Model) 

The various refrigerants under consideration were evaluated in a modified ideal cycle analysis 

using the NIST program Cycle_D /Dom03/. The Cycle_D input conditions selected for the 

analysis were consistent with those used in prior studies /Cal04/. The conditions and 

assumptions used are given below. 

The various refrigerants under consideration were evaluated in a modified ideal cycle analysis 

using the NIST program Cycle_D /Dom03/. The Cycle_D input conditions selected for the 

analysis were consistent with those used in prior studies /Cal04/. The conditions and 

assumptions used for unitary air-conditioners are given below. 

Location 10 Years 20 Years 50 Years 

Phoenix, Arizona 47.5 48.2 49.2 

Sacramento, California 43.5 44.5 45.7 

Imperial, California 49.9 51.0 52.5 

Salt Lake City, Utah 40.0 40.7 41.7 

Las Vegas, Nevada 46.0 46.6 47.5 

Bahrain Intl Airport 45.6 46.4 47.5 

Kuwait Intl Airport 51.0 51.6 52.3 

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 47.7 48.9 50.4 

Riyadh [ASUD AFB], Saudi Arabia 46.6 47.1 47.6 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 127

CYCLE_D requires the system capacity as one of its inputs. Thus, the capacity does not 

decrease as the condensing temperature. Instead, the Cycle_D model calculates the compressor 

volumetric displacement (or flow) required to deliver the specified cooling capacity. However, 

the inverse of the calculated volumetric capacity provides a good estimate of the expected 

cooling capacity decrease with increasing ambient temperatures. For each refrigerant, the 

outdoor ambient was allowed to increase to the point where CYCLE_D provided a warning that 

the conditions were within 15 K of the critical temperature, because the model accuracy above 

this temperature is in doubt. 

11.2.4 Cycle Analysis Results 

For the equipment, the capacity and efficiency decrease rather significantly as the outdoor 

temperature increases. The principal focus in the model run outputs was on system efficiency. 

The Coefficient of Performance (COP) results are presented in Table 11-3. The corresponding 

data plots are shown in Figure 11-1. 

Table 11-3: COP as a function of the condensing temperature (C) 

Refrigerant Condensing temperature (C) Refrigerant 

35 40 50 60 65 

HCFC-22 6.28 5.08 3.57 2.64 2.29 HCFC-22 

HFC-32 6.03 4.85 3.35 2.43 2.09 HFC-32 

HFC-134a 6.41 5.18 3.62 2.66 2.30 HFC-134a 

HC-290 6.31 5.09 3.54 2.58 2.23 HC-290 

R-407C 6.23 5.01 3.47 2.51 2.15 R-407C 

R-410A 6.01 4.800 3.27 2.32 1.95 R-410A 

HC-600a 6.54 5.30 3.74 2.78 2.42 HC-600a 

R-32/600 

(95.0/5.0%) 6.05 4.86 3.36 2.44 2.09

R-32/600 

(95.0/5.0%) 

R-32/600a 

(90.0/10.0%) 6.01 4.82 3.32 2.38 2.03

R-32/600a 

(90.0/10.0%) 

Parameter

Average Evaporating Temperatures 

 Input Temperature 10 C (50 F) 

 Superheat 5 C (9 F) 

Average Condensing Temperatures 

 Input Temperature 40 – 80 C (104 – 176 F) 

 Subcooling 5 C (9 F) 

Compressor Efficiencies 

 Isentropic 73% 

 Volumetric 100% 

 Motor 92% 

Piping Losses 

 Suction None 

 Discharge None 

 Suction or Discharge Line Heat Exchanger None 

Fan and Control Power 

 Indoor Fan None 

 Outdoor Fan None 

 Controls None
128 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 11-1 clearly illustrates the decrease in efficiency as the ambient temperature increases. 

The efficiency decreases by about one-half from the moderate condition of 25o

C ambient to a 

temperature in the range of about 50o

C ambient that was shown to be representative of the 

extreme temperatures in the hottest climates. This is a direct result of the fact that the "thermal 

head" against which the air conditioner is working nearly doubles between the moderate and 

extreme conditions. 

The theoretical analysis also shows that some refrigerant options will experience a greater 

decline in COP than others and may be more suitable for use in high ambient applications if the 

systems are properly designed to utilise these alternate refrigerants. 

 Even where COPs are similar, these refrigerants are not necessarily interchangeable. Each of 

these refrigerants has unique characteristics that may make it more suitable for different 

applications. For example, HC-290 is highly flammable and may not be suitable for high 

charge applications but this refrigerant could potentially be used in low charge applications 

where the flammability of the refrigerant can be safely addressed. In addition, for some of the 

refrigerants the efficiency and capacity degrade less at high ambient temperatures than others 

(for example R-407C versus R-410A). Therefore, R-407C could be an alternative to R-410A in 

geographic regions where extensive operation at extreme ambient temperatures is likely to 

occur. In addition some of the lower pressure refrigerants such as R-134a and HC-600a are 

generally more suitable for large systems such as centrifugal chillers than for unitary equipment. 

Fig. 11-1 COP/COP(R-22) versus

Condensing Temperature

0.8000

0.9000

1.0000

1.1000

1.2000

35 40 45 50 55 60 65

Condensing Temperature -- Deg. C

COP/COP(R-22)

R-22

R-32

R134a

R-290

R-407C

R410A

R-600a

R-32/600 (95.0/5.0)

R-32/600 (90.0/10.0)
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 129

11.2.5 Published Performance Data 

Published performance data for HCFC-22 and R-410A showing high ambient performance is 

available for many commercially available products. The following Table 11-4 compares the 

performance of two 3 ton air conditioners one using HCFC-22 and the other using R-410A. 

Table 11-4: Performance comparison of HCFC-22 and R-410A Air Conditioners 

Outdoor Ambient °C Refrigerant 35 46 52 

Capacity (kW) 9.9 8.9 8.45 HCFC-22 COP 3.13 2.37 2.02 

Capacity (kW) 9.9 8.8 8.1 R-410A COP 3.19 2.30 1.91 

 Source: Carrier Product Data, Catalog 24ABS3-4PD and 24ABBB3-4PD 

The following figures show similar data for 3-ton air conditioners from another manufacturer. 

Figures 11-2 and 11-3 illustrate the effects of ambient temperature on the capacity of typical 

equipment. The case used here is the actual product data for a physical system, nominally rated 

at 3 tons capacity under the standard ARI rating conditions. 

Figure 11-2: Load (Q), power consumption (P) and energy efficiency (EER) as a function of 

the ambient for a typical HCFC-22 unit 

R-22 air conditioner

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

32.5 37.5 42.5

Tem perature, C

Q -Total P-Total EER

For this example, the chosen indoor conditions were 24o

C dry bulb temperature and 15oC wet 

bulb, for a relative humidity of about 49%. 

Figure 11-2 shows that while the ambient condition increases from 29.4o

C to 46.1oC, the 

capacity for the R-22 unit decreases by about 16%, and the efficiency decreases by 35%. 

Figure 11-3 shows that while the ambient condition increases from 29.4o

C to 46.1oC, the 

capacity for the R-410A unit decreases by about 18% and the efficiency decreases by 39%. 
130 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 11-3: Load (Q), power consumption (P) and energy efficiency (EER) as a 

function of the ambient for a typical R-410A unit 

R-410A air conditioner

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

32.5 37.5 42.5

Temperature, C

Q-Total P-Total EER

Data presented by Bullock /Bul99/ and Ward /Wel99/ show similar reductions in performance at 

high ambient temperatures. Bullock also reported that system design factors (coil face velocity 

and internal volume) can improve the performance of R-410A systems at high ambient 

temperatures. Therefore, variations in the high ambient performance can be expected between 

different product designs. 

11.2.6 Overview 

The current refrigerants of choice for unitary air conditioning are HCFC-22, R-407C and R410A. R-410A is the most widely used replacement for HCFC-22 in developed countries, but 

R-407C is also used as a replacement in some applications. The following are the most likely 

replacements for HCFC-22 for use in high ambient temperature climates. 

11.2.6.1 R-410A 

R-410A systems have been demonstrated to operate acceptably at ambient temperatures up to 

50 °C. The performance (capacity and efficiency) of R-410A air-conditioners falls off more 

rapidly than HCFC-22 systems at high ambient temperatures (above 40 °C) as shown in Table 

11-3, and Figures 11-2 and 11-3. However, the optimum selection of compressor, airflow, 

condenser design and expansion device can reduce the performance losses at high ambient 

temperatures /Bat04/. 

Even with optimised designs, when applying R-410A systems that will operate a significant 

number of hours at high ambient temperatures, the system designer should take into 

consideration the reduced high ambient capacity when sizing the equipment. 

11.2.6.2 HC-290 

HC-290 has performance characteristics similar to HCFC-22. The characteristics are close 

enough that the current products that employ R-22 could be re-engineered to employ HC-290. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 131

HC-290 has successfully been commercialised as an HCFC-22 replacement in low charge, room 

and portable air-conditioners applications of less than 4 kW /Dev09a/. 

IEC standard 60335-2-40 has established the criteria for determining the maximum charge limit 

for highly flammable refrigerant applications. Application of IEC 60335-2-40 would limit 

refrigerant charges to less than 250g in most designs. 

The reason for limiting the refrigerant charge is concern about the safety of larger charges of 

hydrocarbons. In direct expansion (DX) systems, a single refrigerant line or heat exchanger 

failure could discharge the refrigerant into the conditioned space; potentially allowing the 

refrigerant concentration in the space to exceed the lower flammability limit, LFL of the 

refrigerant. Since the energy of combustion of these hydrocarbons is close to 50 MJ/kg, a 

significant leak could result in a substantial safety risk. 

Safely and cost effectively applying hydrocarbons to larger unitary systems will be a significant 

technical challenge and could require the use of an intermediate refrigerant loop in addition to 

other safety considerations. This would result in a decrease in overall system efficiency on the 

order of 10-20%. Furthermore, flammability risks still remain to be addressed in the factory and 

for the installer and service technicians. 

11.2.6.3 R-407C 

R-407C systems will typically perform in nearly the same way as HCFC-22 systems at typical 

ambient temperatures. Since R-407C refrigerant requires only modest modifications to existing 

HCFC-22 systems, it has also been used as a transitional refrigerant in equipment originally 

designed for HCFC-22. 

At ambient temperatures above 40°C, R-407C systems show less degradation of capacity and 

efficiency than R-410A systems --typically having capacities and efficiencies somewhat less 

than similar HCFC-22 systems but above those of R-410A systems. 

There are currently R-407C air conditioning products widely available in Europe, Japan and 

other parts of Asia. 

11.2.6.4 HFC-134a and HC-600a 

HFC-134a and HC-600a would seem attractive from the point of view that they have similar 

performance to HCFC-22 at high ambient temperatures. However, both of these refrigerants are 

low-pressure refrigerants. Therefore, extensive redesign of the base system components would 

be required in order to achieve the same capacity and efficiency of the HCFC-22 system. 

Design changes would include larger displacement compressors, increased heat exchanger areas 

and increases in the piping sizes used in heat exchangers and inter-connecting tubing. All of 

these changes would lead to substantial increases in the product costprice. 

Also, HFC-134a does not have a GWP much lower than HCFC-22 or the HFC blends R-410A 

and R-407C. In addition, additional design changes would be required with HC-600a to address 

the high flammability of this refrigerant. Therefore, HFC-134a and HC-600a are not 

considered the most viable options to replace HCFC-22 in unitary air-conditioning applications. 

11.2.6.5 CO2

Carbon dioxide (R-744) offers a number of desirable properties as a refrigerant: readily 

available, low-toxicity, low GWP and low cost. These desirable characteristics are offset by the 

fact that CO2 has a very low critical temperature (31°C) and will operate above critical point 
132 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

conditions in most air-conditioning applications. Operation at these conditions results in a 

significant degradation in both capacity and COP. 

These losses can be partially offset by the addition of internal cycle heat exchangers and 

expanders or ejectors. However, CO2 systems are not expected to provide a good alternative to 

HCFC-22 or HFC refrigerants when being applied in high temperature regions (> 40°C). 

11.2.6.6 HFC Replacements 

Alternatives to HFC refrigerants for air-conditioning applications are in the early stages of 

development. A number of new refrigerants are being investigated to replace R-407C and R410A, including HFC-1234yf. Additional candidate refrigerants, which are mixtures of known 

refrigerants have also been proposed or are under study by refrigerant suppliers. 

While refrigerant manufacturers are believed to be working to qualify other chemicals or blends 

that might be new, their development has not progressed to the point where they are available to 

unitary equipment manufacturers for evaluation and equipment development. 

Therefore, it is premature to recommend alternatives to R-410A or R-407C at this early stage of 

the development other than HC-290, which may be applicable in very low charge (< 250 g) 

applications when appropriate safety and application requirements are considered. 

11.2.7 Concluding Remarks 

These studies have highlighted the primary refrigerant options that could be utilised to design 

both low-ODP and low-GWP replacements for HCFC-22 in air-conditioning applications for 

use in high ambient environments. In the near term, regions with hot climates should be able to 

rely on the refrigerants and technologies that are currently commercially available to replace 

HCFC-22 (R-407C, R-410A and HC-290). 

However, when replacing HCFC-22 products with those using R-410A or R-407C the 

application engineer will need to take into consideration the reduced capacity at the design 

ambient temperature when sizing the equipment for the design cooling load. The application 

engineer should consult the application data published by the manufacturer when making sizing 

decisions. In most cases R-410A or R-407C will only need to be sized 5-15% larger than 

HCFC-22 equipment to compensate for the lower capacity at ambient temperatures up to 50 °C. 

When replacing HCFC-22 in low charge applications (small window and portable room air 

conditioners), the system designer may want to consider the use of HC-290. When replacing 

HCFC-22 with HC-290 it may be needed to limit the usage of HC-290 to low charge 

applications (<250 g) and make the appropriate design changes to comply with all applicable 

codes and standards. It is stressed that HC-290 should not be used as a retrofit solution, since 

appropriate safety considerations need to be addressed in the fundamental design of the product. 

HFC-134a and HC-600a would seem attractive from the point of view that they have similar 

performance to HCFC-22 at high ambient temperatures. However, both of these refrigerants are 

low-pressure refrigerants. The use of these low pressure refrigerants would require extensive 

redesign of the base system components in order to achieve the same capacity and efficiency of 

the HCFC-22 system. Therefore, R-134a and HC-600a are not considered cost effective options 

to replace HCFC-22 in unitary air-conditioning applications. 

A number of low GWP alternatives to HFC refrigerants are currently under development. 

However, because these refrigerants are in the early stages of development it is premature to list 

them as options to the current HCFC alternatives. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 133

In the longer term, as non-ODP and low-GWP technologies are developed to replace current 

HCFC-22, R-407C and R-410A products, equipment designed to operate with acceptable 

efficiency and capacities at the extreme environment conditions should become widely available 

in both developed and developing countries. 

11.2.8 References 

/ASH05/ ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals, 2005 Edition, Chapter 28, CD with Data 

tables, 2005 

/Bat04/ D. J. Bateman, Performance of DuPontTM Suva® 410A, Compared to R-22, at 

High Ambient Temperatures, bulletin K-05738, DuPont Chemicals, 

Wilmington, DE, USA, 2004.10 

/Bul99/ ASHRAE, Seattle, WA, June 1999 

/Cal04/ J. M. Calm and P. A. Domanski, “R-22 Replacement Status,” ASHRAE Journal, 

46(8):29-39, August 2004; erratum, 46(10):8, October 2004 

/Dev01/ S. Devotta et al, “Alternatives to HCFC-22 for Air Conditioners,” Applied 

Thermal Engineering, 21:703-715, 2001

/Dev05/ S. Devotta, A. S. Padalkar, and N. K. Sane, “Performance Assessment of HC290 as a Drop-In Substitute to HCFC-22 in a Window Air Conditioner,” 

International Journal of Refrigeration, 28:594–604, 2005 

/Dom02/ P. A. Domanski and W. V. Payne, Properties and Cycle Performance of 

Refrigerant Blends Operating Near and Above the Refrigerant Critical Point – 

Task 2: Air Conditioner System Study, report ARTI-21CR/605-50010-01-Pt. 2, 

October 2002 

/Dom03/ P. A. Domanski, D. A. Didion, and J. S. W. Chi, CYCLE_D: NIST VaporCompression Design Program (version 3.0), Standard reference database 49, 

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, 

USA, 2003 

/IPCC07/ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2007: 

The Physical Science Basis – Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth 

Assessment Report, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and United 

Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), IPCC Secretariat, Geneva, 

Switzerland, 2007 

/Mot00/ S. F. Y. Motta and P. A. Domanski, “Performance of R-22 and Its alternatives 

Working at High Outdoor Temperatures, Proceedings of the Eighth 

International Refrigeration Conference, (2000.07.25-28), Purdue University, 

West Lafayette, Indiana, USA, 47-54. 2000.07 

NCDC: www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalextremes.html#hightemp 

/Pay02/ V. W. Payne and P. A. Domanski, Comparison of an R-22 and an R-410A Air 

Conditioner Operating at High Ambient Temperatures, paper R2-1, 

Proceedings of the Ninth International Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 

Conference (2002.07.16-19), Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA, 

2002 

/UNEP06/ Report of the Refrigeration, Air-Conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical 

Options Committee (RTOC) – 2006 Assessment, IBSN 978-92-807-2822-4, 

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Ozone Secretariat, Nairobi, 

Kenya, January 2007 

/Wel99/ W. D. Wells, D. B. Bivens, M. Yokozeki, and C. K. Rice, R-410A performance 

near critical point, presentation, ASHRAE Annual Meting (Seattle, WA, USA), 

1999.06.21 

/WMO06/ Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2006, World Meteorological 

Organization (WMO), Global Ozone Research and Monitoring Project, Geneva, 

Switzerland; United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), Nairobi, Kenya; 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Washington, DC, 
134 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

USA; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Washington, 

DC, USA; and the European Commission, Research Directorate General, 

Brussels, Belgium; March 2007 

11.3 Refrigerants for High Ambient Temperature Commercial Refrigeration 

11.3.1 Introductory Comments 

Commercial refrigeration covers a wide variety of equipment: stand-alone equipment, 

condensing units, and centralised systems. According to the type of system, the refrigerant 

charge varies from some hundreds grams to thousand kilograms. Moreover, depending on the 

system type, the refrigerant choice is different. To summarise the usual choices, HFC-134a 

with a relatively low volumetric capacity is used in small equipment (nearly all stand-alone 

equipment and some condensing units) whereas refrigerants such as HCFC-22 or R-404A, with 

a large volumetric capacity, are used in large commercial systems and in most condensing units. 

In order to define a range of temperatures, moderate climate exhibits an yearly average 

temperature between 12 and 15°C with 2 to 3 months where the average temperature are around 

20 to 25°C and for some hours of the day up to 35°C. Hot climates exhibit average yearly 

temperatures around 20°C with several months with average temperature in the vicinity of 30°C 

and many hours of the day with temperature higher than 40°C. 

It has to be mentioned that, since the 1970’s, Europe has progressively enforced a lower 

temperature for frozen food: from -15°C to -18°C at the core of the frozen products. The 

consequence has been the progressive shift from HCFC-22 to R-502, because the consequence 

of a lower temperature of the product is a lower evaporating temperature moving from typically 

-35°C to -38°C or even lower. This change of evaporating temperature has, even in moderate 

climate, led to a too high discharge temperature at the high pressure side of compressors using 

HCFC-22. R-502 (a blend of 51.2 % of CFC-115 and HCFC-22) exhibits a lower discharge 

temperature because CFC-115 has a lower heating capacity. R-404A and R-507 have been 

formulated in order to replace R-502 and comprise also high molecular weight molecules 

leading to lower discharge temperatures compared to HCFC-22. In summary, HCFC-22 is not 

the best designed refrigerant molecule for high ambient temperatures, if the evaporating 

temperature is lower than -35°C. 

Hot climates imply high condensing temperatures and, for the usually applied refrigerants, high 

condensing pressures. Those high pressures and temperatures have several consequences: 

 The energy penalty for a single-stage system is about 1.5% per K of higher condensing 

temperature, meaning that COPs of medium and low-temperature commercial systems are 

about 15 to 25% lower in hot climates compared to moderate ones; 

 For low-temperature applications (frozen food), the discharge temperatures of the 

compressor with HCFC-22 are so high that liquid injection is necessary either at the suction 

port or at an intermediate stage if the compressor design allows such an injection. 

High temperatures at the compressor discharge line imply energy losses and possible 

decomposition of the lubricant when temperatures become higher than 140°C. As indicated 

above, HCFC-22 is not the best refrigerant to be used in a direct expansion system for lowtemperature applications (evaporating temperature below –35°C) with a condensing temperature 

above 50°C. Several technical options have been developed over time in order to improve 

energy efficiency for low-temperature applications and also to limit the discharge temperature at 

the compressor discharge port. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 135

11.3.2 Refrigerants for Small Commercial Refrigeration Systems in Hot Climates 

Table 11-1 (in chapter 11.1) summarises the main thermodynamics and environmental 

properties (the GWP and ODP values have been taken from the 2006 RTOC report) of 

refrigerants that have been used or could be used in small commercial refrigeration equipment 

Stand-alone equipment and some condensing units (those with smaller refrigeration capacity) 

have been developed successively with CFC-12 and then HFC-134a. The use of isobutane (HC600a) in domestic refrigeration began in Europe in 1994. The significant introduction of this 

refrigerant in this application has also led to the use of this refrigerant in small commercial 

equipment such as water fountains, for ice cream freezers and all equipment requiring larger 

cooling capacities compared to water fountains the preferred choice for HCs is propane (HC290). Due to their critical temperatures (see Table above), HFC-134a as well as HC-600a are 

well suited to hot climate applications. It has to be noted that HC-290 presents a lower 

discharge temperature compared to HCFC-22 and so has a possible larger operation span in hot 

climate. The limitation for the use of HC-600a or HC-290 is the refrigerant charge, due to 

safety. For larger systems as condensing units or stand alone display cases the refrigerant 

choices are usually the same as those presented in the following section for large commercial 

systems. 

11.3.2.1 CO2

For larger refrigerant charges (in the range of several hundreds grams) due to flammability 

risks, some global companies have decided to develop the use of CO2 (R-744) for vending 

machines. Because of the low critical temperature of this refrigerant (31°C), those systems 

experience very high pressure (above 10 MPa) and there is no more condensation at the highpressure side, so the usual phase-change cycle (condensation at the high pressure and 

evaporation at the low pressure) becomes a trans-critical cycle (cooling of a dense gas phase at 

the high pressure and evaporation at the low pressure). The efficiency of such a trans-critical 

cycle is relatively low and additional components such as liquid/vapour heat exchangers are 

necessary to reach acceptable energy efficiency at high temperature. In summary, CO2 is not a 

suitable fluid for hot climates, due to relatively poor energy efficiency under those temperature 

conditions. 

11.3.2.2 HFC-1234yf 

Based on the European directive 40/2006, HFC-134a will be banned in mobile air-conditioning 

systems in Europe progressively from 2011 to 2017. This regulation has led the main chemical 

companies to develop new refrigerants with very low GWP. The first one that has been 

thoroughly studied is 2,3,3,3 tetra-fluoro-pro-1-ene, named HFC-1234yf (also commercialised 

under HFO). The thermodynamic properties of this refrigerant are very close to the ones of 

HFC-134a (see Table 11-1), it is very moderately flammable, and its toxicity is low and 

comparable to HFC-134a. It is expected that HFC-1234yf will be mass-produced at some time; 

this will determine the time when it can be used at large scale in mobile air conditioning. It can 

be used in small commercial refrigeration similarly to HFC-134a with small adaptation of 

capillary tubes. It has to be noted that, due to the fact that this refrigerant consists of a larger 

molecule than HFC-134a, its discharge temperature is significantly lower and it may therefore 

be more adapted for hot climates. 

In summary, three possible refrigerants can be easily used at high ambient temperature 

conditions applying current refrigeration technologies for small equipment; these are HFC-134a, 

HC-600a and HC-290. Where it is too early to make any definite statements at present, the 

range may possibly be expanded by HFC-1234yf in future. 
136 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

11.3.3 Refrigerants for Large Commercial Refrigeration Systems in Hot Climates 

This section addresses not only refrigerant choices but also some design issues, which are of 

interest to enhance energy efficiency of low temperature refrigerating systems and to also 

expand the options for refrigerant choices. 

11.3.3.1 Current Refrigerants in Use 

HCFC-22 is the refrigerant still in use in many developed countries, especially in the U.S.A and 

in all developing countries under a wide range of ambient temperature conditions, but with very 

different evaporating temperatures. In many cases, the evaporating temperature will be fixed at 

a level where the discharge temperature of the compressors is still acceptable (below 140°C). 

Because of the more stringent regulation (2037/2000), Europe has banned HCFC-22 in new 

commercial refrigeration equipment as of 2000. Nevertheless, the installed base using HCFC22 is still important and intermediate HFC blends such as R-422D or R-427A have been 

developed in order to enable an easy retrofit from HCFC-22 to those blends. Those blends 

having HFC-125 as a component exhibit lower discharge temperatures compared to HCFC-22. 

Nevertheless, all HFC-125 based blends have high GWPs. R-404A, which has replaced R-502 

and sometimes also HCFC-22 in commercial centralised systems presents a lower energy 

efficiency under hot ambient temperatures (high temperature condensing conditions) due to its 

relatively low critical temperature (Tc = 72°C) compared to R-502 (Tc = 80°C). 

It has to be emphasised that a “free” sub-cooling of the refrigerant is available when 

supermarkets are air-conditioned: the refrigerant leaves the high pressure receiver at for 

example 50°C or above, the long liquid lines (about 100 m or more) are installed in the sales 

area, which temperature is about 25°C and so the refrigerant enters the expansion valve at about 

30°C, this temperature gain leads to a better energy efficiency for the refrigerating systems but 

it has been paid by the energy consumption of the air conditioning system. 

In the absence of the “free” cooling, an interesting design has been developed in order to 

improve the cooling capacity and the energy efficiency in very hot outdoor conditions. It 

consists of installing a small refrigerating system working typically with HFC-134a whose 

purpose is only to cool the liquid phase of R-404A (or even HCFC-22) after the condensation in 

order to generate a large sub-cooling typically down to 10°C. The drawback in this case is that 

the liquid line has to be insulated all along. 

11.3.3.2 Hydrocarbons and HFCs 

In Northern Europe, some equipment manufacturers have developed refrigeration systems using 

hydrocarbons, either HC-290 (propane) or HC-1270 (propylene). For centralised systems, two 

different types of equipment can be distinguished: 

 condensing units with refrigerant charge of HC-290 up to 5 kg in direct expansion systems. 

The number of those systems can be estimated at several hundreds, mainly in Germany, the 

United Kingdom and Denmark 

 centralised indirect systems with HC-1270 or HC-290 or R-404A as primary refrigerants. 

 in Germany, many so called “discounter” supermarkets (specific type in Germany) use HC290 for display cases with short lines as the so called distributed systems. The charges vary 

between 500 g and 2.5 kg. 

For centralised systems, due to the large refrigerant charge and the number of fittings when 

some hundreds of evaporators are installed in the sales area, it is impossible to use direct 

expansion systems with flammable refrigerants. Indirect systems have been used in commercial 

refrigeration for more than ten years. They consist of circulating a heat transfer fluid (HTF) in 

the heat exchanger (formerly evaporator) of the display cases. This HTF cools air as the 

refrigerant was doing before and the HTF is then cooled by the refrigerant in the machinery 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 137

room in a primary heat exchanger or primary evaporator. This design allows reduction of the 

refrigerant charge by more than 50% and the refrigerant could be either an HFC or an HC 

depending on local regulations on the use of flammable refrigerants and also the policy of the 

commercial company. 

Taking into account the practices in all European countries, the main refrigerant in use for 

medium and low temperatures in centralised systems is R-404A as a replacement for R-502 and 

HCFC-22. It has to be noted that for very high ambient conditions, R-404A with a critical 

temperature of 72 °C, shows significant limits of efficiency. As indicated above, 

complementary sub-cooling by a small refrigerating unit dedicated only to sub-cool R-404A in 

liquid phase after condensation could be an interesting and relatively low cost provision; this 

sub-cooling unit normally works with a high temperature suited refrigerant such as HFC-134a. 

Equal to air conditioning in the case of R-410A, it may also be more advantageous at high 

ambient temperatures to go to a solution in which R-407A is applied instead of R-404A. 

For HCs, indirect systems with refrigerant charges up to 50 kg have been installed in separate 

machinery rooms equipped with refrigerant monitoring and high ventilation rates in order to 

mitigate the risk of explosion in case of refrigerant leaks. A German company has developed 

such a system with HC-1270. The number of these systems can be estimated to be around 50 in 

the whole of Europe. 

11.3.3.3 Ammonia (R-717) 

Ammonia can be used in indirect systems so that ammonia (which is toxic and moderately 

flammable) can be contained in the machinery room. Ammonia is used in Europe in some 

commercial refrigeration supermarkets but the use is not widespread due to the safety issues. 

For a cascade system, ammonia can be used at the two levels of temperatures that are applied (-

15°C and –35 °C), but it is much more efficient to use a cascade system with ammonia for the 

high temperature level and CO2 for the low temperature. 

11.3.3.4 Design issues 

Design of large refrigerating commercial systems in hot climates is characterised by specific 

criteria such as larger condenser surfaces to limit the difference of temperature between the 

refrigerant and air. Specific liquid refrigerant sub-cooling equipment can also be installed. 

Those design choices are made independent of the choice of the refrigerant. 

Commercial refrigeration has always been driven by initial costs and simplicity of design, and 

as a consequence, a general design rule for refrigerating systems has not been applied in the 

case of low evaporating temperatures (which corresponds to conservation of frozen food and ice 

creams). 

 

The rule, which is respected in all large industrial low temperature refrigerating systems, is the 

following. When the difference of temperature between evaporation and condensation is larger 

than 70 °C, a two-stage system has to be chosen. A limited number of technical option exits for 

such a two-stage design: one of them is a cascade system where a low temperature refrigerant as 

CO2 is used in the low temperature stage and a higher temperature refrigerant such as ammonia 

(R-717) in the high temperature stage. HCFC-22 and HFC-134a can also be used in the high 

temperature stage. This two-stage structure has gained much interest in the last five years in 

Europe in commercial refrigeration; this specifically in order to reduce (limit) the charge of 

HFCs. 
138 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

A preliminary conclusion can be drawn at this stage. The replacement of HCFC-22 in 

commercial refrigeration in hot climates may be addressed by introducing two-stage systems: 

 a normal cascade system; 

 a so called injection cycle where the same refrigerant is used in the two stages. Sub-cooling 

of the liquid and cooling of the vapour are realised at an intermediate temperature. 

These two-stage designs increase the energy efficiency significantly (up to 30%) depending on 

the (outdoor) ambient temperature. 

11.3.3.5 Refrigerants for Centralised Systems under Hot Conditions 

The use of indirect systems would be possible in countries with high ambients because there is 

no significant variation of the evaporation temperature. It would be possible to replace HCFC22 in large commercial refrigeration systems with HFC blends (with high GWP), such as R404A or even R-422D or R-427A. However, for these blends the refrigerating capacity could 

be about 5% lower than for HCFC-22 and the efficiency could also be in the order of 5 to 10% 

lower, compared to HCFC-22. 

R-407C is used in centralised systems in Japan (R-407C has the lowest GWP (1800) of all HFC 

blends). HCs such as HC-290 and HC-1270 could be used under hot ambient temperature 

conditions and they exhibit relatively low discharge temperatures compared to HCFC-22. 

However, refrigerant quantities have to be limited for safety reasons and direct expansion 

systems should have an almost completely welded circuit in order to limit refrigerant leaks. 

One of the most important safety precautions that needs to be taken here is charge reduction. 

11.3.4 Concluding Remarks 

The above studies have highlighted the refrigerant options that could be utilised to design 

replacements for HCFC-22 in commercial refrigeration for use in high ambient environments. 

In the near term, the regions with hot climates should be able to rely on the refrigerants and 

technologies that are currently commercially available to replace HCFC-22 (R-404A, R-407A 

and R-407C and HC-290). 

However, when replacing HCFC-22 products with those using R-404A or R-407C the 

application engineer will need to take into consideration the reduced capacity at the design 

ambient temperature when sizing the equipment for the design cooling load. E.g. R-407C will 

only need to be sized 5-10% larger than HCFC-22 equipment to compensate for the lower 

capacity at ambient temperatures up to 50°C. 

Low GWP alternatives to HFC refrigerants (partially fluorinated alkenes such as HFC-1234yf) 

are currently being developed. HFC-1234yf may be a candidate to replace HFC-134a in small 

equipment. Because refrigerant alternatives of this kind for larger equipment are assumed to be 

in the early stages of development it is premature to list them as definite options to the current 

HCFC-22 alternatives. 

When replacing HCFC-22 in low charge applications (commercial vending units etc.) one could 

consider the use of HC-290. This could also be done for distributed systems in supermarkets 

with relatively low charge. 

Design of large refrigerating commercial systems in hot climates is characterised by specific 

criteria such as larger condenser surfaces to limit the difference of temperature between the 

refrigerant and air. Specific liquid refrigerant sub-cooling equipment can also be installed. 

Those design choices are made independent of the choice of the refrigerant. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 139

The replacement of HCFC-22 in commercial refrigeration in hot climates may be addressed by 

introducing two-stage systems: 

 a normal cascade system; 

 a so called injection cycle where the same refrigerant is used in the two stages. Sub-cooling 

of the liquid and cooling of the vapour are realised at an intermediate temperature. These 

two-stage designs increase the energy efficiency significantly depending on the (outdoor) 

ambient temperature. 

11.3.5 References 

/Bax03a/ Baxter, V.D. (editor), 2003a, Advanced supermarket refrigeration/Heat recovery 

systems. Vol. 1, Executive summary. IEA Heat Pump Center, 73 pp (ISBN: 90-

73741-48-3). 

/Bax03b/ Baxter, V.D. (editor), 2003b, Advanced supermarket refrigeration/Heat recovery 

systems. Vol. 2, Country Reports. IEA Heat Pump Center, 73 pp (CD-ROM ISBN: 

90-73741-49-1). 

/Coc04/ Coca Cola, 2004, The Coca Cola company - Alternative refrigeration background. 

Refrigerants Naturally Conference, Brussels, 2004. 

/EU00/ Regulation (EC) no. 2037/2000 the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 

June 2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer. 

/Gir04/ Girotto, S., Minetto, S. and Nekså, P., (2004): Commercial Refrigeration with CO2

as Refrigerant, Experimental Results, Int. J of Refrigeration, Vol 27 (7), November 

2004 

/IPCC05/ IPCC, 2005, Safeguarding the ozone layer and the global climate system. Issues 

related to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons. Cambridge University 

Press. 2005. ISBN: 13-978-0-521-68206-0. 

/Rhie08/ Rhiemeier J-M., Harnish J., Ters Ch., Kauffeld M., Comparative assessment of the 

climate relevance of supermarket refrigeration systems and equipment. Research 

report 206 44 300 – UBA-FB 001180-e March 2009 

/RAC01/ Why a secondary system should be considered first. Refrigeration and Air 

Conditioning, December 2001, pp. 26-27. 

/UNEP06/ UNEP, 2006 Refrigeration, AC and Heat Pumps Assessment Report, ISBN 978-

92-807-2822-4 UNEP Nairobi, January 2007. 

11.4 Refrigerants for Deep Mines 

11.4.1 Background 

Mine refrigeration has been practised since the 1860s in the USA, originally with transport of 

naturally produced ice from the surface by returning emptied ore cars into the mines /McP93/. 

Vapour-compression refrigeration, currently the most widespread method of mine airconditioning, appears to have been used for mine cooling as early the 1920s in Brazil and the 

UK and the 1930s in South Africa and India. Application escalated in the 1960s with large 

centralised refrigeration plants, located underground, in the South African gold mines. 

Limitations on the heat rejection capacity of return air, development of energy recovery devices 

for water pipelines in shafts, and improvements in chilled water and brine distribution systems 

led to renewed preference for surface plants. 

As mine depths now increase to 4-5 km (2.5-3.1 mi), virgin rock temperatures approach 60-70 

°C /del88, JMV06, MVS06, Ram01, Ros08/. A second factor adds to the cooling loads, 

namely auto-compression. Since air pressure increases as mines go deeper into the earth, 

similar to water pressure increases with depth in oceans, compression of ventilation air also 
140 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

increases its temperature /Eco07/. For a mining depth of 4 km (2.5 mi) the temperature increase 

due to auto-compression is approximately 16 °C (29 °F) /Ram01/. 

While both effects imply high and nearly continuous requirements for heat removal, neither 

implies a high-temperature cooling condition. Instead, refrigerant condensing (heat rejection) 

temperatures are governed by approach to wet-bulb temperatures for the surface-located cooling 

towers. Refrigerant evaporating (heat absorption) temperatures are governed by approach to the 

chilled-water or other HTF supply temperature, economically selected to maximise the 

temperature lift and thereby reduce pumping burdens because of the significant distribution 

distances (depth). Use of ice slurries is gaining acceptance to capitalise on the latent heat of 

vaporisation to minimise mass transport requirements over single-phase options. Doing so 

implies a chiller evaporating temperature below 0 °C (32 °F), or a higher thermal lift than for 

conventional comfort-conditions, but not high-ambient operation. 

The problem is compounded in open-systems in which the chilled water (or other HTF) is loop 

is open at mining depth, for example in spray cooling. Just as air-warms by auto-compression 

(see above), the column of chilled water within a vertical supply pipe for underground delivery 

heats up by pressurisation. Water chilled to 2 °C (36 °F) at the surface warms to 4.5 °C (40 °F) 

at 1000 m (3300 ft) depth /Xst05/. Typical mine installations have open water reservoirs at 

several below-ground depths water to manage piping pressurisation and simplify depth 

increases since deep and especially ultra-deep mines typically progress in depth with time. 

11.4.2 Deep Mines 

The focal questions for deep mines differ in several respects from those for applications 

addressed in preceding sections of this report. 

Unlike air-cooled systems for which high outdoor temperatures lower efficiency and capacity, 

the ambient operating conditions for deep mines generally are less extreme. High-ambienttemperature operation in very warm climates increases cooling and, for many applications, also 

refrigeration loads. 

Additionally and generally more significantly, it results in both high thermodynamic lift and 

refrigerant condensing at temperatures approaching the thermodynamic critical point. In 

contrast, most deep mines are in more moderate climates and heat rejection (refrigerant 

condensing) typically employs cooling towers rather than air-cooled condensers. The governing 

metric for refrigerant condensing (heat rejection) in mine cooling systems, therefore, is wet-bulb 

rather than dry-bulb temperature. High-ambient temperature locations actually have an 

advantage in this regard, since they typically are dryer and have greater wet-bulb depression. 

The heat absorption temperature, and therefore the refrigerant evaporating temperature, 

generally is lower than for comfort air conditioning to minimise the pumping burdens to deliver 

cooling to significant depths, far more distant from the cooling. 

With exception of in-situ refrigeration systems once competitive for shallow mines, nearly all 

deep mines use chillers located above ground /del88/ and pump a heat transfer fluid (HTF 

sometimes also identified as a secondary loop coolant or incorrectly as a “secondary 

refrigerant”) below ground for indirect rather than direct-expansion (DX) cooling. As mining 

depths increase, phase-change ice slurries become more attractive than single-phase HTFs, such 

as water or glycol-inhibited water or similar brines. These ice slurries capitalise on the latent 

heat of vaporisation and thus reduce the mass transport burden compared to single-phase, 

sensible (thermally) cooling approaches. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 141

The cooling requirement is nearly continuous and the required equipment sizes are quite large, 

resulting in significant energy requirements and heightened concerned with energy-related 

greenhouse gas emissions. Thermal loads for deep mines are nearly independent of climatic 

factors since the primary cooling load is from geothermal heat from the earth and temperature 

increases resulting from depth-induced compression /Eco07/, rather than solar-driven heat 

gains. 

Also, the cooling load profile is more uniform predicated on nearly constant geothermal heat 

and less diurnally- and seasonally-controlled influences of weather. The high load-profiles, 

required reliability, and practically required system durability change the economics of system 

operation to support very efficient systems with entailing multiple (never single) chillers 

typically with excess aggregate capacity to enable maintenance and accommodate individual 

unit failures. 

While use of cooling towers instead of air-cooled condensers offers advantages for these large 

systems, deep mines often are in regions with more-limited supplies of suitable water, 

evaporated to reject heat (by exploiting the latent heat of vaporisation of water). Additional 

water is used to control mineral and other contaminant compositions in cooling water and to 

make up for amounts lost in wind-induced drift. While water may be available from mine 

drainage in most mines, it may be unsuitable due to high mineral or corrosive content and 

forcing use of water or scarce water from other sources. 

11.4.3 Requirements and Outlook 

The deep mine study has been taken up in 2008, but could not be finalised due to logistics 

problems in planning visits. Further study of the deep mine issue will be deferred pending 

additional data gathering. For this, a next visit is planned to South Africa in May 2009. 

The key data requirements have been identified: 

a. Confirmation of typical evaporating temperature or ranges of evaporating temperatures 

used; 

b. The most common equipment capacities for deep and ultra-deep mines; 

c. Results to date with use of water as a refrigerant particularly when integrated with iceslurry delivery; 

d. Any additional considerations or constraints. 

11.5 Conclusions 

In the chapters above, an analysis has been conducted concerning the suitability of HCFC-22 

alternatives in air conditioning and commercial refrigeration equipment at high ambient 

temperatures. The analysis for the application of alternatives to HCFC-22 in mines is still 

underway and depends on results expected to be obtained in a next visit to South African mines. 

A. In the case of unitary air conditioning the following can be mentioned. 

The use of propane could be preferred for those types of equipment where the amount of 

refrigerant charge would not present a major risk in case of leakage. However, compared to 

HCFC-22 propane performs well, but slightly worse compared to HCFC-22. Design 

modifications could well lead to a similar performance. 

Due to a relatively low critical temperature, the performance of R-410A --as well as R-407C-- is 

lower at all ambient temperatures compared to HCFC-22, but the energy efficiency penalty is 

largest at the highest ambient temperature and could be in the order of 10% lower compared to 
142 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

the application of HCFC-22. Refrigeration capacity also tends to decrease faster than the 

capacity of HCFC-22 with high ambient temperatures. 

In a first instance this reduction in energy efficiency could be reduced by enlarging the surface 

area of components such as condenser or the subcooling pipeline. Optimisation of the design 

would be a first requirement. 

It should be borne in mind that the design has to take into account the highest ambient 

temperature, but the performance through the entire year is much less impacted by the highest 

ambient temperatures since lower temperatures occur during a large part of the year. This 

would lead to different conclusions for the energy efficiency integrated over the entire season. 

This kind of study could be easily performed if enough seasonal data (per hour per day) for 

certain places with high ambient temperatures would be available; it may need further 

consideration. 

HFC-134a and HC-600a would seem attractive from the point of view that they have similar 

performance to HCFC-22 at high ambient temperatures. However, both of these refrigerants 

are low-pressure refrigerants. The use of these low pressure refrigerants would require 

extensive redesign of the base system components in order to achieve the same capacity and 

efficiency of the HCFC-22 system. Therefore, R-134a and HC-600a are not considered cost 

effective options to replace HCFC-22 in unitary air-conditioning applications. 

Once low GWP options (of the type of HFC-1234yf, however, with a higher pressure 

temperature characteristic) would become available, these could be further considered. 

However, there are still too many uncertainties regarding the possible development of this type 

of refrigerants in order to give any reasonable forecast for future application. 

B. In the case of commercial refrigeration the following can be mentioned. 

Where it concerns small commercial refrigeration equipment (stand alone equipment) the use of 

HC-600a should be considered compared to HFCs or HFC blends. Charges would be relatively 

small and the energy efficiency and capacity decrease with high ambient temperatures would be 

smaller than in the case of HCFC-22. In the case of smaller units in a supermarket (with the 

condenser in the indoor atmosphere) the external air conditioning will provide constant ambient 

temperatures and the issue of high ambient temperatures is negligible. 

Due to a relatively low critical temperature, the performance of R-404A --as well as R-407C-- is 

lower at all ambient temperatures compared to HCFC-22, but the energy efficiency penalty is 

largest at the highest ambient temperature and could be in the order of 10% lower compared to 

the application of HCFC-22. Refrigeration capacity also tends to decrease faster than the 

capacity of HCFC-22 with high ambient temperatures. 

In a first instance this reduction in energy efficiency could be reduced by enlarging the surface 

area of components such as condenser or the subcooling pipeline. Separate cooling of the 

subcooling liquid line with an external refrigeration loop might be a solution to drastically 

improve the capacity at high ambient temperatures. In summary, optimisation of the entire 

design would be a first requirement. 

As mentioned for unitary air conditioning, the equipment design has to take into account the 

highest ambient temperature, but the performance through the entire year is much less impacted 

by the highest ambient temperatures since lower temperatures occur during a large part of the 

year. This would lead to different conclusions for the energy efficiency integrated over the 

entire season. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 143

In choosing alternative refrigerants, the refrigerants HFC-134a and HC-290 seem attractive 

from the point of view that they would behave similar or better than HCFC-22 at high ambient 

temperatures. So far there is no equipment manufactured for HFC-134a for an entire large 

system since it would imply a significant increase in the volume of the compressor and the 

piping of heat exchangers, which would lead to a substantial increase in costprice. It would be 

advantageous to consider distributed systems for a supermarket in which case low charges of 

HFC-134a or HC-290 can be applied, which would also mitigate to a large degree the safety 

risks in the application of propane. In the case of these distributed systems, it is still assumed 

that the condenser would be mounted outside. Compared to HCFC-22 propane performs well in 

these systems, and the application in smaller units is certainly worth considering. 

In case of larger supermarket systems, the solution to cope with high ambient temperatures can 

be found in two stage refrigeration systems, or systems with a secondary loop. If well designed 

the systems with a secondary loop will provide comparable efficiencies than the one stage 

HCFC-22 systems if high efficiency refrigerants are applied and the secondary loop is 

characterised by good heat transfer characteristics. 

Application of two stage refrigeration systems (with HFC-134a or a hydrocarbon in the first 

loop, and e.g. carbon dioxide in the second loop) would provide less dependency on the ambient 

temperature (important in the case of refrigeration capacity) and would also lead to better 

energy efficiencies. This, however, will imply a certain cost increase dependent on the design 

and the size of the system. 

The replacement of HCFC-22 in commercial refrigeration in hot climates may be addressed by 

introducing two-stage systems: 

 a normal cascade system; 

 a so called injection cycle where the same refrigerant is used in the two stages. Sub-cooling 

of the liquid and cooling of the vapour are realised at an intermediate temperature. These 

two-stage designs increase the energy efficiency significantly, however, much dependent on 

the (outdoor) ambient temperature. 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 145

12 Methyl Bromide - Interim response to Decision XX/6. Report of 

the TEAP Quarantine and Pre-shipment Task Force 

Executive Summary

Decision XX/6 requested TEAP to review all relevant, currently available information on the 

use of MB for QPS applications and related emissions; to assess trends in the major uses, 

available alternatives, other mitigation options and barriers to the adoption of alternatives; and 

to determine any additional information or action that may be required to meet those 

objectives. 

TEAP set up a revitalised Quarantine and Preshipment Task Force (QPSTF) made up of 10 

experts, 4 from A5 and 6 from non A5 countries, to respond to aspects of Decision XX/6 

directed to TEAP. This interim report is provided for 29OEWG, with a full report available 

for 21MOP. 

Reported global production and consumption for QPS was approximately constant over the 

2004-2007 period, though showing substantial fluctuations annually. Reasons for these 

fluctuations have not been identified. 

Global consumption for QPS has averaged nearly 11,000 metric tonnes a year since 1995, 

with some variation from year to year, with minimum consumption of less than 8000 tonnes 

in 1998, with peaks in 1999, 2003 and 2006 at 12,425, 12,286 and 12,207 tonnes respectively. 

Non-A5 Parties accounted for approximately 62% and 46% of reported global consumption in 

2006 and 2007, respectively. Two Parties accounted for 82% of total non-A5 consumption in 

2007. USA reports a wide annual variation in QPS consumption, peaking at 5,089 metric 

tonnes for 2006 and reduced to 2,930 tonnes in 2007. QPS consumption in A5 countries has 

increased since 2000, particularly in the Asian region, while in non-A5 countries it has 

declined. A5 consumption amounted to 38% of total global consumption in 2006 and 54% in 

2007. QPS treatments are frequently carried out at point of export to meet requirements of 

the importing country. 

Despite data gaps and uncertainties, able to make preliminary estimates of the volumes of 

uses covering more than 77% of total reported QPS consumption. The QPSTF estimated that 

at least 66% of total global consumption resulted from 5 main categories of use: fresh fruit 

and vegetables (8% of identified uses); grain, including rice (12%); soil (14%); whole logs 

(21%); and wood and wood packaging material (13%). All of these categories have at least 

some instances where alternatives are not technically available 

Despite recent surveys and submission of further data by various Parties, additional 

quantative data on consumption for major uses is required from Parties to permit satisfactory 

assessment of usage trends. 

There is a discrepancy of about 1,300 tonnes for non-A5 Parties for 2007 between total 

consumption estimated by ‘bottom-up’ analysis and total consumption reported as per Article 

7 data. This difference apparently arises from undefined use in one Party. A discrepancy of 

similar magnitude is apparent yearly over the period 2003-2007. Further clarification is being 

sought on this portion of QPS usage. 

Development of methyl bromide alternatives for QPS applications on commodities continues 

to be a difficult process, exacerbated by the multitude of commodities being treated, the 

diverse situations where treatments are applied, a constantly changing trade and regulatory 

landscape, requirements for bilateral agreement on QPS measures, requirement for very high 
146 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

levels of proven effectiveness and lack of patent coverage or other commercial protection for 

some potential alternatives. Regulations prescribing methyl bromide treatment alone are a 

major barrier to adoption of alternatives as often there is little incentive for the regulation to 

be changed. A key barrier to development of alternatives for soil treatment for growing plants 

of certified high health status is the rigorous testing required to prove an alternative effective. 

So far, TEAP has identified the treatment of a) Export coffee (Vietnam); b) Export rice and 

cassava chips (Thailand, Vietnam); and c) Soil to produce propagation material (USA), as 

categories of use that have been classified as QPS by some Parties but not by others. 

TEAP will publish a list of applications for which technically feasible alternatives have not 

been identified in the September report. TEAP encourages Parties to submit additional 

quantitative data on consumption for major uses as soon as possible. 

12.1 Mandate and scope of the report 

Following Decision XX/6, TEAP set up a revitalised Quarantine and Pre-shipment Task 

Force (QPSTF), to report to the Parties on those parts of Decision XX/6 that requested 

TEAP’s response. TEAP, in consultation with the International Plant Protection Convention 

(IPPC) secretariat, has been requested to review all relevant, currently available information 

on the use of MB for Quarantine and Pre-shipment (QPS) applications and related emissions, 

to assess trends in the major uses, available alternatives, other mitigation options and barriers 

to the adoption of alternatives, and determine what additional information or action may be 

required to meet those objectives. The full text of Decision XX/6 is included in Annex 1 of 

this chapter for reference. 

In particular, the assessment is required to consider: 

3⁄4 Volumes of MB used for QPS, by major uses and target pests; 

3⁄4 Technical and economic availability of alternatives for the main MB uses, by volume, 

and of MB recovery, containment and recycling; 

3⁄4 QPS applications for which no alternatives are available and an assessment of why 

alternatives are not technically or economically feasible or cannot be adopted; 

3⁄4 Illustrative examples of regulations that directly affect the use of MB for QPS 

treatment; 

3⁄4 Barriers preventing the adoption of alternatives to MB; 

3⁄4 Projects demonstrating technically and economically feasible alternatives, including 

technologies for recapture and destruction of methyl bromide for QPS 

3⁄4 Opportunities for reducing MB use or emissions for QPS 

In addition, Decision XX/6 requested TEAP to provide the following information in its draft 

report to the twenty-ninth meeting of the Open-Ended Working Group: 

Paragraph 5: “To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to present 

a draft report based on the analysis of the available information to the Open-ended 

Working Group at its twenty-ninth meeting, indicating areas where the information is 

not sufficient, explaining, where appropriate, why the data were inadequate and 

presenting a practical proposal for how best to gather the information required for a 

satisfactory analysis;” 

Paragraph 7: “To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, in 

accordance with its terms of reference, to list categories of use it has identified that 

have been classified as quarantine and pre-shipment use by some Parties but not by 

others by the twenty-ninth meeting of the Open-ended Working Group and that those 

Parties are requested to provide the information on the rationale for doing so to the 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 147

Technology and Economic Assessment Panel in time for inclusion in its final report to 

the Twenty-First Meeting of the Parties:” 

This interim report provides in particular, a response to paragraphs 5 and 7 of Decision XX/6. 

It also describes work in progress and preliminary findings related to the remaining tasks 

under Decision XX/6, which will be addressed in the Final Report of the QPSTF due to be 

submitted by TEAP for the 21st Meeting of the Parties. 

12.1.1 Background to the report 

Production and consumption of methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting substance, for quarantine 

and pre-shipment uses is exempted from control under Article 2H, para. 6 of the Montreal 

Protocol. Parties have been required to report their production and consumption for QPS 

purposes (Beijing Amendment, Art. 1, para. O). 

Parties have been encouraged to use alternatives to methyl bromide for QPS purposes where 

technically and economically feasible (Decisions VI/11(c), VII/5) and XI/13, XVI/11). 

Nevertheless, consumption of methyl bromide for QPS purposes continues to be substantial. 

TEAP (2004) estimated QPS use of MB to be about 28% of global methyl bromide 

consumption in 2002, equivalent to 11,245 tonnes. In 2006, MBTOC (2007) reported that 

although production of MB for QPS purposes (Ozone Secretariat data) had been 

approximately constant over the period 1999-2004 at around 10,500 metric tonnes per annum, 

it showed an increase of about 30% in 2005. The increase came at a time when ‘controlled’ 

uses of methyl bromide decreased rapidly as a result of progress with phasing out of MB in 

both Article 5 and non-Article 5 countries. 

In 2007, the most recent year for which the Ozone Secretariat has complete data as at May 

2009, reported global production of MB for QPS uses was 12,984 metric tonnes, after a lower 

reported production in 2006 of 12,075 metric tonnes. Global production of MB for nonexempt uses, has been falling rapidly in response to the phaseout activities for methyl 

bromide for both Article 5 and non-A5 Parties and in 2007, at 12,875 metric tonnes, this fell 

below that for QPS for the first time. It is expected to exceed production for non-exempt uses 

substantially in 2008, with the continued downward trend in non-exempt uses. 

Around 90% of the methyl bromide applied in QPS uses (calculated from MBTOC 2002) is 

emitted and thus potentiallypresents a risk to the ozone layer. An exception is when recapture 

systems are fitted and emissions are reduced substantially, At this time, only a small fraction 

of total applied methyl bromide is recaptured. This is probably less than 0.1% of applied 

methyl bromide, but the exact quantity recaptured and reused or destroyed is not known. 

Uses of methyl bromide for QPS are diverse, but there is a well-established set of specific 

uses. TEAP and its MBTOC have reported on this issue in several reports (TEAP, 1999, 

2003, 2006; MBTOC 1998, 2002, 2007). They noted that individual tonnages for methyl 

bromide uses for quarantine and pre-shipment treatment of particular commodities were not 

available on a comprehensive and worldwide basis, though specific surveys or datasets were 

available for a number of countries. In many countries, records of QPS usage by application 

have not been routinely kept or easily assessed. However, following Dec XI/13, all EC 

Member States are required to use logbooks recording QPS uses and quantities, and data are 

available since 2004 in many cases. 

In 2004 a survey of QPS uses by individual Parties was carried out in response to Decision 

XI/13(4). This survey provided data on uses for less than 50% of reported global 

consumption. Decision XI/13(6) urged Parties to implement procedures to monitor the QPS 
148 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

uses of methyl bromide by commodity and quantity, but these may not have been in place by 

the time the survey was conducted, limiting the availability of the information requested. 

Decision XVI/10(4) requested Parties that had not already submitted data to provide best 

available data on QPS uses and associated quantities to the Quarantine and Pre-shipment Task 

Force before 31 March 2005. Both Decisions requested information from the Parties on what 

alternatives were available to the individual Party for particular QPS applications, and 

specifically for the five largest consuming applications. Responses by Parties to the 2004 

survey and subsequent information provided under Decision XVI/10(2) covered about 65% of 

the total reported annual consumption for QPS during the 2002-2004 period. Responses from 

Parties indicate wide variation in the kinds of data collected by individual Parties and the 

precision with which they can report to the Protocol commodity by commodity use. 

Decision XX/6 urges those Parties that have not yet done so to report data on the use of 

methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment applications by April 2009 and to report 

such data in accordance with existing Protocol requirements and decisions annually 

thereafter. It further encourages Parties to put in place a national strategy involving actions to 

help reduce the use of methyl bromide for phytosanitary measures and/or reduce emissions of 

methyl bromide and make such strategies available to other Parties through the Ozone 

Secretariat in accordance with the recommendation of the third meeting of the Commission 

on Phytosanitary Measures under the IPPC (IPPC, 2008). 

12.1.2 Fulfilment of Decision XX/6 – Process 

In response to Para. 4 of Decision XX/6, TEAP conformed a streamlined and revitalised QPS 

task force (QPSTF) under the coordination of two co-chairs, one from an A5 country and one 

from a non-A5 Party. The task force is presently composed of ten members including the cochairs, six from non-A5 Parties and four from developing (A5) Parties, with broad regional 

representation. Names and details of QPSTF members can be found in Annex 2. 

QPSTF work was conducted though conference calls and electronic communication. A 

private website for posting documents was created with the help of the Ozone Secretariat to 

help progress work. Communication has been established with the IPPC in response to the 

Decision mandate. Cooperation of the Parties, either directly or via the regional UNEP 

Compliance Assistance Programmes (CAP) was sought through the Ozone Secretariat. 

Responses and valuable information has been received directly from twenty one Parties, and 

permission to use data from surveys, previously considered confidential, was obtained. 

The QPSTF further conducted extensive reviews of published literature, conference 

proceedings, QPS regulations from different countries, consultation with experts and others, 

to access relevant information to the best extent possible. 

Draft reports were tabled at the MBTOC-Soils and MBTOC-QSC meetings (April 2009) and 

then at the TEAP meeting (April 2009) for discussion, review and input. 

No face to face meetings of the full QPSTF have been held and none have been scheduled at 

this time, although it is possible that such a meeting may be needed around September 2009 

in order to finalise the report to be presented during the 21st MOP according to mandate. 

In keeping with Decision XX/6 the QPSTF has considered categories of use and options for 

adopting alternatives to methyl bromide for QPS uses in relation to IPPC rules and measures. 

In particular reference has been made to the IPPC recommendation “For the replacement or 

reduction of MB as a phytosanitary measure” (IPPC, 2008). 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 149

12.2 Availability of information: response to paragraph 5 of Decision XX/6 

In response to paragraph 5 of Decision XX/6, QPSTF analysed the available information and 

identified the key data gaps. Table 12.1 provides a summary of the findings related to each 

topic listed in Decision XX/6. The following Sections provide a description for the major 

topics. 

12.2.1 Volumes of MB used for QPS 

National statistics on the production, import and export of MB intended for QPS have been 

submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by a number of Parties in their annual reports under Article 

7 of the Protocol. The ‘Data Access Centre’ on the Ozone Secretariat’s website contains the 

data on MB production for QPS, and QPS consumption. The available data lie in the period 

from 1986 to 2007, although there are many gaps in the early years. QPS reporting was not 

specifically required under the Articles of the Montreal Protocol until the Beijing Amendment 

was adopted in 1999. The Beijing Amendment inserted into Article 7(3) a requirement for 

Parties to report the annual amount of MB used for QPS (Beijing Amendment, Art. 1, para. 

O). This Amendment entered into force in 2002 or 90 days following a Party’s ratification 

date. Some Parties have not ratified this Amendment at the present time. 

A number of Parties submitted QPS data to the Ozone Secretariat for the years before the 

Beijing Amendment came into force as a result of several Decisions. In 1997 Decision 

IX/28(6) revised the official formats for reporting Article 7 data and stipulated that, when 

reporting on QPS, Parties should report the amount ‘consumed’ (imports, production, exports) 

rather than actual ‘use’. Decision X/11(4) reminded Parties of the need to report on the 

volumes of MB consumed for QPS as set out in Decision IX/28. Most recently in 2008 

Decision XX/6(1) urged Parties that have not yet reported QPS data under Article 7 to do so 

by April 2009, and annually thereafter. 

12.2.2 Overview of QPS production and consumption 

Data have been submitted by 7 Parties that produced MB for QPS in the period 1991-2007. 

Table 1 indicates the recent years for which the data and totals are complete and incomplete, 

and the number of data gaps in each year. The Data Access Centre indicates gaps in 

significant areas in the period 1991-1998, and as a result the total volume of QPS is 

substantially under reported. However, the data on MB production for QPS is complete for 

the years 1999 and 2002-2007. After 1999, the data is absent for one Party (China) and only 

for the years 2000 and 2001. The QPSTF has estimated this missing data values by assuming 

a linear trend between 1999 and 2002 reported values. 

12.2.2.1 Total Global Production for QPS Purposes 

Production data, both in aggregate and for individual Parties provide a useful check 

on the adequacy of reported consumption data. Data on production and consumption 

by individual Parties has not previously been available publicly, but was released 

under Decision XX/6(2) 

Global production showed a steady decline from 1992 till 1999 but then was 

relatively stable at approximately 10,500 metric tonnes from 2000 to 2004. Since 

2004, there have been substantial fluctuations in total reported production for QPS, 

with values of 13,815, 10,275 and 12,984 tonnes for 2005, 2006 and 2007 

respectively (Fig 12.1). 
150 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure. 12.1. Estimated global production of methyl bromide for QPS uses 

1991 - 2007 

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1992 1996 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Methyl bromide (metric tonnes)

Source: MBTOC, 1994, 1998; MBTOC estimates; Ozone Secretariat data, April 2009 

Table 12.1: MB production for QPS, available data for 1997-2007 

Year Reported MB 

production 

(tonnes) 

Number of data 

gaps 

1997 7784 1 

1998 8118 1 

1999 11950 0 

2000 9793 1 

2001 9496 1 

2002 11269 0 

2003 10246 0 

2004 10660 0 

2005 13815 0 

2006 10275 0 

2007 12984 0 

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data Access Centre, May 2009. Data rounded to the nearest whole tonne. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 151

12.2.2.2 Production by Party for QPS Uses 

Seven Parties to the Montreal Protocol have reported production of methyl bromide for QPS 

uses: five non-Article 5 Parties - France, Israel, Japan, Ukraine and the United States; and two 

Article 5 countries – China and India. Fig. 12.2 below shows great variation in production 

levels for some Parties. 

The fluctuations in total global methyl bromide production for QPS are refected by those in 

production reported from Israel. Reasons for this fluctuation have not been identified at this 

stage. Inventory changes are a possibility. 

Figure 12 2. Production of methyl bromide for QPS uses by Party, 1999 – 2007 

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

MB (metric tonnes)

China

France

India

Israel

Japan

Ukraine

USA

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, 2009 

12.2.2.3 Consumption by Party for QPS uses 

In the period 1991-2007 QPS consumption data has been submitted to the Ozone Secretariat 

for some years by 41 non-A5 Parties and 67 A5 Parties, giving a total of 108 Parties. QPS 

consumption figures are available for as early as 1986 for some Parties but not for others. 

Because information gaps make it difficult or impossible to conduct a proper analysis, the 

QPSTF considered it best to use data from 1999 onwards for consumption when data for most 

Parties is available. 

As per Ozone Secretariat guidelines, "QPS consumption" is taken to mean QPS Production 

plus QPS Imports minus QPS Exports. ‘Consumption’ may thus be different to ‘use’. 

Differences between the two data sets may arise from several factors, notably changes in 

inventory during the year of reporting. Drawdown of stocks of material gives a lower 

calculated consumption compared with reported use, while stockpiling leads to higher 

calculated consumption compared with reported use. 
152 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Among the 15 non-A5 Parties (counting the EC-27 as one Party), 9 Parties have submitted 

data points for at least 9 years continuously in the period 1999-2007, allowing longer term 

trends to be analysed. Data for 1999-2007 are available for the major QPS users i.e. Parties 

that have consumed more than 100 tonnes in any year since 2002. The available data for nonA5 Parties since 1999 are sufficient for QPSTF to make estimates of the totals using the 

Ozone Secretariat data alone. 

Among the A5 Parties, 28 have submitted data points for at least 9 years, while 34 Parties 

have reported data for at least 4 of the last 5 years (2003-2007). Thirteen A5 Parties have 

reported QPS consumption >100 tonnes in any year since 2002. In most cases, these large 

MB-users have reported data since 2002 or much earlier. 

Global consumption for QPS has averaged nearly 11,000 metric tonnes a year since 1995, 

with minimum consumption of less than 8000 tonnes in 1998, with maxima in 1999, 2003 and 

2006 at 12425, 12,286 and 12,207 tonnes respectively, as seen in Fig. 12.3 below. 

Figure 12.3: Reported global consumption of methyl bromide for QPS uses, 1995-

2007 

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, 2009 

Control measures under the Montreal Protocol typically apply differently to Article 5 and 

non-Article 5 members. In the discussion below, data for these two groupings is presented 

separately, following this precedent. However it should be noted that QPS treatments are 

often associated with international trade and consumption in one (exporting) country is 

frequently to meet the requirements of another (importing) country. This is in contrast to the 

situation with most other ODS where consumption usually occurs within the country, though 

they may be included in manufactured items for export. 

Figure 12.4 shows the reported QPS consumption in A5 Parties and non-A5 Parties from 

1999 to 2007. When consumption is considered in the light of regional groupings of A5 and 

non-A5 countries, the following trends are evident: 

3⁄4 In 2007 reported consumption for QPS in A5 countries exceeded that in non-A5 for 

the first time. 

3⁄4 Total consumption of MB for QPS uses peaked in non-Article 5 Parties in 2000 with 

a reported consumption of 9,646 metric tonnes. In 2006 consumption was reported at 

7,536 tonnes, reducing to 4,949 tonnes in 2007. 

3⁄4 In contrast, reported consumption for QPS uses in Article 5 countries has grown 

approximately linearly since 2000, from 3,990 tonnes to 5,803 tonnes in 2007. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 153

Evolution of reported consumption for A5 and non-A5 Parties is illustrated in Figure 

12. 4 below. 

Figure 12.4: Total reported consumption by Article 5 and non-Article 5 Parties 

over the period 1999 – 2007

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

MB (metric tonnes)

A 5 Parties

Non-A 5 Parties

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, 2009 

12.2.2.4 Consumption in Non-Article 5 Parties 

Consumption and use of methyl bromide for QPS purposes for treatment of commodities in 

trade can occur in either the importing or exporting country. Often the exporting country is an 

A5 Party. There is a trend for the NPPOs of many countries to encourage specified quarantine 

treatments to be carried out at point of export, not at import. This is designed to ensure only 

consignments free of quarantine pests are brought within the country’s borders, giving 

improved border security and ecosystem protection. A result of this process is to move the 

methyl bromide consumption or use in these instances from the importing country’s methyl 

bromide account to that of the exporting one. This contrasts with the consumption of methyl 

bromide for controlled uses (fumigation of soils, commodities and structures) where all the 

methyl bromide consumption and use occurs in the country requiring the fumigation. Detailed 

global statistics are not available for how much QPS fumigation occurs in originating country 

and how much in importing (destination) country. 

It may be speculated that the reasons for the increases QPS consumption in Article 5 countries 

with corresponding decrease in non-A5 countries results from a combination of the trend 

towards increased treatment at country of origin prior to shipment, much increased trade from 

A5 countries that are at risk of infestation by quarantine pests and requiring QPS fumigation 

and concurrent adoption of non-methyl bromide alternatives in non-A5 countries. As 

examples, it was estimated (US response to Decision XVI/10) that of the 498 tonnes used for 

commodity fumigation in the US in 2004, 252 tonnes (52%) was used on exports to meet the 

quarantine requirements of the importing country. In New Zealand at least 84% of the methyl 

bromide was used in 2007 on export commodities to meet the quarantine requirements of the 

importing country. This use of MB is directly related to the trends in trade of logs and lumber. 
154 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

There has been increasing fumigation in countries in the Asian region following introduction 

of the AFAS (Australian Fumigation Accreditation Scheme) replacing treatments formerly 

carried out in Australia. The scheme (AFAS 2009) is designed to ensure a high standard of 

quarantine fumigation is carried out in countries exporting to Australia so that overseas 

fumigations can be recognised by Australian quarantine authorities, avoiding the need for 

treatment or retreatment at point of entry into Australia. 

Nine non-A5 Parties reported consumption of MB for QPS purposes in 2006 and 2007. 

Together, they accounted for approximately 62% and 46% of total global consumption in 

2006 and 2007 respectively. Two Parties, Japan and the USA, represent 82% of total non-A5 

consumption in 2007. The USA reports a wide variation in QPS consumption, peaking at 

5,089 metric tonnes for 2006. There is no obvious trend in reported consumption for Japan 

since 2004. Both are major destinations for commodities shipped from A5 countries with 

stringent quarantine requirements to safeguard the environment, human and animal health and 

agriculture and both have had major incursions of exotic organisms that have caused severe 

economic and environmental damage. All other Parties reflect a downward trend in MB 

consumption for QPS purposes. Details on such consumption may be found in Table 12.2 and 

Fig 12.5 below. 

Table 12.2: Large volume* consumers of MB for QPS uses in non-Article 5 

regions (metric tonnes). 

Party 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

Australia 352 352 425 517 475 415 441 390 360 359 294 

European 

Community 

910 782 1328 2855 790 800 758 880 474 342 194 

Israel 853 986 225 319 337 437 501 416 331 277 210 

Japan 2175 1620 1450 1637 1408 1525 2845 1277 1166 1105 1107 

New Zealand 56 96 60 58 51 100 140 205 126 215 170 

Russian 

Federation 

 209 223 250 117 1612a 117 157 113 148 33 

Ukraine 315 315 409 257 -356b -24b 

United States 4038 3663 3079 4127 3722 4116 2931 5089 2930 

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, 2009, rounded to the nearest tonne 

(a) This value is being checked. 

(b) As per the definition of consumption (production, plus imports minus exports), when exported 

quantities (which could come from stocks) are larger than those imported or produced for a given 

year a negative value arises. 

* Large volume users have reported QPS consumption of >100 tonnes a year in 2006 or 2007 

An analysis of regional consumption for non A5 Parties indicates the following trends as 

illustrated by Fig 12.5 below: 

3⁄4 Aggregate reported consumption in Australia and New Zealand has remained stable at 

around 500 tonnes in the period considered. 

3⁄4 The EC, Japan and Israel show a general downward trend although there were was 

increased consumption in the EC in 1999 and 2000 when reported consumption reached 

2855 metric tonnes, and in 2003 for Asia (Japan and Israel) with 3357 tonnes. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 155

3⁄4 Similarly, Non-EC European Parties report peak consumption in 2002, due in particular 

to significantly increased consumption in the Russian Federation for that year21. 

3⁄4 Reported consumption in North America (USA and Canada) has ranged from 

approximately 2,900 to 5,800 tonnes. Although lower in 2007 than in 1999, consumption 

showed a sharp increase in 2006 when the United States reported 5106.2 metric tonnes 

consumed for QPS purposes. 

Figure 12.5: Reported MB consumption for QPS purposes in non-A5 Parties in 

various regions 

-1,000

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

MB (metric tonnes)

Asia

Aust & NZ

North America

EC

Non EC Europe

Source: Ozone Secretariat data, April 2009 

12.2.2.5 Consumption in Article 5 Parties 

Analysis of QPS consumption data reported in 2006 and 2007 by A5 Parties (Ozone 

Secretariat data) indicates that forty-three countries reported consumption in 2006 and 39 in 

2007. In aggregate, A5 consumption amounted to 38% of total global consumption in 2006 

and 54% in 2007. Consumption trends for A5 Parties can be summarised as follows: 

3⁄4 In 2006, ten A5 Parties reported consumption of MB for QPS purposes that was 

larger than 100 metric tonnes. Aggregate consumption for this group of Parties was 

84% of the total reported consumption for this group in 2006. 

3⁄4 The remaining 26% was composed of three medium volume users consuming 

between 50 and 100 tonnes (accounting to 6% of total A5 use for that year), eleven 

small volume users (between 5 and 50 tonnes) and nineteen low volume consumers 

(LVC) with usage below 5 metric tonnes. 

 

21 The value for the Russian Federation for 2002 is being checked. It appears 

anomalously high compared with previous and subsequent years. 
156 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

3⁄4 In 2007, eleven countries reported usage at or above 100 metric tonnes for QPS 

purposes. Together, this accounted for 5100 tonnes or about 87% of total A5 

consumption in that year. 

3⁄4 The remaining 23% was composed of four medium users (between 50 and 100 metric 

tonnes of MB) summing 5% of the total A5 consumption for the year, ten small users 

(between 5 and 20 tonnes) and fourteen LVC. 

The largest volume consumers of MB for QPS purposes (consumption at or above 100 tonnes 

for 2006 and/or 2007) appear in Table 12.3 below. Several countries in different world 

regions show a sustained increase in consumption. Preliminary discussion on particular 

categories of use and key pests is included in this interim report and will be addressed in 

detail in the final QPSTF report. 

Table 12.3: Large volume* A 5 consumers of MB for QPS (metric tonnes). 

Party 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

Brazil 52 107 223 167 

China 67 889 223 121 1118 1291 725 1519 1029 1855 

Egypt 200 54 89 160 150 138 

India 182 207 210 308 295 114 389 301 330 361 

Indonesia 169 147 210 189 252 252 252 337 211 250 

Malaysia 46 61 93 168 156 171 252 285 300 

Mexico 1252 1106 312 359 715 155 96 135 240 239 260 

Republic of 

Korea 950 390 884 350 516 543 377 536 425 288 381 

Singapore 40 37 231 109 35 35 52 46 85 98 153 

Thailand 259 253 458 146 208 375 620 455 539 558 

Vietnam 70 330 380 250 325 336 530 599 656 677 

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, 2009, rounded to the nearest tonne 

*Large volume users have a reported QPS consumption of >100 tonnes a year in 2006 or 2007 

An analysis of methyl bromide consumption for QPS uses per region reveals that largest 

consumers are located in Asia as seen in Fig. 12.6. Further, that QPS consumption in that part 

of the world is increasing. This was also found in a recent survey of QPS uses conducted 

through CAP for Region of Asia and Pacific (ROAP), where total estimated QPS 

consumption for the Asia/ Pacific (including Taiwan, PRC and Pacific Islands) in 2005 was 

estimated to be about 34% of the global QPS production for that same year (UNEP/ ROAP, 

2008). To a lesser extent, an upward tendency with respect to consumption of MB for QPS 

uses is also observed in Latin American countries since 2002, following a decline to a low 

point then. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 157

Figure 12.6: Regional QPS consumption in Article 5 Parties 1997 – 2007 (metric 

tonnes) 

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

1997199819992000200120022003200420052006

2007

Year

MB (metric tones)

 Africa

 Asia

 Eastern Europe

 Latin America and the

Caribbean

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, April 2009 

12.2.2.6 Global production vs. global consumption 

As seen in Fig. 12.7 and table 12.4 below, between 1999 and 2007 reported production of MB 

for exempted QPS uses has been roughly at the same level as reported consumption. Data 

prior to 1999 for reported consumption by country is incomplete and thus the comparison can 

only be made to totals subsequent to 1999. Differences between production and consumption 

between 2002 and 2007 exceeded 1000 tonnes on a yearly basis, possibly reflecting stock 

changes. The aggregate values over this period were closely similar (production, 69,265 

tonnes; consumption, 69,882 tonnes).

Figure 12.7: Global production of MB for QPS uses compared to global 

consumption 

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

MB (Metric tonnes)

Production

Consumption

Source: Ozone Secretariat Data, April 2009 
158 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 12.4: Analysis of available QPS information, data gaps, and preliminary proposals for gathering information (under par

XX/6) 

No Information topics to 

be reviewed under 

Decision XX/6 

paragraphs 4-7 

Areas where information is available 

or not sufficient, and reasons 

Proposals 

informatio

satisfac

1 Review of all relevant 

currently available information on the use of MB for QPS applications 

For QPS consumption data: many gaps in A5 data, some gaps in non-A5 data. For major applications: data gaps for some major users. New data received for Parties in response to Dec XX/6. A number of Parties have not reported QPS consumption data to the Ozone Secretariat. Inadequate responses to surveys in 2004-2006 (. New surveys available for Asia Australia, New Zealand 21 Parties have responded to Dec XX/6 

Encourage Pareport data. Qbe sent to natexperts. If nebe encouragequestionnaire website. 

2 Review of related 

emissions 

Estimates are available in previous MBTOC & TEAP reports. 

Update of estby QPSTF, to final report.. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

No Information topics to 

be reviewed under 

Decision XX/6 

paragraphs 4-7 

Areas where information is available 

or not sufficient, and reasons 

Proposals 

informatio

satisfac

3 Assessment of trends in 

the major uses 

TEAP has carried out detailed surveys in the past. Data showing trends for major uses over several years is only available for some Parties. More data would be very useful for trend analysis. Protocol does not require Parties to report a breakdown of major uses. This type of information is not routinely collected in many large volume consuming countries. However useful information has been received from several Parties 

Targeted quespecific counMB for majoassistance fronational expetype of inform(IPPC catego

4 Review of available 

alternatives 

Data available for this task in past MBTOC and TEAP reports. Presently updating. 

Updating from treatment maphyto websiteresearch in m

5 Review of other 

mitigation options 

Sufficient information can be compiled QPSTF asses

6 Review of barriers to the 

adoption of alternatives 

Sufficient information can be compiled Preliminary a

conducted. Fupending 

7 Additional information 

or action to meet those objectives [Alternatives? Mitigation? Emission reduction?] 

Sufficient information can be compiled QPSTF asses
160 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

No Information topics to 

be reviewed under 

Decision XX/6 

paragraphs 4-7 

Areas where information is available 

or not sufficient, and reasons 

Proposals 

informatio

satisfac

8 Description of the 

majority of the volumes of MB used for QPS, by the major uses and target pests 

Refer to no. 3. For target pests sufficient information 

can be compiled 

Updating from treatment maphyto websiteusers 

9 Technical and economic 

availability of alternatives for the main MB uses, by volume 

Information on technical availability is available for some major users. Data on economics can be compiled however this work will be time-consuming. 

Economic dafrom companalternatives, aexamples or c

10 Technical and economic 

availability of technologies for MB recovery, containment and recycling 

Sufficient technical information is available. More information to be compiled on economics 

Preliminary fEconomic dafrom companalternatives, a

11 QPS applications for 

which no alternatives are available to date 

Past MBTOC and TEAP reports have published lists; these can be updated 

QPSTF asses

12 Assessment of why 

alternatives are not technically or economically feasible or cannot be adopted (see 11) 

Sufficient information can be compiled QPSTF asses
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

No Information topics to 

be reviewed under 

Decision XX/6 

paragraphs 4-7 

Areas where information is available 

or not sufficient, and reasons 

Proposals 

informatio

satisfac

13 Illustrative examples of 

regulations or other measures that directly affect the use of MB for QPS, including information requested in Decision X/11 (Dec X/11(3): To request the Parties to submit a list of regulations that mandate the use of MB for QPS 

Examples compiled. Useful information received from several Parties. Further work will be conducted 

Preliminary f

14 Barriers preventing the 

adoption of alternatives to MB for QPS 

Sufficient information can be compiled Preliminary f

Further asses

15 Projects demonstrating 

technically and economically feasible alternatives 

Sufficient information can be compiled. Information received from some Parties (i.e. Canada) 

QPSTF asses

16 Projects demonstrating 

technologies for recapture and destruction of MB for QPS 

Sufficient information can be compiled QPSTF asses

17 Highlight areas where 

sufficient information indicates opportunities for reductions in MB use or emissions for QPS 

Information can be compiled QPSTF asses
162 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

No Information topics to 

be reviewed under 

Decision XX/6 

paragraphs 4-7 

Areas where information is available 

or not sufficient, and reasons 

Proposals 

informatio

satisfac

18 List of available MB 

recapture technologies 

Sufficient information can be compiled – see no. 10 

Preliminary fFurther QPSTpending

19 Where information is 

insufficient, a final proposal for further data gathering 

Sufficient information can be compiled Preliminary f

Further QPSTpending

20 List categories of use 

that have been classified as QPS by some Parties but not by others 

Further information on the particular circumstances of uses would be useful 

List includedanalysis preseQPSTF assesresponses fro
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 163

12.3 Major QPS uses and volumes 

At various stages since 1994, TEAP and MBTOC has carried out surveys and/or contacted 

national experts in order to compile information about major QPS uses, and to estimate 

volumes in some cases (e.g. MBTOC 1995, 1998, 2003, 2007). Parties are not required to 

report information about major QPS uses under the Montreal Protocol. Nevertheless, data 

have been made available by some Parties. In 1999 Decision XI/13(6) urged Parties to 

implement procedures to monitor the uses of MB by commodity and quantity (using a form 

shown in TEAP’s report of April 1999, if necessary). In 2004 Decision XVI/10 requested 

Parties to submit data on individual QPS categories of use to TEAP, who then reported to 

Parties on the issue (TEAP 2006). Some Parties have indicated that their data were based on 

estimates rather than precise record keeping or surveys. 

While there remain some data gaps and uncertainties, QPSTF has been able to make 

preliminary estimates of the volumes of uses covering more than 77% of total reported QPS 

consumption, with 66% of total global consumption resulting from 5 major categories of use. 

In keeping with Decision XX/6, QPSTF adopted categories of use for QPS in conformity with 

those used by the IPPC, with some additions and modifications. These were as used in Annex 

6 of 3CPM – Recommendation for the replacement or reduction of the use of methyl 

bromide as a phytosanitary measure (IPPC, 2008) and are given in Table 12.5. 

Table 12.5: Main categories of MB use for QPS purposes 

Category Uses

Bulbs, corms, tubers and rhizomes (intended for planting)

Cut flowers and branches (including foliage)

Fresh fruit and vegetables 

Grain, cereals and oil seeds for consumption including rice (not 

intended for planting)

Dried foodstuffs (including herbs, dried fruit, coffee, cocoa) 

Nursery stock (plants intended for planting other than seed), and 

associated soil and other growing media 

Seeds (intended for planting) 

Soil and other growing media as a commodity, including soil exports 

and soil associated with living material such as nursery stock* 

Wood packaging materials 

Wood (including sawn wood and wood chips) 

Whole logs (with or without bark) 

Hay, straw, thatch grass, dried animal fodder (other than grains and 

cereals listed above) 

Cotton and other fibre crops and products 

Commodities 

Tree nuts (e.g. almonds, walnuts, hazelnuts) 

Buildings with quarantine pests (including elevators, dwellings, 

Structures and equipment factories, storage facilities) 

Equipment (including used machinery and vehicles) and empty 

shipping containers and reused packaging 

Preplant and disinfestation fumigation of agricultural land* Soil as agricultural land 

Miscellaneous small 

volume uses 

Personal effects, furniture, air and watercraft, artifacts, 

hides, fur and skins 

Source: IPPC, 2008 list of categories; *Not on IPPC 2008 list 
164 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Designation of a particular use as QPS is dependent on interpretation of the definitions of 

QPS set out in Decisions of the Parties. In the analysis below, uses for QPS were as reported 

by the individual Party. This includes cases where the category of use was identified as one 

where it was classified as quarantine and pre-shipment use by some Parties but not by others 

(see Section 12.8). 

12.3.1 Definitions of 'Quarantine' and 'Pre-shipment' 

The scope of the QPS exemption set out in Article 2H para. 6 has been clarified in Decisions 

VII/5 and XI/12 of the Protocol relating to the terms 'Quarantine' and 'Pre-shipment'. TEAP 

(2002) provided some discussion and examples of cases that might or might not fall within 

the QPS exemption. There is also discussion of the scope of the exemption from control under 

the Protocol for QPS uses of methyl bromide in the UNEP/IPPC (2008) publication ‘Methyl 

Bromide: Quarantine and Preshipment Uses’. 

Differences in interpretation of the scope and application of the QPS exemption by individual 

Parties has led to some differences in the uses that were reported as QPS in the data accessed 

by the QPSTF and, presumably, in the aggregate consumption of methyl bromide for QPS 

purposes reported under Art. 7, as amended in the Beijing Amendment Para. O. This is 

discussed in section 12.5.3 below. 

Specifically, the Seventh Meeting of the Parties decided in Decision VII/5 that: 

a) “Quarantine applications”, with respect to methyl bromide, are treatments to 

prevent the introduction, establishment and/or spread of quarantine pests 

(including diseases), or to ensure their official control, where: 

i. Official control is that performed by, or authorised by, a national 

plant, animal or environmental protection or health authority; 

ii. Quarantine pests are pests of potential importance to the areas 

endangered thereby and not yet present there, or present but not 

widely distributed and being officially controlled 

b) "Pre-shipment applications" are those treatments applied directly preceding 

and in relation to export, to meet the phytosanitary or sanitary requirements of 

the importing country or existing phytosanitary or sanitary requirements of 

the exporting country;

In the International Plant Protection Convention, the following definitions apply: 

“Quarantine pest” - a pest of potential economic importance to the area 

endangered thereby and not yet present there, or present but not widely 

distributed and being officially controlled; 

“Regulated non-quarantine pest” - a non-quarantine pest whose presence in 

plants for planting affects the intended use of those plants with an 

economically unacceptable impact and which is therefore regulated within the 

territory of the importing contracting party.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 165

The QPSTF notes that ‘not yet present there’ is referring to exotic pests, rather than an 

endemic pest. Exotic pests may be long established in defined regions of a country, but still 

subject to quarantine measures for regions where they are not established. 

The definition of a quarantine pest under the Montreal Protocol differs from that under the 

IPPC by one word, “economic”: the Montreal Protocol refers to “pests of potential 

importance” while the Convention definition refers to “pests of potential economic 

importance”. However, under the IPPC, it has been clarified in a supplement to ISPM No. 5 

that “economic” includes environmental considerations. 

The IPPC deals with pests of plants, and not of livestock, which would have potential 

economic impact, again including environmental considerations. The scope of the IPPC 

covers the protection of cultivated plants in agriculture (including horticulture and forestry), 

uncultivated/unmanaged plants, wild flora, habitats and ecosystems. 

The IPPC definition of a quarantine pest relates to official control, which means established, 

authorised or performed by a national plant protection organisation. 

The Montreal Protocol’s definition covers environmental and other pests that might endanger 

a region without direct quantifiable economic loss. An interpretation of Decision VII/7 is that 

the use of methyl bromide as a quarantine treatment may only be for pests that are officially 

recognised as quarantine pests and must be officially authorised by a competent authority. 

The IPPC definition of a quarantine pest relates to official control, which means established, 

authorised or performed by a national plant protection organisation. Under the Montreal 

Protocol definitions, “competent authorities” include not only national plant protection 

organisations, but also national animal or environmental protection authorities or national 

official health authorities. An interpretation is that simple, commercial and contractual 

arrangements to supply fumigated or pest-free commodity do not qualify a treatment as 

‘quarantine’. 

QPS treatments under the Montreal Protocol relate not only to official phytosanitary 

treatments, but may also apply to “sanitary” treatments, e.g., against human or animal 

pathogens and vectors (e.g. mosquitoes), covered by multilateral agreements such as the 

World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) and World Health Organization (WHO). It is 

estimated that about 1% of total quarantine QPS use by volume may fall in this category 

(UNEP/ IPPC, 2008). 

Pre-shipment treatments target non-quarantine pests that may be present in both the exporting 

and importing country. These pests are usually ones that affect storage or end-use quality of 

the exported commodities, and are outside the scope of the IPPC. Exceptionally, these 

commodities may be seeds for planting, with the associated pests being ‘regulated nonquarantine pests’ in IPPC terminology. 

The definition of 'Pre-shipment' is unique to the Montreal Protocol. It is given and elaborated 

in Decisions VII/5 and XI/12. The Eleventh Meeting of the Parties decided in Decision XI/12 

that pre-shipment applications are "those non-quarantine applications applied within 21 days 

prior to export to meet the official requirements of the importing country or existing official 

requirements of the exporting country”. 

As per decision VII/5, official requirements are those, which are “performed by, or authorised 

by a national plant, animal, environmental, health or stored product authority". 
166 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

12.3.2 Overview of QPS use by category of use 

A general analysis on categories of use by volume was conducted, on the basis of information 

received from Parties in response to Decision XX/6 supplemented by data from previous 

surveys of QPS uses (TEAP 2006, UNEP/ROAP 2008). Data received was most complete for 

2007. In consequence, that year was taken as representative for the analysis. Where data was 

not available for that year, the most recent year for which detailed information was used as an 

estimate for 2007, without adjustment. All data used was for 2004 or later. 

It was the Task Force’s opinion that is was unlikely that there had been major changes in the 

overall proportions of use in the 2004 – 2007 period. This is supported by the lack of change 

in global reported QPS consumption during that period. 

Total consumption reported by A5 Parties to the QPSTF in response to Decision XX/6 and 

consumption identified from other sources as explained, amounted to approximately 5,044 

metric tonnes of methyl bromide. Total consumption reported by A5 Parties to the Ozone 

Secretariat for 2007 as per Article 7 was 5,803 tonnes. This leaves 759 tonnes for which uses 

have not been allocated. However, nearly 90% of this figure corresponds to thee Parties – 

India (reported 2007 QPS consumption of 360.5 tonnes), Singapore (153 tonnes) and Brazil 

(167 tonnes 

For non-A5 Parties, total consumption reported to the QPSTF or identified from other sources 

amounted to 3,472 metric tonnes, whilst total consumption reported as per Article 7 data for 

2007 was 4949 tonnes. This leaves an unidentified amount of 1,477 tonnes. 

The only large volume non-A5 QPS consumer for which data was not available is Israel, 

which reported a consumption of 210 tonnes for 2007. The remaining difference of 1,267 

tonnes apparently arises from unidentified use in the US, which submitted a breakdown of 

QPS uses for an estimated 1,969 metric tonnes in 2005, in response to Decision XVI/10.Total 

consumption reported for that year (Article 7) was 2,931 tonnes. Data gathering for the US is 

ongoing, but there is an indication that the quantity of QPS accounted for is much lower than 

reported consumption and that there is a continuing surplus of reported consumption over 

identified use of 1000 tonnes or more each year over the period 2003-2007. 

Table 12.6 and Fig. 12.8 below present QPS use categories at the global level by volume. Figs 

12.9 and 12.10 illustrate the main regional uses by A5 and non-A5 Parties by volume of 

methyl bromide used. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 167

Table 12.6: Volumes (metric tonnes) and percentage of MB used for QPS by 

category in A5, non-A5 countries, and globally.

Use category A 5 Parties Non- A 5 Parties Global 

Tonnes % Tonnes % Tonnes % 

Fruit and vegetables 355 6% 291 6% 646 8%

Grain 948 16% 324 7% 1272 12%

Wood Packaging Material 1122 19% 263 5% 1385 13%

Wood 160 3% 84 2% 244 2%

Logs 1432 25% 804 17% 2236 21%

Soil in situ 0 0 1489 30% 1489 14%

Dried Foodstuffs 215 4% 5 <1% 220 2%

Cut Flowers and bulbs 168 3% 7 <1% 175 1%

Equipment 82 1% 8 <1% <1% <1%

Seeds 116 2% 10 <1% 126 1%

Miscellaneous 133 2% 99 3% 263 2%

Undefined or Other 322 4% 91 <1% 2% 1%

Total - identified uses 5053 87% 3472 70% 8486 77%

Total - as per A7 data 5803 100% 4950 100% 10614 100%

Difference - unidentified 750 13% 1477 30% 2558 23%

Fiureg 12.8: Global categories of MB use for QPS purposes 

23%

6%

12%

2% 13%

21%

14%

2%

1% 3% 1%

2%

Unallocated Fruit & veg Grain

WPM Wood Logs

Soil in situ Dried foodstuffs Cut flowers & bulbs

Misc Seeds Other

Source: Data received from Parties in response to Decision XX/6; UNEP/ROAP, 2008; 

Banks, 2008 
168 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 12.9: Major categories of use for MB (QPS) in non-A5 Parties, 2007 

6%

7%

5%

2%

17%

2%

30%

31%

Fruits & veg Grain WPM Wood Logs Misc Soil in situ Unallocated

Notes: Data for Australia and USA are for 2005. 

Figure 12.10: Main categories of MB use for QPS in A5 countries 

17%

3%

6%

16%

19% 2%

3%

25%

2%

1% 2%

4%

Unallocated Cut fl & bulbs Fresh fruits & veg Grain

Seeds WPM Wood Logs

Dried foodstuffs Misc uses Equipment Other

Notes: Data for Asia/Pacific Parties are for 2005 and taken from UNEP/ROAP survey (2008) except 

for Malaysia and Vietnam (who submitted updated data for 2007). Data for Chile and Argentina are for 

2005 

QPSTF is compiling additional information to address all of the topics listed in Decision 

XX/6 and this information will be provided to the Parties in a TEAP report of October 2009. 

12.4 Emissions data 

Precise information on emissions is not available, since it varies from one situation to another. 

However previous MBTOC and TEAP reports have provided estimates of the emissions of 

MB from major uses. Available data including recent reports (e.g. US CCSP, 2008) will be 

reviewed and updated where necessary, for the QPSTF final report. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 169

12.5 Available Alternatives 

12.5.1 Manuals and other data sources for approved treatments 

Further discussion on availability of alternatives for QPS will be presented in the final QPSTF 

report. 

Previous MBTOC and TEAP reports have reviewed existing alternatives for various QPS uses 

(e.g. MBTOC 1995, 1998, 2002, 2007; TEAP 1999, 2006). The 2002 MBTOC Assessment 

(MBTOC 2002) provided detailed discussion of alternatives to QPS methyl bromide use on 

commodities in specific circumstances. An updated, comprehensive discussion on alternatives 

was included in the 2006 MBTOC Assessment Report (MBTOC, 2007). A detailed report on 

QPS and alternatives is given in TEAP (2003), produced in response to Decision XI/13(4). 

MBTOC (2002) recognised thirteen different categories of alternative treatments such as heat, 

cold and irradiation that are approved by regulatory agencies as QPS treatments in one or 

more countries for disinfestation of perishable and durable commodities. The MBAIS 

database (AQIS 2009a) provides a listing of references to methyl bromide alternatives for 

QPS and other uses. 

Existing alternatives to MB for QPS treatment of perishable and durable commodities are 

based on (1) pre-harvest practices and inspection procedures; (2) non-chemical (physical) 

treatments; and (3) chemical treatments. Edited to here TB comments 

For perishable products (e.g. fresh fruits and vegetables, cut flowers), pest control based on 

pre-harvest practices, as part of the systems approach, must describe the cultural techniques 

leading to pest reduction, they must have an agreement on the area of the pest-free zones, and 

be subject to inspection in order to receive certification. In these cases, regulatory approval 

depends on a number of factors including knowledge of the pest-host biology, evidence of 

commodity resistance to the pest, trapping and field treatment results, monitoring of pests and 

diseases, and careful documentation. Additionally, some countries maintain a pest-free zone 

by placing restrictions on the movement of commodities into the zone and/or by disinfesting 

vehicles and commodities that are categorised as high risk before or on entry. There are a 

number of examples of this systems approach in place that avoid use of QPS methyl bromide. 

Non-chemical treatments kill pests by exposure to changes in temperature and/or atmospheric 

conditions, or high energy processes such as irradiation and microwaves, or physical removal 

using air or water jets. Often a combination of these is required to kill pests or pest complexes 

because they can tolerate a single treatment. 

Non-chemical treatments for QPS purposes as alternatives to methyl bromide tend to be 

specific to particular commodities and pests. Many commodities will not tolerate particular 

treatments or the treatment may not be effective against the broad range of pests that may be 

present. These processes have most utility where there is a consistent through-put of product 

to justify the costs of construction and maintenance of facilities and trained staff. Mangos 

from Brazil are treated by hot water before shipment to the USA to ensure that living exotic 

tephritid fruit flies are not transported in the shipment. Irradiation of tropical fruit from 

Hawaii to the USA mainland is another example of a treatment to prevent introduction of 

certain fruit fly species found in Hawaii to the other USA states. 

Many quarantine treatments are post-entry where a treatment is required only if inspection 

finds a quarantine organism in the shipment at the port of entry. Typically, a treatment, 

usually methyl bromide fumigation, is ordered before the commodity can be released for 

distribution. 
170 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

MBTOC (2002) noted more than 300 individual alternatives approved for quarantine 

treatment of perishables and more than 70 approved as QPS treatments for durable 

commodities. These examples are often specific to a particular commodity and export trade 

and are drawn from a few categories of alternatives. 

National Plant Protection Organisations typically keep listings of approved treatments for 

imports, with specifications varying according to phytosanitary requirements of receiving 

countries and pest risk. In many cases, methyl bromide fumigation may be specified as a 

quarantine treatment, but often there are also approved alternative treatments or processes 

given. 

Examples of manuals of approved quarantine treatments include: 

USA - APHIS PPQ manuals – 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/import_export/plants/manuals/index.shtml 

Australia – AQIS Import Conditions database - 

http://www.aqis.gov.au/icon32/asp/ex_querycontent.asp 

New Zealand - Approved Biosecurity Treatments for Risk Goods Directed for Treatment - 

http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/files/regs/stds/bnz-std-abtrt.pdf 

Some National Plant Protection Organisations also keep listings of treatments required to 

meet the quarantine and preshipment requirements of importing countries (e.g. PHYTO 

(AQIS 2009)). These can include both methyl bromide and approved alternatives. 

Some international standards produced by the IPPC (ISPMs) detail specific treatments for 

quarantine pests. These are: 

ISPM 15 – dealing with the disinfestation of wood packaging material in international trade as 

a quarantine measure against various pests of wood and forests. The standard contains 

specifications for both heat treatment and methyl bromide fumigation. The standard 

acknowledges that methyl bromide is an Ozone-Depleting Substance. It states “In the 

absence of alternative treatments being available for certain situations or to all 

countries, or the availability of other appropriate packaging materials, methyl 

bromide treatment is included in this standard.” (IPPC 2006, 2009b) 

ISPM Nos 18 and 28 – dealing with irradiation treatment of fruit flies and some other pests to 

quarantine standards. Irradiation is an accepted treatment by some countries that may replace 

methyl bromide for control of some important quarantine pests, notably various species of 

pest tephritids (fruit flies). These are important objects of quarantine in many countries. It is 

particularly useful for treatment of tropical fruit that do not tolerate methyl bromide 

fumigation well, and as an alternative to heat treatments (IPPC, 2003, 2009a). 

Additionally, several ISPMs deal with aspects of establishment of pest-free areas as a 

phytosanitary measure. Pest-free areas, where agreed, can provide a means to avoid 

precautionary quarantine fumigations of various fruit exports/imports with methyl bromide, 

particularly against exotic tephritids (fruit flies). 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 171

12.5.2 Availability of alternatives and technologies for the main methyl bromide 

uses 

Globally, the main categories of use of methyl bromide for QPS by volume (>300 tonnes a 

year) identified from data presented in Section 12.3 are: 

• Fresh fruit and vegetables 

• Grain including rice 

• Soil in situ 

• Whole logs 

• Wood and wooden packaging material. 

These main categories represent about 85 % of the uses for which detailed information is 

available at this time (i.e. excluding unidentified uses) and % of total reported uses. Further 

clarification is being sought on the unidentified portion of the QPS usage. But, from the 

judgement of the QPSTF and in view of the high level of coverage already achieved, it is 

unlikely that further major uses will be identified in the final report. 

All of these categories have approved non-methyl bromide alternatives in at least some 

applications. Specific alternatives may not be available for a particular trade or situation 

because of the risk or presence of particular quarantine pests, lack of approval by the 

importing NPPO, or lack of registration or commercial supply of the particular treatment. 

A brief description of alternatives for the main categories follows, with some examples. A 

comprehensive analysis of alternatives, both available (approved) and under development, 

will be contained in the QPSTF final report. 

12.5.2.1 Fresh fruit and vegetables 

As stated in the previous section, this is a complex category comprising a large group of 

products such as apples, grapes, cucurbits, tomatoes, various other vegetables and other 

similar perishable foodstuffs. There are a wide variety of measures available, applied 

individually or in combination, which can be used to achieve pest reduction to quarantine 

requirements. Treatments are against a wide variety of insect and mite pests of quarantine 

significance, varying according to origin and country of destination. In many cases, approved 

treatments are limited to a particular situation, i.e. a particular commodity with a particular 

pest from a particular country or region and a particular quarantine concern of the importing 

country. (MBTOC, 2007). A more detailed analysis of alternatives available and under 

development for this category will be included in the QPSTF final report. 

12.5.2.2 Alternatives for Wood and Wood Packaging Materials 

ISPM 15, for treatment of wood packaging materials, recognises heat as an approved and 

accepted alternative to methyl bromide. The 2009 revision (IPPC 2009) did not recognise 

other alternatives, but several potential alternatives are under continued testing. Many 

countries presently comply with the ISPM 15 standard entirely with heat treatments and 

without using methyl bromide. The EC has published a manual of options and alternatives to 

comply with ISPM 15 without using MB (Vermeulen and Kool, 2006). 
172 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

12.5.2.3 Alternatives for grain, including rice 

MB fumigation continues to be used for pre-shipment treatment of cereal grains where either 

logistical constraints or importing country specifications preclude the use of phosphine, the 

principal accepted fumigant alternative. Heat treatment, and chemicals such as dichlorvos 

(where permitted) are also possible alternatives Methyl bromide fumigation is often the 

treatment of choice or sole approved and available treatment for the situations where a 

quarantine treatment is required, though it is recognised that it may not be ideal for this 

purpose (MBTOC, 2007). 

12.5.2.4 Alternatives for whole logs 

Treatment of whole logs, with bark or debarked, against many quarantine pests continues to 

rely heavily on methyl bromide for many international trades. New Zealand has successfully 

treated some 6 million m3 of exported softwood bark on logs in the past six years with 

phosphine in the holds of ships to China replacing around 1,420 tonnes of methyl bromide. 

The target concentration is a minimum 200 ppm for 10 days to treat quarantine Cerambycidae 

and Scolytidae. Due to sorption of the gas by the logs (Zhang, 2004) top-up of phosphine is 

required 5 days into the voyage to prevent the concentration falling below 200 ppm. A 

technician is required to be onboard by IMO to monitor the fumigation. In transit tests have 

shown an even gas distribution throughout the loaded ship holds is rapidly achieved. 

One of the major disadvantages of phosphine when compared to methyl bromide is the long 

exposure time (up to 10 days) required. Considerable efficacy data has been developed in 

support of this application (Frontline Biosecurity 2003; Crop and Food 2004; Hosking and 

Goss 2005; Zhang 2003; Zhang and van Epenhuijsen 2005) . Trials have shown that 

quarantine pests such as the New Zealand dry wood termite Kalotermes brouni, 

Cerambycidae eggs and larvae (Arhopalus tristus and Prionoplus spp.) and Scolytidae 

(Hylurgus/Hylastes) can be controlled by a 72 hour phosphine treatment. For example: 

Arhopalus eggs, 100% mortality was achieved at a CT of 300 g phosphine/h/m3, 

Hylurgus/Hylastes and Prionoplus larvae, 100% mortality was achieved at a CT of 100 g 

phosphine/h/m3. 

Research in China and Japan has demonstrated that phosphine killed 10 species of forest 

insects including Cerambycids, scolytids and platypodids. Oogita et al. (1997) fumigated the 

cerambycids (Semanotus japonica, S. japonicus ), Callidiellum rufipenne and 

Monochamus alternatus, the scolytids (Phloeosinus perlatus, Cryphalus fulvus and 

Xyleborus pfeili) and the platypodids (Platypus quercivorus and P. calamus) with 

phosphine at concentrations of 1.0 and 2.0 g m3 for 24 and 48 hours at 15°C and 25°C. S. 

japonica and P. perlatus eggs were killed at 2.0 g m3 for 24 hours at 15°C, but larvae and 

pupae of all species were not killed at 2.0 g m3 for 48 hours at 15°C. At 2.0 g m3 for 48 hours 

at 25°C, all stages of C. fulvus and X. pfeili, except larvae of C. fulvus, were killed. The 

work concluded that more than 48hrs was required. 

Debarked Pinus radiata logs from New Zealand do not require fumigation for market access 

into China or Malaysia. 

In Japan, the developments of alternative chemicals to methyl bromide for imported logs has 

been carried out by research institute on plant protection of MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, 

Forestry and Fisheries, 2009), manufactures and other bodies concerned MB use because MB 

use for logs is the largest in total MB use in plant quarantine. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 173

Some of research activities using methyl iodide were reported from 2003. Nine kinds of 

insect pest species for logs, smaller Japanese ceder longicorn (Callidiellum rufipenne), 

Japanese pine sawyer (Monochamus alternatus), cryptomeria bark borer (Semanotus 

japonicus), pine bark beetle (Cryphalus fulvus), Iarch ips (Ips cembrae), ambrosia beetle 

(Xyleborus pfeili), alnus ambrosia beetle (Xylosandrus germanus), yellow-spotted pine 

weevil (Pissodes nitidus), pine weevil (Shirahoshizo rufescens) were fumigated with 

methyl iodide and found the egg stages were more susceptible. Besides, larval and pupal 

stages showed similar susceptibilities. All tested species except for smaller Japanese ceder 

longicorn (C. rufipenne) were killed completely with the fumigation of methyl iodide 

50g/m3 for 24 hours at 15C (Naito et al., 2003). Mortality tests for pine wood nematode 

(Bursaphelenchus xylophilius) which indicated almost equal tolerance to methyl iodide 

with above mentioned nine species provided more than 99% of mortality for nematode that 

were fumigated with methyl iodide 30g/m3

 at 15C and 100% mortality was obtained at the 

test with 40g/m3 of dosage (Soma et al., 2005). Subsequently, large scale mortality test for 

pine wood nematode was examined at three different temperature and 10,800, 33,500 and 22, 

400 individuals were killed completely at 10C with 60g/m3

, 15C with 40-50 g/m3 and 25C 

with 30g/m3

, respectively (Soma et al., 2005). It is therefore, 87,800 nematodes in total were 

completely killed by lower dosages than the nominated standards of plant quarantine 

expecting for adopting in near future. 

The research report of the mixture fumigant of SF and MITC (Sulfuryl fluoride 30%, MITC 

30% and carbon dioxide 40%, w/w) was presented from 2004. All stage of three kinds of 

forest insect species, alnus ambrosia beetle (X. germanus), ambrosia beetle (X. pfeili) and 

pine bark beetle (C. fulvus) and adult stage of smaller Japanese ceder longicorn (C. 

rufipenne) were killed 100% at the dosages of SF15g/m3 + MITC 15g/m3

 and of SF 21g/m3 + 

MITC 21g/m3

 at temperature range with 18.3-21.2°C although achieving of complete kill for 

each of species tested were difficult when they had been fumigated with single gas of SF or 

MITC (Soma et al., 2004). These four species were considered less tolerant to mixture 

fumigant than pine wood nematode (B. xylophilius) and large scale mortality test using pine 

wood nematode provided complete kill of 97,400, 59,500 and 22,700 individuals with SF 

27g/m3 + MITC 27g/m3

 at 10C, SF 21g/m3 + MITC 21g/m3 at 15C and SF 15g/m3 + MITC 

15g/m3

 at 25°C, respectively (Soma et al., 2006). 

Both the sulfuryl fluoride/methyl isothiocyanate mixture and also methyl iodide have been 

registered as agrochemicals in Japan. 

12.5.2.5 Alternatives for soils in situ 

A very large amount of research and experience has been devoted to the development and 

adaptation of alternatives to methyl bromide for pre-plant soil fumigation (MBTOC, 2007, 

TEAP, 2008, 2009). There is widespread adoption of these alternatives. The production of 

propagation materials (i.e. bulbs, cuttings, seedlings, young plants, slips, and trees) is subject 

to high health standards and often certification requirements, which are readily achieved with 

methyl bromide. 

In the case of strawberry runners for example, MB is used to meet the certification standards 

for strawberry runner stock. The certification typically specifies a low tolerance of particular 

pests and diseases. 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. The 

same is true for stock plants used for producing cuttings of many ornamental plants. 
174 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

In spite of these requirements, there are several measures accepted as alternatives to MB for 

production of propagative material. Methyl iodide and 1,3-D/ Pic for example, are proving 

extremely effective for several US nursery sectors (e.g. Kabir et al., 2005). A recent version 

of NIPM Item #7 “Approved treatment and handling procedures to ensure against nematode 

pest infestation” lists 1,3-D (Telone II) and iodomethane (methyl iodide) together with methyl 

bromide, as alternative treatments to achieve certification requirements related to nematode 

control (CDFA, 2009), although iodomethane is not currently registered in California. 1,3-

D/Pic and Pic alone have totally replaced the use of MB in the Spanish strawberry runner 

industry (García-Méndez et al., 2008; López-Medina et al., 2007; De Cal, 2004) and are 

showing excellent results for sweet potatos, forest nurseries and perennial tree nurseries 

(Quicke et al., 2007; 2008; Enebak et al, 2007; Shrestha, et al., 2008, Hanson et al, 2008; 

Weiland et al,, 2008, Schneider et al., 2009). Substrates are becoming increasingly adopted 

as they avoid the need for methyl bromide in many countries (Stoddard et al., 2008; Walter et 

al., 2008). 

An alternate approach to chemical soil treatments is the production of nursery stock in 

containers of different types, using soil-less substrates (MBTOC, 2007). Production systems 

where this approach is economically feasible and allows for the production of high quality 

products have been identified. In Japan for example, a simple, economically feasible system 

using trays filled with substrate is proving particularly useful for the production of strawberry 

runners. Various materials are used as substrates (e.g. rock wool, peat moss, rice hulls, 

coconuts husk and bark) and can be reused after sterilising with solar heat treatment or hot 

water (Nishi and Tateya, 2006). In the USA, production of strawberry plugs has proven 

successful since many years (Durner et al, 2002) as well as in other countries. Steam is in 

wide use for cleaning substrates before reutilisation (EC Management Strategy, 2008). 

12.5.3 Applications for which no alternatives are available 

In the past several MBTOC reports have listed the QPS applications for which the committees 

had not identified technically feasible alternatives (e.g. TEAP April 1999 p.57-58). QPSTF 

will be able to update these lists relating to technical feasibility. However, availability is 

country-specific and even site-specific. Depending on how ‘available’ is defined for this 

specific task, it could potentially require the compilation of a very large database for each 

country/commodity /pest combination, and would require very large resources which are 

beyond the scope of the QPSTF. On the other hand it would be feasible in the time available 

to evaluate the lack of availability in a more general manner, by technology type, or to 

examine the lack of availability in a few selected countries, as illustrative examples.

12.6 Regulations that directly affect the use of MB 

Decision X/11 asked Parties to submit to the Ozone Secretariat in 1999 a list of regulations 

that mandate the use of MB for QPS. No responses are available to QPSTF. Nevertheless, 

information on regulations that require the use of MB is available in phytosanitary treatment 

manuals and treatment schedules published on the official national phytosanitary authorities, 

and related publications. Often, the actual regulations are found on the internet. QPSTF has 

already compiled information for key countries and major QPS uses, and has found it to be 

complicated as many regulations may cover a single use. 

At this stage, the QPSTF has been able to establish that regulations and the interpretation of 

regulations for QPS use vary widely between countries. For instance certain countries strictly 

adhere to the need for MB in a phytosanitary certificate only when it has been prescribed by a 

National Plant Protection Organization or for preshipment when an importing country has 

published official phytosanitary requirements prescribing its use. Other regulations interpret 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 175

that QPS MB use as a treatment that maintains freedom of pests and diseases irrespective of 

their status as a quarantine pest. In some regulations nil tolerance to a pest is expected 

whereas in others the commodity (or soil) is expected to be essentially free of pests and 

diseases. 

The QPSTF is compiling a list of regulations to present in the final report. 

12.7 Barriers to adoption, mitigation options 

Past MBTOC and TEAP reports have reported on some of the barriers to adoption of MB 

alternatives and mitigation options (e.g. MBTOC 1998, 2002, 2007; TEAP 1999, 2000, 2006, 

2007). For some countries such information has been published in papers about QPS issues 

produced by national phytosanitary authorities and national experts. Further analysis on this 

topic will be included in the QPSTF final report 

Development of methyl bromide alternatives for QPS applications continues to be a difficult 

process, exacerbated by the multitude of commodities being treated, the diverse situations 

where treatments are applied, and a constantly changing trade and regulatory landscape. 

A variety of technologies are potentially suitable as replacements for some commodities and 

some circumstances. In many cases, uncertainty about phytotoxic effects and effectiveness 

against the target pests constrain use of alternatives. There may be considerable cost, effort 

and time associated with the registrations and approvals that are required for many quarantine 

uses. 

Changing quarantine regulations and bilateral quarantine agreements are the responsibility of 

governmental agencies but, in many countries, pesticide registrations are initiated by the 

private sector. In the past, pesticide companies have been reluctant to invest money to register 

and market pesticides for small markets represented by many of these quarantine uses, or 

where patent protection is lacking. Alternatives that do not require registration such as heat, 

cold and inert gases may be more easily adapted in cases where their use is appropriate to the 

tolerance of the commodity, the situation and where they show sufficient efficacy. However, 

these treatments still require bilateral quarantine agreement or regulation in the importing 

country before use will be allowed. 

The required standard of efficacy for quarantine uses is extremely high because the 

consequences of exotic pests surviving treatments can be catastrophic to regions where the 

new pest becomes established. As compared to normal pest control and pre-shipment 

treatments, quarantine treatments seek to absolutely prevent entry of any pest individuals into 

a country and as such must be as close to 100% effective as possible. A common quarantine 

standard is probit 9, which states that 99.9968% of pests in the shipment must be killed or 

made reproductively sterile by the treatment—an extremely difficult target to reach. Proof 

that an alternative treatment reaches this specification is a costly and onerous task, often 

required for particular combinations of commodity and pest. 

Pre-shipment uses on the other hand, are usually for widely distributed pests that are already 

found in the importing country. Consequently, the efficacy standard does not need to be as 

severe as in the case of quarantine and research requirements to establish efficacy can be less 

rigorous as well. It would appear that there are fewer obstacles to adopting alternatives for 

pre-shipment methyl bromide uses than for quarantine uses. 

Regulations prescribing MB treatment alone are a major barrier to adoption of alternatives as 

often there is little incentive for the regulation to be changed. Also, often the data has not 

been generated to prove effective control of all pests with an alternative to a standard similar 

to MB and Parties are unwilling to take on the possible increased risk. 
176 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

A key barrier to development of alternatives for soil treatment for plants of certified high 

health status is the rigorous testing required to prove an alternative effective, however MB is 

accepted as the effective standard and requires no testing to validate its performance. 

Other barriers to adoption of alternatives have been summarised by the EC in its Report on 

QPS Applications sent to QSC (Touchdown, 2009) and include; 

3⁄4 Importing countries specifications mandating the use of MB 

3⁄4 Alternative is uneconomical, logically impractical or unregistered 

3⁄4 The technical expertise to assess a pest risk is not available 

12.8 A list of categories of use identified by TEAP that have been classified as 

QPS by some Parties and not by others 

Paragraph 7 of Decision XX/6 requests TEAP to list MB use categories that have been 

classified as QPS by some Parties but not by others, and submit them to the 29OEWG. 

QPSTF was able to identify three specific categories of use that are considered to fall under 

the QPS exemption by some Parties, but others would apparently not consider them to be QPS 

under the same technical conditions. All these examples have consumption or use at greater 

than 50 tonnes a year of methyl bromide. These categories may include some methyl bromide 

applications against pests of quarantine concern. 

The three categories of current QPS uses listed by the QPSTF are:

1. Treatment of export coffee for QPS, as reported by Vietnam (UNEP/ ROAP, 2008). 

2. QPS treatment of export rice and cassava chips from Thailand and Vietnam (UNEP/ 

ROAP, 2008). 

3. Fumigation of soil used to produce propagation material in the United States (i.e. 

strawberry runners, sod or turfgrass, forest nursery seedlings, ornamental nursery 

material for propagation purposes), when such material needs to be moved across 

administrative boundaries within the country (e.g. across State borders). 

Vietnam is the only Party to report substantial use of methyl bromide for QPS disinfestation 

of export coffee (UNEP/ROAP, 2008). Other coffee-producing countries control the pests of 

coffee in storage by other means. No pests of quarantine concern requiring methyl bromide 

treatment have been identified associated with coffee shipments from Vietnam, though coffee 

berry borer (Hypothenemus hampei) may be of concern to some import destinations. 

Infestation of raw coffee by the coffee bean weevil (Araecerus fasciculatus) and other 

storage insect and mite pests is typically controlled by good storage practices, particularly 

storage at low moisture content (equilibrium relative humidity). Typically, raw coffee in store 

is fumigated with phosphine to control storage pests if it should become infested. This can 

include fumigation prior to shipment if required contractually by the importer. It may be that 

the methyl bromide fumigations are conducted for contractual reasons, not to meet official 

phytosanitary requirements. 

With regard to rice exports from Vietnam and rice and cassava chip exports from Thailand, 

there are similar concerns over whether some or most of the methyl bromide treatments would 

be classified as QPS by many Parties. Some treatments may be to ensure that shipments do 

not carry khapra beetle (Trogoderma granarium), a pest of quarantine concern to several 

countries. However, most of the methyl bromide used may be for contractual reasons to 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 177

ensure shipments are free of common storage pests, widespread in both exporting and 

receiving country, and not for official phytosanitary requirements of the importing country 

(UNEP/ ROAP, 2008) 

In the case of pre-plant fumigation of soil with MB, only one Party, USA, classifies methyl 

bromide treatment of soil for domestic production of high plant health propagation material 

for strawberry runners, sod or turf, forest seedlings, ornamentals as a quarantine measure. 

Other Parties, such as Australia, EC, Chile and Argentina, have classified this activity as 

normal use of methyl bromide, subject to phaseout, and have now or in the past applied for 

CUEs to permit methyl bromide use post-phaseout, where they considered alternatives were 

not available, technically or economically. However, part of the US QPS use on soils is 

against exotic pests that are declared objects of quarantine (quarantine pests, see below), but 

most appears to be for production of propagation material of high plant health status as 

discussed above. 

Table 12.7 lists some Parties that do and do not consider production of strawberry runners of 

high plant health status to be QPS. 

In IPPC terminology, the target of the treatment may come under the category ‘regulated nonquarantine pests’ (see Section 12.5.1), as the pests and diseases that are to be controlled with 

the treatment are established in both the production and receiving areas and may not come 

under ‘quarantine pest’ according to an interpretation of Decision VII/5. 

Table 12.7: Parties that may and may not consider preplant fumigation of soil 

during production of strawberry runners of high plant health status to be QPS (a)

Country Use considered quarantine by the Party and 

exempted as QPS? 

Australia No, CUN submitted 

Canada No, CUN submitted 

EC No, CUN submitted 

Israel No, CUN submitted 

USA Yes, CUN for intra area use only 

Chile Yes, at one time, but no longer so (b)

Argentina, Lebanon No, MLF phaseout project accepted 

(a) A similar situation exists for other propagation material mentioned below (Table 12.6) with only the US 

considering this use as QPS. 

(b) Chile provided information in response to Decision XIV/10 that listed fumigation of soil for production of 

strawberry runners as QPS, but this classification was later changed to non-QPS. 

Pre-plant fumigation of soil with MB was declared to qualify for a QPS exemption under the 

final rule published in the US Federal Register on January 2, 2003 (68 FR 238). The final 

rules states that ‘the exemption for quarantine applications applies to methyl bromide 

used for growing propagative material if the methyl bromide is being used to grow 

propagative material to meet official quarantine requirements of the destination to 

which the propagative material will be transported’. The final rule only cites strawberry 

rhizomes as examples of propagative material, but EPA clarifies that ‘the exemption also 

covers other propagative material, including tree seedlings, when the methyl bromide 

is used to meet an official quarantine requirement of the destination to which the 

propagative material will be transported’. 
178 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

The exemption is for MB used to grow propagative material (also referred to as ‘plants for 

planting’) that qualifies under the following parameters: a) is to be transported from one 

locality to another, where official quarantine requirements apply; b) is performed to meet 

official quarantine requirements specifying that “underground portions of the propagative 

material are to be free from quarantine pests”. 

Use of MB to meet this exemption was estimated at 477 tonnes for the state of California in 

2005 (Trout 2007). Quantities of MB exempted as QPS use for the production of propagative 

material was reported in CUNs submitted by the USA in 2004 and appear in Table 12.8 

below. 

Table 12.8: Quantities of MB used for soil fumigation for the production of 

propagative material in USA in 2004, exempted as QPS use. 

Propagative material tonnes

Bulb growers 261 

California deciduous nurseries 127 

California rose nurseries 136 

Forest nurseries 174 

Strawberry nurseries 463 

Turfgrass (sod) 266 

Western raspberry nurseries .25 

Misc. 24

Total 1476

Source: US Response to Decision XVI/10, rounded to nearest tonne. 

The use of methyl bromide to produce plants for propagation is distinct from treatments of 

soil to eliminate recognised quarantine pests either in soil transported as a substrate or treated 

in situ. For example: 

3⁄4 Soil or substrate that is either imported or exported as a commodity (to grow plants 

in) is sometimes fumigated with MB as a quarantine measure. This use is for example 

reported by Malaysia (UNEP, 2006) (usage of 5.05 tonnes was reported for 2007 in 

this category). 

3⁄4 The potato cyst nematode Globodera pallida is a quarantine pest in the United 

States with occurrence limited to the state of Idaho. Regulations 301.86 to 301.89 

impose restrictions on the movement of materials from the state and designates 

quarantined areas within the state. (Federal Register Vol 73 No. 177, Sept 11, 2008; 

USDA 2007). An eradication program presently covers a total of eight fields 

comprising approximately 445 ha, which are fumigated with MB once a year usually 

in the spring. In both 2007 and 2008, 217 tonnes was used for this purpose.The 

fumigation is followed by a 1,3-D/ chloropricrin fumigation 6 months later. (Vick, 

2009, pers. comm.; USDA 2007). The programme is expected to take several years to 

complete. 

3⁄4 In a similar quarantine operation, to eradicate golden nematode from an infested area 

in New York state, USA, 9.3 ha of soil was fumigated with methyl bromide using 4.5 

tonnes in 2008. 

3⁄4 In Australia, approximately 19 tonnes of methyl bromide were used in both 2007 and 

2008 to control an incursion of potato cyst nematode. Methyl bromide as a soil 

treatment was used prior to 2006 to control and eliminate branched broomrape, an 

exotic quarantine pest (parasitic plant) of limited distribution within Australia. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 179

In accordance with Decision XX/6(7), Vietnam, Thailand, and USA are requested to provide 

the information on the rationale for classifying the listed categories as QPS to the Technology 

and Economic Assessment Panel in time for inclusion in its final report to the Twenty-First 

Meeting of the Parties 

The QPSTF believes that, in the responses submitted by Parties, it would be necessary for 

such information to contain: 

• The context in which the MB is used for QPS, such as a description of the goal of the 

QPS treatment and the target pest(s); 

• The number of days between treatment and shipment; 

• The destination country or countries; 

• Legislative requirements that have influenced the use of MB for QPS in the exporting 

and/or importing country or countries; 

• The time of the year when the treatment is carried out 

• Other information relevant to the QPS use of MB. 

In order for the information to be analysed and discussed by the QPSTF, the information 

should be sent to TEAP no later than 1 September 2009. 

12.9 References 

AQIS 2009a Methyl Bromide Alternatives Information System (MBAIS) http://www.daff.gov.au/animalplant-health/plant/methyl_bromide_alternatives_information_system (accessed 14 May 

2009) 

AQIS 2009b PHYTO Database - Plants and Plant Products Export Conditions 

http://www.daff.gov.au/aqis/export/plants-grains-hort/phyto (accessed 14 May 2009). 

Arhopalus Ferus, Pests of Export Logs – 2003 – Crop & Food Research. 

Brash, D, Bycroft, B, van Epenhuijsen, K, & Somerfield, K – Phosphine requirement for control of 

Arhopalus eggs and Hylastes/Hylurgus larvae – June 2008 – Crop & Food Research. 

Brash.D,van Epenhuijsen. K, Zhang.Z, Bycroft B, Tumambing.J, Hosking.G; Phosphine for disinfestation 

of pine logs and sawn timber from New Zealand. MBAO 2008 

CDFA (2009). California Departent of Food an Agriculture. 

http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PE/Nursery/pdfs/NIPM_7.pdf

De Cal, A., Martínez-Terceno, A., López-Aranda, J.M. and Melgarejo P. (2004). Alternatives to methyl 

bromide in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Plant Disease 88(2): 210-214. 

Durner, E.F., E. B. Poling and J. L. Maas, 2002 Recent Advances in Strawberry Plug Transplant 

Technology. HorTechnology 12(4): 545 - 550

EC. European Community (2008). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of 

critical uses of Methyl Bromide. July, 2008 

Enebak, 2007. Methyl bromide and the Montreal Protocol: An update on the Critical Use Exemption and 

Quarantine Pre-shipment process. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-50 pp 135 - 

141 

Federal Register (2003) United States of America. January 2, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 1 

Federal Register (2008). United States of America Vol. 73 No. 177, Sept 11, 2008 
180 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

López-Medina, J., J. M. López-Aranda, J. J. Medina, L. Miranda, C. Soria, F. Domínguez, E. VázquezOrtiz1 and F. Flores (2007). Strawberry production from transplants fumigated with methyl 

bromide alternatives. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research 2007 5(3), 407-416 

García-Méndez,, E., D. García-Sinovas, M. Becerril, A. De Cal, P. Melgarejo, A. Martínez-Treceño, S A. 

Fennimore, C. Soria, J. J. Medina and Jóse M. López-Aranda (2008) Chemical Alternatives 

to Methyl Bromide for Weed Control and Runner Plant Production in Strawberry Nurseries. 

HortScience 43 (6): 177 - 182 

Glassey.K, Hosking.G, Goss.M;Phosphine as an alternative for the fumigation of pine logs and sawn 

timber . MBAO 2005 

Hanson, B., J. Gerik and S. Schneider (2006). Evaluation of reduced Methyl Bromide rates and alternative 

fumigants in field grown perennial crop nurseries. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, 

USA, 2006. 

Hosking, Gordon & Goss, Mike – Phosphine Fumigation of Logs April 2005 –Frontline Biosecurity. 

IPPC (2003). ISPM No. 18. Guidelines for the use of irradiation as a phytosanitary measure IPPC: Rome. 

16 pp. 

IPPC (2006). ISPM No. 15. Guidelines for regulating wood packaging material in international trade (2002) 

with modifications to Annex 1 (2006). IPPC: Rome. 11 pp. 

IPPC (2008) International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures. ISPM 28: Replacement or reduction of 

methyl bromide as a phytosanitary measure. FAO, Roma, Italia, 9 pp. 

IPPC (2009a). ISPM No. 28. Phytosanitary treatments for regulated pests. IPPC: Rome. 28 pp. 

IPPC (2009b). International standards for phytosantary measures. Revision of ISPM No. 15. Regulation of 

wood packaging material in international trade. 

https://www.ippc.int/servlet/CDSServlet?status=ND0xMzM5OSY2PWVuJjMzPSomMzc

9a29z 

Kabir et al (2005). Alternatives to MB for strawberry runner plant production. HortScience 40:1709-1715 

MBTOC (2007). 2006 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi, Kenia, 485 pp. 

MBTOC 1995. 1994 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi. 

MBTOC 1998. 1998 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi. 

MBTOC 2002. 2002 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP 

Nairobi. 

Misumi et al., (In press, 2009) Development of a methyl bromide fumigation standard for imported 

vegetables to reduce usage based on insect pest susceptibility. Res. Bull. Pl. Prot. Japan No. 45 

Naito H., M. Goto, N. Ogawa, Y. Soma and F. Kawakami (2003) Effects of Methyl Iodide on Mortality of 

Forest Insect Pests. Res. Bull. Pl. Prot. Japan No.39: 1-6. 

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. 

Oogita, T., Soma, Y., Mizobuchi, M., Oda,Y. & Matsuoka, T.K. 1997: Mortality tests for forest insect pests 

by phosphine fumigation. Research Bulletin of the Plant Protection Service Japan. No.33:17-

20. 

Plant Protection Station, MAFF, Japan (2009) Plant quarantine statistics 

Quicke, M., T. Starkey and S. Enebak (2008) Area-Wide demonstration of alternatives: Forest nurseries in 

the southern US . In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 181

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 

Schneider, S. M., B.D. Hanson, J.S. Gerik, A. Shrestha, T.J. Trout, and S. Gao. 2009. Comparison of 

Shank- and Drip-Applied Methyl Bromide Alternatives in Perennial Crop Field Nurseries. 

HortTechnology 19:331-339. 

Shrestha, A., G. T. Browne, B. D. Lampinen, S. M. Schneider, L. Simon, and T. J. Trout (2008) Perennial 

crop nurseries treated with methyl bromide and alternative fumigants: Effects on weed seed 

viability, weed densities, and time required for hand weeding. Weed Technology 22(2): 267-274. 

Soma Y., H. Naito, Y. Abe, T. Itabashi, Y. Matsumoto and F. Kawakami (2006) Effects of Some 

Fumigants on Mortality of the Pine Wood Nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus Infesting 

Wooden Packages; 7. Fumigation Schedules for Pine Wood Nematode by Mixture Gas of 

Methyl Isothiocyanate and Sulfuryl Fluoride. Res. Bull. Pl. Prot. Japan No.42: 15-22. 

Soma Y., M. Goto, N. Ogawa, H. Naito and K. Hirata (2005) Effects of Some Fumigants on Mortality of 

Pine Wood Nematode, Bursaphelenchus xylophilus Infecting Wooden Packages; 5. Mortality of 

Pine Wood Nematode and Fumigation Standards by Methyl Iodide. Res. Bull. Pl. Prot. Japan

No.41: 1-7. 

Soma Y., M. Goto, N. Ogawa, H. Naito, F. Kawakami, H. Komatsu, A. Tateya, A. Arita, M. Nomura, T. 

Sato, F. Mori, Y. Abe, T. Itabashi, Y. Hisada and H. Miyachi (2004) Mortalities of Forest 

Insect Pests by Mixture Fumigants. Res. Bull. Pl. Prot. Japan No.40: 19-23. 

Stodard (2008). Methyl bromide fumigation alternatives for sweet potato hotbeds in California In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

http://mbao.org/2008/027Stoddard.pdf. 

TEAP. (1999). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel April 1999, Volume 2: 

Essential Use Exemptions, QPS Applications for Methyl Bromide, Progress and Control of 

Substances and other Reporting Issues. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya, 227pp. 

TEAP. (2006). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel. Progress Report. May, 2006. 

Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations 

Environment Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP, 2008 Report of the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel. October 2008. Ozone Secretariat, 

UNEP, Nairobi 

TEAP, 2009 Report of the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel. May, 2009. Ozone Secretariat, 

UNEP, Nairobi 

Toucdown Consulting (2009) The use f methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment applications in 

the European union for the period 1 January to 31 December 2007. Touchdown Consulting, 

La Hulpe, Belgium 20pp 

Trout, T. (2007). Tracking fumigant use in California.. In: Proceedings of the Annual International 

Research Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. San Diego, CA, 

USA 

UNEP/ IPPC, 2008. Methyl Bromide: Quarantine and Preshipment uses. United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi, Kenya, 16 pp. 

UNEP, 2007. Protecting the Ozone Layer. Malaysia implementing the Montreal Protocol. UNEP, Nairobi, 

48 pp 

UNEP/ ROAP 2008. Report to UNEP CAP ROAP Programme Bangkok. Quarantine and preshipment 

used for methyl bromide in ROAP and potential for their replacement. Prepared by 

Jonathan Banks, 45 pp 

US CCSP, 2008. US Climate change science program. Trends in emissions of ozone depleting substances, 

ozone layer recovery and implications for ultraviolet radiation exposure. September 2008 

draft 234 pp 

USDA (2007). Potato cyst nematode in Idaho. Amended environmental assessment, July 2007. United 

States Department of Agriculture, Riverdale, MD, United States. 37 pp. 
182 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Vermeulen and Kool (2006). Phase-out of methyl bromide as ISPM-15 treatment. Analysis of options to 

reduce the use of methyl bromide and possible alternatives. CLM Research and Advice, 

Oulemborg, Holanda, 29 pp. 

Vick, Ken (2009). USDA. Personal Communication. 

Walters, T., T. Miller, M. Particka, J. N. Pinkerton and I. Zasada (2008) Methyl bromide alternatives for 

raspberry nurseries. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Weiland, J., J. N. Pinkerton, W. Littke, J. Browning, C. Masters, R. Rose, D. Haase, T. Miller, B. Edmonds 

and A. Leon (2008) Methyl Bromide alternatives in Oregon and Washington forest tree 

nurseries . In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Wei-Young, Wang, Burridge, Paul, Bain John & Goss Mike – Phosphine as a Phytosanitary Dis-Infestation 

Treatment for NZ Grown Pine, Logs destined for India July 2008 – STIMBR & the Forest 

Industries Development Agenda (FIDA) 

Zhang Z, C W van Epenhuijsen, D Brash & K G Somerfield – In-transit Phosphine fumigation for export 

logs and timber without top-up – is it possible? March 2003 – Crop & Food Research 

Confidential Report No 1619 

Zhang, Z, - Phosphine as a fumigant to control Hylastes Ater and 

Zhang, Z, van Epenhuijsen C W, Brach D & Hosking G P – Phosphine as a Fumigant to control Hylastes 

ater and Arhopalus Ferus, Pests of Export Logs – 2004 – Crop & Food Research. 

Zhang, Z. – Fumigating export logs using Phosphine to eliminate insect pests March 2003 – Crop & Food 

Research Confidential Report No 834 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 183

Annex 1 to CHAPTER 12 - Decision XX/6 

Decision XX/6 - Actions by Parties to reduce methyl bromide use for quarantine and 

pre-shipment purposes and related emissions 

Recognizing that methyl bromide use for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes is an 

important remaining use of an ozone-depleting substance that is not controlled pursuant to 

paragraph 6 of Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol and that the 2006 assessment report of the 

Scientific Assessment Panel indicated that “emissions associated with continued or expanded 

exemptions, QPS ... may also delay recovery [of the ozone layer]” 

Recalling that Article 7 of the Montreal Protocol requires Parties to report on the annual 

amount of methyl bromide used for quarantine and pre-shipment applications and that 

decision XI/13 urges Parties to implement procedures to monitor the uses of methyl bromide 

by commodity and quantity for quarantine and pre-shipment, 

Recalling decision VII/5 urging Parties to refrain from using methyl bromide and to use nonozone depleting technologies wherever possible and decision XI/13 encouraging Parties to 

use recovery and recycling technologies where technically and economically feasible until 

alternatives are available, 

Reaffirming the importance of managing and, when economically and technically feasible, 

replacing quarantine and pre-shipment applications of methyl bromide, as stated in the 

preamble to decision XVII/15, 

Stressing that methyl bromide is a potent ozone-depleting substance and that it and many of 

its alternatives are hazardous substances that have caused serious human health impacts, 

notably on workers in ports and warehouses in some Parties, 

Recognizing that many Parties have relied on methyl bromide for trade and the conservation 

of biodiversity and will continue to do so until alternatives become available and accepted for 

all quarantine and pre-shipment uses, 

Acknowledging the efforts made by Parties to phase out or reduce the use and emissions of 

methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes whether through adoption of 

alternatives or the use of recapture technologies, 

Acknowledging with appreciation the joint efforts of the Ozone Secretariat and the 

International Plant Protection Convention in reviewing alternatives to methyl bromide for 

phytosanitary purposes, particularly under ISPM-15, and the Convention’s recommendation 

encouraging Parties to develop and implement strategies to replace and/or reduce methyl 

bromide use for phytosanitary applications, 

Mindful that the use of methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes is still 

increasing in some regions of the world, 

Recognizing current data gaps and the need for better information to monitor and analyse 

trends in quarantine and pre-shipment use and further to identify opportunities for reducing 

global amounts of methyl bromide required for quarantine and pre-shipment applications 

under the Montreal Protocol, 
184 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

1. To urge those Parties that have not yet done so to report data on the use of methyl 

bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment applications, as required under paragraph 3 of 

Article 7, by April 2009 and to report such data in accordance with existing Protocol 

requirements and decisions annually thereafter; 

2. To request the Ozone Secretariat: 

a) To update the definition of pre-shipment in paragraph 5.6 of the 

Instructions/Guidelines for data reporting to reflect decision XI/12; 

b) To post on its website, production and consumption data reported by the Parties 

under paragraph 3 of Article 7 for methyl bromide used for quarantine and pre 

shipment applications; 

3. To request the Implementation Committee to consider the reporting of methyl bromide 

used for quarantine and pre-shipment applications under paragraph 3 of Article 7, in 

accordance with the Non-Compliance Procedure of the Montreal Protocol; 

4. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, in consultation with the 

International Plant Protection Convention secretariat, to review all relevant, currently 

available information on the use of methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment 

applications and related emissions, to assess trends in the major uses, available 

alternatives and other mitigation options, and barriers to the adoption of alternatives or 

determine what additional information or action may be required to meet those objectives; 

the assessment should consider: 

a) A description of the majority of the volumes of methyl bromide used for quarantine 

and pre-shipment applications, by the major uses and target pests; 

b) The technical and economic availability of alternative substances and technologies for 

the main methyl bromide uses, by volume, and of technologies for methyl bromide 

recovery, containment and recycling; 

c) Quarantine and pre-shipment applications for which no alternatives are available to 

date and an assessment of why alternatives are not technically or economically 

feasible or cannot be adopted; 

d) Illustrative examples of regulations or other relevant measures that directly affect the 

use of methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment treatment (including 

information requested in decision X/11); 

e) Other barriers preventing the adoption of alternatives to methyl bromide; 

f) Projects demonstrating technically and economically feasible alternatives, including 

technologies for recapture and destruction of methyl bromide for quarantine and 

preshipment applications; 

5. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to present a draft report 

based on the analysis of the available information to the Open-ended Working Group at 

its twenty-ninth meeting, indicating areas where the information is not sufficient, 

explaining, where appropriate, why the data were inadequate and presenting a practical 

proposal for how best to gather the information required for a satisfactory analysis; 

6. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to present a final report 

highlighting areas where sufficient information indicates opportunities for reductions in 

methyl bromide use or emissions for quarantine and pre-shipment purposes, including a 

list of available methyl bromide recapture technologies for consideration by the Parties 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 185

and, where there is insufficient information, a final proposal for further data gathering for 

the consideration of the Twenty-First Meeting of the Parties; 

7. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, in accordance with its terms 

of reference, to list categories of use it has identified that have been classified as 

quarantine and pre-shipment use by some Parties but not by others by the twenty-ninth 

meeting of the Open-ended Working Group and that those Parties are requested to 

provide the information on the rationale for doing so to the Technology and Economic 

Assessment Panel in time for inclusion in its final report to the Twenty-First Meeting of 

the Parties 

8. To request the Ozone Secretariat, in cooperation with the Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel, the International Plant Protection Convention secretariat 

and other relevant bodies, to organize in the margins of the Twenty-First Meeting of the 

Parties a workshop to discuss the report of the assessment referred to in paragraph 4 of the 

present decision and other relevant inputs with a view to determining possible further 

actions; 

9. To request the Ozone Secretariat to strengthen cooperation and coordination with the 

International Plant Protection Convention secretariat in accordance with decisions 

XVII/15 and XVIII/14; 

10. To encourage Parties in accordance with the recommendations of the third meeting of the 

Commission on Phytosanitary Measures under the International Plant Protection 

Convention to put in place a national strategy that describes actions that will help them to 

reduce the use of methyl bromide for phytosanitary measures and/or reduce emissions of 

methyl bromide and make such strategies available to other Parties through the Ozone 

Secretariat, where possible before the Twenty-First Meeting of the Parties; the strategy 

may include the following areas for action: 

a) Replacing methyl bromide use; 

b) Reducing methyl bromide use; 

c) Physically reducing methyl bromide emissions; 

Accurately recording methyl bromide use for phytosanitary measures.

 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 187

13 Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) 

Progress Report 2009 

This chapter updates trends in methyl bromide (MB) production and consumption, and gives 

progress in the development and adoption of alternatives for preplant soil use, and post 

harvest and commodity uses of MB . Information on registration, re-registration and 

deregistration of in-kind methyl bromide alternatives is also presented in conformity with 

Decisions Ex. I/4(i) and Ex. I/4(j). 

13.1 MB production and consumption update 

An update on MB production and consumption for controlled uses was compiled primarily 

from the database on ODS consumption and production of the Ozone Secretariat available in 

March 2009. Under the Protocol, consumption at the national level is defined as ‘MB 

production plus MB imports minus exports, minus QPS, minus feedstock’; it thus represents 

the national supply of MB for uses controlled by the Protocol (i.e. non-QPS). Some countries 

have revised or corrected their historical consumption data, and as a consequence official 

figures and baselines have changed. At the time of writing this report, all Parties had 

submitted data for 2007 and the database for MB is much more complete than in the past. 

13.1.1 Production trends 

Trends in the reported production of MB for all controlled uses (excluding QPS and 

feedstock) in all non A5 and A5 countries are shown in Figure 13.1 and have been falling 

consistently from 1998 to 2004. In 2005, the total was 18,141 metric tonnes, which 

represented 27% of the production baseline (67,376 tonnes). In 2006, the global MB 

production for controlled uses increased to 19,635 tonnes (29% of baseline), although the 

consumption in both A 5 and Non-Article 5 countries decreased from the preceding year 

(details can be found in section 13.1.2). Production in 2007 continued the downward trend, 

totalling 12,877 tonnes or 19% of the baseline.
188 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 13.1: Historical trends in reported global MB production for all controlled 

uses, excluding QPS and feedstock, 1991 - 2007 (metric tonnes) 

Data for 1991 and 1995-2007 were taken from the Ozone Secretariat dataset of March 

2009. Data for 1992-94 were estimated from Table 3.1 of MBTOC’s Assessment Report 

(2002) and Table 3.1 of MBTOC’s Assessment Report (2007). 

Non-Article 5 countries reduced their MB production for controlled uses from about 66,000 

tonnes in 1991 (non-A5 baseline) to less than 17,603 in 2005. Non-Article 5 production for 

controlled uses increased to 18,666 tonnes in 2006 due to increased production in Israel. It 

decreased again in 2007 to approximately 12,191 tonnes, which included production for 

export to Article 5 countries. 

Article 5 countries reduced their production for controlled uses from a peak of 2,397 tonnes in 

2000 to about 536 tonnes in 2004. It increased to 969 tonnes in 2006. MB production in 

Article 5 regions fell from 70% of baseline (1,375 tonnes, average 1995-98) in 2003 to 39% 

of baseline in 2004. For 2007 the production amount is 686 tonnes, which represents 50% of 

the baseline. At present, production of MB for controlled uses in Article 5 countries 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 Report of 

2006 (Table 3.3). In 2007, MB was produced for controlled uses in one Article 5 country 

(China) and three Non-Article 5 countries (Israel, Japan and USA). 

13.1.1.1 Production for QPS purposes 

Decision XX/6 required the Ozone Secretariat to post on its website, MB production and 

consumption data reported by the Parties for exempted uses (QPS) under paragraph 3 of A 7. 

The following analysis is based on such data, as well as estimates made by MBTOC in past 

reports (TEAP, 2006; MBTOC, 2002; 2007). 

Reported MB production for exempt QPS uses, as reported to the Ozone Secretariat by 

Parties, rose substantially in 2005 over the long term and decreasing trend. Data reported for 

2006 shows a return to the expected trend, however, 2007 again reflects an increase (Fig. 

13.2). There has been 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. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 189

Figure 13.2: Reported or estimated QPS production 1990 - 2006 

Global production of MB for QPS uses 1992 - 2007

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1992 1996 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

metric tonnes

Source: MBTOC, 1994, 1998; MBTOC estimates; Ozone Secretariat data, April 2009 

13.1.2 Global consumption 

On the basis of Ozone Secretariat data, global consumption of MB for controlled uses was 

estimated to be about 64,420 tonnes in 1991 and remained above 60,000 tonnes until 1998. 

Global consumption was reported as 45,527 tonnes in 2000, falling to 26,336 tonnes in 2003 

and 12,183 tonnes in 2007 as illustrated by Fig 13.3 below. 

Figure 13.3: Baselines and trends in MB consumption in Non-Article 5 and A 5 

regions, 1991 – 2007 (metric tonnes)

 Source: MBTOC estimates calculated from Ozone Secretariat data of April 2009. 
190 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.1.2.1 Consumption trends in Non-Article 5 countries 

Figure 13.3 shows the trends in MB consumption in Non-Article 5 countries for the period 

between 1991 and 2007. The official baseline for Non-Article 5 countries was 56,043 tonnes 

in 1991 and since the consumption has declined steadily. By 2003, this consumption had 

been reduced to about 14,520 tonnes, representing 26% of the baseline. In 2004, consumption 

appeared to increase to 18,454 tonnes (33% of baseline), however this occurred primarily 

because 3,310 tonnes scheduled for export to Article 5 countries were not shipped before 31 

December of that year and this consignment was counted as part of the official national 

consumption of a Non-Article 5 Party. In 2007 the estimated consumption based on quantities 

approved or licensed amounted to 8,475 tonnes or about 15% of the baseline. For 2008 about 

6,966 tonnes were approved or licensed which is a further reduction to 12% of the baseline 

(figure not shown in graph as information for Article 5 Parties is not at this date fully 

available). 

Trends in MB consumption in major Non-Article 5 regions can be summarised as follows: 

• In 1991 the USA, European Community, Israel and Japan used 95% of the MB 

consumed in Non-Article 5 countries. 

• For 2008, permitted levels amounted to 21%, 1%, 24% and 7%, in the same order, 

whilst for 2009 these figures came down to 17%, 0%, 17% and 5% respectively. 

• In the past, MB was consumed for controlled uses by 40 out of 45 Non-Article 5 

countries. The majority of these countries no longer use MB (Table 13-1). 

• Of the eleven Parties applying for MB for CUEs in 2007 only five have sought CUEs 

in 2009. 

Table 13-1 summarises national MB consumption as a percentage of national baseline in 

Parties that were granted critical use exemptions (CUE). In general, Parties have made 

significant reductions in CUE. The EC has not submitted critical use nominations (CUN) 

since 2008. 

Table 13-1: Summary of MB consumption in Article 5 and Non-Article 5 countries 

Number of Parties 

Status of MB use Non-Article 5 Parties in 

2009 

Article 5 Parties in 

2006 

Total 

Parties using MB 5 44 49 (26%) 

Parties that used MB in 

1991 and now have zero 

consumption (a, b) 

35 48 83 (43%) 

Parties with no MB 

consumption since 1990 (b) 

5 54 59 (31%) 

Total 45 146 191 (100%) 

(a) MB consumption reported by Ozone Secretariat. (b) Excluding QPS

Table 13-2 presents consumption in Non-Article 5 Parties as a proportion of national 

baselines.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 191

Table 13-2: MB consumption(a) in relation to national baselines in Non-Article 5 

Parties that currently use MB 

MB consumption (a) Party , tonnes (percentage of national baseline) 

1991 2003 2005 2006 2007 (a) 2008 (a) 2009 (a) 

Australia 704 182 (26%) 116 (16%) 55 (8%) 49 (7%) 50 (7%) 38 (5%) 

Canada 200 58 (29%) 62 (31%) 42 (21%) 53 (27%) 42 (21%) 39 (20%) 

EC 19,612 (b) 5,162 (26%) 2,431 (13%) 1,487 (8%) 522 (3%) 213 (1%) 0 (0%) 

Israel 3,580 992 (28%) 1,072 (30%) 841 (23%) 967 (27%) 861 (24%) 611 (17%) 

Japan 6,107 1,430 (23%) 595 (10%) 489 (8%) 636 (10%) 444 (7%) 305 (5%) 

New Zealand 135 35 (26%) 30 (22%) 27 (20%) 18 (13%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 

Switzerland 43 11 (24%) 4 (9%) 4 (9%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 

United States 25,529 6,755 (26%) 7,255 (28%) 6,475 (25%) 6,230 (24%) 5,356 (21%) 4,262 (17%)c 

MB consumption data for 1991-2007 from Ozone Secretariat dataset of April 2009. Figures for 2007-

2008 are authorised or licensed CUEs from reports of Meetings of the Parties and licensing data 

(a) Calculations of baselines does not account for pre 2005 stocks (b) Authorised or licensed CUEs 

(actual MB consumption has not yet been reported) (c) Baseline of the 25 EC countries that were 

member states in 2005 

13.1.2.2 Consumption trends in A 5 and CEIT countries 

Figure 13.3 shows the trend in MB consumption in Article 5 countries in the period between 

1991 and 2007. Trends can be illustrated as follows: 

• The Article 5 baseline was 15,703 tonnes (average of 1995-98), rising to a peak 

consumption of more than 18,125 tonnes in 1998. A 5 consumption was reduced 

to 67% of baseline in 2004 (10,512 tonnes) and 40% in 2007 (6,226 tonnes). 

• Since 2003, total Article 5 consumption has fallen by 1,420 metric tonnes per 

year on average (2003-2007), as shown in Fig 13.4 below. Article 5 consumption 

may therefore be expected to be about 4,726 tonnes in 2008 and 3,306 tonnes in 

2009. 

• All but two Article 5 Parties have continued to make substantial progress in 

achieving reductions in MB consumption at a national level, as illustrated by the 

following information. Further details are presented in Tables 13.3 and 13.4. 

Trends at national level can be described as follows: 

• The vast majority of Article 5 Parties achieved the national freeze level in 2002. 

• By 2004, 87% of Article 5 Parties (125 out of 144) had achieved the 20% 

reduction step earlier than the scheduled date of 2005. Only 19 remaining Parties 

needed to take action to meet the 20% reduction step in 2005. 
192 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

• In 2007, 88% of Article 5 Parties (127 Parties) reported national consumption of 

less than 50% of the national baseline. Only seventeen Article 5 Parties 

consumed more than 50% of their national baseline. 

• 74% of Article 5 Parties (107 Parties) reported zero MB consumption in 2007. 

This shows continued progress since 2002 when 50% of Article 5 Parties reported 

zero MB consumption. 

• According to latest reported consumption data (for 2007) only two Article 5 

countries (Ecuador and Honduras) were in non-compliance with the 20% 

reduction step of 2005. Reported consumption for Honduras lies within the 

commitment set forth in Decision XVII/34 (225 ODP tonnes in 2007). 

• 84% of Article 5 Parties (120 Parties) reduced their national MB consumption to 

less than 50% of national baseline in 2006 (Table 13-3). 

Table 13-3: National A5 MB consumption as percentage of national 

baseline, 2003-2007 

Status of national MB consumption 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

MB consumption was 0% of national baseline 87 91 96 101 107 

MB consumption was 1 – 50% f national baseline 19 22 19 29 22 

MB consumption was 51 – 80% of national baseline 11 10 21 10 13 

MB consumption was more than 80% of national baseline 25 19 8 4 2 

Total number of A5 parties examined 142 144 144 144 144 

Analysis of zone Secretariat Data, April, 2009.Data for 2003, 2004 and 2005 were taken from Table 

3.10 of MBTOC 2006 Assessment Report 

At regional level, the decrease in consumption has been greatest in CEIT countries, followed 

by Asia and Africa, while Latin America is the region with smaller relative reductions, and is 

the only region that consumes more MB now than in 1991 (Fig. 13. 4). Some agricultural 

sectors in Latin America are still reporting significant use of MB, including melons in Central 

America, strawberries in Chile and Argentina, and cut flowers in Ecuador. 

The status of MB phase-out in Article 5 regions in 2007, compared to the regional baselines 

(1995-98 average) is as follows: 

3⁄4 Latin America has phased-out 40.7% of its regional baseline 

3⁄4 Africa has phased-out 76.2% of its regional baseline 

3⁄4 Asia has phased-out 68.5% of its regional baseline 

3⁄4 CEIT region has phased-out 99.7% of its regional baseline 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 193

 Figure 13- 4: MB Consumption trends in Article 5 and CEIT countries 1991 - 2007 

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005

MB consumption (tonnes)

Latin America

Africa

Asia, Middle

East

CEIT

Source: Ozone Secretariat database, 2009 

Substantial progress has been achieved in Article 5 countries that consumed the greatest 

quantities of MB. Only 12 Parties still report consumption between 100 and 500 tonnes and 

only two countries remain in the usage category above 500 tonnes. The top 15 MB consuming 

countries together accounted for 80% of the Article 5 baseline in the past, and about 86% of 

total Article 5 consumption in 2000/1. National details are provided in Table 13-4 below. The 

top 15 countries reduced MB consumption by 65% from 2001 to 2007 (from 14,932 tonnes in 

2001 to 5,284 tonnes in 2007). 

• In the last 3 years alone, the top 15 countries have reduced MB by 43% (from 9,399 

tonnes in 2004 to 5,284 tonnes in 2007). 

• In 2007, MB consumption in the top 15 countries was only 42% of the baseline on 

average (Table13. 4 column 4). 

• By 2007 these large consumers have phased out 73% of their historical peak use of 

MB. 

Many Article 5 countries are finishing or implementing MLF projects to reduce or totally 

phase-out MB. This includes 14 of the 15 largest MB consuming countries (i.e. countries that 

consumed more than 470 metric tonnes, which together accounted for 80% of the A5 baseline 

consumption). The exception is South Africa, which is currently preparing a GEF project for 

MB phase-out. Notably, two Parties in this group, Brazil and Turkey, which reported 

consumption larger than 500 tonnes in the past, have now phased out completely and reported 

zero consumption in 2007. 

Table 13-4: Fifteen largest Article 5 consumers of MB in the past

Country National MB consumption (MT) 

In peak year 

a

 

Baseline 

(1995 – 98) 

2007 

(% baseline) 

MB 

eliminated 

from peak 

year to 2007 

MB 

eliminated 

from 

baseline 

year in 2007 

MLF 

project 

China 3,501 1,837 603 (33%) 83% 67% Yes 

Morocco 2,702 1,162 440 (38%) 84% 62% Yes 

Mexico 2,397 1,885 1,491 (79%) 38% 21% Yes 

Brazil 1,408 1,186 0 (0%) 100% 100% Yes 

Zimbabwe 1,365 928 36 (4%) 97% 96% Yes 
194 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country National MB consumption (MT) 

In peak year 

a

 

Baseline 

(1995 – 98) 

2007 

(% baseline) 

MB 

eliminated 

from peak 

year to 2007 

MB 

eliminated 

from 

baseline 

year in 2007 

MLF 

project 

Guatemala b 1,311 668 485 (73%) 63% 27% Yes 

South Africa 1,265 1,005 100 (0%) 92% 90% No c

Turkey 964 800 0 (0%) 100% 100% Yes 

Honduras b 852 432 414 (96%) 51% 4% Yes 

Argentina 841 686 496 (72%) 41% 28% Yes 

Thailand 784 305 203 (67%) 74% 33% Yes 

Costa Rica b 757 571 397 (69%) 8% 31% Yes 

Egypt 720 397 310 (78%) 57% 22% Yes 

Chile 497 354 280 (79%) 44% 21% Yes 

Lebanon 476 394 30 (8%) 94% 92% Yes 

Total of top 

15 countries 

19,840 12,610 5,284 (42% 

av.) 

73% average 58% average 

a

 Maximum national MB consumption in the past 

b

 Melon producers in these countries increased consumption greatly in recent years. Guatemala and 

Honduras are implementing projects designed to bring compliance 

c

 South Africa was not considered eligible for a MLF project and was invited to prepare a GEF project 

13.2 Alternatives for soil treatments 

13.2.1 Key alternatives

Major chemical alternatives, 1,3-D/Pic, chloropicrin, metham sodium and metham potassium, 

used alone and/ or in combination with other alternatives continue to prove as effective as MB 

and are now widely adopted in many preplant soil applications (TEAP, 2005 a,b; Mann et al. 

2005; CDPR PUR data, 2007; Spotti, 2004; Carrera et al. 2004; Porter, 2005; MBTOC 

2007). The recent registration of methyl iodide and adoption of a 3 way fumigant system 

(1,3-D/ chloropicrin/metham sodium) (Culpepper et al., 2008) in the USA have offered 

further options for many of the remaining uses proving difficult to control with other 

alternatives. Various parties previously applying for CUNs particularly in strawberry fruit, 

tomatoes and vegetable crops, have adopted these alternatives on a wide scale. This includes 

control of soilborne pathogens in the more difficult nursery and replant industries where high 

levels of disease control are required to meet quality standards (e.g. certification 

requirements). 

Formulation changes and more adequate application methods continue to improve the 

effectiveness of several alternatives (Pic EC, 1,3-D/Pic EC) and wider adoption has occurred 

where these are available. In many instances, this has involved a change in cropping practice, 

i.e. slightly longer plant back times and a greater awareness of soil conditions which improve 

the efficiency of alternatives; modification to application machinery, sometimes with 

economic implications have sometimes been also necessary. Some sectors that were formerly 

heavily reliant on methyl bromide have completely switched to other chemical alternatives 

and improved crop rotation practices; others have adopted more diverse types of alternatives 

including substrates, steam and various combinations of fumigants, other pesticides, resistant 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 195

varieties and grafted plants adopted alone or in combinations with fumigant and not fumigant 

nematicides (Porter et al, 2007). 

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 weed for 

several critical uses (Gilreath et al, 2004; Belcher et al 2007; Culpepper et al, 2007). 

Methods which avoid the need for methyl bromide, such as cropping in substrates, grafting 

plants onto resistant rootstocks and using resistant varieties, continue to expand in the 

ornamental and vegetable industries (Cantlifee and Vansickle, 2003; Cantliffe et al, 2003; 

Savvas, 2003; Trout and Damoradan, 2004; Tognoni et al, 2004; TEAP 2005 a, b). 

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

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

use can be achieved with application machinery that allows co-injection of methyl bromide 

and chloropicrin or by using premixed formulations. These formulations have proven equally 

effective for controlling soilborne pathogens as formulations containing higher quantities of 

methyl bromide (e.g. 98:2, 67:33) (e. g. Porter et al. 1997; Melgarejo, 2004; López-Aranda et 

al. 2004). 

Low permeability barrier films, LPBF, (e.g. VIF or equivalent) allow increased retention of 

MB and extended effective exposure periods for pests, thus controlling pathogens and weeds 

at reduced MB application rates compared to those used with conventional films (e.g. Gilreath 

et al., 2003; Gilreath et al., 2005; Hamill et al., 2004; Minuto et. al., 2003; Santos 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 standard polyethylene film. Reductions are 

typically between 25 – 50% less for MB/Pic 98:2 formulations as well as other formulations 

(67:33, 50:50 and 30:70). Studies are also proving their use for effective dosage reduction of 

alternatives, such as 1,3-D, Pic and methyl iodide (Gilreath et al., 2004; Noling, 2004; Hamill 

et al., 2004; Fennimore et al., 2004; Austerweil et al., 2006; Ou et al., 2007, MBTOC 

2007). This is important because dosage reduction may increase areas available to be treated 

with specific fumigants that are limited by township caps and may lead to further reduction in 

MB use and possibly reduce the buffer zone requirements which limit adoption of alternatives 

in some countries (Gilreath et al., 2003; Fennimore et al., 2004; Fennimore et al., 2003; Ou 

et al., 2007). 

Adoption of barrier films has increased substantially for uses in several countries still 

applying for critical us exemptions to methyl bromide, including Japan, Israel and the south 

eastern states of the USA. At present, California prohibits the use of barrier films (VIF) with 

methyl bromide, 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)), 

however barrier films can be used to improve efficacy of alternative fumigants. 

Another treatment which is increasing in use is a soil heat treatment by hot water and vapour 

heat treatment which is currently applied in Japan (Kita, 2004 ; Nishi, 2005, Uematsu et al., 

2003; Takeuchi, 2004). This treatment is applied for the sterilization of the soil for bag 

culture, nursery and tray culture. Soil reduction redox potential method is now widely applied 

for soil disinfestation in combination with solarization. (Momma 2008; Kubo et al 2004; 

Shinmura 2004; Takeuchi 2004). 
196 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.2.2 Update on registration of chemical alternatives: 

13.2.2.1 Europe 

The EC has completed the review of existing pesticides that were on the market before 1993. 

This review examined about 1000 active pesticide substances and removed over two-thirds of 

them from the market. A new EU list of approved pesticide active substances has been 

established (Ministerio de Medio Ambiente , 2009). 

As a result of this review the following changes apply in the EU as of March 2009: 

3⁄4 Authorisations for pesticides containing MB were withdrawn by 18 March 2009, 

with a grace period, if any, allowing the use of existing stocks until 18 March 2010. 

Since no CUEs were allowed in the EC for 2009 and 2010, MB stocks can only be 

used for QPS; 

3⁄4 Authorisation for dazomet will cease by 31 December 2010, with a grace period 

ending 31 December 2011; whether an application for re-registration of dazomet 

will be submitted is not known; 

3⁄4 Unless new submissions are made for re-registration, authorisations for chloropicrin 

are scheduled to cease by 31 December 2010, with a grace periods expiring 31 

December 2011. Submissions are expected; 

3⁄4 The grace period for 1,3-D expired on 20 March 2009. A number of EU countries 

have authorised or are expected to authorise temporary permits allowing 1,3-D to be 

used where it appears necessary (under the EC plant protection products directive). 

 A submission has been made for re-registration of 1,3-D. New studies have been 

reviewed and the national authority leading the risk assessment reported that the 

new information has resolved earlier concerns about impurities and groundwater 

(Ministerio de Medio Ambiente 2009). A study in five European countries 

demonstrated negligible contamination of groundwater with 1,3-D or its metabolites 

in different locations where this fumigant had been used over severalyears (Terry et 

al., 2008). 

3⁄4 A risk assessment for metham (both metham sodium and metham potassium) was 

completed and reviewed, but no further action taken. 

13.2.2.2 Registration of chemical alternatives in the USA 

Methyl iodide now holds a permanent registration in the US in all states except California, 

New York and Washington. Methyl iodide is registered for use on strawberries, peppers, 

tomatoes, field grown ornamentals, stone fruits, tree nuts, vines (table, raisin and wine grapes) 

and nurseries (forest, strawberry, stone fruit and tree nuts). 

DMDS has a pending registration application for uses on tomatoes, peppers, eggplants, 

cucumbers, squash, melons, onions, field grown ornamentals and forestry nursery crops. 

Annex 1 of this chapter includes a detailed table with registration information for all 

substances presently considered to be alternatives for MB for both preplant and postharvest 

uses. 

13.2.2.3 Registration of chemical alternatives in Japan 

1,3-D is registered for the control of MNSV of melon, however it can cause phyototoxicity 

and its efficacy can be variable. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 197

A mixture of azoxystrobin and metalaxyl M is now under registration review for the control 

of root rot disease of ginger, Table 13-5 below lists alternatives already registered and in 

process of evaluation or registration in Japan. 

Table 13-5: Registration status of chemical alternatives to MB in Japan 

Use category Alternatives available Status of 

registration 

Alternatives 

under 

development 

Possible 

date of 

registration 

Chestnut 

(Commodity) 

None Methyl iodide Unknown 

Cucumber (Soil) None Attenuated virus Unknown 

Chloropicrin Registered Methyl iodide Unknown 

Dazomet Registered Amisulbrom Unknown 

Metham sodium Registered Sodium phsphite Unknown 

1,3-D/ Pic Registered Mixture of 

azoxystrobin + 

metalaxyl-M 

Unknown 

Mixture of 1,3-D + 

MITC 

Registered 

Metalaxyl Registered 

Propamocarb Registered 

Ginger (field & 

protected, soil) 

Cyazofamid Registered 

 

Green & hot 

pepper 

(Soil) 

None Attenuated virus Unknown 

Melon (Soil) Mixture of 1,3-D/ Pic Registered Methyl iodide 

Attenuated virus 

Unknown 

Watermelon soil None Attenuated virus Unknown 

13.2.2.4 Registration of chemical alternatives Australia 

The main alternatives registered in Australia remaining MB user, the strawberry nursery 

industry, appear in Table 13-6 below 

Table 13-6: Registration status of chemical alternatives to MB in Australia 

Use 

category 

Alternatives 

available 

Status of 

registration 

Alternatives under 

development 

Possible 

registration 

date 

Chloropicrin Registered Weed control ineffective, not 

recommended in regulations 

Methyl iodide 

1,3- D Registered Phytotoxic in cool conditions, not 

recommended in regulations 

Cyanogen 

Metam Sodium Registered Variability in results, not 

recommended in regulations 

Strawberry 

Nurseries 

Dazomet Registered Variability in results and cost, not 

recommended in regulations 

Methyl iodide and ethanedinitrile both have registration applications pending with the 

APVMA (Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority). 
198 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.2.2.5 Registration of chemical alternatives in Canada 

Pic-100 has been registered by PMRA (Pest Management Regulatory Agency) for use by the 

remaining MB user, a strawberry nursery grower, but has not received clearance by the Prince 

Edward Island authorities due to groundwater contamination concerns. 

13.2.2.6 Registration of chemical alternatives in Israel 

In general, there is no change in the status of registration for fumigants since the last progress 

report. Details are presented in Table 3.17 below. Current status of the main alternatives is as 

follows: 

• Metham sodium is registered for potato, eggplant, tomato, cucurbits, lettuce, 

brassicae, peanuts, flowers, avocado, replant of various perennials and potting media. 

However, there is no effort at present to extend registration to other crops. 

• Choropicrin is not registered, however initial registration procedures are under way 

for cucurbits (Pic in pure form and combined with DMDS)

• DMDS is not presently registered for any crop. A registration package is expected to 

be submitted by the end of 2009 for nematode control in tomato and cucumber. 

• 1,3- D is registered for cucurbits, carrots, tomato, potato, gerbera, sweet potato,

 annual and perennial flowers, herbs, strawberries. 

• 1,3-D/Pic has restricted availability in Israel. It is registered in potato, tomato 

eggplant, peppers, strawberry and some cucurbits (watermelon and melon). There is 

no manufacturing facility in Israel and its importation is problematic. 

• Dazomet is only registered for melon, watermelon and tomato. 

• Methyl iodide is undergoing an application for registration, with preliminary trials 

undertaken this year. 

Table 13-7: Registration of chemical alternatives to MB in Israel 

Use 

category 

Alternatives available Status of 

registration 

Alternatives 

under 

development 

Possible date 

of 

registration 

1,3D Registered DMDS Unknown 

Chloropicrin Not Registered 

Dazomet Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Not Registered 

 

Metalaxyl 

Cucumber 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos 

Registered 

 

1,3D Registered DMDS Unknown 

Chloropicrin Not Registered Methyl idoide Unknown 

Dazomet Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

Melon 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos Registered 

1,3-D Registered 

Chloropicrin Not Registered 

Dazomet Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

Flowers 

indoor 

1,3-D/ Pic Not Registered 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 199

Use 

category 

Alternatives available Status of 

registration 

Alternatives 

under 

development 

Possible date 

of 

registration 

Mixture of 1,3-D + MITC Not Registered 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos 

Chloropicrin Not Registered 

Dazomet Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Not Registered 

Flowers 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos 

1,3D Registered DMDS Unknown 

Chloropicrin Not Registered 

Dazomet Not Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

Strawberry 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos Registered 

1,3D Registered 

Chloropicrin Not Registered 

Dazomet Not Registered 

Metham sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Not Registered 

Metalaxyl 

Sweet potato 

Cadosaphos, oxamyl, fenamifos 

Registered 

 

 

13.2.3 Crop specific strategies 

This section below provides an overview of the main strategies adopted in both A 5 and on-A 

5 Parties, for those crops presently applying for critical use of MB (CUNs). 

13.2.3.1 Vegetables 

 a. Tomatoes 

Effective alternatives adopted in the tomato sector include combinations of chemicals such as 

1,3-D/Pic metham sodium, dazomet, methyl iodide and non-chemical methods (e.g. 

substrates, grafting, resistant varieties, biofumigation, solarisation) Besri, 2007a, 2007b,). 

MB use for tomatoes has been entirely phased out from all European countries, as Australia 

and Israel (except for the control of broomrape, Orobanche spp). The main alternatives 

adopted are soilless culture often in combination with other options such as resistant cultivars 

and grafting, grafting, alone or grafting in combination with fumigants such as 1,3- D Pic, 

MS, and MI (methyl iodide), mostly to limit the damages of root knot nematodes (Mann et 

al., 2005, Besri 2007a, 2007b, Runia, 2006, Culpepper et al.,, 2008). 

Adoption of grafting continues to increase and is now commonly used in Eastern Europe, 

Northern Africa, Central America, and North America. In the USA, grafting is still largely 

limited to greenhouse production and small organic producers but new research is underway 

to help establish this technology (Louws, 2008; Kubota, 2008). Introduction of this 

technology to open fields has potential efficacy as an IPM tool to reduce soil fumigants in 

vegetable production (tomato, eggplant, melons, and cucumbers), but with some limitations 

(Besri 2008, Kokalis-Burelle 2008, Davis et al., 2008, Lin et al 2008, Rivard et al 2008). 
200 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Kokalis-Burelle et al (2008) evaluated the combination of grafting + fumigants (MB, MI/ Pic, 

DMDS/ Pic) under metalized barrier films. 

In Mediterranean countries grafting represents a viable alternative effective against vascular 

wilts and root rots (Besri, 2008). In Morocco, grafting is now implemented on 100 % of the 

protected tomato producing area. In Turkey, yields in tomato increased by about 35% when 

using grafted plants, although this proportion varied with the rootstock used (Yilmaz et al., 

2008). In Spain, grafting was introduced to protect plants from pathogens such as various 

races of Fusarium oxysporum, Verticillium dahliae; Phytophthora spp.,and 

Pyrenochaeta sp. and the nematodes (Meloidogyne spp). Grafting is now common in 

watermelon and tomato, but less in pepper, eggplant, melon and cucumber (Dianez et al., 

2007).

In Japan, grafting is used singly or in combination with alternative chemicals for nematode 

control (1,3-D, Pic, MS and fosthiazate) for 60% of the regular tomatoes and 90% of the 

cherry tomatoes produced in the Kumamoto region where a high proportion of the country’s 

production is concentrated (Nishi and Tateya, 2006a). Recently, a grafting robot including an 

automatic seedling feeder system has been developed. It reduces labour and increases 

efficiency and accuracy. Commercial availability of this device is expected soon (Kobayashi 

2005, Kobayashi 2008, Kobayashi 2008). The robot has been introduced in the US for the 

production of grafted vegetables (Kokalis-Burelle 2008). In Taiwan grafted tomatoes 

represent a viable solution against bacterial wilt (Lin et al., 2008).

In Florida, Telone C-35 was reported to be as effective as MB for controlling root-knot 

nematodes in tomatoes (Dickson, 2007). Nutsedge control has been efficiently achieved in the 

USA with the herbicide halosulfuron. Acrolein combined with other chemicals such as Eptam 

(EPTC), halosulforon or dazomet enhanced control of nutsedge and other weed species 

without adversely affecting yield. Yields were comparable or higher than those obtained with 

MB. (Belcher et al., 2007). 

Methyl iodide applied under metalized mulch controlled nutsedge as well as MB at various 

dosages, with highest obtained at 252 kg/ha. Metalized mulch also reduced incidence of 

bacterial wilt (Ralstonia solanacearum) to a greater extent than VIF (Olson and Kreger, 

2007; Bernal, 2007; Thomas et al., 2007). 

Welker et al (2008) reported that fumigation with DMDS / Pic 80:20 kills inoculum to a 

depth sufficient to produce an economical harvest. 

In Turkey, solarisation has been extremely successful at replacing MB in polyhouses (Yilmaz 

et al, 2008). In addition, soil solarization in combination with biocontrol agents (BCA); 

rifampicin resistant Pseudomonas fluorescens strain (PfT-8) and a carbendazim resistant 

Trichoderma harzianum strain (ThM-1) were introduced and evaluated as a potential 

disease management strategy for tomato damping-off caused by Pythium spp. (Jayaraj and 

Radhakrishnan, 2008). Incidence of damping-off disease was significantly suppressed in 

solarized plots containing BCA compared to control plot. 

b. Eggplant 

Adoption of grafting continues to expand in the eggplant sector as new and more suitable 

rootstocks become available. In Turkey for example, yields of grafted eggplants were shown 

to increase by 25-30% in comparison to non-grafted plants. Fruit quality was much improved 

and although planting density remains largely unchanged, growers find it possible to leave 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 201

grafted plants in production for several years, especially when grown on previously solarised 

soil treated with alternative fumigants (Yilmaz et al, 2007b). 

c. Peppers 

Various chemical alternatives have proved efficient for the control of soilborne pathogens and 

weeds. For example, methyl iodide/ Pic 50:50 with VIF, DMDS/ Pic and a combination of 

Telone II /Pic and dazomet under LDPE and barrier films were tested in Georgia (USA) on 

bell pepper with excellent results (Culpepper et al., 2007, 2008). 

In Spain, biofumigation has proven successful for peppers grown in the Murcia and CastillaLa Mancha regions (Bello et al., 2008). Biofumigants most commonly applied include goat, 

sheep and cow manure, organic matter from rice, mushroom, olive, brassicae, and garden 

residues. The effect of pepper residues on Meloidogyne incognita populations was also 

evaluated by Piedra-Buena et al. (2007). 

Solarization in combination with chemical and non-chemicals alternatives has been 

extensively studied for pepper production in different countries (Morra et al., 2007, Santos et 

al., 2008, Sogut and Elekcioglu, 2007, Yucel et al., 2007; Saha et al., 2007). The efficacy of 

soil solarization in combination with Trichoderma spp., dazomet and fresh chicken manure 

for the control of root knot nematodes was studied by Sogut and Elekcioglu, (2007) in 

Turkey. All alternatives significantly reduced nematode incidence and damage. In the USA, 

Morra et al., (2007) found that cultivation of grafted peppers in solarised soil was a 

promising technical solution to substitute chemical treatments of soil disinfection. The impact 

of solarization in combination with soil fumigants (MB/ Pic, 1,3-D/ Pic, metham sodium) on 

hot pepper production in high-tunnels was studied in Costa Rica (Santos et al., 2008), where 

nematode damage was significantly reduced and yields improved. 

d. Cucurbits 

Production of grafted cucurbits continues to expand in Mediterranean countries. When 

combined with other treatments, grafted plants do not need for MB fumigation (De Miguel, 

2004b, Beltrán et al, 2008). In Italy, grafted plants are used with alternative fumigants (e.g. 

1,3-D or Pic) (Spotti, 2004). Rootstocks resistant to soilborne pests and pathogens such as 

Meloidogyne sp. and Fusarium oxysporum are available for melon, watermelon and 

cucumber; Monosporascus cannonballus and Didymella bryoniae for melon; and 

Phomopsis sclerotiodes for cucumber (Blestos, 2005; De Miguel 2004 a, b, c; LópezGalarza, et al. 2004; Crinó et al, 2007). 

In Israel, grafting is also showing promising results, particularly when this system is carefully 

adapted to particular growing conditions of each region (Cohen et al., 2005, 2007; Koren, 

2002). Grafting is commercially adopted for watermelons and is successful for prostrate 

melon cultivars, however some incompatibility constraints remain for trellised cultivars. 

In Morocco, grafting of cucurbits enjoys wide commercial adoption. Many rootstocks with 

resistance to most of the soil borne pathogens (except Meloidogyne) are now available. 

Grafting is used as a component of IPM program (Besri 2008). 

In the USA, the main focus is still on alternative fumigants, combined with herbicides when 

additional weed control is necessary (Culpepper et al., 2007). Methyl iodide applied under 

metallized tarps has shown to be as efficacious as MB (Hausbeck and Cortright, 2007; Olson 

and Kreger, 2007), but this fumigant is not yet registered for cucurbits. In Florida, 1,3D /Pic 
202 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

showed better control of soil borne pathogens of melon than MB/Pic formulations (Olson and 

Kreger, 2007). In Georgia, fumigant combinations using 1,3-D, chloropicrin and methamsodium were as effective as methyl bromide for controlling Meloidogyne incognita (Kofoid 

& White), Pythium irregulare, Rhizoctonia solani and Cyperus esculentus in squash 

crops (Desaeger et al, 2008). 

Non-chemical alternatives such as grafting, physical barriers and biofumigation are being 

increasingly tested in the US. For example, physical barriers were tested for weed control: 

yellow nutsedge emergence in transplanted cantaloupe was suppressed by the combined 

effects of thin-film mulches and competitive size differential provided by using cantaloupe 

transplants (Johnson & Mullinix, 2007). 

Kokalis-Burelle et al (2008) evaluated the combination grafting + fumigants under metalized 

film . Grafted watermelons show potential in the USA for production without MB, but 

commercial growers are reluctant to adopt this technology due to economic concerns. Several 

studies are presently being conducted to address this (Cushman and Huan, 2008; Taylor et 

al., 2008). 

Grafting combined with either avermectin, fosthiazate or calcium cyanamide are efficient 

alternatives to MB presently in use in China for cucumber production (Cao, 2009 pers. 

comm). 

13.2.3.2 Ornamental crops 

Alternatives such as fumigants, production in substrates and steam, have been been widely 

adopted (including A5 Parties) and only two Non-Article 5 Parties presently request CUNs 

for ornamentals, Israel and the United States.. 

Floriculture is a complex industry with many flower types, production cycles and cropping 

systems involved. As a result, shifting to alternatives often requires growers to change 

production practices substantially and implement IPM, but these have been shown to be 

extremely effective (e.g. UC Davis, 2009). This may include transition to soilless systems, at 

times with increased investment, but often with improved quality and yields (Savvas, 2003; 

Graffiadelis, 2000; Grillas et al., 2001; Akkaya et al., 2004; Minuto et al., 2005; Vos and 

Bridge, 2006; Yilmaz et al., 2008; 2007 ab). 

Constraints to adoption of alternatives include regulatory issues (e.g. township caps in USA), 

and registration. However, alternatives that do not need registration such as steam and 

substrates are used by many growers around the world particularly for flowers grown in 

protected environments. Effective results have also been obtained with solarisation, for 

example in Israel, Italy, Turkey and the state of Florida in the United States (McSorley et al., 

2006; McSorley et al., 2008; 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, 2008; Rea, 2008). 

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). It is of particular 

importance to adjust boiler capacity, fuel type and steam delivery options to each particular 

situation (Fennimore et al., 2008ab). Steam is generally suited for protected flower 

production and for sterilizing re-utilised substrates. Costs associated with steaming may be 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 203

reduced through implementation of IPM strategies and by considering different types of fuels, 

boiler types and steaming systems (Runia 2000). 

Chemical alternatives are increasingly used in ornamental production around the world and 

include dazomet, metham sodium, 1,3- D, with and without Pic and methyl iodide (Rosskpf et 

al., 2008;. Reuven et al., 2005; Schneider et al., 2003, Gerik, 2005 a and b, Gerik and Green, 

2004, Gerik et al., 2006; Mann et al, 2005; Tostovrsnik et al, 2005; Klose et al, 2007; 

2008). Application of fumigants with barrier films, such as VIF, is allowing for reduced rates 

of chemicals, including MB (Klose et al, 2007). Commercial adoption of methyl iodide is 

taking place at a very fast rate in US states such as Florida where it has recently become 

registered (US CUN Ornamentals, 2009). 

13.2.3.3 Strawberries 

a. Chemical alternatives in strawberry fruit sector 

Formulations of 1,3-D/Pic, Pic alone and metham sodium combined with other fumigants 

have been adopted widely throughout industries applying for CUN’s, and replaced 85% of the 

production area previously treated with MB/ Pic mixtures. Of the Parties previously applying 

for CUN’s, most have completely implemented these alternatives. Australia and France 

phased out in 2005, the United Kingdom in 2006 and Italy, New Zealand and Spain in 2007 

(EC 2008). In 2009, USA and Israel are the only non- A 5 countries continuing use of MB 

for this use. 

Recent trials on strawberry fruit in Australia, Spain and the US confirm that MI/Pic and 

DMDS/Pic performed as well as MB/Pic (e.g. Santos et al, 2007, López-Aranda et al., 2007, 

Mann et al 2007, Noling 2008), and others . Dazomet + 1,3-D and Pic alone were also very 

effective ( López-Aranda et al, 2008). In Florida, field studies were conducted to compare 

the performance of several chemical alternatives on the control of sting nematode 

(Belonolaimus spp.) and marketable yield of 'Camarosa' strawberry (Gilreath et al., 2008). 

1,3-D/Pic and dazomet, 1,3-D/Pic, Pic and MNa, and fosthiazate/ Pic all proved equally 

effective as MB/Pic for strawberry plant vigor, sting nematode control, and early and total 

marketable yields. 

In the EC, a range of chemical alternatives have been adopted to fully replace MB, including 

1,3/D, MS, dazomet and Pic although as stated previously their registration is under revision. 

In China, a new formulation of 1,3-D/Pic in capsules has been developed, as well as methyl 

iodide and MI/Pic capsules. Initial results showed that there was no significant different 

between 1,3-D capsule application and injection application. Avermectin is registered as a 

nematicide and is in wide use (Cao, 2008 pers. comm.). 

b. Non-chemical alternatives in strawberry fruit sector 

Strawberry production in substrates accounts for approximately 5% of world production. It 

occurs mainly in greenhouses and in cool climates with short cropping cycles, targeting early 

season markets or niche markets. The Netherlands, Japan, Italy, New Zealand, UK and China 

are some of the key producers using substrates for strawberry fruit production (Lieten, 2004; 

López-Medina, 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 worldwide for 

this crop. 
204 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

c. Adoption of alternatives in the California Strawberry fruit sector 

The California strawberry fruit industry is the largest remaining critical use for MB 

worldwide using around 1000 tonnes of MB. To further evaluate progress in uptake of 

alternatives, MBTOC conducted a study of historical MB use data in strawberry fruit in 

California using the following sources: http://calpip.cdpr.ca.gov/cfdocs/calpip/prod/main.cfm 

and California strawberry commission acreage survey information (Figure 13. 6.). 

Conclusions of this study where that despite a large range of regulations which restrict use of 

alternatives, there has been steady progress in reducing reliance on MB over the years up until 

2010 (Figure 13.5). Data shows that some regions have almost eliminated use of MB (eg. 

Oxnard), however others have not reduced reliance on MB (Figure 13.6). As an example, in 

Watsonville/ Salinas, the total production area has grown significantly since 2005 and the use 

of MB, being still at 75% of the production area. 

Figure 13.5: MB use by the Californian strawberry sector 1998 - 2010

California use data vs CUE data, strawberry fruit

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

# kg MB use (exemption)

CUE - US

allocation

CUE - FL allocation

CUE - E US

allocation

CUE - CAL

allocation

CAL MB use

Linear (CAL MB

use)

Sources: http://calpip.cdpr.ca.gov/cfdocs/calpip/prod/main.cfm and US CUN data. 

In Fig. 13.6. below, the solid lines indicate growth of production area within counties, the 

dashed lines show the production areas within the same county using MB. (Source: CalDPR 

data: www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/pur/purmain.htm ) 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 205

Figure 13.6: California strawberry production areas vs areas using MB 

Cal Strawberry area (total vs with MB)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009 projected

Ha

Watsonville/Salinas

Wats/Sal with MB

Santa Maria

St Maria with MB

Oxnard

Oxnard with MB

Orange/San Diego

Or/SD with MB

San Joaquin

San J with MB

13.2.3.4 Strawberry nurseries 

MB is used for the production of strawberry runners to meet strict certification standards for 

virtually pest-free strawberry runner stock. 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 and mean an alternative should give the same level of risk as MB or 

better. For this reason only a few alternatives are suitable and these include methyl iodide, 

1,3-D/Pic in some situations and substrate production of plug plants are the alternatives being 

adopted. In particular, MI is becoming accepted as a one to one replacement for this industry 

and trials continue to prove effective in Australia, China, Spain and the USA (Mann et al., 

2007; Cao, pers comm., 2008). 

In other studies, a range of alternative fumigant combinations (MI/Pic, and 1,3-D/ Pic 

followed by dazomet, Pic followed by dazomet) controlled weeds at levels comparable to 

MB/Pic (Fennimore et al., 2008 ab). 

In Japan, a simple, economically feasible system using trays filled with substrate is proving 

particularly useful for the production of strawberry runners. Various materials are used as 

substrates (e.g. rock wool, peat moss, rice hulls, coconuts husk and bark) and can be reused 

after sterilising with solar heat treatment or hot water (Nishi and Tateya, 2006b). 

13.2.3.5 Nurseries and propagation material for other crops 

Many types of propagation material (bulbs, cuttings, seedlings, young plants, sweet potato slips, and 

trees) are subject to high health standards. Alternatives to MB need to provide a level of pest and 
206 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

pathogen control sufficient to achieve an acceptable yield and quality from a clean root system or 

clean bulbs. This is critical to prevent the spread of economically important pests and pathogens from 

the nursery fields to the fruiting or production fields. 

For certified nursery stock, regulations might specify either a level of control that must be achieved or 

approved soil treatments that are accepted as meeting certification standards (CDFA, 2009). For noncertified stock, the market sets the standard that must be met. In either case, lack of a clean root 

system could mean a 100% loss in marketable product for the grower. MB has commonly been used 

to meet clean propagative material standards. In some cases, sufficient data and grower experience 

have allowed growers to transition from the 98:2 formulations of MB that were commonly used in the 

past to 67:33 or 50:50 formulations depending on the pest or pathogen to be controlled and level of 

severity of the infestation [Porter et al., 2007]. In other cases, only the amount of MB is specified in 

certification requirements, regardless of the formulation (CDFA, 2009). The California Dept of Food 

and Agriculture has recently approved the use of 1,3-dichloropropene as a certified nursery stock soil 

treatment for certain crops under specific conditions and methyl iodide, if and when it is registered for 

use in California (CDFA, 2009). Research trials (Schneider et. al, 2009), indicate some materials 

(such as MI) and some combinations (such as 1,3-D /Pic) show promise as MB alternatives for 

specific circumstances. 

The requirement for broadacre treatment of nursery soil (to avoid recolonization from adjacent, 

untreated soil) has hindered adoption of barrier films (LPBF) in some areas (such as the US) where 

gluing of LPBF for broadacre treatment is not commercially available. Recent progress to this respect 

is however being made in trials in California (Fennimore and Weber, 2008). 

An alternate approach to the use of soil treatments is the use of containerized, or soil-less substrate, 

production systems where this approach is economically feasible and is able to produce a product, i.e, 

root system, of acceptable size and quality to the marketplace. 

13.2.3.6 Other crops 

a. Potatoes and Sweet potatoes 

No CUE was submitted for potato production in 2009 indicating good progress toward 

adoption of alternatives for this crop. 

Nominations were submitted for sweet potatoes used for obtaining high quality disease-free 

transplant material. MB is required to control soilborne fungal, bacterial and nematode pests 

affecting production. T Stoddard et al (2008) tested a number of alternative to MB for sweet 

potato slips including Pic, PicChlor 60, solarization, 1,3-D combined with dazomet, plus 

additional treatments (napropamide, dicloran, thiabendazole and flumioxazin). Solarization 

and untreated control plots required significant hand weeding. 1,3-D and dazomet, and Pic 

alone yielded better and provided greater financial returns than MB although the latter case 

had 10% higher weeding costs than MB. 

b. Ginger 

Pythium sp. (Pythium zingiberis) is the major concern for ginger production. In the absence 

of resistant cultivars, disease control is dependent on detecting the pathogen in soil and in 

propagation materials and by planting pathogen-free propagative materials in clean areas. 

Several non chemical control methods have been considered for managing the impact of 

ginger diseases. These include improving drainage of the soil through appropriate ploughing, 

carefully regulating the watering practices and using pathogen-free water sources. Sanitation 

practices should ensure that tools and clothing are free of pathogens before being introduced 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 207

into ginger fields. Infected plants should be immediately removed. Cyazofamid has been 

recently registered for rhizome rot disease of ginger in Japan. Propamocarb is also available. 

These two products are applied as a soil drench around the individual ginger plants. A mixture 

of azoxystrobin and metalaxyl M is under registration review. Methyl iodide is not yet 

registered but seems to offer promising effectiveness, however no data are available as to 

potential phytotoxicity. Phosphorous acid based compounds are also under evaluation as 

potential controls. Finally soilless cultivation has been tested but is still an experimental 

application to ginger cultivation (Hayden et al., 2004). 

13.2.3.7 Replant diseases 

Replant disease is a serious problem affecting certain orchards of perennial fruit trees and 

grapevines. The disorder still represents a major economic threat and challenge to growers. 

Replant is poorly understood as it is often caused by undefined pathogen complex that can be 

complicated by abiotic factors such as soil type and nutrition. A major factor contributing to 

the problem is the persistence of old, well developed and established deep seated roots from 

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 pathogens, but 

also to kill the old roots. Non-fumigation management practices therefore can include the 

nearly impossible physical removal of such roots. Killing prune roots by means of systemic 

herbicides and using a persistent nematicide has been described by McKenry et al., (2007). 

A number of alternatives to MB are presently in use in many countries, not only where 

specific pathogens are known to contribute to the problem but also where the disease complex 

is of unknown aetiology such as in many instances of specific and non-specific apple replant 

disease (Van Schoor et al., 2009). These include agronomic practices such as rotation where 

possible, resistant rootstocks, organic soil amendments in the United States (Mazzola et al.,

2009), partially replacing old soil with fresh soil, appropriate macro- and micronutrient 

supplementation in South Africa (Van Schoor et al., 2009), biofumigation and (Nyczepir et 

al., 2007) solarisation in the US (Tanner et al., 2006) , singly or in combination. The most 

appropriate chemical alternatives now include methyl iodide: Pic (MI/Pic 50:50). 1,3-D used 

singly or with Pic, Pic alone, metham sodium and dazomet is used successfully where the 

required dosage rates are allowed under prevailing local regulation (Browne et al., 2003; 

Tostovrnisk et al., 2005; Reginato et al., 2008). Methods to replant orchards and vineyards 

successfully without MB have been reported (McKenry et al., 2007, 2006). Widespread 

commercial use of mixtures occurred in Australia before phase out of methyl bromide 

(Tostovrnisk et al., 2005; VDPI 2004, 2005). Performance of re-planted sweet cherry 

rootstocks was evaluated in Chile in soils treated with MB and 1,3-D, with equally effective 

results (Reginato et al., 2008). No critical use applications have been submitted in the past 

years requesting MB specifically for apple replant disease. 

Constraints to adoption of alternatives exist in the US and are mainly of regulatory nature. 

Methyl iodide has not yet been registered in a few states of which California is the more 

important. Although 1,3-D is effective in killing old roots and successfully used in light sandy 

soils, the dosage needed for the heavy soils (560-750 kg/ha) exceeds the maximum of 370 

kg/ha allowed under California regulations (McKenry, 2005). 

A major hurdle in replant research is the extended period needed to obtain meaningful and 

reliable results in contrast to research on annual crops. Trials were initiated in 2007 under the 

Pacific Area Wide Pest Management Program for Integrated Alternatives to Methyl Bromide 

of the USDA-ARS. Results are not expected within 4 years (Wang et al., 2008; Lampinen et 

al., 2006) 
208 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Almond replant disease can be successfully controlled by Pic if the disease is not mediated by 

nematodes (Browne et al., 2006). Further studies are being conducted on almonds and other 

stone fruit with alternative fumigants at reduced rates in California (Browne et al., 2007; 

Browne et al., 2008; Coates et al, 2007) showing promising preliminary results of global 

positioning (GPS) placed spot treatments using Pic alone or in combination with 1,3-D. The 

Pacific Area-Wide Pest Management Program focuses on IPM including the use of minimum 

fumigant rates and fumigated areas, targeted fumigant methods (minimising non-targeted 

emissions), non-chemical approaches and risk-based management guidelines (Browne et al, 

2008). Similar trials are underway with walnut (Kluepfel et al., 2007). 

13.2.3.8 Weeds 

a. Broomrape 

Broomrapes (Orobanche spp.) are root parasites of higher plants that depend entirely on 

their hosts for nutrients. they parasitize a wide range of economically important hosts, such as 

tomato (in greenhouses and in the open field), sunflower, chickpeas, groundnuts, potato, 

crucifers, carrots, herbs, melon and watermelon, rendering soils useless for crop production. 

Many alternatives to MB have been reported but unfortunately no single method of control 

provides complete protection against these pathogens, which makes an integrated approach 

combining various techniques necessary. The main challenge with broomrape is reducing the 

seed bank in heavily infested soil, which is no longer in production such as processing tomato 

fields in Israel. Abanga et. al (2007) have described a community-based integrated 

management approach for controlling broomrape in seven countries in the Near East and 

North Africa (NENA) where this weed causes serious problems. Nadal et al. (2008) have 

demonstrated that glyphosate is a suitable herbicide for the control of O. crenata in narbon 

bean for Southern Spain, however, this treatment can be phytotoxic for some high value crops 

such as tomatoes. Recently Muller et al., (2009) reported the potential use of Fusarium as a 

biopesticide against O. ramosa. 

b. Nutsedge 

Yellow and purple nutsedge, Cyperus spp are a key target for critcal use of MB that still 

requires effective alternatives. In the past year, trials involving combinations of herbicides 

and combinations of fumigants have been shown to be effective. 

Webster et al., (2008) showed that glyphosate minimized nutsedge tuber production, is 

economical, and poses no herbicide carryover issues to vegetables. Also, in Alabama (US) a 

field study in tomatoes showed that yellow nutsedge was controlled with acrolein in 

combination with other herbicides and metham sodium. The successful combinations 

included acrolein with either Eptam, halosulfuron or metham sodium. (Belcher, et al, 2007). 

In Florida, Gilreath and Santos (2008) have combined fumigation programs with either Pic 

and fosthiazate or 1,3-D/Pic + metham sodium together with herbicides (napropamide+ 

trifluralin) in pre-emergence and post-directed trifloxysulfuron and shown improved control 

of nutsedge. In a separate study, Santos (2009) showed that the combinations are either 

napropamide and S-metolachlor or EPTC followed by metham-K provided similar levels of 

control as MB/Pic. 

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). Thomas et al., (2009) used 

colored plastic mulches with Telone C35, which controlled weeds and prevented nutsedge 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 209

penetration, by retaining the fumigant and allowing passage of infra-red and red light through 

the film while restricting other photosynthetically active wavelengths. The IR and red lights 

changed the morphology of nutsedge from a hard plastic-penetrating point to a soft leafy 

structure that cannot tear the film. 

In Georgia trials, MB/Pic (67/33), methyl iodide/Pic (50/50) and a three fumigant system of 

1,3-/D followed by chloropicrin, followed by metham sodium were evaluated on peppers. 

Nutsedge was controlled similarly with MB/Pic, methyl iodide/Pic and the 1,3-D/Pic/metham 

combinations. DMDS did not perform as well as MB/Pic (Culpepper et al., 2007). 

13.2.3.9 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 ) worldwide. Seeds, grafted seedlings, soil, plant sap and cuscuta (Cuscuta 

subinclusa , C. lupuliformis , C. campestris) are the main means of dissemination for these 

viruses . However, the only country requesting a critical use to control them is Japan, which 

will nevertheless be phasing out this application by 2013 (Tsuda, 2008). 

Except for 1,3- D/Pic, which is registered to control MNSV in Japanese melons, no other 

chemical alternatives are registered. However these viruses can be controlled with a thorough 

IPM program that includes seed treatment with heat (Nagai, 1981) and sanitation practices 

such as removing residues from the previous crop before transplant and immediate removal of 

infected plants, which are aimed at reducing virus inoculum. Soilless culture and treatment of 

soil with hot water or steam are also recommended control practices. 

Pepper Mild Mottle Virus can be controlled by treatments that accelerate the degradation of 

low cost plant debris, such as wheat bran. Wrapping roots with paper can avoid the virus 

infection from infected soil during transplantation, and planting seedlings into pots that 

decompose can reduce virus infection. Preimmunization with an attenuated virus is a 

promising means of protection against aggressive strains. Combination of these control 

methods increases the efficiency of any individual technique for protection against PMMoV 

(Nishi et al., 2008). Pepper varieties that are resistant to the P123 strain of PMMoV have been 

developed (Tsuda et al., 1997), however another strain of PMMoV which overcomes 

resistance has been reported (Genda et al., 2007). 

Melon necrotic spotted virus can be controlled by resistant varieties selected for each melon 

producing region. 1,3-D/Pic is registered to control MNSV and risks of phytototoxicity can be 

avoided by changes application methods. Crop rotation with tomato and other cultural 

practices are under development to control MNSV (Ohoizumi T et al. 2008) and Kyuri green 

mottle mosaic virus of cucumber (Kubota, 2008). 

13.2.4 Economic aspects of methyl bromide alternatives 

The existing peer-reviewed literature on the economics of the impact of the methyl bromide 

phase-out can 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. 
210 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

To this end, a further four articles have been traced, all of which fall within the category of 

partial budgeting identified above, with all four focusing on economic aspects of soils use 

(Byrd et al, 2006 ab; Fennimore et al., 2008 ab; Sydorovych, et al., 2008; Taylor, et al., 

2006). 

Economic appraisal of CUNs remains difficult despite advice from the parties regarding the 

nature of the economic information to be provided in the nominations. This difficulty arises 

because of the absence of practical criteria for determining the financial and economic 

feasibility of alternatives.

13.3 MBTOC QSC Progress Report 

This Progress Report for MBTOC QSC includes: 

1. News reports of particular interest to the Parties; 

2. A short report on the interrelation of the use of recapture equipment in the context of 

the upcoming ban on MB QPS use in the EU; 

3. An interim report on progress in finding alternatives to high moisture dates; 

4. A research update on alternatives to methyl bromide for post harvest uses (structural, 

commodity and quarantine). 

The reference list for the QSC Progress Report and the QSC Interim CUN Report has 

been incorporated into the overall reference list at the end of this report. 

13.3.1 News reports concerning MB alternatives 

In this past year there have been three key news reports that can be expected to impact the use 

of methyl bromide and alternatives. 

The deregistration of MB by the European Union for all uses, including quarantine use was 

announced in March 2009 (EU, 2009). Although the EC had not licensed the use of methyl 

bromide for critical uses for at least two years previously, there had been some remaining MB 

use for quarantine, both for imports and exports. However, as of March 18, 2010, even these 

uses will be phased out. In a press release announcing this and other regulatory matters for 

ozone depleting substances, the European Parliament noted that by being more restrictive than 

the Montreal Protocol Europe, the EU would continue to lead by example. 

Other Parties may wish to assess whether the EU decision might enhance the potential for 

pest incursions from European shipments at import, and if so, the need for treatment. Bilateral 

agreements for quarantine treatments are difficult to attain and usually require a considerable 

and lengthy research investment and so Parties may find they need to strengthen efforts and 

investment at this time. Further discussion of the issues surrounding recapture of MB from 

QPS treatments will be found below. 

In the United States, Chemtura has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, a legal action which 

protects assets and allows financial and corporate restructuring for a certain time period. 

Chemtura and its affiliated companies are the main supplier and distributor of methyl bromide 

(as well as other chemicals including alternatives to methyl bromide for soils uses (Reisch, 

2009; Whaba, 2009)). The impact of this action on American methyl bromide users and the 

countries that import American methyl bromide remains unclear. It can take months to import 

MB from suppliers from other countries, and there can be a problem with incompatibility of 

shipping containers. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 211

Recently published reports indicate that the fumigant, sulfuryl fluoride (SF), has a global 

warming potential higher than previously considered (Millet et al., 2009). Sulfuryl fluoride is 

being promoted as a direct replacement for methyl bromide for treatment against pests of 

many dry commodities and in flour mills, food processing facilities and for household termite 

control. In addition, MBTOC is aware of new pending registrations for sulfuryl fluoride as a 

soil fumigant. 

The new Mühle et al paper estimates the “most likely” GWP for SF of about 4,800, a value 

similar to that of CFC-11 (Mühle et al., 2009, Muhle et al, 2009a; Papadimitriou et al., 2008). 

Previous reports indicated GWP ranged between 278 and 477 to as high as 8000. The 

concentration of sulfuryl fluoride in the atmosphere is increasing rapidly, with the global 

tropospheric background concentration of SO2F2 increasing by 5 ± 1% per year. Tropospheric 

concentrations rose from about 0.3 ppt (parts per trillion, dry air mol fraction) in 1978 to 

about 1.35 ppt in May 2007 in the Southern Hemisphere, and from about 1.08 ppt in 1999 to 

about 1.53 ppt in May 2007 in the Northern Hemisphere (Mühle et al., 2009a). SF is a 

relatively stable material in the stratosphere. Papadmitriou et al (2008) give an estimated 

stratospheric half-life of 630 years. These atmospheric observations and associated GWP 

estimates have generated much discussion and concern about the use of sulfuryl fluoride as a 

methyl bromide alternative (St. John, 2009; Dow AgroSciences, 2009). 

Heat treatment is also a key alternative to MB for pest control in milling and food processing. 

It should be noted that the global warming impact of heat treatments has not been published. 

Determining whether, or how to reconcile the use of an alternative to an ozone depleting 

chemical when the alternative has been found to be of a high global warming potential will 

require a policy decision of the Parties and domestic regulatory authorities. However, 

informal reports from flour milling companies indicate concern that continued use of SF 

could negatively impact their efforts to decrease their climate change impacts. 

Figure 13.7: Tropospheric concentrations of SF

Issues Surrounding Methyl Bromide Recapture and 

(Source: Muhle et al, 2009a).

13.3.2 Regulations Concerning QPS MB Use 

MBTOC Notes that technically feasible methods are commercially available to reduce 

emitted MB by about 50% of the amount of MB used in container fumigation, but also notes 

these methods are not implemented into the various CUNs and the programs for QPS. 
212 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.3.3 Issues Surrounding Methyl Bromide Recapture and Regulations 

Concerning QPS MB Use 

Several companies have invested large amounts of money into the commercial development 

of MB recapture systems for treatment of containers and chambers holding MB-treated 

commodities. MBTOC has identified the following companies that are now providing MB 

recapturing services or equipment: Nordiko (Australia); Desclean (Belgium); Eco2 

(Netherlands); Ruvoma (Netherlands); TIGG (United States). In addition, Value Recovery 

Systems (US) is offering, but has not yet built, MB recapture systems. These companies are 

commercially active and offering their techniques and equipment around the world. 

The technique relies mainly on adsorption of MB from the air/gas mixture by activated carbon 

prior to release into the ambient atmosphere. Together with improved gas tightness of the 

container or chamber, about 50 % of the introduced gas can be recaptured and not emitted to 

the atmosphere. Costs for operations of recapture equipment have been estimated by the 

equipment suppliers to be an approximate 15 % increase over the cost for the fumigation 

without this technique. 

Belgium and Netherlands had formerly been advanced in ozone protection by ensuring 

reduced emissions from quarantine MB use. Their regulations require that 80% of MB gas be 

recaptured at the end of quarantine treatments. Recently however, the EU has deregistered 

methyl bromide for all uses, including quarantine use. It was announced in March 2009 (EU, 

2009) that as of March 18, 2010, QPS use of MB, and the use of recapture equipment will be 

eliminated. 

As a result of the new EU regulation, importing counties may have to increase their MB 

fumigations when EU-originating commodities arrive in the importing countries. It could be 

argued that increased MB emissions may result because needed quarantine treatments may 

occur in countries that import commodities from the EU, and noting that the receiving 

countries do not use recapture equipment. 

MBTOC notes there would be a significant reduction in MB atmospheric emissions if Parties 

were to adopt regulations requiring the use of recapture equipment from QPS container and 

chamber fumigations. 

MBTOC suggests that meetings with experts in quarantine, trade, quarantine pest control and 

recapture might assist Parties to maintain quarantine security while reducing MB emissions. 

Such experts might already be members of MBTOC, IPPC and country quarantine 

committees. 

13.3.4 Preliminary Report on Progress in Resolving the Problem of Pests in High 

Moisture Dates 

Parties, particularly the North African countries of Algeria and Tunisia, have discussed with 

deep concern the problem of controlling pests in high moisture dates. Currently methyl 

bromide is used by several Parties to disinfest dates and prevent fermentation. In 2003, 

MBTOC noted that technically and economically effective alternatives have not been 

identified for fresh, high-moisture dates. The Parties then passed Decision XV/12 which noted 

the problem and its resulting impact on MB use in those countries. The Decision also 

indicated a need for a project to identify suitable alternatives and a workshop to share this 

information. 

In 2008, UNIDO took the initiative to respond to Decision XV/12. Following consultation 

with MBTOC QSC, a scientific and technical expert (Patrick Ducom, France) was identified 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 213

and a preliminary investigation of potential pest control techniques was launched. Five 

alternatives were tested at Ministry of Agriculture LNDS research institute in Bordeaux 

France, using dates sent by an Algerian date exporter and accompanied by scientists and 

technical experts from Algeria. 

As a result of this study considerable information about potential alternatives was identified, 

and discussed below in the results of the workshop. 

UNIDO held a workshop on the replacement of methyl bromide for disinfestation of high 

moisture dates in Vienna April 16-17, 2009. Since the workshop was held only one week 

before the MBTOC QSC meeting, and since the official workshop report was not available at 

time of preparation of the MBTOC report, our report on this workshop is interim. 

Present at the workshop were executives from major date-exporting companies from Algeria 

and Tunisia; scientific and technical experts from those countries and Israel; MBTOC 

members from Canada, France, Germany, Morocco, United Kingdom and United States of 

America; ozone officers from North Africa; and UNIDO officers. 

As a result of the study, and following discussions during the workshop, one key technical 

problem was resolved. It had previously been identified by MBTOC members that lack of 

information on moisture content of dates in various producing countries was preventing 

understanding of the issue. MBTOC members consider moisture content to be a key 

determinant of the selection of an effective disinfestant. After the presentation of information 

about date production in Algeria, Israel, Morocco, Tunisia and the USA, it became apparent 

that “dates at high moisture content” such as it appears in Decision XV/12 must be 

specifically defined. 

Consequently, the following definition was proposed: 

“dates at high water content” are dates of the Deglet-Nour variety, with a moisture 

content from 30 to 40% (compared to the wet weight). The colour of such dates is 

light and somewhat transparent. These dates are marketed still attached to small 

branches. The relative humidity in equilibrium with these high-moisture dates allows 

the rapid development of yeasts resulting in fermentation, if the dates are either stored 

or fumigated in gas tight conditions. Gas tightness sufficient for fermentation can also 

occur in consumer packaging. 

The results of the laboratory tests in France, and research in Israel, were discussed at the 

workshop, and the potential alternatives were evaluated. 

Controlled atmosphere facilitated fermentation, resulting in a high loss of the quality of the 

fruit. 

Sulfuryl fluoride and ethyl formate were both promising in that they controlled pests, they can 

be used in the existing vacuum chambers, and they only require short exposure times. 

Unfortunately, following discussion at the workshop, these potential alternatives had to be 

eliminated for use in North African countries. Sulfuryl fluoride is essentially not available in 

North African countries because of lack of registration and lack of suppliers. 

Ethyl formate is not registered as an insecticide in the EU, the principal market of North 

African dates and no company seems eager to register it. So, although ethyl formate has been 

registered in Israel and found effective for the control of pests in high moisture dates, it is not 

available to North African date exporters. Therefore, these two alternatives will not be studied 

further in tests in 2009. 
214 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

A phosphine product formulated as gas mixed with CO2 was effective but it was determined 

to be not available to North African date producers because the product has been withdrawn 

from sale in the EU by its producer. 

Phosphine generated in pure form (and not from formulations containing ammonia), was 

found to be technically effective for high moisture dates on branches, although using this 

technique resulted in the need to change treatment logistics. Managing treatment time when 

using this technique is important. If treatment time exceeds 72 hours, fermentation can result. 

Thus further work is needed to clarify this method. 

Heat treatment, (50 ̊C for 2 hours with a 2 hr come-up time) was previously found to be 

effective for other date varieties and at drier moisture contents (Navarro et al, 2004; 

Finkleman et al, 2006). Recent preliminary studies in Israel found the same method to be 

quite promising for high moisture dates on branches. Work on this technique is ongoing. If 

not done properly, heat can produce a non-desirable effect of cracking and pasty texture. Thus 

further work is also needed to clarify this method for high moisture dates. 

A date producer reported that deep freezing (- 25 ̊C) is currently used for the treatment of 

fresh Deglet-Nour in branches for the organic market. This treatment requires a very high 

investment and high operating costs so it was determined it could not be considered as an 

alternative for the entire production of fresh and high-moisture dates. 

MBTOC notes clear and significant positive results from the preliminary laboratory work and 

the workshop. We appreciate the ongoing liaison with UNIDO, the project managers, 

researchers and the date producing and export sectors. The official report from UNIDO will 

identify further project work in this field. 

13.3.5 Methyl Bromide Alternatives for Postharvest Uses -- Research Update 

13.3.5.1 Alternatives used for control of pests in structures 

MBTOC QSC has published several reviews of alternatives to the use of methyl bromide in 

structures with a substantive review of the technical efficacy of alternatives in flour milling in 

the May 2008 TEAP report. 

MBTOC has noted previously that IPM programs designed specifically for each particular 

facility, properly carried out, monitored, documented and evaluated are a necessary pest 

control pre-requisite. In some cases, IPM programs have proved sufficient for pest control in 

some facilities. 

However, treatments to control pests in milling and food processing facilities are the norm; 

two countries, Canada and the United States, continue to submit critical use nominations for 

MB. Two methods have become the main alternatives to methyl bromide for pest control in 

structures: heat treatment and sulfuryl fluoride fumigation. No new fumigants or methods 

have become commercially available since our last progress report, but there has been 

considerable research on the use of these methods, and on techniques to improve IPM 

approaches. One new aspect is the research focus on the use of heat to improve the 

effectivness of sulfuryl fluoride fumigation of mills and food processing facilities. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 215

13.3.5.2 Research about Improvements in IPM Techniques 

Aerosols can be useful as part of IPM programs; they are particularly used in warehouse 

environments where the combination of various foods and packaging in storage makes the use 

of treatments difficult or impossible. Arthur et al investigated the use of two commercially 

available aerosols in combination, finding that Esfenvalerate killed IMM eggs but not 5th

instar larvae, but that methoprene was effective against 5th instar larvae, so a combination 

treatment was determined to be the best method. In the economic analysis the decision was 

that full rate of Esfenvalerate and full rate of methoprene was less risk. Cost for both optimum 

egg and larvae control was reported as US$1.17/10,000 ft3 There is no special registration 

required to use these two aerosols in combination (Arthur et al, 2008). 

Methods to evaluate the effectiveness of IPM programs and pest control treatments, under 

commercial conditions, was the subject of a paper by Campbell of USDA Agriculture 

Research Service. In a paper that evaluated a large number of fumigations, including repeat 

fumigations, as well as IPM components such as the use of aerosols, pest trapping methods 

and sanitation differences Campbell was able to recommend the use of aerosols as part of an 

enhanced IPM program, and the conduct of autumn fumigations instead of spring fumigations 

which resulted in slower pest population rebound (Campbell, 2008). 

Working in flour mills in Northern Italy, Savoldelli and Panzeri, co-workers at the University 

of Milan Institue of Ag Entomology, evaluated IPM methods to see if IPM could be used to 

substitute for an annual fumigation. The goal was to suppress pest populations during the 

warm months of May and Oct. They conducted weekly pest monitoring, used several different 

kinds of traps and also used mass trapping as a pest control measure. Water and oil filled traps 

were more effective at this than were funnel traps. From previous pest observations they 

found that pests increased in May, so they focussed extraordinary cleaning in May. They 

found very high flour residues and IMM in the legs of equipment. They identified seven 

stored product species and several outdoor species which come in through open doors etc. 

also cockroaches which came up manhole covers connected to urban sewer system. They also 

had clothing webbing moths on the cotton covers of flour sacks. They fixed this last problem 

by cleaning out the air filters where they found larvae. Flour silos leaks were sealed with 

acrylic silicone. As a result of this work they determined they can substitute IPM for 

fumigation but they need weekly monitoring, investment in staff training and building 

improvements and higher costs for labor for cleaning (Savoldelli and Panzeri, 2008). 

13.3.5.3 Research about Heat as a Stand-Alone Treatment 

As discussed in the MBTOC review of alternatives for flour milling, heat treatment is one of 

two main pest control methods for control of pests in flour mills (TEAP, 2008). Heat 

treatment is an active commercial technique, and consequently there were few research 

reports available this year. Each year, Kansas State University in the United States offers a 

workshop on heat treatment of flour mills and food processing facilities. Interested readers 

should contact Kansas State Department of Grain Science and Industry. 

13.3.5.4 Research about Sulfuryl Fluoride Fumigation 

In North America, Dow AgroSciences is the leading supplier of sulfuryl fluoride for pest 

control in mills and food processing facilities. Williams and Thoms of Dow AgroSciences 

presented a summary of commercial acceptance of ProFume® the SF product they supply. 

Through September 2008, there were 419 confirmed commercial fumigations, of 567 

individual structures at 234+ North American locations including 27 US states and Puerto 

Rico plus three Canadian provinces. Of these fumigations, 35% were repeat fumigations of up 
216 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

to 8 consecutive ProFume fumgations, comprising 29% with four or more consecutive SF 

fumes. In their fumigation records, the mean temperatures recorded in flour mills was 29°C; 

planned exposure time was 29.7 h. In previous MBTOC reports, it has been noted that 

temperatures above 26°C are recommended to ensure SF treatments kill pest eggs in mills 

(Williams and Thoms, 2008). 

Dow AgroSciences also summarized the commercial acceptance of Profume in Europe. In 

1991, MB food industry use in EU was 640,000 MT; Italy was formerly the No.1 country for 

MB use in EU. Now zero MB is used. Four production and imports to the EU remain 

relatively flat between 2002 and 2005; 45 million metric tonnes of wheat and rye milled each 

year. Pasta production is up slightly in the EU from 2002. Therefore, MB phase out has not 

caused disruption in flour or pasta production. In 2008, Dow AgroSciences and associated 

pest control companies conducted 255 SF fumigations in EU. Average size of fumigated 

structures is 7-25 x 1000m3

 or about 250-900 x 1000ft3). The effectiveness of the fumigations 

was evaluated and it was determined that where insects were observed sooner than expected, 

an inadequate dosage rate was used at the temperature experienced (Stanislas, 2008). 

The effect of sulfuryl fluoride fumigations and heat treatments in German flour mills was 

evaluated by Muck and Boye. Two northern Germany mills were observed; one that milled 

oats and maize (23,000m3

); and one that milled wheat and rye (volume 40,000m3). Exposure 

was 50 h for SF and 40 h for heat (50° C for 24 h). Monitoring done by dome traps for beetles 

and delta traps for moths. After SF only three insects were caught in total during three months 

monitoring. With heat treatment result was two beetles first month (two floors), and 18 on 

four floors by the second month. The researchers consider both methods valid since they used 

to get survivors after MB treatment as well (Muck and Boye, 2008). 

Klemenz and co-workers at the Federal Research Center for Cultivated Plants in Berlin 

Germany looked at the use of sulfuryl fluoride in mills, residue of the gas and efficacy against 

Tribolium castaneum and Esphestia kuehniella. Max Concentration/Time (CT) for SF 

fumigations is 1,200 gh/m3

 and SF can only be used 3x/yr. Klemenz and co-workers asked if 

the recommended parameters were effective for mills in Germany. A mill of 60,000 m3

 was 

fumigated for 60 h and with a dosage rate of 1,200gh/m3

. Pest control rate of all insects was 

98%, and they had some eggs of each species and in one species they only had 92% control 

rate. Germany demands a 99.9% fumigation success rate (allowed survival of 1 out of 1000 

pests). So they have determined that the SF parameters used in Germany are insufficient to 

meet the German regulation that demands 99.9% efficacy of fumigation. The next research 

focus of this team will be to look at combination SF and heat treatments plus other methods to 

improve treatment efficacy (Klemenz et al, 2008). 

Reichmuth, from this same institute, reported later in 2008 that German millers say that 50% 

of mills have considerable surviving pests because of egg outgrowth after fumigation. 

Reichmuth suggested that the reason might be problems of scale up from lab methods to real 

world milling. For example, he noted that lab measurements suggest a MB dose of 5g/m3

, but 

the standard structural dosage recommendation for MB fumigation is 20g/m3

. Reichmuth 

suggested that combination of fumigants, heat and/or other methods be investigated to 

improve SF treatment efficacy (Reichmuth, 2008). 

Maier and co-workers at Purdue University monitored environmental conditions during eight 

fumigations of three flour mills to create their Computational Fumigation Model. Seven 

fumigations were with SF; there was one MB fume followed by SF fume in the same facility. 

Exposure times <24 h. Half- loss time was 17 hours. Sealing appeared to prevent heat loss 

from the fumigated structure. Sealing did not result in pressure build up in the mill. Sealing 

efficacy, wind speed and direction, mill temperature (and the temperature difference nightversus-day) and circulation fan efficacy were the key contributors to fumigation efficacy. 

They advised that circulation fans should be left operating during the entire fumigation. Their 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 217

model can assist mill operators and fumigators what the initial concentration should be under 

certain wind conditions (Maier et al, 2008). 

In associated work, Chayaprasert evaluated the importance and implementation of pressure 

testing for structural fumigation. He presented the equations needed for pressure leaking and 

understanding the relationships (Chayaprasert et al, 2008). 

Thoms and co-workers at Dow AgroSciences summarized the use to date of their sulfuryl 

fluoride products Vikane® and ProFume®. Vikane, the SF product used to kill termites in 

structures has been used on more than 1 million buildings. ProFume registrations have 

continued to progress with a 2008 registration in Greece, a 2007 registration in Ireland and 

Spain. Additionally, in 2008 the EU set temporary MRLs for fluorine residues resulting from 

SF fumigation. In North America there have been 455 ProFume structural fumigations in 182 

locations in 25 states plus Canada and Puerto Rico. In 2007, there were 201 commercial 

fumigations in EU. In related case studies reported, they found SF works faster than PH3 to 

fumigate seeds with no losses of germination (Thoms et al, 2008). 

13.3.5.5 Other Structural Research 

As a reminder of the important role MB has played in controlling pests that destroy museum 

building components and historical artefacts, and to ensure that fumigation was conducted 

properly, Ferizli and Emekci from Turkey’s Ankara University collaborated in the fumigation 

of Istanbul’s Yildiz Palace. Built in 1880 this huge (40,000 m3

 or 500,000 square meters) is a 

national historic site. The building is two stories, made of timber and masonry and a 

basement; mother of pearl covers much of the surfaces. The treatment of removable historical 

artefacts was conducted with controlled atmospheres in cubes in the basement while the 

treatment of the building was conducted with MB. (Artefact treatment covered elsewhere in 

this report.) Methyl bromide treatment was conducted at 22°C and treatment was 25-32g/m3

and for two days. The venting and ducting system required to fumigate such a large building 

was extensive. Ducts removed air from the building, mixed it with MB, and circulated 

through the building. The opposite was done during aeration. Since the fumigation museum 

staff have not found evidence of wood destroying insects. Now with the registration of 

sulfuryl fluoride, the researchers are intending to use it to fumigate other historical palaces 

(Ferizli and Emekci, 2008). 

Ensuring effective fumigation of grains in concrete elevators is difficult because they usually 

do not have recirculation systems and are not well sealed, especially at the top. Yet ineffective 

fumigations are associated with pest resistance. An effective phosphine fumigation requires 

200 ppm for 5 days to kill grain pests. USDA researchers Flynn and Reed, examined the 

effects of outside air temperature on movement of phosphine gas in concrete elevator bins 

trying to determine the reasons for failures in bin fumigation. Pest distribution in the grain 

mass in the bin starts with high populations on top of the grain in the summer then as cooler 

weather comes the pests move towards grain mass center. Their color illustration of timelapsed modelling of gas movement showed how the fumigant moves through the bin over 

time under different grain temps and environmental conditions. They determined that when 

grain temperature is similar to or less than outside temperature, fumigant pellets can be 

applied equally all through grain mass. When grain temperature is warmer, it is best to apply 

fumigant to bottom half of the grain mass. The authors noted an ongoing a problem in killing 

all the pests on top of the grain, where the insect density is the highest. They recommended 

that engineers develop better ways to seal the bin vents and the loading hatches in concrete 

elevator bins. Also fumigators should improve the sealing of the unloading vent (Flinn and 

Reed, 2008). 
218 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

13.3.6 Research into control of non-quarantine pests in commodities 

There is a wider variety of treatments and methods used to control non-quarantine pests in 

commodities than there is for structures. And, in recent years, it seems there is a greater focus 

for pest control in commodities, perhaps because of heightened vigilance in avoiding pest 

incursions in food processing structures and retail facilities. 

MBTOC’s previous reports have reviewed the use of numerous pest control methods for 

commodities. Recent research has included pest control methods using phosphine (in various 

formats), controlled atmospheres, sulfuryl fluroride, and hermetic storage. 

Yang and co-workers in Beijing China investigated the effect of different oxygen 

concentrations and temperature on respiration of Tribolium castaneum. Low O2 is the 

preferred controlled atmosphere treatment in China because CO2 is expensive but they can 

manipulate low O2 by manipulating nitrogen, which is less expensive in China. Controlling 

pests with O2 is considered green technology and includes the additional benefit of inhibiting 

fungi in grain. Oxygen concentrations of less than 2% for more than 15 days will control 

heavy grain infestation (such as when grain arrives at the warehouse). Another approach is to 

control the O2 concentration to between 5-10% for more than 2 months which will both 

inhibit pest development and fungi (Yang et al, 2008). 

Riudavets and co-workers in Spain worked to find methods to shorten the time required for 

effective modified atmosphere (MA) treatment of rice against rice weevil. Current MA 

methods take too long for effective treatment (at 40 – 100% CO2) it takes 5 days for control of 

eggs of S. oryzae. Because of the difficulty to obtain registered fumigants in the EU, 

Ruidavets et al looked at combining CO2 with SO2 which in EU is accepted as a food 

additive. 3% SO2 and 70% CO2 worked well; increasing concentrations of SO2 increased 

effectiveness. At 50 -150 ppm SO2, the researchers did not report flavour problems but this 

aspect was preliminary and the subject of future work. Examining rice, flour and almonds for 

residues, they found wheat flour sorbs the SO2 most. Aeration to obtain 50ppm which is the 

regulatory limit, would take 24 hr to 7 days depending on fumigant concentration (Ruidavets 

et al, 2008). 

Wei and co-workers at Southwest University in Chongqing China reviewed the effectiveness 

of fumigants and controlled atmospheres against psocids, a growing problem pest for food 

processing companies world wide. Often overlooked because of their small size, psocids have 

been found in a wide range of mills, food processing and stored product facilities. Psocids can 

both damage, and contaminate food products. In this review, phosphine and ethyl formate 

were found to be the most effective and practical control methods, since psocids adapted to 

controlled atmospheres (Wei et al, 2008) 

Navarro reviewed achievements in modified atmospheres and fumigation in Israel. Treatment 

by modified atmospheres is carried out in a wide variety of structures, including rigid 

structures, plastic structures, flexible silos lined with wire mesh, liners to enclose bag stacks 

and storage cubes. Commodities disinfested with modified atmospheres in Israel include 

organic wheat, grains, cocoa beans, bulbs, dried fruits and museum artefacts (Navarro, 2008) 

Emecki and Ferizli in Turkey showed damage to museum artifacts resulting from furniture 

beetle (Anobium punctatum). Following the phase out of methyl bromide in 2004, they used 

high N2 atmosphere in PVC cubes for control of damaging pests of museum artefacts. An 

automated control system was used to ensure effective control levels in a long term treatment 

(and to avoid errors that might damage the artefacts). The flexible PVC envelopes are 

inexpensive and can be reused many times. The modified atmosphere was 99% N2 and 1% 

O2, maintained for 30 days. Environmental temp was 19 – 25 ̊C and always high relative 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 219

humidity (RH), since they are by the sea. There were no survivors. It is difficult to zip up the 

plastic cubes (other researchers have also noted this problem), but with practice a method was 

found (Emecki and Ferizli, 2008) 

Bhadriraju, at Kansas State University in the US, worked with Thai producers of pet food and 

cat litter to determine methods to control mites in pet food packages. The mites, found in 

packages shipped to US from Thailand were identified by a Greek researcher as Suidasia 

medanesis . This mite is also found in house dust. The addition of 1% O2 (which results in 

about 20% O2) will kill all the mites. Ascorbic acid can be added to pet food pouches to do 

oxygen scavenging, since package purging inflates the package and reduces carton-packing 

efficacy. The oxygen scavengers are allowed to be incorporated into the packaging and they 

are approved for food contact surfaces in food packaging. He also looked at the packaging 

material to see if mites could penetrate them (Bhadriraju, 2008). 

Becket, of CSIRO in Australia examined the response of S. oryzae eggs to diurnal interrupted 

doses of phosphine. Daily temperature cycles in the fumigation chamber or space result in 

phosphine dispersal patterns, causing repeated interrupted treatment or variable 

concentrations. S. oryzae eggs are tolerant to phosphine and the diurnally fluctuating 

treatment effect reduces efficacy and considerably lengthens treatment times. Lower 

phosphine concentrations reduced the impact on treatment time (Becket, 2008). 

Noyes and Phillips of Oklahoma State University in the US developed a CTP model for 

optimum efficacy of closed loop fumigation (CLF system) in partially sealed storages. Their 

model was designed with the following assumption >200ppm PH3>100 hours = kill all insects 

and no pest resistance. Partial sealing @P1/2 = 1 min. Also peak time using tablets is 40 – 60 

h and pellets 12-24 h. These are at 25-30° C and 11-13% moisture content and also included a 

closed loop fan in operation at various times. Some grain storage facilities have been 

retrofitted and sealed to run on this model (Noyes and Phillips, 2008). 

Waterford of CSIRO Australia worked with Peterson at the United States Department of 

Agriculture to investigate the potential for using ethanedinitrile (C2N2) against cereal 

pathogens. C2N2 devitalizes grain and it is used to disinfest timber against pests. In this 

instance, its effectiveness was examined against karnal bunt, dwarf bunt, boil smut and 

sorghum blowing mildew. The effective treatment was 120 mgL-1, 75% RH from 0-5 days 

and 5-22°C. Efficacy improves as temperature improves. It was more difficult to kill the 

spores when present on bunted kernels than if they are naked spores (Waterford and Peterson, 

2008). 

Xiaoping and co-workers at Chengdu Grain Storage Institute in China examined the effect of 

sulfuryl fluoride on three stored product pests in grain. Sulfuryl fluoride was approved for 

grain treatment in China in 2008. They became interested in SF because they found 28% of 

pests were phosphine resistant. SF at low concentrations and also in combination with CO2

(5.94 g/m3

 SF with 14.27 g/m3 CO2 for 30 days) was found to be effective against Sitophilus 

oryzae, Rhyzopertha dominica (Fabricus) and Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) (Xiaoping et 

al, 2008). 

Elpano and Navarro used hermetic storage to control aflatoxin of high moisture corn under 

tropical conditions. Corn for animal feed is harvested in Philippines in unfavourable 

conditions (25.65% moisture content, and can be as high as 35% moisture content in harvest). 

This corn (Monsanto’s Bt corn) needs to be stored gas tight, with minimal loss weight and 

quality. They used Grain-Pro cocoons and the sleeves which can line shipping containers. The 

test period was March to Sept and Sept to Jan. There were no significant change in starch or 

alcohol content over time. Carbohydrates were converted to lactic and acetic acids; protein 

content increased. RH and temp stabilized by 500 hr. During the first four days there is an 
220 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

increase in temp, but then respiration stops. Aflatoxin increased from 59 ppb to 90 ppb in one 

week and stayed at that level. There was no reduction in palatability and digestibility for cattle 

and swine growth (Elpano and Navarro, 2008). 

Jonfia-Essien and co-workers conducted a project for the Ghana Cocoa Board to examine the 

effectiveness of hermetic storage in insect control and quality preservation of cocoa beans in 

Ghana. Ghana does not use MB to disinfest cocoa beans; phosphine is used. Insect infestation 

breaks down the nib and cocoa butter and it increases free fatty acids and causes flavour 

problems. Some insecticides cause residues which are not accepted by importers. They 

wanted to use modified atmospheres to biogenerate an O2 deficient and CO2 rich atmosphere 

for insect control. And they wanted to reduce operational costs and reduce use of insecticide. 

A bag stack was built inside the cocoon using Tribolium castaneum, Lassioderma 

serricorne, Carpophilus hemipterus and Araecerus fasciculatus as test insects in bags in 

the cocoon. The cocoons were left outside (temperature ranged from 28 – 32° C). O2 content 

in the cocoon decreased constantly each day so that by day 17-18 there was zero O2. In the 

cocoons after 6 weeks there was 100% mortality of both pests in the cocoons. Three weeks 

was not a sufficient treatment; the 3 week samples showed some pest survival. Pests crawled 

out of the cocoa bean and were found only on the bottom of the cocoon. The cocoon did not 

result in any condensation on the cocoa. After 9 weeks no change in quality was found. So, 

hermetic storage was better for pest control when they have extended storage periods, good 

for quality and more economical and convenient. They say this because their standard storage 

requires use of sand snakes for sealing fumigation sheets at floor level and insecticides, and 

these standard storage methods result in condensation which harms the cocoa. The researchers 

said that if not fumigated there are several insect species infesting cocoa beans with a usual 

infestation rate of about 40 – 60 insects per 60 kg bag (Jonfia-Essien et al, 2008). 

Johnson, of USDA in California worked on vacuum treatment for California tree nuts, using 

GrainPro cocoons. Moisture content of the product and life stage of the pests can affect pest 

control efficacy, diapausing stages are very resistant. Structures used for modified 

atmospheres also hold vacuum and they can get a vacuum in 10 min. Looked at low, medium 

and high moisture content. At 25 ̊C, and higher moisture, and especially with diapausing pests 

they found lower levels of control. At 30 ̊C even in high moisture and with diapausing pests 

they achieved 100% mortality at 20 hours, except with walnuts where they never achieved 

100% mortality even at 30 ̊C with diapausing pests. This researcher again reported difficulty 

zipping the cubes, but the problem was overcome with practise. They had to use sand snakes 

around stacks to prevent rodent incursion. In field trials there was the additional problem of 

decreasing ambient temp (as autumn progressed) which increased difficulty to kill pests. If 

ambient temp is below 25 ̊C, it is necessary to extend the treatment beyond 72 hours 

(Johnson, 2008). 

Tebbets et al of USDA ARS in California used multifactor methods to improve the 

understanding of insecticidal efficacy and degradation of SF in stored walnuts. They detailed 

SF treatment schedules for Amyelois transitella eggs and diapausing coddling moth (Cydia 

pomonella) larvae, under both atmospheric pressure (NAP) and reduced pressure (100 

mmHg) environments. In addition, they reported the relative influence of dose, pressure, 

temperature, and exposure duration on both insect mortality and levels of known residues 

(e.g., SO2, FSO3

1-, F 1-, SO42-).4,5 . In light of environmental health concerns surrounding 

sub-ppm chronic exposures in diet and drinking waters, fluoride residue levels generated from 

SF hydrolysis were provided. In more practical context, the efficacy of SF relative to methyl 

bromide for treating stored walnuts infested with these pests was discussed. In conclusion, 

multivariate experimental techniques have a marked potential for streamlining the 

development of physicochemical–based approaches that reduce insect damage in perishable 

and durable commodities (Tebbets et al, 2008) 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 221

Two other research papers reported on the control efficacy of sulfuryl fluoride for dried fruit 

pests. Williams and Thoms, 2008, reported research, conducted between 2006 – 2008, with 

the California Dried Fruit Association. They examined the effect of SF on Dried Fruit Beetle 

(DFB) in dates in 141.6 M chamber. Temperature was 24° C (75°F), CT was 536-636 g/m3

 at 

21-24°C gave 99.6% control of DFB at all life stages (exposure time was 15-16 h). Bioassays 

were conducted for 5 weeks (Williams and Thoms, 2008). 

Baltaci and co-workers in Germany looked at efficacy of SF against Rust Red Grain Beetle 

and Merchant Beetle. The experimental laboratory data support that a ct product of 1500 

gh/m3 is sufficient also to control all life stages of the investigated two beetles at all 

temperatures tested (Baltaci et al, 2008). 

Phillips reported the work of a multi-state investigation which is trying to resolve the pest 

contamination problems seen in Southern-cured pork. This specialty food product of the 

Southern US is aged at room temp for months (with the assistance of salt and nitrate rubs) 

until the pork becomes shelf stable. The pork becomes infested with Tyrophagus 

putrescentiae (Ham or cheese mites), a ubitquitous part of the house mite complex with can 

also infest pet food) and Necrobia rufipes (Redlegged ham beetle), a predatory and 

cannibalistic pest of dry fish, dry eggs, cheese, meats. Currently, infested Southern cured pork 

in storage is treated with methyl bromide. All SF fumigations were conducted for 48 h at 

23°C because this is the usual MB ham fumigation protocol. Tested 22g/m3 for beetles and up 

to 100g/m3

 for mites. This resulted in 100% kill at 18-20g/m3 for the beetle. However they did 

not even achieve 100% kill at 99g/m3

. (In the US the max dose allowed is 31.25g/m3). 

Therefore SF was not considered to be a treatment for ham against mites. They are now 

investigating the potential effectiveness of phosphine, or low O2 and high CO2., however, they 

are concerned that the poorly structured traditional ham storage houses in the US won’t hold 

the CO2. (Phillips et al, 2008). 

Sekhorn and co-workers at Mississippi State University were part of the multi-state project 

discussed above. They looked at the effect SF fumigation had on composition of Southern dry 

cure pork. They measured SF residue and F ion residue, because EPA limit for residues in 

pork is 20ppm. They looked at ham volatiles with gas spectrometry and gas chromatographolfactomer which measures aroma impact compounds. (This estimates intensity of an odour 

by human sniffing.) Even at fumigation concentrations of 72g/m3

 the F ion was only 14 ppm 

which is less than EPA level. Also SF residue levels were found to be below the EPA legal 

limit. There were odor differences between fumigated and non-fumigated samples, but these 

were judged to be minimal based on instrumental analysis. In their sensory tests, flavour 

analysis showed no effect up to 36g/m3

 fumigation level (Sekhorn et al, 2008). 

Lagunas-Solar and co-workers assessed the effectiveness of radiofrequency disinfestation of 

almonds and rice. They tried to eliminate the thermal effects on the product while increasing 

temp of the pests. RF does this by combining the thermal and electrical effects. Insect pests 

are very greatly affected by oscillating electric fields (polarizing effects), this causes rapid 

heating of the pests, but the treatment is well tolerated by low-moisture foods. RF is 

especially useful to kill eggs that have been laid internally in the kernel. (Pests bore into the 

kernel, make a cavity, lay eggs and then deposit a chemical plug in the borehole to create an 

airlock that prevents easy access to fumigants.) They treated 12 kg per batch with 10-14 Mhz 

and a two minute treatment time. Lagunas-Solar noted that Salmonella, E.coli and insects 

are targeted with this method, with the bacterial killed beforehand. This method uses much 

less energy and it is expected to cost much less than other thermal heating methods. In paddy 

rice he looked at grain moths and R. dominica (a borer); killing R. dominica required 1-2 

hours at 70 ̊C. These workers are now developing pre-commercial prototypes of equipment 

for this work with the Almond Board of California (Lagunas-Solar et al, 2008). 
222 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Chen and co-workers at Virginia Tech University in the US examined vacuum and 

vacuum+steam treatment of mold fungi to disinfest cotton bales. Low pressure vaccum has 

been shown to work on pests inhabiting wood, so they thought they would assess potential 

effectiveness on five types of fungi. The ISTMD4300 – 1 method was used for fungal 

inoculation. They added the inoculated cotton into three places within the highly compressed 

bales. They tried five cycles of vacuum with different vacuum and different temperatures, but 

they were aiming for 70°C for 60 min. Their vacuum-plus-steam method killed the fungi in 2 

hours. Further work is needed to assess the effect on cotton quality (Chen et al, 2008). 

13.3.7 Research about control of quarantine pests in commodities 

Methyl bromide is very commonly listed as a quarantine treatment for a very wide range of 

food and non-food commodities. While quarantine use of MB is not controlled under the 

Montreal Protocol, many countries are trying to avoid the use of methyl bromide, either 

because of environmental, health or cost concerns. However, the establishment of quarantine 

agreements first requires lengthy research and then usually requires lengthy bilateral and 

international negotiations. Effective quarantine methods are very important; they help ensure 

the health of agriculture, forestry and environment. Parties are encouraged to focus and invest 

in researching and gaining agreement for effective non-MB quarantine methods. 

Liu from USDA, in Salinas California, worked on ultra-low oxygen; low-temperature and low 

temperature plus phosphine for quarantine treatment for perishables. The perishables were: 

lettuce, broccoli and table grapes. The pests were Lettuce aphid, Western Flower thrips, 

Leafminer flies and pupae (although this method can not control pupae). Additionally, 

although not a common pest, the presence of Black Widow spiders in grapes has been 

reported in the media causing considerable consternation in the food chain when it is found. 

This method gives 100% mortality of Black Widow spider, at 1°C and 0.5% O2. The reason is 

that Black Widow spider has a poorly effective O2 distribution system, so it is more 

susceptible than insects. Ultra-low oxygen effectively kills pests by suffocation, but can 

cause off flavour (because of generation of CO2). Treatment usually takes a few days, but if 

the temp is lower, the treatment is usually more effective. The longer the treatment time, and 

the higher the temp, the better the quality; a balance must be found between treatment effects. 

The lettuce shows browning in heart-leaves and more severe browning colour in exterior 

leaves when the treatment is not done properly. But lettuce can be acclimatized to colder 

temps to avoid injury. There was good efficacy with broccoli and no negative quality effects. 

They noted an insufficient amount of work had been done on the problem of phosphine 

residues in the food. This treatment gives no effect on grape quality. He also looked at low 

temp and phosphine fumigation of same commodities and same pests. Phosphine was 

generated by the Horn Generator to treat an airtight commercial shipping container. They 

determined that 320 -940 ppm at 2.4°C an 18 h exposure was effective. The treatment was 

safe to quality of lettuce, broccoli, asparagus and strawberries. Thrips were controlled (Liu, 

2008). 

Emery of the Department of Agriculture and Food in Western Australia explained the very 

unusual case of an urban eradication of Khapha beetle in Western Australia. Australia does 

not have Khapra beetle, but in 2007, there was a postborder detection of Khapra beetle in the 

personal effects of a new immigrant family as they unpacked in Perth, Australia. The pest was 

identified by a local pest control company and confirmed by Australian authorities who 

immediately implemented an Emergency Pest Response Deed. The family was moved out of 

the house with only the clothes on their backs. Immediate spraying of house and car and 

gardens with insecticides was conducted to immediately knock the bugs down while awaiting 

full fumigation. Immediate fumigation of all empty cardboard packing boxes found in the 

garage was conducted (in a shipping container) and then they buried the boxes. The house and 

garage were shrink wrapped and fumigated with methyl bromide at 80g/m3 for 48h. The gas 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 223

concentration was not allowed to fall below 20g/m3

. There were many social problems and 

new learnings concerning working with the family and neighbours, especially concerning 

negative effects of fumigating carpeting and household items. The fumigation and aeration 

took about 2 weeks because they kept finding high gas concentrations airing off/ from 

cushions, bins and water bottles. The Department of Agriculture is now trapping for two years 

in the house and at neighbours. No khapra beetle has been found in the 15 months following 

fumigation (Emery et al, 2008). 

Leesch and Tebbets of USDA used ozone to control pests in export commodities. Perishables 

require quick treatments against quarantine pests. The pests of concern were: Bean thrips in 

navel oranges (although it overwinters in the orange only as adults), citrus mites, coffee berry 

borer (green coffee) and Black Widow spider in grapes. Oranges and bean thrips required 

5,000ppm for 2 hr to get 100% efficacy at commercial scale. Waxing oranges avoided most of 

the damage caused by ozone treatment. (Ozone damage looks like dry brown cracked effect 

on the navel and stippling on the skin and red spots or cauterized wounds if there were preexisting wounds on the orange.). Ozone was not effective against lemon and citrus mites. 

Ozone was not effective against coffee berry borer eggs, but 10,000 ppm for 6 hrs at 13+3°C 

was effective against other life stages. (Further work was conducted on this problem; see 

Armstrong et al, 2008 below). Ozone easily kills Black widow spider (sometimes present in 

grapes). Grapes tolerate the treatment well. Ozone treatment requires continual replenishment, 

which is accomplished by ozone generators on site. It is Generally Recognized As Safe by 

regulatory authorities so no registration is required (Leesch and Tebbets, 2008). 

Armstrong and co-workers in Hawaii investigated the use of ozone as a quarantine process for 

green coffee imports to Hawaii. Green coffee has to be fumigated with methyl bromide (48 

mg/liter MB for 8 h) upon import to the State of Hawaii, United States against coffee berry 

borer (CBB), Hypothenemus hampei (Ferrari) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), life stages and 

coffee leaf rust (CLR), Hemileia vastatrix Berkeley & Broome (Basidiomycota: 

Pucciniales), urediniospores. CBB and CLR are two of the most destructive pests of coffee 

production worldwide and are found in all coffee producing areas except the Hawaiian Islands 

and Queensland, Australia. Coffee processing eliminates CBB life stages and CBB can not 

reproduce on green coffee. So, the CBB threat is hitchhikers. The results of O3 fumigation 

efficacy tests with CBB demonstrated that fumigation with 10,000 ppm O3 gas under -32 mm 

Hg vacuum at 13.0 ± 3.0°C for 6.0 h killed all CBB larvae, pupae, and adults, but did not kill 

all CBB eggs. However, because the drying methods used in coffee processing eliminate CBB 

from coffee, and because CBB cannot survive or reproduce in green coffee with a 9-12% 

moisture content, adult CBB hitchhikers would be the only life stage encountered in green 

coffee, and they would be eliminated by O3 fumigation. The combination of drying methods 

used in coffee processing, maintaining green coffee MC at 9-12%, and fumigation with 

10,000 ppm O3 gas under -32 mm Hg vacuum at 13.0 ± 3.0°C for 6.0 h is a systems approach. 

The results of O3 fumigation efficacy tests with CLR urediniospores demonstrated that 

fumigation with 10,000 ppm O3 gas under -32 mm Hg vacuum at 13.0 ± 3.0°C killed all 

urediniospores within 1 h. Therefore, the O3 fumigation at 6 h for CBB is more than adequate 

to ensure quarantine security against CLR urediniospores. The results of coffee quality studies 

demonstrated that fumigation with 10,000 ppm O3 gas under -32 mm Hg vacuum at 13.0 ± 

3.0°C for 6.0 h did not adversely affect coffee flavor or aroma, the two most important 

organoleptic properties of brewed coffee (Armstrong et al, 2008). 

Flack et al 2008, reported collaborative research between USDA and Dow AgroSciences to 

investigate the proposed quarantine dosages for Pinewood Nematode (PWN) control with 

sulfuryl fluoride. Treatment schedules for PWN at 15°C have been published and were 

evaluated, but not approved for ISPM-15 for control of PWN in infested wood. ISPM wanted 

further test results on naked pests and in wood at different moisture content. The proposed 

quarantine dose rate is 1500 CT where they get no survival of any life stage at 25°C. At 20°C, 
224 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

however, they got survival at 2143 CT, perhaps resulting from higher wood moisture content. 

The new CT was increased by 200 g-h/m3

 for lower temps. SF is more likely to be used if the 

woodpacking material is already loaded with commodity or equipment and yet the pallets 

have been found to be not heat treated. The new treatment schedule has been submitted to 

ISPM. 

Messenger et al examined the potential to use sulfuryl fluoride as a quarantine treatment 

against Emerald Ash Borer in logs and firewood. The emerald ash borer (EAB), Agrilus 

planipennis Fairmaire (Coleoptera: Buprestidae), is an important exotic pest of ash trees 

(Fraxinus spp.) which has spread across several US states and into Southern Ontario in 

Canada. Quarantines are in effect preventing movement of any potentially infested ash trees, 

logs, and firewood to areas where the EAB does not occur. The quarantine prevents the use of 

the wood for furniture making and other purposes. EAB has killed 40 million ash trees 

already. Currently no fumigation treatment allowed; the wood must be chipped or burned. 

Testing established that (15.6°C for 24 and 48 hrs; 21.1°C for 24 and 48 hrs) was effective in 

eliminating 100% of all temperature-acclimated larvae (typically the most tolerant stage) of 

the EAB inside infested ash tree logs using each SF dose at both temperatures and exposure 

times during chamber fumigation trials. In 2008, these SF doses applied in 24 and 48 hr 

commercial fumigations of hardwood logs with inserted infested EAB ash logs were 100% 

successful. Treatment: at 15.6°C SF dosage is 144g/m3

 for 24h or 128g/m3 for 48h. At 

21.1°C the SF dosage is 128g/m3 for 24 h or 104g/m3

 for 48 h (Messenger et al, 2008). 

13.4 References 

Abanga, M.A. , B. Bayaaa, B. Abu-Irmailehb and A. Yahyaouia (2007). A participatory farming 

system approach for sustainable broomrape (Orobanche spp.) management in the Near 

East and North Africa. Crop Protection 26(12): 1723 – 1732 

Akkaya, F., A. Ozturk. and B. Ozkan (2004). An economic analysis of alternatives to use of methyl 

bromide for greenhouse vegetables (tomatoes, cucumbers) and cut flowers (carnation). 

Acta Horticulturae 638: 479 – 485. 

Armstrong, J.W., Follett P., Brown S.A., Leesch J.G., Tebbets J.S., Smilanick J., Street D., Portillo M., 

McHugh T.H., Olsen C.W., Whitehand L., Cavaletto C., Nagai N., Bittenbender H.C., 

Bustillo A.E., Pena J.E. and L. Mu. 2008. Ozone fumigation to control quarantine pests 

in green coffee. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, November 

2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 75. 

Arthur F.H., Jenson E.A., and J.R. Nechols. 2008. Esfenvalerate plus methoprene aerosol to control 

the Indianmeal moth. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, 

November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 82 

Austerweil M., Steiner B., Gamliel A. (2006) Permeation of soil fumigants through agricultural plastic 

films. Phytoparasitica, 34 (5), 491-501. 

Baltaci D., Klementz D., Gerowitt B. and M.J. Drinkall. (2008) Sulfuryl fluoride against all life stages 

of Rust-Red Grain Beetle (Cryptolestes ferrugineus) and Merchant Grain Beetle 

(Oryzaephilus mercator. 2008. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, 

November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 87 

Barel, M. (2003). Steam training course manual, UNDP, New York.

Beckett S. 2008. The mortality response of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) eggs to diurnal interrupted doses of 

phosphine (PH3). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled 

Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. 

Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 10 - 14 

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 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 225

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) 

Beltrán R., A. Vicent, J. García-Jiménez, and J. Armengol (2008). Comparative epidemiology of 

Monosporascus root rot and vine decline in muskmelon, watermelon, and grafted 

watermelon crops. Plant Disease, 92(1): 158-163

Bernal R.F. (2007). Effect of Midas (chloropicrin 62 %, methyl iodide 33%) on the control of 

Meloidogyne incognita in greenhouses of Salto, Uruguay. In: Annual International 

conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29-

November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 33-1, 33-4 

Besri M. (2007a). Economical aspects of grafting tomato in some Mediterranean countries. 

Proceedings of the international research conference on methyl bromide alternatives and 

emissions reductions, October 29- November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 59-1, 59-5 

Besri, M. (2007b). Current situation of tomato grafting as alternative to Methyl Bromide for Tomato 

production in Morocco. In: International research conference on methyl bromide 

alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29- November 1, 2007, San Diego, 

California, 62-1, 62-5 

Besri, M. (2008) - Cucurbits Grafting as Alternative to Methyl Bromide for Cucurbits Production in 

Morocco. Proceedings MBAO Conference, Orlando (FL) 2009, 60-1 60-5. 

Bhadriraju S. 2008 Evaluation of methods to control mites in pet food. Presented to the 8th International 

Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. September 

2008. 

Blestos, F.A. (2005). Use of grafting and calcium cyanamide as alternatives to methyl bromide soil 

fumigation and their effects on growth, yield, quality and Fusarium wilt control in melon. 

Journal of Phytopathology 153 (3): 155-161. 

Browne, G.T., Connel, J.H. and S.M. Schneider (2006). Almond Replant Disease and Its Management 

with Alternative Pre-Plant Soil Fumigation Treatments and Rootstocks. Plant Disease

90:869-876. 

Browne, G., B. Lampinen, B. Holtz, D. Doll, J. Edstrom, L. Schmidt, S. Upadhyaya, M. Shafii, B. 

Hanson, D. Wang, S. Gao, N. Goodell, and K. Klonsky (2008). Integrated pre-plant 

alternatives to methyl bromide for almonds and other stone fruits. Annual International 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, 10-14 November, 

Orlando, Florida, USA.

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. 

Browne, G., J. Connell, H. Becherer, S. McLaughlin, S. Schneider, R. Lee, and E. Hosoda. (2003). 

Evaluation of rootstocks and fumigants for control of almond replant disease. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Nov. 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, 11.1 –11.2. 

Byrd, M., C.L. Escalante, M. Wetzstein, E. Fonsah and G. Esendugue (2006a). 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) 

Byrd, Mark, Esendugue Greg Fonsah, Cesar Escalante, and Michael Wetzstein, (2006b). The impact 

on farm profitability and yield efficiency of bell pepper production of the Methyl 

Bromide phase-out program in Georgia. Journal of Food Distribution Research, Vol 37 

No1. March: 48-50, 
226 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

CDFA (2009). California Department of Food and Agriculture. NIPM Item #7. Approved Treatment 

and Handling Procedures to Ensure Against Nematode Pest Infestation of Nursery Stock. 

Revised January 13, 2009. http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/phpps/PE/Nursery/pdfs/NIPM_7.pdf 

Campbell J.F. (2008). Evaluating impact of structural fumigation on pest populations. Presented to: 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. 

www.mbao.org paper 83 

Cantliffe, D.J. and J.J. Vansickle. (2003). Competitiveness of the Dutch and Spanish greenhouse 

industries with the Florida fresh vegetable industry. Univesrity of Florida Extension 

Service Bulletin HS918. 

Cantliffe, J. N. Shaw, M. Smither-Kopperl and P.A. Stansly (2003). Greenhouse production with soilless media as a Methyl Bromide alternative. Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 3-6, 2003, San Diego, 

California, pp. 135.1 – 135.2. 

Cao, A. (2008). Personal Communication, Beijing, China 

Cao, A. (2009). Personal Communication, Beijing, China. 

Carrera, T,, A. Carrera and A. Pedros (2004). Use of 1,3-dichloropropene / chloropicrin for the 

 production of strawberries in Spain. Proceedings of International Conference on 

 Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

CDPR. (2009) Pesticide Use Report (PUR Data) for 2007. California Department of Pesticide 

Regulation 

Chayaprasert W., Maier D.E. and K.E. Ileleji. 2008. Evaluating importance and implementation of the 

building pressurization test in structural fumigation using computer simulations. 

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Pages 683-687. 

Chen Z. and M.S. White. 2008. Efficacy of vacuum/steam treatment of mold fungi in cotton bales. 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. 

www.mbao.org paper 70 

Coates, R., Upadhhyaya, S. and Browne, G. 2007. Trre planting site-specific fumigant fumigant 

application to controlalmond replant disease. Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, 

California. 

Cohen, R., Y. Burger and C. Holev (2007) Introducing grafted cucurbits to modern agriculture. The 

Israeli experience. Plant Disease 91(8): 916 - 923 

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 

non-infested soils. Annals of Applied Biology 146(3): 381

CPMA. 2009. Evaluation of alternatives to methyl bromide for use in structural fumigation of Canadian 

pasta manufacturing facilities. Canadian Pasta Manufacturing Association. 

Crinò, P., Lo Bianco, C., Rouphael, Y., Colla, G., Saccardo, F., Paratore, A. (2007). Evaluation of 

rootstock resistance to Fusarium wilt and gummy stem blight and effect on yield and 

quality of a grafted 'inodorus' melon. HortScience 42(3): 521-525 

Culpepper, S., L. Sosnoskie, K. Rucker, B. Tankersley, and D. Langston (2008) DMDS or the 3-Way: 

Which is more effective in Georgia? In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 

– 14, 2008 

Culpepper A. S., P. Sumner, D. Langston, K. Rucker, G. Beard, and J. Mayfield; T. Webster; W. 

Upchurch. (2007). Can Georgia growers replace methyl bromide? Proceeding of the 

Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions 

reductios, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 20-1, 20-5 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 227

Cushman, K.E., Huan, J. (2008) Performance of four triploid watermelon cultivars grafted onto five 

rootstock genotypes: Yield and fruit quality under commercial growing conditions. Acta 

Horticulturae 782: 335-341 

Davis, R. A., Perkins-Veazie, P., Sakata, Y., Lopez-Galarza, S., Maroto, J. V., Lee, S. G., Huh, Y. 

C., Sun, Z., Miguel, A., King, S. R., Cohen, R. and Davis, J. M. L. (2008). Cucurbit 

grafting. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 27(1): 50-74. 

De Miguel, A. (2004a). Use of grafted cucurbits in the Mediterranean region as an alternative to 

Methyl Bromide. Fifth International Conference On Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 26-

30 September, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal Sept 2004. 

De Miguel, A. (2004b). Use of grafted plants and IPM methods for the production of tomatoes in the 

Mediterranean region. Fifth International Conference On Alternatives to Methyl 

Bromide, 26-30 September, 2004, Lisbon, Portugal Sept 2004. 

Desaeger, J.A., Seebold, K.W., Csinos, A.S. (2008). Effect of application timing and method on 

efficacy and phytotoxicity of 1,3-D, chloropicrin and metham-sodium combinations in 

squash plasticulture. Pest Management Science 64(3): 230-238 

Diánez, F., Díaz, M., Santos, M., Huitrón, V., Ricárdez, M. and Camacho, F. (2007). The use of 

grafting in Spain. Technical Workshop on non-chemical alternatives to replace methyl 

bromide as a soil fumigant. R. Labrada. Budapest, Hungary, 26-28 June 2007, United 

Nations Environment Programme (UNEP): 87-97.

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 

Dow AgroSciences. Untitled press release (response to news reports concerning the global warming 

potential of sulfuryl fluoride). January 22, 2009. 

EC, European Community, (2008). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of 

the critical uses of Methyl Bromide. May 2007. European Community, Brussels. 

Elpano A.R. and S. Navarro. (2008). Hermetic storage of high moisture corn under tropical conditions. 

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Pages 259 – 263. 

Emekci M. and A.G. Ferizli. (2008). Modified atmosphere applications in Museums. Proceedings of 

the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored 

Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 421-

423. 

Emery R.N., Kostas E., and M. Chami. 2008. An urban eradication of Khapra beetle in Western 

Australia. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Pages 670-674. 

European Parliament. Substances that deplete the ozone layer. March 25, 2009. 

Fennimore, S., and J.B. Weber (2008). Evaluation of Mdas, MBPic and Telone C35 retention with 

Totally Impremeable Film (TIF) compared to standard film at Salinas, CA. CSC Field 

Dayy, 9 April, 2008. 

Fennimore, S., Z. Kabir, H. Ajwa, O. Daugovish, K. Roth and J. Rachery (2004). Weed response to 

chloropicrin and InLineTM dose under VIF and standard film. In: Annual International 

 Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 

Nov 3- 6, 2004, Orlando, Florida. USA. 

Fennimore, S., Z. Kabir, H. Ajwa, O. Daugovish, K. Roth and J. Valdez (2003). Chloropicrin and 

Inline dose response under VIF and HDPE film: Weed control results. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Nov 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. 
228 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Fennimore, S.A., Duniway, J.M., Browne, G.T., Martin, F.N., Ajwa, H.A., Westerdahl, B.B., Goodhue, 

R.E., Haar, M., Winterbottom, C.Q. (2008a). Methyl bromide alternatives for California 

strawberry nurseries. California Agriculture. April-June 2008: 62-67 

Fennimore, S.A., Haar, M.J., Goodhue, R.E., Winterbottom, C.O. (2008b) HortScience, Vol. 43, No. 5, 

pp. 1495-1500 

Ferizli A. G. and M. Emekci. 2008. Fumigation applications in historical buildings. Proceedings of the 

8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored 

Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 428-

431 

Finkleman S., Navarro S., Rinder M., and R. Dias. (2006). Use of heat to disinfest and control insects 

of dates: Laboratory and field trials. Phytoparasitica 34(1) pages 37-48 

Flack E., Barak A., Thoms E., and M. Messenger. (2008). Confirmation of proposed sulfuryl fluoride 

quarantine dosages for pinewood nematode control. Presented to: Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org. paper 91 

Flinn P. and C. Reed. (2008). Effects of outside air temperature on movement of phosphine gas in 

concrete elevator bins. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled 

Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. 

Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 704 – 706 

Genda Y., A. Kanda H. Hamada K. Sato J. Ohnishi and S. Tsuda (2007) Two Amino Acid 

Substitutions in the Coat Protein of Pepper mild mottle virus Are Responsible for 

Overcoming the L4

 Gene-Mediated Resistance in Capsicum spp. Phytopathology 97(7): 

787-793 

Gerik, J.S. (2005a). Evaluation of soil fumigants applied by drip irrigation for Liatris production. Plant 

Disease 89: 883-887. 

Gerik, J.S. (2005b). Drip applied soil fumigants for floriculture production. Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct 

– 3 Nov San Diego, California, 105-1 - 105-4 

Gerik, J.S. and I.D. Greene (2004). Drip applied soil fumigants for calla lily production Phytopathology

94(6): 

Gerik, J.S., I.D. Greene, P. Beckman and C.L. Elmore. (2006). Preplant drip-applied fumigation for 

calla lily rhizome nursery. HorTechnology 16(2): 297 – 300 

Gilreath, J. P. and Santos, B. M. (2008). Managing weeds and nematodes with ombinations of methyl 

bromide alternatives in tomato. Crop Protection 27: 648–652 

Gilreath, J.P., Santos, B.M., and Motis, T.N. (2008) Performance of methyl bromide alternatives in 

strawberry. HortTechnology, Vol. 18, No. 1. pp. 80-83 

Gilreath, J.P., T. Motis and M. von Hulten (2004). Retention of 1,3-D and nutsedge control with VIF. 

Powerpoint presentation. University of Florida. Available on University of Florida IFAS 

website. 

Gilreath, J.P., T. N. Motis, B.M. Santos and J.W. Noling. (2003). Retention of 1,3-dichloropropene and 

nutsedge control with Virtually Impermeable Film. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Nov 3-6, 2003, 

San Diego, California USA. 

Gilreath, J.P., T.N. Motis and B.M. Santos (2005). Cyperus spp. control with reduced methyl bromide 

plus chloropicrin doses under virtually impermeable films in pepper. Crop Protection

24(3): 285 - 287. 

Grafiadellis, I., K. Mattas, I. Tzouramani and K. Galanopoulos (2000). An economic analysis of 

soilless culture in gerbera production. HortScience 35(2): 300 – 303. 

Grillas, S., Lucas, M., Bardopolou, E., and Sarafopoulus, S. 2001. Perlite based soilless culture 

systems: Current commercial applications and prospects. Acta Horticulturae 548:105 – 

113. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 229

Gullino, M.L. and A. Garibaldi (2007). Critical aspects in management fo fungal diseases of rnamental 

plants and directions in research. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 46: 135 – 149 

Gullino, M.L., A. Camponogara, A. Gasparrini, V. Rizzo, C. Cini and A. Garibaldi (2003). Replacing 

Methyl Bromide for soil disinfestation. The Italian experience and its implications for 

other countries. Plant Disease 87 (9): 1012 – 1019. 

Hamill, J.E., D.W. Dickson, L. T-Ou L.H. Allen, N.K. Burelle and M.L. Mendes (2004). Reduced 

rates of MBr and C35 under LDPE and VIF for control of soil pests and pathogens. 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions. 3-6 November 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Hausbeck M. and B. Cortright (2007). Managing melon soil-borne pathogens in Michigan with MBR 

alternatives. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emission Reductions. October 29- November 1, 2007. San Diego, California. 

Hayden, A.L., L.A. Brigham and G.A. Giacomelli (2004). Aeroponic cultivation of ginger (Zingiber 

officinale) rhizomes. Acta Horticulturae 659:397-402 

Jayaraj, J. and N. V. Radhakrishnan (2008). "Enhanced activity of introduced biocontrol agents in 

solarized soils and its implications on the integrated control of tomato damping-off 

caused by Pythium spp." Plant and Soil 304(1-2): 189-197. 

Johnson C., Benjamin G and Mullinix J. (2007). Cultural control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus 

esculentus) in transplanted cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) by varying application timing and 

type of thin-film mulches United States Department of Agriculture, Research, Education 

and Economics, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS), Crop Protection and 

Management Research Unit, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, November 2007 

Johnson J. 2008. Vacuum Teatment for California Tree Nuts. Presented to: Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 71. 

Jonfia-Essien W.A., Navarro S. and J. V. Dator. 2008. SuperGrainBag: A hermetic bag liner for insect 

control of stored cocoa beans in Ghana. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference 

on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. 

Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 291-293. 

Kita, N. (2004) Practical use of the hot water soil sterilization in agricultural production. PSJ 

Soilborne Disease Workshop Report 22:38-48.

Klementz D., Rassmann W. and C. Reichmuth. 2008. Sulfuryl fluoride – Efficacy against Tribolium 

castaneum and Ephistia Kuehniella and residues of the gas in flour after fumigation of 

mills. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Page 533 – 537. 

Klose, S., J. Gerik, H.A. Ajwa, C. Wilen, and M. A. Mellano (2008) Pest Control in Field-Grown 

Ranunculus without Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 

– 14, 2008 

Klose, S., J. Gerik, Ajwa, H. and C. Wilen (2007). Pacific area-wide MB alternatives program for cut 

flower and bulb crops. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

Kluepfel, D. and B. Beede. (2007). Methyl Bromide alternatives for use in walnut production 

systems.Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

Kobayashi, K., (2005) Grafting robot for fruit vegetables. Research Journal of Food and Agriculture 

28 (11) 

Kobayashi, K., (2008) Development of automatic seedling feeder for grafting robot for fruit 

vegetables (Part 3). Proceeding of 67th Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society of 

Agriculture Machinery 
230 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Kokalis-Burelle N;, E. N. Rosskopf, M. Bausher, G.McCollum and Chieri Kubota (2008). In: 

International Research Conference on methyl bromide alternatives and emissions 

reductions, November 11-14, 2008, Orlando, Florida.63-1; 63-2 

Koren A. (2002) Grafting vegetable transplants in Israel, 2002. International Methyl Bromide 

 Compliance Workshop, December 8-13, 2002, Israel, 46 pp. 

Kubo, C. et al (2004) Effect of sterilization by soil reduction on soil-borne diseases and nematode.

Bulle. Chiba Agric.Res. Cent. 3:95-104 

Kubota K. (2008) Control of Kyuri green mottle mosaic virus in Cultivation of Cucumber without 

Methyl Bromide Plant Protection Vol. 62, No.6, 541-544, 2008

Lagunas-Solar M.C., Truong T.D., Essert T.K. and C. U. Pina. (2008). Disinfection and disinfestation 

of nut and grain products with radiofrequency power. Presented to: Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 69 

Lampinen, B., Browne, G., Schneider, S., Shrestha, A., Holtz, B. and Simon, L. (2006). Alternative 

pre-plant soil fumigation treatments for deciduous tree crops. Pp 39-1 – 39-5 In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, November 3-6 Orlando, Florida, USA paper 39

Leesch J.G. and J.S. Tebbets. 2008. The use of gaseous ozone to control pests in export commodities. 

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Pages 108- 113. 

Lieten, F. (2004). Substrates as an alternative to methyl bromide for strawberry fruit production in 

Northern Europe in both protected and field production. Proceedings of International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Lin C., Hsu S.T., Tzeng K. C. and Wang J.F. (2008) Application of a Preliminary Screen to Select 

Locally Adapted Resistant Rootstock and Soil Amendment for Integrated Management 

of Tomato Bacterial Wilt in Taiwan. Plant Disease 92, 909-916 

Liu Y.B. 2008. Advances in postharves pest control on perishable commodities using ultralow oxygen 

treatment and low temperature phosphine fumigation. Proceedings of the 8th International 

Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors 

Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 3-9. 

López-Aranda J.M., L. Miranda, F. Romero, C. Soria, P. Domínguez, R.M. Pérez-Jiménez, P.M. 

Martín-Sánchez, M. Talavera, F. Romero, B. De Los Santos and J.J. Medina. (2008) 

Strawberry production in Spain: Alternatives to MB, 2008 

results. http://mbao.org/2008/Proceedings/053LopezAranda3SpainHuelvaStrawberry2008.pdf

López-Aranda J.M., L. Miranda, F. Romero, B. De Los Santos, C. Soria, R. Pérez-Jiménez, T. Zea, M. 

Talavera and J.J. Medina. (2007) Strawberry production in Spain: Alternatives to MB, 

2007 results. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emission Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. 

López-Aranda, J.M., Miranda, L., Romero, F., De Los Santos, B., Soria, C., Medina, J.J., Montes, F., 

Vega, J.M., Páez, J.I., Bascón, J., Martínez-Treceño, A., García-Sinovas, D.,GarcíaMéndez, 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. In: T. Batchelor and F. Alfarroba (Ed)s. Proceedings of 

International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 

2004. Lisbon. 

López-Galarza, J., A. San Bautista, D. M. Pérez, A. Miguel, C. Baixaulil, B. Pascual, J. V. Maroto, J. 

L. Guardiola 2004. Effects of grafting and cytokinin-induced fruit setting on colour and 

sugar-content traits in glasshouse-grown triploid watermelon. Journal of Horticultural 

Science and Biotechnology 79(6): 971-976 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 231

López-Medina, J., A. Peralbo, M.A. Fernández, D. Hernanz, G. Toscano, M.C. Hernández and F. 

Flores (2004). Substrate systems for production of strawberry fruit in Spain and 

Mediterranean climates. Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to 

Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

Maier D.E., Chayasprasert W. and K.E. Ileleji. 2008. Improving structural fumigation from engineering 

perspectives. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere 

and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan 

Publishing Group. Pages 545 – 549 

Mann R.C., S.W. Mattner, R.K. Gounder, and I.J. Porter (2007). Methyl iodide offers opportunities for 

methyl bromide phase out and soil disinfestations in Australia. In: Annual International 

Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, San 

Diego, California, USA. 

Mann, R.C., S.W. Mattner, R.K. Gounder, R.W. Brett and I.J. Porter (2005). Evaluating novel 

 soil fumigants for Australian horticulture. Pp 34-1 – 34-4 In: Annual International 

 Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, Oct 

31 - Nov. 3, San Diego, California, USA. 

Mann, R.C., Mattner, S.W., Gounder, R.K., and I.J. Porter (2007). Iodomethane offers 

opportunities for methyl bromide phase out and soil disinfestations in Australia. 

 p 77:1-4. In Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions. November, 2007. San Diego, USA. 

Mazzola, M., J. Brown, X. Zhao, A. D. Izzo and G. Pazio (2009). Interaction of Brassicaceous Seed 

Meal and Apple Rootstock on Recovery of Pythium spp. And Pratylenchus penetrans

from Roots Grown in Replant Soils. Plant Disease 93:51-57. 

MBTOC. 2007. 2006 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. 

UNEP, Nairobi. 494pp. 

MBTOC. 2002. 2002 Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, Nairobi. 

McKenry, M. (2005). Strategies and Tactics for Fumigating Clay loam Soils. Annual International 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, Oct 31- Nov 3, 

San Diego, California, USA. 

McKenry, M. V., Buzo, T. and Kaku, S. 2007. Replanting vineyards without soil fumigation. Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 28 Oct – 1 Nov, San Diego, California. 

McKenry, M., Buzo, T. and S. Kaku (2006). Replanting stone fruit orchards without soil fumigation. 

Annual International Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission 

Reductions, 6-9 November, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

McSorley, R., Koon-Hui Wang and E.N. Rosskopf (2008) Methyl Bromide alternatives for floriculture 

production in a problem site. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 

2008 

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. 

Messenger M.T., Barak A.V., Neese P., Thoms E., and S. Prabhakaran. (2008). Sulfuryl fluoride as a 

quarantine treatment for Emerald Ash Borer in firewood. Presented to: Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 92 
232 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Millet D.B., Atlas E.L., Blake D.R., Blake N.J., Diskin G.S., Holloway J.S., Rynda C. Hudman R.C. 

Meinardi S., Ryerson T.B., and G. W. Sachse. (2009). Halocarbon Emissions from the 

United States and Mexico and Their Global Warming Potential. Environ. Sci. Technol., 

2009, 43 (4), pages 1055–1060 

Ministerio de Medio Ambiente (2009) Spanish proposal for the active substance 1,3-dichloropropene 

period of grace extension. Submission by the Ministry of Environment of Spain to the 

EC Standing Committee on Plant Protection Products – Legislation, 3 February 2009. 

Minuto, A., A. Garibaldi and M.L. Gullino (2003). Chemical alternatives to Methyl Bromide in Italy: 

an update. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emission Reductions, November 3-6, 2003, San Diego, California, USA. 

Minuto, A., V. Grasso, M.L. Gullino and A. Garibaldi (2005). Chemical, non-chemical and biological 

control of Phytophthora cryptogea on soil-less grown gerbera. Acta Horticulturae 698: 

153-158. 

Momma, N. (2008) Biological soil disinfestations (BSD) of soilborne pathogens and its possible 

mechanisms. JARQ 42 (1), 7-12 http://www.jircas.affrc.go.jp 

Morra, L., M. Bilotto, et al. (2007). "Integrated approach with grafting and soil disinfection to protect 

pepper in greenhouse." Colture Protette 36(7): 57-63. 

Muck O. and J. Boye. 2008. Impact of sulfuryl fluoride fumigation and heat treatment on stored 

product insect populations in German flour mills. Proceedings of the 8th International 

Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors 

Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 99 - 102 

Mühle J., Huang J., Weiss R.F., Prinn W.G., Miller B.R., Salameh P.K., Harth C.M., Fraser P.J., Porter 

L.W., Greally B.R., O'Doherty S., and P. G. Simmonds. 2009. Sulfuryl fluoride in the 

global atmosphere. J. Geophys. Res., 114, D05306, Doi:10.1029/2008JD011162. 

Mühle, J., P. Fraser, R. Weiss, P. Steele, P. Krummel and P. Salameh. 2009a. Nitrogen trifluoride and 

sulfuryl fluoride: two new greenhouse gases, Abstracts: Greenhouse 2009 – Climate 

Change and Resources, Perth WA, 23-26 March 2009, p. 155. 

Muller-Sto ̈ Ver D, Kohlschmid E & Sauerborn J (2009). A novel strain of Fusarium oxysporum from 

Germany andits potential for biocontrol of Orobanche ramosa. Weed Research. 49, 175–

182.

Nadal, S., M.T. Moreno, B. Roman 2009. Control of Orobanche crenata in Vicia narbonensis Crop 

Protection 27 (2008) 873–876 

Nagai Y. (1981) Control of Mosaic Diseases of Tomato and Sweet Pepper Caused by Tobacco Mosaic 

Virus. Special Bulletin of the Chiba-ken agricultural experiment station 9: 32-42. 

Navarro S. 2008. Achievements of modified atmospheres and fumigants in Israel. Proceedings of the 

8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored 

Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 657 - 

663 

Navarro S., Finkelman S., Rinder M., and R. Dias. 2004. Emigration and control of nitidulid beetles 

from dates using heat. Integrated Protection of Stored Products. IOBC Bulletin/WPS Vol 

27(9) pages 219-225 

Nishi Y. et al. (2008) Growing Technique of Capsicum without Using Methyl Bromide Plant 

Protection Vol. 62, No.6, 533-536, 2008 

Nishi, K. (2005) Hot water treatment, newly developed and expanding soil sterilization method. 

Proceedings of Vegetable and Tea science 2:9-17.

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. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 233

Noling J (2008). Large scale demonstration trialing of methyl bromide alternatives in Florida 

strawberry. 

 http://mbao.org/2008/Proceedings/010NolingJMBAO2008USDAAreaWide.pdf 

Noling, J.W, and J.P. Gilreath (2004). Use of virtually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida 

strawberry. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions, 3-6 November, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Noyes R.T. and T.W. Phillips. 2008. CTP model for optimum efficacy of closed loop fumigation (CLF) 

systems in partially sealed storages. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on 

Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. 

Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 269 - 273 

Nucifora, S., G. Vasquez and F. Giuffrida (2001). Spread of soilless cultivation in the area of Ragusa 

(Italy). Acta Horticulturae 554: 305 – 309. 

Nyczepir, A.P.and R. Rodriguez-Kabana (2007). Preplant Biofumigation with Sorghum or Methyl 

Bromide Compared for Managing Criconemoides xenoplax in a young Peach Orchard. 

Plant Disease 91:1607-1611. 

O’Neill, T.M., K.R. Green and T. Ratcliffe (2005). Evaluation of soil steaming and a formaldehyde 

drench for control of fusarium wilt in column stock. Acta Horticulturae 698: 129 - 134 

Ohoizumi T. et al. (2008) Growing Technique of Melon without Using Methyl Bromide Plant 

Protection Vol. 62, No.6,529-532, 2008 

Olson S.M., and R. Kreger (2007). Efficacy of midas (50/50) as a soil fumigant for tomato production. . 

Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and 

emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 32-1, 32-4 

Ou, L.T., J.E. Thomas, L.J. Allen, J.C. Vu D.W. and Dickson. (2007). Emissions and distribution of 

methyl bromide in field beds applied at two rates and covered with two types of plastic 

mulches. Environmental Science 42(1): 15 – 20. 

Papadimitriou V. C., Portmann R. W., Fahey D. W., Mühle J., Weiss R. F., and Burkholder J. B. 

(2008). Experimental and Theoretical Study of the Atmospheric Chemistry and Global 

Warming Potential of SO2F2. J. Phys. Chem. A, 112, 12657–12666. 

Phillips T.W., Mahbub Hasan Md., Aikins M.J., and M.W. Schilling. 2008. Efficacy of sulfuryl 

fluoride to control ham mites and red-legged ham beetles. Presented to: Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org Paper 89 

Piedra-Buena, A. P., A. Garcia-Alvarez, et al. (2007). Use of pepper crop residues for the control of 

root-knot nematodes. Bioresource Technology 98(15): 2846-2851. 

Pizano, M. 2005. Worldwide trends in substrate use. FloraCulture International, March 20 – 21. 

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.J. (2005). Review and analysis of international research of alternatives to methyl bromide for 

pre-plant fumigation. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov San Diego, California 

Porter, I.J., L. Trinder and D. Partington. (2006). Special Report Validating the Yield Performance of 

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for Preplant fumigation. TEAP/MBTOC Special Report, 

UNEP Nairobi, May 2006 97pp. 

Porter, I.J., M. Pizano and M. Besri (2007). Impact of the Montreal protocol regulations on preplant 

soil use and trends in adoption of alternatives. In: Annual International Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California USA. 

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. 
234 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Reginato, G., Córdova, C. and Mauro, C. (2008). Evaluation of rootstock and management practices to 

avoid cherry replant disease in Chile. Acta Horticulturae 795:357-362

Reichmuth C. and D. Klementz. 2008. How to overcome the egg-weakness of sulfuryl fluoride – 

combinations of control methods. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 88 

Reisch, M. 2009. Chemtura’s bankruptcy. Chemical and Engineering News. March 23, 2009. 

Reuven, M., Y. Szmulewich, I. Kolesnik, A. Gamliel, V. Zilberg, M. Mor, Y. Cahlon and Y. BenYephet (2005). Methyl bromide alternatives for controlling fusarium wilt and root knot 

nematodes in carnations. Acta Horticulturae 698: 99 - 104 

Riudavets J., Gabarra R., Jose Pons M., Castane C., Alomar O., and Guri S. 2008. Toxicity effects of 

high carbon dioxide modified atmospheres in combination with sulfuryl dioxide on the 

rice weevil Sitophilus oryzae. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on 

Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. 

Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 21 – 26. 

Rivard C.L , S. O’Connell, M. Peet and F. J. Louws, 2008. Grafting as a viable tool to manage major 

tomato diseases in the southeastern USA. Proceedings of the Annual International 

Research Conference on methyl bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, 

November 11-14, 2008, Orlando, Florida., 61-1; 61- 3 

Rosskopf, E.N., N. Kokalis-Burelle, E. Nissen, O. Nissen, R. Hartman, E. Skvarch, R. McSorley, R. 

Kreger, T. Estes and C. Owens, (2008). Area-wide demonstration of chemical 

alternatives to methyl bromide for Florida ornamentals In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, 

Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Runia, W. (2000). Steaming methods for soils and substrates. Acta Horticulturae 532:115-123. 

Runia, W.T. and L.P.G. Molendijk (2006). Improved efficacy of metham sodium by rotary spading 

injection. Wageningen University and Research Center, Lelystad. 16pp. 

Saha, S. K., K. H. Wang, et al. (2007). "Effect of solarization and cowpea cover crop on plant-parasitic 

nematodes, pepper yields, and weeds." Nematropica 37(1): 51-63. 

Santos, B. M. 2009. Drip-applied metham potassium and herbicides as methyl bromide alternatives for 

Cyperus control in tomato. Crop Protection 28 68–71 

Santos, B.M. and Gilreath, J.P. (2006). Chemical alternatives to methyl bromide for vegetable crop 

production in Florida, United States CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, 

Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2006 1, No. 057 

Santos, B.M., J.P. Gilreath and T.N. Motis (2005). Managing nutsedge and stunt nematode in pepper 

with reduced methyl bromide plus chloropicrin rates under virtually impermeable films. 

HortTechnology 15(3): 596-599. 

Santos, 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, T. M., Mora-Bolaños, J. E., and Solórzano-Arroyo, Z. J. A. (2008). "Impact of solarization and 

soil fumigants on hot pepper production in high-tunnels." Asian Journal of Plant Sciences

7(1): 113-115 

Savoldelli S., and E. Panzeri. Integrated pest management in the Italian mill industry. Proceedings of 

the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored 

Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 157-

161 

Savvas, D. (2003). Hydroponics: A modern technology supporting the application of integrated crop 

management in greenhouse. Food, Agriculture and Environment 1 (1): 80 – 86. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 235

Schneider S.M, T. Trout, J. Gerik, D. Ramming and H. Ajwa (2003). Methyl Bromide alternatives for 

perennial field nurseries – 1st and 2nd year performance. Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Nov. 3-6, San 

Diego, California, 2003, pp. 7.1 – 7.5. 

Schneider, S. M., B.D. Hanson, J.S. Gerik, A. Shrestha, T.J. Trout, and S. Gao. 2009. Comparison of 

Shank- and Drip-Applied Methyl Bromide Alternatives in Perennial Crop Field 

Nurseries. HortTechnology 19:331-339. 

Sekhorn R.K., Schilling M.W., Phillips T.W. and W.B. Mikel. 2008. Chemical composition of dry cure 

hams fumigated with sulfuryl fluoride. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 90. 

Shinmura, A.(2004) Principle and effect of soil sterilization method by reducing redox potential of 

soil. PSJ Soilborne Disease Workshop Report 22, 2-12. 

Sogut, M. A. and I. H. Elekcioglu (2007). "Methyl bromide alternatives for controlling Meloidogyne 

incognita in pepper cultivars in the eastern mediterranean region of Turkey." Turkish 

Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 31(1): 31-40. 

Spotti, C. (2004). The use of fumigants and grafted plants as alternatives to Methyl Bromide for the 

 production of tomatoes and vegetables in Italy. Proceedings of International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 2004. Lisbon. 

St. John J. 2009. Sulfuryl fluoride: Another greenhouse gas two worry about. Greentech Media. March 

10, 2009 

Stanislas B. 2008. Adoption of Profume® in Europe after the phase out of methyl bromide. Presented 

to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. 

www.mbao.org paper 85 

Stodard (2008). Methyl bromide fumigation alternatives for sweet potato hotbeds in Califronia 

http://mbao.org/2008/027Stoddard.pdf. 

Sydorovych, O., C. D. Safley, et al. (2008). "Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for 

the production of tomatoes in North Carolina." Horttechnology 18(4): 705-713) 

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 

Takeuchi, T (2004) Effect of sterilization by soil reduction on soil-borne diseases in Chiba Prefecture. 

PSJ Soilborne Disease Workshop Report 22, 13-21. 

Tanner, S.C., G.L. Reighard and C.E. Wells (2006). Soil Treatment Differentially Affect Peach Root 

Development and Demography in a Replant site. Proc. 6th Intnl. Peach Symposium. Ed. 

R Infante, Acta Horticulturae 713:381-387.

Taylor, M., Bruton, B., Fish, W., Roberts, W.(2008) Cost it analyses of using grafted watermelon 

transplants for fusarium wilt disease control. Acta Horticulturae 782: 343-350

TEAP (2006).Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2006. Montreal 

Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment 

Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP (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 

TEAP (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. 

Tebbets J.C., Tebbets, J.S. Leesch J.G. and S. S. Walse. 2008. Multifactor exploration of the 

insecticidal efficacy and degradation of sulfuryl fluoride in stored walnuts. Presented to: 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, November 2008, Orlando Florida. 

www.mbao.org paper 86 
236 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Terry, A.S., A.D. Carter, R. L Humphrey, E.Capri, B. Grua,. A. C Panagopoulous A. Pulido-Bosch, 

and S. H Kennedy (2008) A monitoring programme for 1,3-dichloropropene and 

metabolites in groundwater in five EU countries. Pest Managment Science 64:923–932 

Thomas J. E., L.-T. Ou, L.H. Allen, Jr., J.C. Vu and D.W. Dickson (2007). A 2-year study of 

wavelength selective plastic mulches in Florida tomato production . Proceeding of the 

Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions 

reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, California, 55-1, 55-4 

Thomas, J.E., Ou, L. T., Allen, L. H., Vu, J. C. and Dickson, D. W., (2009). Nematode, fungi, and 

weed control using Telone C35 and colored plastic mulches. Crop Protection 28: 338–

342 

Thoms E., Busacca J. and S. Prabhakaran. 2008. Commercialization of a new fumigant – The 

Profume® success story. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled 

Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. 

Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 698-703 

Tognoni F, L. Incorcci and L. A. Pardossi (2004) Use of substrates for intensive production of 

vegetables in Europe and Mediterranean regions. Proceedings of fifth International 

conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, Lisbon, 27-30 September, 2004, 177-181 

Tostovrsnik, N.S., A.L. Shanks, I.J. Porter, S.W, Mattner and R.W. Brett (2005). Facilitating the 

adoption of alternatives to methyl bromide in Australian horticulture. Pp 13-1 – 13/4 In: 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions 31 Oct – 3 Nov, San Diego California USA. 

Trout, T. and Damodaran, N. (2004). Adoption of methyl bromide alternatives by California strawberry 

growers. Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. 

Tsuda S. (2008) The phase Out of Methyl Bromide for Soil Uses in Japan and the Alternative Action 

Plan Plant Protection Vol. 62, No.6, 511-515, 2008. 

Tsuda S., M. Kirita M. and Y. Watanabe (1997) Characterization of a Pepper Mild Mottle Tobamoviurs 

Strain Capable of Overcoming the L3

 Gene-Mediated Resistance, Distinct from the 

Resistance-Breaking Italian Isolate. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 11(4): 327-

331. 

Uematsu, S., K. Nishi and N. Kita (2003) Hot water soil sterilization begins in Japan. Farming Japan 

37:35-41.

UC Davis (2009). University of California ta Davis, IPM. Pest Management Guidelines: Floriculture 

and Ornamental Nurseries. March, 2009. Davis, California, 178 pp. 

US CUN Ornamnetals, (2009) Critical Use Nomination. USA CUN 11. Soil. Ornamentals, Open Field. 

Document submitted to MBTOC, 20pp. 

Van Schoor, L., S. Denman and N. C. Cook (2009). Characterisation of apple replant disease under 

South African conditions and potential biological management strategies. Scientia 

Horticulturae 119:153-162. 

VDPI. (2004). National Methyl Bromide Update. Issue No. 12, May 2004. Victoria Department of 

Primary Industries, Australia. 

VDPI. (2005). National Methyl Bromide Update. Issue No. 13, February 2005. Victoria Department of 

Primary Industries, Australia. 

Vos, J, and Bridge, J. (eds.) (2006). Cases of methyl bromide alternatives used in commercial practice. 

CAB International. 

Wang D., S.R. Yates F.F. Ernst J. Gan and W.A. Jury (1997). Reducing methyl bromide emission with 

a high barrier plastic film and reduced dosage. Environmental Science and 

Technology31, 3686-3691. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 237

Wang, D., S Gao, J. Gerik, B. Hanson, N. Tharayil, G. Browne, C. Smith, K. Klonsky, B. Westerdahl, 

S. Vasquez and s. Yates (2008). Methyl Bromide Alternatives for vineyard replant. 

Annual International Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission 

Reductions, 10-14 November, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Waterford C. and G.L, Peterson. 2008. Efficacy of ethanedinitile (C2N2) against some cereal 

pathogens. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere 

and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan 

Publishing Group. Pages 33 – 38. 

Webster, T. M., Grey, T. L., Davis G. W. and Culpepper, A. S. 2008. Glyphosate Hinders Purple 

Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) and Yellow Nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) Tuber 

Production. Weed Science 2008 56:735–742 

Wei D., Jinjun W., Suang W., Peian T., and D. Yongxue. 2008. Application of controlled atmosphere 

and fumigation to control psocids. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on 

Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. 

Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 27 -32. 

Welker R. M., J. G. Driver and F. J. Louws , 2008.Pladin as a methyl bromide alternative in tomatoes: 

drip vs shank application methods . Proceedings of the Annual International Research 

Conference on methyl bromide alternatives and emissions reductions, November 11-14, 

2008, Orlando, Florida. 41-1, 41-2 

Whaba, P. 2009. Update 1. Chemtura’s US operations file for Chapter 11. Reuters. March 18 

Williams R. and E. Thoms. 2008. Profume® update: Post harvest commercial acceptance and 

performance in the US. Presented to: Methyl Bromide Alternatives Organization, 

November 2008, Orlando Florida. www.mbao.org paper 84 

Xiaoping Y., Yuzin C., Guogan X., Juan A., Jiade S., Guangli S., Shengjie J., and W. Jialiang. 2008. 

Mortality of three stored product pests exposed to sulfuryl fluoride in laboratory and field 

tests. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and 

Fumigation in Stored Products. Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing 

Group. Pages 191 – 195 

Yang C., Jin Z., Guangtao L., Guiqiang Q., Sixu Z., and L. Tao. 2008. Respiration of Tribolium 

castaneum (Herbst) at different oxygen concentrations. Proceedings of the 8th

International Conference on Controlled Atmosphere and Fumigation in Stored Products. 

Editors Daolin et al. Chengdu China. Sichuan Publishing Group. Pages 15-20.

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. 

Yilmaz, S., A. Ünlü, M. Göçmen, N. Mutlu, K. Aydınşakir, A.F. Firat, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Çelikyurt, B. 

Sayin, B., and I. Çelik, (2007b). Grafting as an alternative to MB in vegetable production 

in Turkey. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions Outreach, San Diego, California, USA October 

29 – November 1st, 2007 

Yilmaz, S., M. Göçmen, A. Ünlü, A.F. Firat, K. Aydinşakir, S. Cetinkaya, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Çelikyurt, 

B. Sayin and İ Çelik (2007a). Grafting as an alternative to mb in vegetable production in 

Turkey. Proceeding of the Annual International conference on Methyl Bromide 

alternatives and emissions reductions, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, 

California, 60-1, 60-3 

Yılmaz, S., M. Gocmen, A. Ünlü, K. Aydinsakir, O. Baysal, M. Kuzgun, M.A. Celikyurt, B. Sayın and 

İ .Çelik (2008). Phase out of methyl bromide for soil fumigation in protected horticulture 

and cut flower production in Turkey. Final Report. Antalya, Turkey. 

Yücel, S., Elekçioğlu, İ. H., Can, C., Söğüt, M. A. and Özarslandan, A. (2007). "Alternative treatments 

to methyl bromide in the eastern mediterranean region of Turkey." Turkish Journal of 

Agriculture and Forestry 31(1): 47-53. 

Yucel, S., I. H. Elekcioglu, et al. (2007). "Alternative treatments to methyl bromide in the eastern 

mediterranean region of Turkey." Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 31(1): 47-

53. 
238 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

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 Community 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

EPPO European Plant Protection Organisation 

MI Methyl iodide (= Iodomethane) 

IPM Integrated Pest Management 

LPBF Low Permeability Barrier Film (including VIF films) 

MB Methyl Bromide 

MBTOC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee 

MBTOC QSC MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and Commodities 

MBTOC S MBTOC Soils Subcommittee 

MITC Methyl isothiocyanate 

MOP Meeting of the Parties 

MS Metham sodium 

Non- A5 Non- Article 5 Party 

OEWG Open Ended Working Group 

Pic Chloropicrin 

QPS Quarantine and Pre-shipment 

SF Sulfuryl fluoride 

TEAP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

TIF Totally impermeable films 

VIF Virtually Impermeable Film 

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 239

ANNEX 1 TO CHAPTER 13 - Registration Status of Alternatives to Methyl 

Bromide for the USA 

Updated on March 3, 2009 

Use 

Category

Alternatives Available Status of 

Registration

Potential 

Alternatives

Status of Registration Submission

Commodities Propylene Oxide Registered Ethyl Formate Not registered 

 Phosphine Registered Ethylene Oxide Not registered 

 Sulfuryl Fluoride Registered Methyl Formate Not registered 

Cucurbits 1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 Chloropicrin Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Glyphosate Registered Methyl iodide No registration package submitted but 

registrant intends to submit one 

 Halosulfuron Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Paraquat Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

Eggplant 1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 Chloropicrin Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Halosulfuron Registered Methyl iodide No registration package submitted but 

registrant intends to submit one 

 Metham Sodium Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Napropamide Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Trifluralin Registered 

 1,3-D + Napropamide + 

Trifluralin 

Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

Food 

Facilities 

Phosphine Registered Ethyl Formate Not registered 

 Sulfuryl Fluoride Registered Ethylene Oxide Not registered 

 Methyl Formate Not registered 

1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

Chloropicrin Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

Forest 

Seedlings 

Dazomet Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 Metham Sodium + 

Chloropicrin 

Registered 

 1,3-D/Pic Registered 

Ham Sulfuryl Fluoride* Registered 

Nurseries: 1,3-Dichloropropene Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

Raspberries Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Dazomet Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

 1,3-D + Metham Sodium Registered 

Nurseries: 1,3-D Registered DMDS No registration package submitted 
240 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Use 

Category

Alternatives Available Status of 

Registration

Potential 

Alternatives

Status of Registration Submission

Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

Dazomet Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

Methyl iodide** Registered 

Metham Sodium Registered 

1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

1,3-D/Pic + Metham Sodium Registered 

1,3-D + Metham Sodium Registered 

Fruit and Nut 

Tree 

1,3-D + Dazomet Registered 

Nurseries: 1,3-D Registered DMDS No registration package submitted 

Roses Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Dazomet Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 1,3-D / Pic Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic + Metham Sodium Registered 

 1,3-D + Metham Sodium Registered 

1,3-D Registered DMDS No registration package submitted f 

Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

Orchard 

Replant 

Dazomet Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 Sodium Tetrathiocarbonate Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

 1,3-D + Metham Sodium Registered 

 1,3-Di/Pic + Metham Sodium Registered 

Ornamentals 1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 Dazomet Registered Furfural No registration package submitted for 

 Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered Potassium Triiodide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

 Dazomet + Chloropicrin Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

Peppers Metham Sodium Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 1,3-D Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Chloropicrin Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Halosulfuron Registered 

 Glyphosate Registered 

 Paraquat Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

 1,3-D/Pic Registered 

 1,3-D + Metham Sodium Registered 

Post-Harvest 

Uses 

Phosphine Registered Ethyl Formate Not registered 

 Sulfuryl Fluoride* Registered Ethylene Oxide Not registered 

 Methyl Formate Not registered 

Strawberry 1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 Chloropicrin Registered Furfural No registration package submitted for 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 241

Use 

Category

Alternatives Available Status of 

Registration

Potential 

Alternatives

Status of Registration Submission

 Dazomet*** Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 Terbacil Registered 

 1,3-D/Pic Registered 

 1,3-D/Pic + Metham Sodium Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

Strawberry Chloropicrin Registered DMDS No registration package submitted 

Nursery 1,3-D Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Methyl iodide** Registered Propargyl 

Bromide 

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

Tomato 1,3-D Registered DMDS Registration application under review 

 Chloropicrin Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Dazomet*** Registered Pebulate Nothing pending; not registered 

 Fosthiazate Registered Propargyl 

Bromide

Nothing pending; not registered 

 Glyphosate Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Methyl iodide** Registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 Paraquat Registered 

 Halosulfuron-methyl Registered 

 s-Metolachlor Registered 

 Trifloxysulfuron-methyl Registered 

 Rimsulfuron Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

 1,3-D+ Metham Sodium Registered 

 1,3-D/ Pic Registered 

Turf (sod) 1,3-D Registered DMDS No registration package submitted 

 Chloropicrin Registered Furfural No registration package submitted 

 Methyl iodide** Registered Sodium Azide Nothing pending; not registered 

 Metham Sodium Registered 

 Dazomet Registered 

 Dazomet + Chloropicrin Registered 

 Metham Sodium + Pic Registered 

*Research on-going to evaluate efficacy in controlling mites 

** Federally Registered (as of October 2008). Not registered in California, New York, 

and Washington. 

***The registration for Dazomet is limited to California only. 

 

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 243

14 Evaluations of Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide and 

Related Matters – Interim Report 

14.1 Scope of the Report 

This 2009 interim report provides evaluations by MBTOC of CUNs submitted for methyl 

bromide (MB) in 2010 and 2011 by Parties in accordance with Decision IX/6 (Annex I, 

MOP16). CUNs were submitted to the Ozone Secretariat by the Parties, in accordance with 

the timetable set out in the Annex I referred to by Decision XVI/4 (Annex II of this report). 

This interim report also provides information from Parties on stocks (Decision Ex.1/4 (9f)), 

an update on registration issues affecting availability of alternatives for preplant and post 

harvest uses (Decision Ex. 1/4 (9i) and (9j)), partial information on actual MB consumption 

for critical uses (Decision XVII/9), apparent adoption rates of alternatives, as evidenced by 

trend lines on reduction of MB CUNs (Decisions XIX/9, XX/5), and consideration of 

national, sub national and local regulations and law on the use of MB alternatives (Decision 

XX/5). It is noted that trend lines on adoption do not necessarily indicate true adoption rates 

for alternatives, because the use of stocks of MB may be available to the same sector or areas 

of production may have fallen within the sector due to a range of circumstances. 

Standard presumptions used in the 2009 round were the same as those used in the 2008 round. 

MBTOC Soils (MBTOC S) conducted a review of commercial use rates in countries for 

preplant soils use in March 2009. This review confirmed that most actual MB rates presently 

used commercially in sectors conformed with the present standard presumptions, unless 

CUNs identified regulations which required different rates. MBTOC S has updated references 

to substantiate its standard presumptions for MB dosage rates (Annex III). These standard 

presumptions are subject to continual review, however any changes are required to be 

approved by Party’s at the preceding MOP to the year of assessment (Decision s.be presented 

to the MOP for notification of the Parties as required in Annex 1, MOP16. 

 MBTOC S has initial responsibility for the pre-plant uses and alternatives of MB. MBTOC 

Quarantine, Structures and Commodities (MBTOC QSC) has initial responsibility for issues 

concerning MB uses and alternatives for quarantine, pre-shipment, structural and commodity 

treatments. Evaluations of CUNs for the two categories are reported separately below. 

Outcomes from deliberations by the two MBTOC subcommittees were discussed and vetted 

via electronic communication. Recommendations made by MBTOC S were circulated to 

MBTOC QSC and vice versa, as part of the process of reaching consensus within the whole 

committee. The economists attended parts of both subcommittee meetings for MBTOC QSC 

in Rotterdam and MBTOC S in Agadir. 

14.2 Critical Use Nominations for Methyl Bromide 

14.2.1 Mandate 

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

production plus imports minus exports) of MB is to be phased out in Parties not operating 

under Article 5(1) of the Protocol, by 1 January 2005. However, the Parties agreed to a 

provision enabling exemptions for those uses of MB that qualify as critical. Parties 

established criteria, under Decision IX/6 of the Protocol, which all such uses need to meet in 

order to be granted an exemption. TEAP and its MBTOC provide guidance to the Parties’ 

decisions on critical use exemptions in accordance with Decisions IX/6 and Annex I of 

Decision XVI/4. Refer to Annexes I and II of this report for copies of these Decisions. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 244

14.2.2 Fulfilment of Decision IX/6 

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

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

the full amount of the nomination. Where some of the conditions were not fully met, MBTOC 

recommended a decreased amount depending on its technical and economic evaluation. The 

full text for Decision IX/6 can be found in Annex I at the end of this document. MBTOC 

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

when the Party failed to show that it was not effective. In this round of CUNs, as in previous 

rounds, MBTOC considered all information provided by the Parties, including answers to 

questions requested by MBTOC, up to the date of the assessment. 

MBTOC has again encountered difficulty in the assessment of some nominations for MB use 

on soils when yield losses presented in some nominations differ markedly from those reported 

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

references. This is important for economic assessments where several comparisons with 

alternatives are based on data from studies conducted many years ago, (some on different 

crops e.g. tomato for eggplant CUNs) and these may not account for data with the new 

alternatives and new application methods for established alternatives. 

Now that technically effective alternatives have been identified for most applications, 

regulations on the use of these alternatives and comparative information on the economic 

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

and future CUNs. Without this information, further CUNs may not be assessable, as MBTOC 

will be unable to analyse the impact of national, subnational and local regulations and law as 

required in Decision XX/5. In some cases, MBTOC has proposed existing commercially and 

economically feasible alternatives and potential research and regulatory issues to Parties that 

could assist the phase out of MB. 

In paragraph 20 of Annex 1 referred to in Decision XVI/4, Parties, inter alia, specifically 

requested that, in cases where a nomination relies on the economic criteria of Decision IX/6, 

MBTOC’s report should explicitly state the central basis for the Parties economic argument 

relating to CUNs. 

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

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

“is not available in sufficient quantity and quality from existing stocks of banked or recycled 

methyl bromide” (para. 1 (b) (ii)). Parties nominating critical use exemptions are requested 

under decision Ex.I/4(9f) to submit an accounting framework with the information on stocks. 

Since the consideration of stocks is an active area of negotiation for the Parties, MBTOC has 

not made an adjustment to a nomination to account for stocks held and has relied on Parties to 

make this adjustment. 

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

Parties from 2006 to 2009 for the preceding year and summarized in Table 14-1 to 14-4 

below. Parties may wish to consider this information in the light of Decision IX/6 1(b)(ii). 

Efficient functioning of commerce requires a certain level of “pipeline” stocks and additional 

stocks to respond to emergencies. Additionally, stocks may be held on behalf of other Parties 

or for exempt uses (feedstock and QPS uses). The correct or optimal level of stocks for 

virtually every input to production is not zero. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 245

Table 14-1: Quantities of MB (metric tonnes) ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end 

of 2005, as reported by Parties in 2006/2007 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2005 

Amount on 

hand at 

start of 

2005 

Quantity 

Acquired for 

CUEs in 2005 

(production 

+imports) 

Amount 

available 

for use in 

2005 

Quantity 

used 

for CUEs in 

2005 

Amount 

on hand 

at the 

end of 

2005 

Australia 146.6 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: MB inventory held 

by USA companies: 2004 = 12,994 tonnes; 2005 = 9,974 tonnes. 

Table 14-2: 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 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2006 

Amount on 

hand at 

start of 

2006 

Quantity 

acquired for 

CUEs in 2006 

(production + 

imports)

Amount 

available 

for use in 

2006 

Quantity 

used for 

CUEs in 

2006 

Amount 

at the end 

of 2006 

Australia 75.1 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) 

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

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

in 2005). 

(c) The sum of 499 tonnes of stocks produced/imported in 2006 specifically for CUEs, plus 7,671 

tonnes stocks acquired pre-2005. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 246

Table 14-3: Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2007, as 

reported by Parties in 2008/2009 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2007 

Amount on 

hand at 

start of 

2007 

Quantity 

Acquired for 

CUEs in 2007 

(production 

+imports) 

Amount 

available 

for use in 

2007 

Quantity 

used 

for CUEs in 

2007 

Amount 

on hand 

at the 

end of 

2007 

Australia 48.553 0 45.832 45.832 45.832 0 

Canada 52.874 0.897 38.073 38.970 38.622 0.348 

EC 689.142 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(a) 4 314 11 985 4 269 6 503(b) 

(a) Amount of pre-2005 stocks 

(b) The sum of 45 tonnes of stocks produced/imported in 2007 specifically for CUEs, plus 6,458 

tonnes stocks acquired pre-2005. 

Table 14-4: Quantities of MB ‘on hand’ at the beginning and end of 2008, as 

reported by Parties in 2009 under Decision XVI/6. 

Quantity of MB as reported by Parties (metric tonnes) 

Party Critical use 

exemptions 

authorized 

by MOP for 

2008 

Amount on 

hand at 

start of 

2008 

Quantity 

Acquired for 

CUEs in 2008 

(production 

+imports) 

Amount 

available 

for use in 

2008 

Quantity 

used 

for CUEs in 

2008 

Amount 

on hand 

at the 

end of 

2008 

Australia 48.450 0 41.037 41.037 41.037 0 

Canada 42.19 0.348 32.937 33.285 31.281 1.997 

EC 245.146 6.409 206.146 212.555 212.463 0.092 

Israel 

Japan 443.775 24.467 392.994 417.461 409.937 7.524 

USA 5 336 1 730 

6458(a) 

3 036 9464 4 083 5381(b) 

269(c) 

(a) Amount of pre-2005 stocks 

(b) Includes the pre-2005 stocks 

(c). Amount of unused allocation for CUEs which will be reduced from following years production 

14.2.4 Stocks 

TEAP notes that the amount of MB stocks held by the US is now substantially greater than 

the total critical use allocation in a given year. In 2006, the US predicted that pre 2005 stocks 

for preplant soil uses would be exhausted by 2009, yet a major proportion of the pre 2005 

stocks are still available. TEAP notes that the US has made allowances for some of the use of 

these stocks as critical allowances for CUNs and suggests that Parties may wish to seek 

clarification on how the remaining stocks will be apportioned. 

14.2.5 Reporting of MB Consumption for Critical Use - Decision XVII/9 

Decision XVII/9(10) of the 17th MOP requests TEAP and its MBTOC to “report for 2005 and 

annually thereafter, for each agreed critical use category, the amount of methyl bromide 

nominated by a Party, the amount of the agreed critical use and either: 

(a) The amount licensed, permitted or authorised; or 

(b) The amount used 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 247

Since the start of the CUN reviews in 2003, MBTOC has provided the amounts of MB 

nominated and agreed for each critical use (Annexes VI and VII). Not all Parties supply data 

under Table 2 of the accounting framework, set out on p. 65 of the Handbook on Critical Use 

Nominations (version 6 of December 2007). Data reported here for (a) and (b) above is thus 

incomplete. 

Tables and figures in this report (Table 14-4, Figures 14-1 and 14-2) 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 may have been sold into the same 

sectors. Table 14-5 in particular shows the amounts nominated and approved for ‘Critical 

Use’ in 2009 and 2010. 

14.2.6 Trends in Methyl Bromide Use for CUEs since 2005 

As part of the requirements of Decision XVII/9, trends in phase out by Parties are shown 

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

nominations for consumption for preplant soil uses and post harvest uses, although this has 

occurred at different rates. Figs 14-1 and 14- 2 show the trends in the reduction in amounts 

approved/nominated by Parties for ‘Critical Use’ from 2005 to 2011 for some key uses. The 

complete trends in phase out of MB by country, as indicated by change in CUE, are shown in 

Annexes V and VI. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 248

Figure 14-1: Amounts of MB exempted for CUE uses in preplant soil industries 

from 2005 to 2010. Solid lines indicate the trend in CUE methyl bromide. Dashed 

lines indicate quantity of MB nominated by the Parties in either 2010 or 2011. 

 

Cucurbits and Melons

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

metric tonnes

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Japan

USA

 

Cutflowers

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

metric tonnes

Australia

Belgium

France

Greece

Israel

Italy

Portugal

Spain

USA

Orchard Replant

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Year

metric tonnes

France

USA

 

Peppers and Eggplant

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Years

metric tonnes

Belgium

France

Italy

Japan

Spain

USA

Strawberry Fruit

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

metric tonnes

Australia

France

Israel

Italy

New Zealand

Spain

UK

USA

Tomatoes

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Greece

Italy

USA
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 249

Figure 14-2: Amounts of MB exempted for CUE uses in mills and food processing 

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

Dashed lines indicate quantity of MB nominated by the Party in either 2007 or 

2008. 

 Food Processing and Mills

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year

metric tonnes

Belgium

Canada

France

Germany

Greece

Israel

Italy

UK

USA
250 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 14-5: Summary of Critical Use Nomination (2005 – 2011 in part) and Exemption (2005 – 2010 in part) Amoun

Parties under the CUN/CUE Process. (Note: A breakdown of CUN and CUE amounts by sector is given in Annex VI

QUANTITIES NOMINATED 

QUANTITIES APPROVED 

PARTY 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2005 

(1ExMOP 

and 

16MOP) 

2006 

(16MOP+ 

2ExMOP+ 

17MOP) 

2007 

(17MOP 

+ 

18MOP) 

2008 

(18MOP 

+ 

19MOP)

2009 

(19MOP) 

Australia 206.950 81.250 52.145 52.900 38.990 37.610 35.450 146.600 75.100 48.517 48.450 37.610 Canada 61.992 53.897 46.745 42.241 39.115 35.080 19.368 61.792 53.897 52.874 36.112 39.020 European Community1

5754.361 4213.47 1239.873 245.00 0 0 0 4392.812 3536.755 689.142 245.146 0 

Israel 1117.156 1081.506 1236.517 952.845 699.448 383.700 * 1089.306 880.295 966.715 860.580 610.854 Japan 748.000 741.400 651.700 589.600 508.900 288.500 249.420 748.000 741.400 636.172 443.775 305.380 New Zealand 

53.085 53.085 32.573 0 0 0 0 50.000 42.000 18.234 0 0 

Switzerland 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 0 0 8.700 7.000 0 0 0 USA 10753.997 9386.229 7417.999 6415.153 4958.034 3299.490 2388.128 9552.879 8081.753 6749.060 5355.976 4261.974 TOTALS 18704.241 15617.837 10677.552 8297.739 6244.487 4044.380 2692.366 16050.089 13418.200 9160.714 6990.039 5,254.838 

* Not yet available. 1 Members of the European Community which had CUNs/CUEs included: 

2005 – Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. 2006 – Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. 2007 – France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom 2008 – Poland, Spain 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 251

14.2.7 Evaluations of CUNs – 2009 round for 2010 and 2011 exemptions 

MBTOC met separately in subcommittees in April 2009 to conduct a review of CUNs as requested 

by Parties, to update reports, discuss issues of registration of alternatives and other matters. Two 

MBTOC economists attended both meetings, however the third member unfortunately could not 

attend due to other commitments and has since resigned. The meetings were held as required by the 

time schedule for considerations of CUNs given in Annex I referred to in Decision XVI/4. 

Consensus decisions were made in subcommittees, but all comments made by members were 

considered in final recommendations. Outcomes from deliberations by the two MBTOC 

subcommittees were discussed via electronic communication. Recommendations made by MBTOC 

S were circulated to MBTOC QSC and vice versa, as part of the process of reaching consensus 

within the whole committee. 

During the meeting held in Agadir, Morocco (20-24 April, 2009) MBTOC S reviewed 27 

nominations and made recommendations for all nominations. During the meeting, MBTOC S held 

a bilateral meeting with the US delegation to get further information relevant to the CUN 

assessment. Two new members, one from Brazil and one from Turkey have joined the 

subcommittee. 

MBTOC QSC met in Rotterdam, The Netherlands (20-24 April, 2009). MBTOC QSC reviewed 9 

nominations and one nomination from the Russian Federation, which is at this time on hold pending 

further correspondence from the Party. MBTOC made recommendations for all nominations. 

CUNs in this report relate to CUEs sought for 2009 and 2010. No nominations in this particular 

round were submitted for longer periods. 

Two Parties (Israel and Canada) submitted nominations for the 2010 round and four Parties 

(Australia, Canada, Japan, and the USA) submitted nominations for 2011. These Parties have 

submitted nominations in previous CUN rounds. Israel submitted a nomination for preplant soil use 

of MB for broomrape eradication in polyhouses, which had not been applied for in the previous 

rounds, but has been applied for in open fields. The total number of nominations has been reduced 

from 42 nominations submitted by five Parties in the last round to 36 for the present round. In 

2008, Japan indicated in correspondence prior to the 28th OEWG in Thailand that it plans to phase 

out all preplant soil uses of MB by 2013. 

MBTOC has sometimes recommended quantities of MB for 2010 or 2011 which are different from 

those nominated. The grounds used for these recommendations are given in detail after the relevant 

CUNs in Tables 14-11 and 14-12. The adjustments for preplant soils use may in part be to account 

for presumptions given in Tables 14-8 and 14-9. 

In paragraph 20 of Annex 1 referred to in Decision XVI/4, Parties, among other things, specifically 

requested that MBTOC explicitly state the specific basis for the Party’s economic statement relating 

to CUNs. Tables 14-11 and 14-12 provide this information for each CUN. This information was 

prepared by MBTOC economists. 

In general, CUNs resulted mainly from the following issues: regulatory restrictions on alternatives, 

scale-up of alternatives, economic issues and, to a much smaller degree, the technical unavailability 

of alternatives. This was as in the previous two years of CUNs. For the most part, technical 

alternatives exist. Additionally, MBTOC notes that some Parties continue to struggle with the 

ability to adapt previously identified alternatives to their circumstances, within their definition of 

economic feasibility. 
252 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

14.2.8 Critical Use Nominations Review 

In considering the CUNs submitted in 2009, as in previous rounds , both MBTOC subcommittees 

applied the standards contained in Annex I of the final report of 16 MOP, and, where relevant, the 

standard presumptions given below. In particular MBTOC sought to provide consistent treatment of 

CUNs within and between Parties while at the same time taking local circumstances into 

consideration. 

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 for preplant soil use relating to production of strawberries, tomatoes 

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

on MB alternatives and by a meta-analysis of over 100 potential alternatives (Porter et al, 2006). 

Recent publications on these and other relevant crops appearing in scientific journals, conference 

proceedings, trade magazines and others were also extensively considered. The published studies 

assisted in providing additional transparency to MBTOC evaluations, as requested by the Parties in 

Decision XV/4. MBTOC also used information on the suitability of alternatives for a nomination by 

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

Further, adoption in regions with similar climatic zone and cropping practices was used as an 

indication of the feasibility (technical and economic) of an alternative in a similar region. For 

example for preplant soil uses of MB, 1,3-dichloropropene/Pic (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. 

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

feasible alternatives would provide disinfestation to a level that met the objectives of a MB 

treatment, e.g. meeting infestation standards in finished product from a mill, while ensuring the 

costs were economically feasible in the context of that nomination, to the extent that could be 

determined. 

Unless otherwise indicated, the most recent CUE approved by the Parties for a particular CUN was 

used as baseline for consideration of continuing nominations. 

The standard presumptions, used by MBTOC to assess nominations, are given in the chapters 

ahead. 

14.2.9 Disclosure of Interest 

As in the past, all MBTOC members have prepared disclosure of interest forms relating specifically 

to their level of national, regional or enterprise involvement for the 2009 CUN process, according 

to a standardised format developed by TEAP. The Disclosure of Interest declarations are found in 

Annex VII at the end of this report. As in previous rounds, some members withdrew from a 

particular CUN assessment or only provided technical advice on request for those nominations 

where a potential conflict of interest was declared. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 253

14.3 MBTOC Soils: Final Evaluations of 2009 Critical Use Nominations for Methyl 

Bromide

14.3.1 Summary of outcomes 

In the 2009 round, 27 CUNs were submitted for soil uses, 9 for 2010 and 18 for 2011. Interim 

recommendations were made on all nominations of 382.140 tonnes for 2010 and 2,500.814 tonnes 

for 2011. The recommended amounts totalled 289.874 tonnes for 2010 and 2,154.467 tonnes for 

2011 (Table 14-6). 

MBTOC is recommending a greater transition rate for several nominations as it considers 

alternatives are available and can be adopted for a larger portion of the nomination by 2011 than 

those indicated. MBTOC made a slight reduction to the CUNs submitted by Japan only for sectors 

affected by plant viruses as MBTOC acknowledged the reduction schedule put forward in their 

Action Plan in 2008 (Figure 14-3). MBTOC considered that further reductions were feasible and 

made modest reductions in order to assist Japan meet its phase out by 2013. For some nominations, 

MBTOC adjusted for revised standard MB dosage rates (as presented at 19th MOP) for vegetables, 

strawberries and strawberry runners, where either the Party had provided information to support the 

dose rate or where commercial use rates supported the presumptions. 

Table 14-6: Summary of MBTOC S final recommendations for 2010 and 2011 by 

country for CUNs received in 2008 for preplant soil use of MB (tonnes)

CUE approved at 20th

MOP 

CUN for 2010 and 2011 MBTOC-S Interim 

Recommendation 

Country 

2009 2010 2010 2011 2010 2011 

Australia 29.790 29.790 22.350 

Canada 7.462 5.261 5.261 

Israel 608.454 382.140 289.874 

Japan 261.600 244.070 234.396 

USA 2998.948 2,221.693 1,892.460 

Total 608.454 3297.800 382.140 2,500.814 289.874 2,154.467 
254 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Table 14-7: Summary of the amounts approved by Parties at 19th MOP for 2010, and 

amounts recommended by MBTOC S (in square brackets) for CUE’s for preplant uses of 

MB (tonnes) for 2010 and 2011 submitted in the 2009 round. 

Years 

Country and Sector 2010 2011 

1. Australia 

1. Strawberry runners 29.790 [22.350] 

2. Canada 

1. Strawberry runners 7.462 [5.261] 

3. Israel 

1. Broomrape protected 

2. Cucumber 

3. Cut flowers & bulbs protected 

4. Cut flowers open field 

5. Melon protected & open field 

 6. Strawberry fruit - Sharon and Gaza 

7. Strawberry runners - Sharon and Gaza 

8. Sweet potatoes 

TOTAL 

[12.500] 

[15.973] 

[63.464] 

[28.554] 

[70.000] 

 [57.063] 

[22.320] 

[20.000] 

[289.874] 

---------- 

---------- 

---------- 

---------- 

---------- 

---------- 

---------- 

4. Japan 

1. Cucumber 

2. Ginger open field 

3. Ginger protected 

4. Melon 

5. Pepper green & hot 

6. Watermelon 

TOTAL 

30.690 

53.400 

 8.300 

81.720 

 72.990 

14.500 

261.600 

[27.621] 

[47.450] 

 [7.036] 

[73.548] 

[65.691] 

[13.050] 

[234.396]

5. USA 

1. Cucurbits 

2. Eggplants (field) 

3. Forestry nursery 

4. Nurseries stock: fruits, nuts & flowers 

5. Orchard replant 

6. Ornamentals 

7. Pepper (field) 

8. Strawberry (field) 

9. Strawberry runners 

 10. Sweet potatoes 

 11. Tomatoes (field) 

TOTAL 

218.032 

19.725 

93.547 

7.955 

183.232 

64.307 

206.234 

812.70 

94.690 

11.612 

292.751 

2,221.693 

[195.698] 

 [19.725] 

[93.547] 

 [7.955] 

[183.232] 

 [64.307] 

 [206.234] 

[812.709] 

 [4.690] 

 [11.612] 

 [292.751] 

[1892.460] 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 255

Figure 14-3: Stepwise reduction schedules for MB (metric tonnes) proposed in the 

Japanese Action Plan, forwarded as information for consideration during the 2008 

round of CUN assessments and MBTOC recommendations. 

(Plan suggests that in 2012, reductions will be between 30 and 70% of amount recommended in 2009 

with total phaseout in 2013) 

 Source: Letter to Ozone Secretariat - August 22,2008 

Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

MB amount (tonnes) 

shown in Japanese 

Action Plan 

444 305 289 260 87 - 202 0

MBTOC 

Recommendations 

444 305 267 234 - - 

14.3.2 Issues related to CUN Assessment for Preplant Soil Use 

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 influenced assessment and the need for MB in the 2009 round were i) registration 

of methyl iodide ( MI or iodomethane) in most states of the USA (not California) in mid 2008 

which has led to commercial adoption on 13,000 acres in the US and substantial reduction in the 

US nominations in SE and Florida (Chism, W., pers com, 2009; Allan, M., pers. comm., 2009) ii) 

acceptance of a 3 way fumigant strategy (1,3-dichloropropene, metham sodium, Pic) being effective 

for nutsedge and pathogen control in USA, iii) changing regulations on key alternatives, 

particularly 1,3-D township caps and buffer zones on 1,3-D, metham sodium and Pic used alone or 

in mixtures (iv) restrictions on use of high rates of Pic (greater than 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2

)) in some 

counties of California, and v) lack of studies in specific sectors i.e. orchard replant in heavy soils, 

and nursery industries. In the 2009 round, MBTOC also used adoption data of alternatives in 
256 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

specific regions where it was available, such as the Californian Department of Pesticide Regulation 

commodity and pesticide data to help with assessment. 

Unusually large buffer zone restrictions on fumigant alternatives, particularly limit their adoption, 

especially in Israel. MBTOC urges Parties to consider review of these regulations in view of the 

ability of barrier films to reduce dose rates of MB and alternatives and associated emissions. As in 

the previous round, Parties have found alternatives more difficult to adopt for propagation 

materials, such as strawberry runners and nurseries, however the lack of research studies provided 

in CUNs has also led to difficulties in assessment. MBTOC considers that several of these do not 

to fully satisfy the requirements of Decision IX/6 and urges Parties to increase studies in these 

sectors. The impact of current reviews of VOC emissions in California may also have a major 

impact on MB use and the use of alternatives in California. MBTOC was also unclear whether 

barrier films can be used for MB uses under VOC regulations as this would impact on dose rates 

required for CUNs. 

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

legislation prevent reductions of MB dosage. For many uses, the mandatory use of MB is specified 

at a high dosage for either treatment of certified propagation material or because bans are imposed 

on the use of barrier films which otherwise could have reduced the MB dosage rate. Also 

regulations on the use of alternatives are preventing their uptake for a substantial proportion of the 

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

regulations with internationally accepted methodologies and to allow use of MB alternatives that lie 

within the Montreal Protocol’s goals. 

14.3.2.1 Registration of alternatives for preplant uses - Decision Ex I/4 (9i) and (9j) 

Decision Ex. I/4 (9i) requires MBTOC “To report annually on the status of re-registration and 

review of methyl bromide uses for the applications reflected in the critical-use exemptions, 

including any information on health effects and environmental acceptability”. Further,

Decision Ex I/4 (9j) requires MBTOC “To report annually on the status of registration of 

alternatives and substitutes for methyl bromide, with particular emphasis on possible 

regulatory actions that will increase or decrease dependence on methyl bromide”.

Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) documents for use of MB, Pic, MS, and dazomet for 

preplant soil fumigation were completed in the USA on July 15, 2008, with a comment period 

allowed until 30 October, 2008. Final decisions are scheduled to be available in June 2009. New 

safety measures such as buffer zones to protect bystanders, reduced application rates, health 

protection measures for workers are required in the RED. The mitigation required in the REDs will 

be implemented in two stages -- most of the measures not related to buffer zones will be 

implemented in 2010 with the buffer zones being implemented in 2011. 1,3-D, which was included 

in the fumigant cluster for comparative purposes only, completed reregistration in the U.S. in 1998, 

and no further mitigation is expected at this time. 

The registration of formulations of a key alternative, 1,3-D/Pic is uncertain in Israel. IM, a major 

alternative to MB, is now registered in all but three states in the United States, including the south 

east region and Florida for field-grown ornamentals, peppers, strawberries and tomatoes. 

(Registration is still pending in California, Washington and New York). This registration has been 

expanded to include other crops in 2009, such as forest nurseries. Trials with MI continue being 

conducted in Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Turkey, Morocco, South Africa, Israel, Italy, Costa 

Rica, Guatemala, Brazil, Mexico and Chile, and the registration process is proceeding in most other 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 257

countries applying for CUEs beside other states in the USA including Australia, Israel and Japan. 

To ensure that the mitigation measures for MI will be consistent with the measures being required 

for the other fumigants, the label requirements are presently being reexamined in the USA. 1,3-

dichloropropene, may be subject to similar provisions when the soil fumigants are evaluated 

together again in 2013. 

The EC has further reported that registration for 1,3-D and other alternatives including chloropicrin, 

dazomet ande metham, sodium are under review. A grace period for the registration of 1,3-D 

became due on 20 March 2009, but its future registration is uncertain. Recognising the role of 1,3-D 

as an alternative to MB, and to achieve the objectives of the Montreal Protocol, this grace period 

may be extended by a further 18 months, pending a review to assess the concrete impact of its 

withdrawal on the use of MB. The manufacturer of 1,3-D has compiled a dossier of additional 

technical information and intends to apply for re-registration of 1,3-D under Directive 91/414 (Dow 

AgroSciences 2007)”. (EC Management Strategy, 2008). 

A number of other chemicals which may be alternatives to MB are being considered for impending 

registration in specific countries recently, including dimethyl disulphide (DMDS) in Europe and the 

USA and MI in Australia respectively. 

14.3.2.2 Update on rates of adoption of alternatives for preplant uses - 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’. 

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

between countries, crops and the pest pressure. In general similar alternatives are being adopted by 

the same sectors throughout a number of countries, although the rate of adoption has varied 

depending on regulations on their use, differences in registration between countries and other 

market forces. In this round as in previous rounds of CUNs, MBTOC has recognised that time is 

needed to effect phase-in of alternatives and has accepted this as a reasonable technical argument 

for lack of availability to the end user sensu Decision IX/6. 

Where possible, data is included in this report showing actual rates of adoption in key regions 

which have phased out MB recently. In particular, recent adoption data from the EC Management 

Strategy (2008) has been included to shows rates of transition to alternatives by several sectors in 

the Member States (Appendix IV). In addition, past adoption rates of alternatives in many 

countries is presented in previous Assessment Reports (MBTOC 2007). Figures 2.1- 2.2 in this 

report show the apparent reduction rates for MB use achieved by many Parties in a number of key 

sectors. As noted above, true reduction and adoption rates may vary from the rate of change of 

CUN/CUE because of factors such as use of stocks or transfer of approved MB between categories 

The CUN reviews presented in Table 14-11 also provide detail of some of the key alternatives that 

Parties have and should consider to further replace MB for the remaining uses. 

For several major preplant soil uses, adoption data from other regions has shown that where 

industries have previously been heavily dependent on MB, e.g. strawberries, tomatoes and other 

vegetable crops (e.g. Australia, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Portugal, New Zealand) almost complete 

adoption of alternative technologies (especially those requiring similar application technologies) 

has been achieved in a 3 to 4 year period. For instance, a full list of adoption rates obtained within 
258 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

the EC is shown in Annex IV. These regions have similar pest complexes to those requesting 

CUNs, but may have different regulatory issues. Possible adoption rates for transition to 

alternatives for preplant soil uses have also been supplied recently by Japan in their National Action 

Plan. This plan indicates the expected rates of transition to alternatives to assist complete phase out 

of MB by 2013. 

Further guidance from the Parties, giving expected rates of adoption of alternatives following 

registration, would assist MBTOC in evaluation of CUNs in future. 

14.3.2.3 Sustainable alternatives for preplant uses 

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

alternatives, which themselves, like MB, have issues related to their long term suitability for use. 

In both the EC and the USA in particular, MB and most other fumigants have been subjected to 

reviews that could affect future regulations over their use for preplant soil fumigation. For preplant 

soil uses of MB, the regulatory restrictions on 1,3-dichloropropene and Pic are preventing further 

adoption of these products in the USA, particularly California and this is putting pressure on 

industries to retain MB. 

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

to MB, to continue to adopt environmentally sustainable and safe chemical and non-chemical 

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

approaches for the longer term. Decision IX/6 1(a)(ii) refers to alternatives that are ‘acceptable 

from the standpoint of environment and health’. MBTOC has consistently interpreted this to mean 

alternatives that are registered or allowed by the relevant regulatory authorities in individual CUN 

regions, without reference to sustainability. 

14.3.2.4 Frequency of allowed MB use for preplant uses 

In the CUN round for 2009, reductions in MB for preplant (soil) uses could be achieved in some 

nominations, where effective alternatives were identified, by reducing the frequency of MB 

fumigations. Instead of all fumigation being made with MB, potential exists to reduce frequency by 

rotation with other methods (i.e. fumigants) in order to reduce MB use to every 2nd or 3rd year. In 

some production systems, MB is already used only every 3rd or 4th year as a result of uptake of 

alternative strategies and crop rotations. 

Noting this effort, MBTOC has not automatically concluded that episodes when MB is not used 

mean a fully successful adoption of alternatives. There is no instruction from Parties as to how to 

consider renewed CUNs in the future that result from a potential need for MB in the years where 

reduced frequency of fumigation is to take place. Similarly, Parties may consider submission of 

renewed or expanded CUN requests should a key alternative cease to be available because of new 

regulatory constraints or loss of registration. MBTOC notes recent action by the European 

Commission (D(2009)410411) Article 3(a) Commission Decision 2007/619/EC which 

“...concluded a phase out of 1,3-D is not likely to lead to critical uses of methyl bromide 

and that, therefore, the period of grace of 1,3-D should not be extended. In fact, other 

chemical alternatives to methyl bromide will remain available until at least March 2010... 

Spain (and a number of other Member States) did not agree with the Commission analysis.” 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 259

14.3.3 Standard presumptions used in assessment of nominated quantities. 

The tables below (Tables 14-8 and 14-9) provide the standard presumptions applied by MBTOC 

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

report of October 2005 and were presented to the Parties at 17th MOP. Studies and reports to 

support them appear in Annex III. They were revised for some sectors after consideration by the 

Parties at the 19th MOP. The rates and practices adopted by MBTOC as standard presumptions are 

based on maximum rates considered acceptable by published literature and actual commercial 

practice. Actual dosage rate of MB in MB/Pic formulations is shown in Table 14-10 below. 

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

particular nominations to a standard rate per treated area where technical evidence supported its use 

(see Annex III). MBTOC considered the maximum MB application rate for 98% MB to be either 

250 or 350 kg/ha (25 or 35 g/m2

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

equivalent) and totally impermeable films (TIF) combined with extended exposure periods. Several 

Parties have indicated that 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2

) of 98:2 were effectively used in standard 

commercial application for many sectors, especially on sandy soils. MBTOC considers 100% MB 

or 98:2 MB/Pic formulations only necessary for CUE uses where other MB/Pic formulations are 

not registered or where regulations prescribe their use. 

In cases where use of high Pic-containing mixtures of MB/Pic (approximately 67:33 or 50:50 or 

lower) and barrier films are considered feasible, maximum dosage rates of either 150 or 175 kg 

MB/ha (15.0-17.5 g/m2

) where nutsedge is the key pest and 125 or 150 kg/ha (12.5-15.0 g/m2) for 

pathogens were considered for use as the maximum standard presumptions, unless there was a 

regulatory or technical reason indicated otherwise by the Party (see Table 14-9 below). MBTOC 

considers these dosage rates to give similar efficacy and yields at a similar cost to higher dosage 

rates of MB/Pic with barrier films. As a special case, MBTOC accepted a maximum rate of 200 kg/ 

ha (20 g/m2

) with high Pic-containing mixtures with barrier films for certified nursery production, 

unless regulations prescribed higher rates. However, studies have indicated that rates of 200 kg/ha 

(20g/m2

) or less (Annex III) of MB: Pic 50:50 were effective with barrier films for production of 

‘certified’ nursery material. 

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

only. MBTOC recognises that the actual rate appropriate for a specific use may vary with local 

circumstances, soil conditions and the target pest situation. Some nominations were based on rates 

lower than these indicative rates. 

During a bilateral meeting held in Alassio, Italy, August 2008, the US delegation indicated that they 

were not able to conform to dosage rates suggested by MBTOC for vegetables and strawberries at 

present (see Table 14-8 below) as they did not have enough trial information to confirm their use 

for specific circumstances. In view of the fact that the Party did not consider experiences from other 

countries and sectors valid for extrapolation to USA circumstances, MBTOC conducted a review of 

MB use rates being adopted with barrier films in early 2009 and in many cases rates less than the 

standard presumptions were shown to be used currently in the US (Schneider, pers comm.). In 

view of this finding, MBTOC applied the revised standard presumptions (as presented to 19th MOP) 

in this round. 
260 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Table 14-8: Standard presumptions used in assessment of CUNs for the 2009 round – 

soil treatments. 

Comment CUN adjustment Exceptions 

1. Dosage rates Maximum guideline rates for 

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

barrier films (VIF or equivalent); 

for mixtures of MB/Pic are 12.5 to 

17.5 g MB/m2

 for pathogens and 

nutsedge respectively, under barrier 

films depending on the sector. All 

rates are 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, TIF) 

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 Pic (Pic) is not 

registered 

4. MB/Pic 

Formulation: 

Weeds/nutsedge 

ass 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 Pic or Pic-containing 

mixtures are not registered 

5. Strip vs. 

Broadacre 

Fumigation with MB and mixtures 

to be carried out under strip 

Where rates were shown in 

broadacre hectares, the CUN 

was adjusted to the MB rate 

relative to strip treatment (i.e. 

treated area). If not specified, 

the area under strip treatment 

was considered to represent 67% 

of the total area. 

Where strip treatment was 

not feasible e.g. some 

protected cultivation, 

emission regulations on MB, 

or open field production of 

high health propagative 

material 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 261

Table 14-9: Maximum dosage rates for preplant soil use of MB by sector used in the 

2009 round (standard presumptions).

Maximum MB Dosage Rate (g/m2) in MB/Pic mixtures (67:33, 50:50) 

Film Type considered effective for:

Strawberries and 

Vegetables 

Nurseries* Orchard Replant Ornamentals 

Barrier films - 

Pathogens 

12.5 15 15 15 

Barrier films - 

Nutsedge 

15.0 17.5 17.5 17.5 

No Barrier films 

– Pathogens 

20 20 20 20 

No Barrier films - 

Nut sedge 

26 26 26 26 

* Maximum rate unless certification specifies otherwise 

14.3.4 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 MB (e.g. MB/Pic 50:50, 45:55 or less). These formulations are 

considered to be equally as effective in controlling soilborne pathogens as formulations containing 

higher quantities of MB (e.g. 98:2, 67:33) (e. g. Porter et al., 1997; Melgarejo et al., 2001; LópezAranda et al., 2003; Santos et al., 2007; Hamill et al., 2004; Carey and Godbehere, 2004; Gilreath 

and Santos, 2005; Hanson et al., 2006). Where such formulations are registered or otherwise 

permitted, non-Article 5 countries have widely adopted formulations containing high proportions of 

Pic in mixtures with MB to meet Montreal Protocol restrictions. Their use can be achieved with 

similar application machinery which allows co-injection of MB and Pic or by use of premixed 

formulations. Consistent performance has been demonstrated with both barrier and non barrier 

films. Parties are urged to consider even lower dosage rates of MB by modifying MB/Pic mixtures 

used and adoption of barrier films where regulations permit as the basis for future CUNs. This 

includes rates as low as 75 kg/ha (7.5 g/m2

) in 250 kg/ha of 30:70 or 33:67 mixtures or 100 kg/ha 

(10 g/m2

) of MB in 250 kg/ha of 50:50 MB/Pic mixtures in conjunction with barrier films as these 

have shown similar effectiveness to higher rates of MB in 67:33 MB /Pic and 335 to 800 kg/ha 

(33.5 to 80 g/m2

) of MB 98% with standard polyethylene. 
262 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Table 14-10: Actual dosage rates applied during preplant fumigation when different 

rates and formulations of MB/Pic mixtures are applied with and without barrier films. 

Rates of application reflect standard commercial applications rates. 

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

application 

rates of 

formulation 

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

A. With Standard Polyethylene Films 

400 39.2 26.8 20.0 12.0 

350 34.3 23.5 17.5 10.5 

300 29.4 20.1 15.0 9.0 

B. With Low Permeability Barrier Films (LPBF) 

250 24.5 16.8 12.5 7.5 

200 19.6 13.4 10.0* 6.0 

175 17.2 11.8 8.8 5.3 

* Note: Trials from 1996 to 2008 (Annex III) show that a dosage of 10g/m2 (e.g. MB/Pic 50:50 

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

the standard dosage of >20g/m2 using standard PE films 

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

reduction 

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

economically feasible steps have been taken to minimise the critical use and any associated 

emission of methyl bromide’. Decision Ex.II/1 also mentions emission minimization techniques, 

requesting Parties “...to ensure, wherever methyl bromide is authorized for critical-use exemptions, 

the use of emission minimization techniques such as virtually impermeable films, barrier film 

technologies, deep shank injection and/or other techniques that promote environmental protection, 

whenever technically and economically feasible.” 

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

and deployment of MB emission reduction technologies, such as use of LPBF, including VIF and 

totally impermeable films (TIF), or other appropriate sealing and emission control techniques 

including deep injection of MB, use of formulations with a lower proportion of MB and/ or reduced 

frequency of application. 

The use of low permeability barrier films or other techniques, ensuring at least the same level of 

environmental protection, was compulsory in the 27 member countries of the European Union (EC 

Regulation 2037/2000) for MB before phaseout and currently for the alternative choropicrin in Italy 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 263

and Spain for preplant soil uses. In other regions, LPBF films are considered technically feasible 

and large adoption has occurred, e.g. Israel and SE USA. In Florida the reported use of barrier 

films in vegetable crops has expanded to over 50,000 acres and it is also exclusively used with the 

alternative MI to assist its effectiveness at low dosage rates (Allan, pers. comm., 2008; Chism, 

pers.comm, 2009). An exception to the adoption of barrier films is in the State of California in the 

USA where a regulation currently prevents use of VIF with MB (California Code of Regulations 

Title 3 Section 6450(e)), but not with the alternatives. Barrier films are consistently improving the 

performance of alternatives at lower dosage rates. The regulation on MB has been set over concerns 

of possible worker exposure to MB when the film is removed or when seedlings are planted due to 

altered flux rates of MB. Recent VOC regulations appear to allow barrier films to be used with MB 

and it is unclear to MBTOC at this stage what impact the conflicting regulations may have on 

CUNs. 

14.3.6 Use of disposable canisters of MB 

One non Article 5 Party is still using small disposable canisters (i.e. 500 to 750g canisters) for 

application of MB for preplant soil use under plastic films under strict worker health guidelines. 

Canister applications have been eliminated for soil use in all other non Article 5 countries and 

various Article 5 countries as this application is considered to be less efficient for the control of 

soilborne pathogens than other methods. This treatment is considered to be more dangerous to 

workers than injection methods, because trained contractors are not generally involved in its 

application. This practice is not considered as effective for pathogen control as use of MB/Pic 

mixtures and also can lead to high emissions of MB as the MB gas is released immediately beneath 

the plastic sheets. According to the Party, canisters are used because they provide small-scale 

farmers with an easy application method and the ability to apply targeted amounts of MB to small 

areas where injection machinery may be difficult to use. In this case, farmers are reported to use 

strict controls. 

 
264 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Table 14-11: Final evaluations of CUNs for preplant soil use submitted in 2008 for 2010 or 2011

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Australia Strawberry 

runners 

35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 29.790 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 22.350 tonnes be approved for 2011. The reduction by MBTOC reduced rate for MB of 187.5 kg/ha 18.75 g/m2). The key pests affecting strawberry runner production are fungi (Phytophthora, Pythi

and weeds (S. arvensis, Agrostis tenuis, Raphanus spp., Poa annua, Cyperus spp). The CUN states that MB:Pic 50:50 at a MB dose 

certification standards. The Party’s request exceeds MBTOC’s standard presumption of 20 g/m2, but this rate continues to remain un

that the registration authority (APVMA) requires 2 years of trials before approving a reduced rate. The Party has however one years dreduced rates under barrier films, LDBF (MB:Pic 50:50 @ 375 kg/ha) provided similar yields to the currently registered standard of Msecond year’s results will be available in August/September 2009. The Party has indicated that it is possible that the registration for thoccur in time for use in 2011. The Party states that the most promising alternative, MI/Pic has been demonstrated in small scale trials MB:Pic. Commercial scale-up trials are in progress and could lead to registration in 2011 or possibly beforehand. If MI:Pic is availablreduction of the nomination. A key alternative,1,3-D:Pic, is considered ineffective due to phytotoxicity and doubling of plant back timeconditions in the high elevation regions. The Party also indicates that the Victorian Strawberry Certification Authority (VSICA) compledevelopment program for soil-less systems for production of foundation stock strawberry runners. Results indicated that the productivsimilar to the current method of production in MB:Pic fumigated soils, and the economics of the soil-less system compares favourably production. VSICA plans to establish a commercial facility by 2011 which, if successful, would eliminate VSICA’s need for MB for fouMBTOC encourages the Party to (1) expedite the registration of MI/PIC and EDN (Mattner et al, 2008) and (2) implement to the greatthe use of soil-less systems for the production of foundation stock strawberry runners . 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that “...the first of a 

economic and biological feasibility of production of foundation stock by soil-less systems was completed this year”. It compared produof production in MB:Pic treated soil in insect proof cages. Results confirm the potential of the soil-less system are being used to desigestablished in November 08.” They conclude that “The economics of the system compare favourably with the current methods of prod
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Canada Strawberry 

runners (PEI) 

6.840 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.462 7.462 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 5.261 tonnes for this use in 2011. The CUN for 2011 is based on a reduced rate fo

acknowledges the Party’s reduction in the absence of formal registration for this dose rate. The Party has attempted to replace MB wuse in Prince Edward Island in January 2003 due to ground water contamination. PIC 100 has been registered by the Pest Managembut the PEI authorities have denied a permit for its use until further groundwater testing has been conducted. While MB:PIC 67:33 @ registered for strawberry runners, which exceeds MBTOC’s standard presumption of 20 g/m2 of MB, the grower has petitioned the PM

barrier films. PMRA, in the absence of a formal label amendment, has granted permission to use a lower rate, but at the grower’s owgrower tested 25% and 30% lower rates under barrier films and results will be available in 2009. The permit for Pic 100 is still pendinCanada registered Pic in 2007. No studies on other potential alternative fumigants, such as Pic, DMDS, MI/Pic have taken place. MBnominations will also demonstrate significant progress with key alternatives. MBTOC encourages the Party (1) to finalize the permits (2) consider the adoption of soilless cultures for at least part of the production cycle.

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic arguments or data 

Israel Broomrape None None 250.000 250.000 125.000 - 12.500 12

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 12.500 tonnes for this use in 2010 for one year only. The nomination for 2010 is for 

pepper and is additional to the outdoor field nominations in previous years. MB use for a national broomrape eradication project on ouapproved as a CUN for the years 2007, 2008 and 2009, but the allocated amounts have not been utilized. It is not clear to MBTOC wcan not be used to fumigate the 50 ha of green house for broomrape in tomato and pepper production, but have assumed that this amnotes that in 2005 CUN the Party stated it would not apply for additional uses and MBTOC is unclear why this nomination has been s

MBTOC acknowledges that a registration for Pic is being considered in Israel and that this would possibly allow for lower dosages of 

and other pathogens as a transition strategy. In the 2008 nomination, the Party reported that results of field trials with 1,3-D in sequenpromising and that registration is expected in 2009. In the 2009 nomination, the Party confirms that Telon EC is a very good chemicaaegyptica the main species parasitizing tomato. It is not clear from the nomination whether 1,3-D/Pic EC (Telon EC) has been registebroomrape when applied under plastic sheets through the drip irrigation system in tunnels or greenhouses. Its efficacy is further enhacombination with MS. It is not clear if this fumigant can eradicate the parasitic plant .The Party has also identified some alternatives foOrobanche (e.g. solarization) but they are considered not adequate for controlling severe infestations of O. aegyptiaca. Field trials we

imazapic, and imazomox (Abanga et al., 2007; Nadal et al.,2008; Miller et al., 2009). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that “Biological cont

aid of a parasitic fly or with Fusaria do not provide economic answers for the broomrape problem” but provides no further supporting e
266 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Israel Cut flowersbulbsprotected 303.000 240.000 220.185 114.450 85.431 - 72.266 63

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 63.464 tonnes for this use in 2010. The recommended amountransition rate applied for adoption of substrates (lilium, calla lilies, gerberas, anemones and carnations outside the Ghaza area), and species where the nomination states these are now registered. The nomination is for a variety of cut flowers produced under cover, wweeds (Cyperus in particular), nematodes (root-knot but also ectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fungi. MBTOC does not consideectoparasitic nematodes. MBTOC does not recommend the use of 1.75 tonnes for fumigating substrates used in rose production as aefficient for this use. Overall, there is very little change from nominations submitted in previous years, particularly in 2007 and 2008 alargely based on transitional measures - LPBF barrier films with reduced rates. In spite of this, registration of certain alternatives, suchas now expanded to include additional flower types. Substrate production protocols are now available for many of the flowers presen

al, 2001; Gullino et al, 2003; Savvas and Passan, 2002; Urrestarazu, 2004; Urrestarazu, 2005). MBTOC is aware that carnation cultivavailable, commercially used and accepted by international markets (Gullino and Garibaldi, 2007)) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic arguments or data 

Israel Cut flowersopen field 77.000 67.000 74.540 44.750 34.698 - 42.554 28

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 28.554 tonnes for this use in 2010. Overall, there is very little submitted in previous years, particularly in 2007 and 2008. Progress towards phase-out is still based on transitional measures - barrieThe nomination is for open field production of cut flowers, which are mainly affected by weeds (Cyperus spp in particular) and nematoectoparasites such as Longidorus) and fungi. MBTOC does not consider MB necessary for controlling ectoparasitic nematodes. Lack 

on flowers such as 1,3-D+Pic, dazomet and metham sodium, continue to be the major constraints affecting substitution of MB at this Pic content are also not registered. In spite of this, registration of metham sodium and 1,3-D has expanded and now includes additionof registration is expected this year. Solarization has been proven to be an efficient alternative for some flower types (ref) and is being combination with alternative chemicals such as metham sodium and 1,3-D. In keeping with the 2008 recommendation, a 25% transitinominated amount to allow for adoption of alternatives, including chemicals and solarization, which is being adopted successfully. Thto the 10.125 t requested for nurseries of geophytes where high health plant material needs to be produced, although no certification 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic arguments or data 

Israel Cucumber None None 25.000 18.750 - - 18.750 15

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 15.937 tonnes for this use in 2010. The reduction is based on 

improved sanitation and possible uptake of other alternatives (MS and 1,3-D) on 15% of the nomination. For 2010, the Party requestamount approved by the Party’s at the 18th MOP. The need for MB under the specific conditions of the intensive indoor cucumber cuIsrael could be considered as a niche request. The crop was not submitted for CUE in the years 2005 and 2006 since the crop’s mos
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

resolved commercially at a satisfactory level. Cucumbers are grown in open ended polyhouses in 3 cropping cycles per annum in the houses of cooperative family and private family farms. A large proportion, 70%, of the critical use is concentrated in one village (Achitspecialized for years in the cultivation of indoor cucumbers for the domestic market. The reasons for this nomination are the appearan

oxysporum f. sp. radicis cucumerinum. The pathogen is highly virulent and the infestation level particularly high in the affected locatio

greenhouses in a short period of time. The required MB will be aimed at the eradication of the pathogen. Although MS and1,3-D is an of the mixture in winter at low temperature it may cause crop phytotoxicity and buffer zones limit its use. The Party also states that MS degradation in field studies. MBTOC acknowledges that alternatives, such as MS+1,3-D, 1,3-D/PIC, grafting, sanitation programs; soal., 2004; Lieten, 2004; Savvas and Passam, 2002; Mutitu et al., 2006) may be feasible alternatives for part or all of the nomination. It the technical and economic feasibility of alternatives (grafting, substrates, and grafting + nematicides) and consider a reassessment talternatives in use with barrier films and new application in methods in future nominations. MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic arguments or data 

Israel Melon - 

protected and field 

125.650 99.400 105.000 87.500 87.500 - 87.500 70

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 70.000 tonnes for this use in 2010. The reduction is based on 

non chemical alternatives (Pivonia et al., 2008) which have been shown to be effective for control of Monosporascus cannonballus, a

supplied by the Party, and uptake of grafted plants and other alternatives on 20% of the nomination. Monosporascus is the key pathobeing used for spring melon in the Arava because of low temperatures prevailing at planting time and short plant back. Regulatory rescase. The requested amount at a rate of 250 kg/ha (25 g/m2) of 98:2 MB under barrier films (LDPF) complies with MBTOC ́s standard 

request for MB over the years first showed a reduction tendency due to the adoption of barrier films, during the last three CUN rounds87.5 tonnes. MBTOC, on the one hand, understands that the widely used formulations with more Pic (MB/Pic 67:33, 50:50) could be MB 98:2 formulations and urges the Party to make the necessary efforts to assess this situation under the criteria of Dec.IX/6 and red

MBTOC understands an alternative fungicide has shown effective control of Monosporascus in Israel (Pivonia et. al; 2008; Israel melothe transition to the alternatives is already ongoing and applied a transition rate based on other countries experience. Another encoumelon which shows potential in the medium-long term. The use of grafted vegetables in Israel is increasing rapidly. Grafted watermel60 to 70% of the total cultivated area of this crop (Cohen et al, 2007). On melon, however, problems of scion-rootstock compatibility aadditional research effort. MBTOC notes that Pic and MB:Pic mixtures and the fungicide, fludioxonil, are effectively used for Monosp

similar conditions (e.g. Stanghelini et al. 2003; Martyn 2002). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that Basamid is not 

price has increased considerably, and because of waiting period constraints. CUN also provides data (Section F) showing that the usprofit margins despite the fact that the cost of MB per kg is higher. The source of the data is not provided.
268 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Israel Strawberry 

fruit - protected (Sharon and Ghaza) 

196.000 196.000 93.000 105.960 77.750 

(42.75 

Sharon) 

35.00 

Ghaza 

- 47.500 

(Sharon) 

50.000 

(Ghaza) 

32

(Sha

25

(Gh

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced CUE of 32.063 tonnes for Sharon and a reduced amount of 25.000 tonnetonnes. The key pests affecting strawberry fruit are fungi (Rhizoctonia solani, Colletotrichum acutatum, Macrophomina phaseolina, V

spp.), nematodes (Meloidogyne hapla), and weeds (Cyperus rotundus, purple nutsedge). The reduction for Sharon is based on incre

followed by MS which has been shown to be effective. Telone EC has a smaller buffer than 1,3-D/Pic shank applied, i.e. 100 m comp

registration has been suspended. MBTOC has adjusted the nomination to the Ghaza Strip to conform with its standard presumption films in sandy loam soils. MBTOC urges the Party to (1) complete as soon as possible its reconsideration of buffers for MB alternativand (2) recommit resources to develop less costly soil-less cultures in suspended pot technology, which had been diverted in the paspursue the timely testing and registration of MI. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. Regarding Sharon, the CUN prov

revenue of a range of alternatives to MB, seemingly showing that all alternatives result in higher profit margins. The per kg price of Malternatives. Regarding Gaza, CUN argues that there are no alternatives to MB, which will mean that the crop can no longer be grown genuine case of economic disruption.” The argument appears to be based on the political realities of the area.

Israel Strawberry 

runners (Sharon and Ghaza) 

None None 0.000 31.900 28.075 

15.825 

(Sharon) 

12.25 

(Ghaza) 

- 13.570 

(Sharon) 

17.50 

(Ghaza) 

13

(Sha

(Gh

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 13.570t for Sharon and a reduced CUE of 8.75 t for Ghaza for this use in 2010. The 

runner production are fungi (Rhizoctonia solani, Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium and Phytophthora spp., Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, Macronematodes and purple nutsedge. The Party stated that MB 98:2 at a rate of 500 kg/ha (50 g/m2) with standard polyethylene films and 

films are necessary to meet certification standards in Ghaza and Sharon respectively. The requested amount for the Ghaza region hastandard presumption of 250 kg/ha for MB use in sandy loam soils. The Party stated that 1,3-D + PIC mixture has been the leading athis alternative is limited by the required 250 m buffer which significantly limits its use in the Sharon strawberry nursery growing area wgas application method is used in the Ghaza Strip growing area because the plots are small, adjacent to houses and there are no injein the area. MBTOC urges the Party to continue trials with alternatives that meet the pathogen tolerance required to meet the certificabased on barrier films being available.

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. No economic data or analysis pro
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Israel Strawberry 

runners and Fruit (Ghaza totals only) 

 28.075 - 67.500 3

MBTOC comments 2009: Comments are included in text boxes above as the Party consolidated the Israel and Ghaza nominations. 

with the availability of barrier films to Ghaza so that MB dosages can be reduced. The reduction is based on barrier films being availa

Israel Sweet 

Potatoes 

None None None 111.500 95.000 - 20.000 20

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 20.000 tonnes for this use in 2010. The Party states that they expect registration of that adoption of these alternatives was the basis for the reduction from 95 tonnes granted for use in 2009 for production of sweet potatrials indicate that Telone II + Adochem super at 400 l/ha appears to be an excellent alternative for MB once registration has been obCUN are consistent with MBTOC’s standard presumptions and the use of barrier films. Trials conducted in the USA with Pic as an albetter yields and returns to growers than MB. Solarization also significantly increased yields and with more effective herbicides may a(Stoddard, 2008) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that semi-commercia

area of 100 ha in 2005 lead to unsatisfactory results and economic losses. CUN also provides data showing that Telon 200+MS 400 

net revenue compared to MB. The source of the data is not provided.
270 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 51.450 34.300 30.690 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 27.620 tonnes for this use in 2011. The recommended quanti

from the recommended amount at the 20th MOP approved amount based on uptake of available alternatives, e.g. steam, soil less cuseeds,1,3-D and Pic and cultural practices such as rotation, root isolation and sanitation. Japan had made public an action plan to couse in 2013 and submitted a revised national management strategy to the Ozone Secretariat in April 2008. MBTOC acknowledges thusing a variety of alternatives in 2013. The nomination is based on the need to control particular viruses of cucumber, since 2005. Gloconsidered as soil borne pathogens but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monincluding cultural practices e.g. sanitation, rotation with a non-host, removal and destruction of crop debris, cleaning and sanitation of surrounded area, and pathogen free seeds has proven very effective in similar situations around the world. The Party has indicated thhosts such as tomatoes and strawberries is an effective way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). As a transition stratincrease adoption of LPBF which allow for reducing MB doses by up to 50%. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used fobeen in place for many years. However, in many countries cucumber production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse condwidely used technique for eliminating a wide array of soil borne plant pathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etcproduction and are widely used in around the world. (Leoni & Ledda, 2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & OzkanParty is encouraged to consider substrate production, which implemented correctly can produce higher yields than MB (MBTOC, 200Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soilless culture as a feasible option (Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakumnotes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical need for a high degree of sanitation and for the use of pathogenumbers of growers can be trained to use substrates systems in a short period of time as experienced in many MLF projects (UNEP/that the Aichi Agricultural Research Centre (2005) identified the effectiveness of KGMMV control by methyl iodide in pot tests. MBTO

continue to pursue the registration of methyl iodide for soil uses (methyl iodide was registered for imported timber in Japan in 2004, u21407). 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that certain alternativ

and economic feasibility. These include inoculation of attenuated virus as vaccine and the bag cultivation system.

Japan Ginger (Field) 119.400 119.400 109.701 84.075 63.056 53.400 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 47.450 tonnes for this use in 2011. MBTOC recognizes that the Party will phase-ou

that various regions will reduce their dosage rate as low as 16-20 g/m2 under barrier films which are within or lower than MBTOC’s sta

MBTOC recommends that all growing regions aim to reduce their rates to this level by 2011. The nomination is for control of Pythium ultimum, Pythium zingiberium) in open field cultivated ginger fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the 

adopting some alternatives and the time required to introduce alternatives and new disease management strategies. The CUN states 

Pythium efficiently but application rates and methods need to be investigated in more detail. The use of fungicides specific to Oomycebeen tested but data as to efficacy is not provided. This current nomination provides promise that alternative treatments to MB are no

production systems for ginger.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN shows that hot water treatmbecause of high initial and running cost, but provides no further details (i.e. data or sources). CUN also provides detailed data on the (Dazomet, Metalaxyl) compared to MB, where both result in negative net revenue (in the case of Dazomet because of lower yields, abecause gross revenue is zero).

Japan Ginger 

(protected) 

22.900 22.900 14.471 11.100 8.325 8.300 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced rate of 7.036 tonnes for this use in 2011. Currently three of five growing r

diseases using a rate of 20-21 g /m2 under impermeable film. MBTOC recommends that the other two regions adopt a rate of 25 g/m2 

would reduce the nomination to 7.036 tonnes. The nomination is for control of Pythium spp. (Pythium ultimum var. ultimum, Pythium z

fields using MB (98:2) applied from small cans. MBTOC recognized the difficulties that growers have in adopting some alternatives analternatives and new disease management strategies. The CUN states that Cyazofamid controls Pythium efficiently, but application rainvestigated in more detail. The use of fungicides specific to Oomycetes, such as phosphonates has been tested but data as to efficaemission technologies, such as low permeability barrier films, are now being used and should allow for much reduced dosage rates (e

This current nomination has reduced the quantity by 15.2% from the 2010 application, but it is envisioned that alternative treatments t

as several are pending registration for Japanese production systems for ginger. MBTOC suggests consideration be given to phosphoin Israel and shown to control Pythium and other Phycomycete induced diseases. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that Pic might cause 

cutting short the harvest of the previous crop or a delay in planting, resulting in economic loss. CUN also shows that hot water treatmbecause of high initial and running cost, but provides no further details (i.e. data or sources). CUN also provides detailed data on the (dazomet, Metalaxyl) compared to MB, where both result in negative net revenue (in the case of dazomet because of lower yields, anbecause gross revenue is zero).
272 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 136.650 91.100 81.720 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 73.548 tonnes for this use in 2011. The recommended quantifrom the 20th MOP approved amount based on uptake of available alternatives, e.g. steam, soil less culture, grafting, pathogen free s

practices such as rotation, root isolation and sanitation. Japan had made public of action plan of complete phase out of MB for critica2013 and submitted revised national management strategy to the Ozone Secretariat in April 2008. MBTOC acknowledges that the Pavariety of alternatives in 2013. The nomination is based on the need to control a particular virus of melons. Globally, this virus is not cpathogen but can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated prohas been proven to be effective in many other countries. The Party has indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomateffective way to reduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF which allow 50%. MBTOC recognises the unique farming system used for melons in Japan which has been in place for many years. However, in production has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminatinpathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widely used in arou

2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrate production, when implemented yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soil les(Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trained to use substrates systems in a shormany MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). Resistant root stocks are now available in Japan. However, according to the party, the root pathogen races. High yielding varieties resistant to the virus are available. Steam has also been found to control the virus, particularly 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that certain alternativ

and economic feasibility. These include inoculation of attenuated virus as vaccine and the bag cultivation system. CUN also shows, bChiba Prefecture that a resistant cultivar produces only 30.8% in net revenue compared with the conventional cultivar with MB. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Japan Pepper 

(green & hot) 

187.200 200.700 156.700 121.725 81.149 72.990 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 65.691 tonnes for this use in 2011, which represents a 10% reamount in 2010. The Party nominated an amount which represented 6.49% reduction from the amount nominated for 2010. Accordindue to the introduction and deployment of alternative technology, more distribution of low permeable barrier film with the dose rate refrequency of MB application to every two years. In comparison to the previous nomination, one region did not apply for 2011, resultinprovided a comprehensive National Action Plan detailing step wise phase out by 2013 using a range of alternatives. MBTOC acknowAction Plan to phase out MB by 2013. They also provided details of an additional strategy which involves immunisation with avirulent culture and resistant varieties which the Party believes will be widely accepted in the future. According to the Party, the development progressing well for the control of some viral strains. The Party reported also that soil less culture (bag cultivation, Kaneko 2006) usinfree soil from mountain, paddy field, peat moss, coconuts shell and timber bark) are being used. Also, resistant varieties (Bagu 1 gou available to some PMMoV strains, plant vaccination by attenuated virus (Kanda, 2008), grafting on resistant root stocks (Anou 4 gou alternatives. Others such as biological control, wrapping the underground part of seedling with easily decomposing paper and soil amdevelopment. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that certain alternativ

and economic feasibility. These include inoculation of attenuated virus as vaccine and the bag cultivation system.

Japan Watermelon 129.000 98.900 94.200 32.475 21.650 14.500 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 13.050 tonnes for this use in 2011. The recommended quantitfrom approved amount at the 20th MOP based on uptake of available alternatives, e.g. steam, soil less culture, grafting, pathogen frecultural practices such as rotation, root isolation and sanitation. Japan had made public an action plan to complete phase out of MB fsubmitted a revised national management strategy to the Ozone Secretariat in April 2008. MBTOC acknowledges that the Party will palternatives in 2013. The nomination is based on the need to control a particular virus of watermelons. Globally, this virus is not consibut can survive in crop debris for several years. The problem mainly arises from continuous monoculture. An integrated program incluproven to be effective in many other countries. The Party has indicated that rotation to non-susceptible hosts such as tomatoes and sreduce virus incidence (Matsuo and Suga, 1993). MBTOC urges the Party to increase adoption of LPBF which allow for reducing MB recognises the unique farming system used for watermelons in Japan which has been in place for many years. However, in many couproduction has already shifted to substrates in greenhouse conditions and has become the most widely used technique for eliminatinpathogens. Inexpensive and simple systems (buckets, bags, etc.) are available for this kind of production and are widely used in arou2004; Budai, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002; Akkaya & Ozkan, 2004; Engindeniz, 2004). Substrate production, when implemented yields than MB (MBTOC, 2002, 2006; Batchelor 2000, 2002; Savvas and Passam 2002). Studies conducted in Japan support soil les(Fukuda and Anami 2002, Sakuma and Suzuki 1995). MBTOC notes however that even when growing in substrates there is a critical sanitation and for the use of pathogen free transplants. Large numbers of growers can be trained to use substrates systems in a shormany MLF projects (UNEP/TEAP, 2004). Resistant root stocks are now available in Japan. However, according to the Party, the root pathogen races. High yielding varieties resistant to CGMMV are also available. Steam has also been found to control the virus, partic
274 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that certain alternativand economic feasibility. These include inoculation of attenuated virus as vaccine and the bag cultivation system.

United States 

Cucurbits 1,187.800 747.839 592.891 486.757 407.091 302.974 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 195.698 tonnes for this use in 2011. The reduction is based odosage rates from 150-175kg/ha to 125-150 kg/ha for MB/Pic mixtures with barrier films, which are the highest use rates considered crops. From the recommended amount, 13.095 t are for Georgia squash, 10.087 t for Georgia cucumber; 39.598 t for Georgia melonregion, and 4.969 t for Maryland and Delaware. MBTOC acknowledges the reduction made by the Party for transition to a 3 way comby Pic alone, followed by metham-sodium, that shows good results against key cucurbit pests in spring season fumigation. MBTOC nfor use in these crops, but the Party stated cucurbits could likely be added to the label during 2009 (Chism, pers. com. 2009). If this hconsiderable impact on future nominations. MBTOC is aware of progress reported on several recent studies showing halosulfuron wilpurple nutsedge and a number of other weeds common in vegetable production, alone or combined with other herbicides (Macrae et 

Brandenberger et al., 2005) on cucurbits and other related crops (Norsworthy, et al, 2007; Bangarwa, et al., 2008). Also glyphosate a

managing nutsedge between spring and autumn crops (Webster et al. 2008). The Party showed references which supported use of aLDPF (Culpepper, 2006). Other studies on possible effective alternatives are available (Ristaino and Johnson, 1999, Babadost and IsDriver and Lows 2003). A combination of 1,3-D or metham sodium with Pic + herbicides (Trifluralin, napropamide, halosulfuron, s-mebest alternative strategy in Florida for nutsedge control in several crops. MBTOC stresses the need of considering also non chemicapest management strategy. Hausbeck, Lamour and others (2004) have reported many efficient management strategies to control Phycrop rotation with non susceptible hosts (carrots, beans, onions, asparagus, soybeans, alfalfa), cultural control (water management, pprotective mulch, raised beds etc.) and the use of registered fungicides (Mefonoxan, Dimethomorph, Zoxamide + Mancozeb, Copper MBTOC notes the use of grafting and resistant varieties are considered as alternatives for long lasting crops in many Mediterranean cYellow nutsedge emergence in transplanted cantaloupe was suppressed by the combined effects of thin-film mulches and competitivusing cantaloupe transplants (Johnson & Mullinix, 2007). Incorporating Brassica spp. residue to reduce populations of soilborne fungi with interesting results (Njoroge, 2008)] 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: According to the CUN, where nutsedges are severe, metham-sodium used alone is techni

due to planting delays, yield losses and inconsistent efficacy, while 1,3 D + Pic is economically infeasible in some areas due to a 21 dlosses. Economic data to support these arguments as well as the CUN generally are provided for all areas and all alternatives. CUN spercent in Maryland and Delaware, 29 percent in the Southeastern states and 50% in Georgia. CUN notes these regions may experiemissed market windows. The UGA-3-WAY research conducted at the University of Georgia is feasible and the CUN was adjusted to states in areas that do not face Karst geology issues as a replacement of a MB+ Pic spring time application. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

United States 

Eggplant (field) 

76.721 82.167 85.363 66.018 48.691 32.820 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 19.725 tonnes for this use in 2011. The reduction is based 

dosage rates from 150-175kg/ha to 125-150 kg/ha for MB/Pic mixtures with barrier films, which are the highest use rates considerecrop. The Party has made a 35% reduction in MB use from the amount approved by the Party’s for 2010. Of this amount, 8.745 t afor Florida. The Party did not recommend a CUN for Michigan for 2011. US nomination is only for those areas where the alternativevaluation and pest pressure (nutsedge, nematodes and P. capsici) is high. The Party is projecting rates of 150 kg/ha for pathogenMBTOC accepted rates nominated by the Party for use with barrier films. The Party states that the treatment, known as the “UGA 3successive soil fumigations, beginning with 1,3-D + Pic application, followed by a Pic application, followed by a metham-sodium or (Culpepper, 2007a) is an alternative for MB in spring crops. For summer and fall crops, this system needs further development for high nutsedge pressure. In addition, metham sodium and metham potassium in the fall require longer waiting periods for planting tmissed market windows. A further constraint to adoption of the UGA-3 WAY is that 1,3-D is restricted in areas of Karst topography vulnerable to leaching from 1,3-D. The Party states that trials with dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) plus Pic are promising, but this combcontrol certain grasses (MacRae and Culpepper, 2008). Trials will continue with this alternative. An application to register DMDS iMI is not registered for eggplant. The US nomination is only for those areas where the alternatives are still under extensive evaluatnematodes and P. capsici) is high.. MBTOC accepted rates nominated by the Party for use with barrier films (1164-165 Kg/). MBTOsubstantial reductions for uptake of other alternatives. The Party states that a 50:50 formulation (MB/Pic) is widely used in Florida babout the formulation used in Georgia. MBTOC considers that further reductions in MB amount may be possible with changes to focombination with barrier films commercially feasible. According to the Party, non chemical alternatives such as grafting, soilless culMBTOC considers that the Party should develop these alternatives which are widely used in many countries and regions with similaIt is important to note that MB is not used in any other non A5 country on eggplant.

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination is partly based on economic arguments. CUN notes that the treatment kntested, as is another potential alternative, Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), with promising results. However, further testing of both is requir(and provisional) budgets for Georgia and Florida that show that the UGA-3-WAY Spring application may yield equal (Florida) or highthan MB but that the Fall application results in negative net farm income in both areas. 
276 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

United States 

Forestry nursery 

192.515 157.694 122.032 131.208 122.060 117.826 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 93.547 tonnes for this nomination in 2011 which includes 53.7

3.978 t for International Paper, 11.162 t for Weyerhaeuser (SE), 12.304 t for Weyerhaeuser (NW), 8.467 t for NE Forest & Conservati

Michigan Seedling Assoc. The nominated amount has been adjusted to 260 kg/ha (26 g/m2) for nutsedge control and 200 kg/ha (20 g

the standard presumption for dosage rate of MB/Pic formulation under HDPE. A 10% reduction has been made to the nominated amoalternatives, particularly MI. Key pests are nutsedge, nematodes and fungi; propagative material requires a very high level of pathogewidespread distribution from the nursery to the production fields. The CUN is for nurseries with moderate or high pest pressure wherNutsedge has no effect on certification, but the Party states that it does affect yield by 3-5%. MBTOC requests that further nominationloss caused by nutsedge, nematodes or fungal pathogens over the number of seasons following fumigation with MB and alternatives economic comparisons to MB treatment. For the Northeast Forest and Conservation Nursery, only 40% is for nutsedge control and 60adjusted to conform to standard presumptions of 20 g/m2. For Michigan Seedlings only 50% is for nutsedge control, so 50% of the no

g/m2. The nomination is for certified forest seedlings produced in 6 forest nursery regions. The CUN is based on economic infeasibilit

lack of effective alternatives for control of nutsedge and a range of fungal pathogens and nematodes. The key alternatives are MI wh1,3-D/Pic, 1,3-D /Pic/metham sodium and metham sodium + Pic. The Party acknowledged that Pic and metham when used in conjunmay provide an effective technical alternative and avoid crop injury. Enebak et al. (2007) found that with LPBF, use rates of MB can states that gluing of LPBF that is necessary for broadacre fumigation of nursery stock is not commercially available, but progress has LPBF will be adopted when the effective gluing technologies are locally, commercially available, however, MBTOC expects that future use. MBTOC observed a demonstration of an effective heat welding technique used with barrier films that was initially described for utrials in Israel (Grinstein and Hetzroni, 1991; Grinstein, 1992). MBTOC considers that glyphosate can be used as a pre-treatment to rHowever, this herbicide has been shown to cause phytotoxicity under nursery conditions. MBTOC acknowledges the initiation of large this sector by the Party now with promising results (Quicke, 2008; Weiland, 2008). A report from this trial on the first year of the 5 yeacounts similar to MB were achieved by several other treatments, but no indication of pathogen or weed pressure was given (Quicke eproduction of these crops is reported as economical for small niche markets; however, MBTOC is aware that International Company, CUN, produces over 40 million tree seedlings per year in substrates in their Brazil operation. Frequency of fumigation is once in two tRotation and cover crops are not fumigated. Research is on-going to reduce rates from 98:2 MB/Pic commonly used where nutsedge reduced rates of 67:33 MB/Pic. This transition has already been made in 70 % of the forest nurseries in the south where nutsedge po
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination is partly based on economic arguments. CUN shows that MI provides the fumigation and hand weeding costs increase. This results in a decline in net operating revenue for the Southern Forest Nursery ManaArborgen of 10%, for Weyerhauser of 18%, for Northeastern Forest and Conservation of 14%, and for Michigan Seedling Association these results do not show other possible impacts due to a) a potential loss in efficacy if current studies overestimate yields using MI; bforest in terms of lower pest pressure (e.g. faster growth, less use of pesticides) when MB is used; c) the fact that MI will have to be aas meeting phytosanitary requirements for nursery shipments; d) the fact that fumigation contractors and nurseries do not currently haMI; and e) lack of clarity as to whether the MI label (MIDAS) allows its use for production of deciduous tree seedlings, which are geneseedlings and have greater pest management requirements.

United States 

Nurseries stock (fruit, nut, flower) 

45.800 64.528 28.275 51.102 25.326 17.363 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a total of 7.955 tonnes for this use in 2010. This comprises 0.955 tonnes for roses, trees. This nomination is for propagation materials that need to be certified as free of pests and diseases, even if certification is volunnomination conform to MBTOC’s standard presumptions. MBTOC recognises that propagative material requires a very high level of control in order to avoid their wide spread distribution. MBTOC acknowledges the Party’s adoption of MB:Pic formulations of 67:33 ancountries. MBTOC acknowledges the federal registration of MI for use in nurseries, but also recognizes that it is not yet registered in 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination is not based on economic arguments. CUN concludes that 1,3-D+Pic is a

alternative to MB in California Rose production where Telone® restrictions do not apply. A similar conclusion is reached with regard tnut nursery trees; however, township restrictions and certification restrictions hinder growers from using Telone® and render it techni

United States 

Orchard replant 

706.176 527.600 405.400 393.720 292.756 215.800 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 183.232 tonnes for this use in 2011. A 10% reduction has bee

amounts to account for uptake of alternatives proven to be effective (Browne et al, 2007; 2008; McKenry, 2006). The CUN is for orcha

unknown etiology; heavy soils or soils which cannot be treated to a sufficient depth to effectively use the reduced rates of 1,3-D now aconstraints (maximum labeled rate) prevent the use of 1,3-D at the rates needed for effective kill of old roots and the associated pathoheavier (fine-textured) soils. Three alternatives,1,3-D alone and 1,3-D combined with Pic or metham sodium, are available technical afor treatment in light soils. Although a two year fallow was found to be effective under Mediterranean conditions by Bello, et al., 2004

that a four year fallow did not sufficiently eliminate the causative nematodes. Recent promising results with a one year fallow combinehave been reported by McKenry (2006). The Party confirms that MB/Pic 67:33 formulation is used for California stone fruit, raisin grapwell for almond and walnut at a dose rate of 20g/m2. Commercial adoption of 67:33 formulation and others containing lower amounts 

predominantly for orchard replant treatment in other countries before switching to alternatives. The recommended amount is based o

standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) for control of pests and pathogens without the use of LPBF. MBTOC recognizes that reg

of LPBF barrier films with MB in California but urges the Party to consider continued evaluation of their use to improve the performanc
278 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The CUN states that the use of partial budgeting does not depict the real cost of orchard the non-bearing years of the orchard. Instead, a cost benefit analysis with a 7% discount rate is used that takes these factors into accWalnut orchard: The CUN refers back to the partial budget and mentions that MB results in about $530 more per hectare than a h

However the NPV and IRR (close to 14%) of both alternatives are similar. Almonds: CUN states that the results of walnuts would also apply to almonds grown on heavier soils. Tree mortality has been e

almonds are replanted, with a 25- 40% yield loss with one year fallow and no fumigant treatment and a reduction of 24-35% compaargues that the use of MB adds value of $63.3 million annually to California nut production California Stone Fruit: CUN states that differences in net operating revenue for even small changes in yield can be substantial. This a

of MB alone are approximately $125/hectare. A decrease of 12% in net operating revenue in the partial budget results, but both aalthough MB provides additional benefits. California Grape: In the case of California grapes MB shows no benefit over 1,3-D once a vineyard is in production. However in cases 

because of township caps MB results in an additional $270/perhectare compared to metham sodium and an additional cost of $400 cHowever the net present value using MB and 1,3 D results in negative figures which questions the viability of investing in grapes. The contribute about $7.2 million annually to the California economy in area where 1,3D cannot be used.

United States 

Ornamentals 154.000 148.483 137.835 138.538 107.136 84.617 - - MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 64.307 tonnes for this use in 2011. This includes 52.167 t for C

MBTOC acknowledges the substantial reduction in Florida. MBTOC does not recommend the requested usage for New York as alter

this use in Anemone coronaria cut flowers i.e. steam and substrates under protected cultivation (Fennimore et al., 2008; Rea et al., 2

large number of species, mostly grown in the field. In Florida, the main species using MB are gladioli, lilies and snapdragon. Additionainclude calla lily, delphinium, dianthus, eustoma, freesia, helianthus, hypericum, iris, larkspur, liatris, matthiola, and ranunculus. MB i(e.g., Fusarium spp., Pythium spp., Phytophthora spp., and Rhizoctonia spp.), plant parasitic nematodes (e.g., root knot, root lesion, s

Cyperus spp. Portulacca, Ambrosia and others), and previous crop propagules. The Party has adjusted dosage rates for all regions to 

MBTOC’s standard presumptions. MBTOC considers alternatives available for some flower types in California, for example 1,3-D/Piccombinations (Klose et al., 2007, Klose, 2008 ) and has reduced the nomination by 10% for phase in of these alternatives. In Florida, alternatives are available, for example 1,3-D/Pic and solarization sometimes combined with chemicals (McSorley et al, 2006 ab; McS
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. A major change in this CUN (registered in 2008), but not in California and New York. Its economic impacts as an alternative to MB are relatively small. The partiaa 4% loss as a percentage of net operating revenue. However CUN mentions that loss figures may not be completely accurate sowned (i.e. subsidized seedling prices and production cost). In addition few long-term trials have been implemented. With regards to substrates some crops (e.g. roses) experience yield gains however for most crops an increase in yield is not enough production. A partial budget was also conducted for California Lily and Ranunculus using 1,3D+pic, Dazomet and Metham Sodium wipercentage of net operating revenue) compared to MB ranging from 194-243%. For New York anemones partial budgeting considereand 20% yield losses due to the lack of research resulting in the absence of yield loss estimates. Losses (as a percentage of net ope

9.1 to 30%. CUN also mention that some growers have attempted using steam but switched back due to high costs and applications 

United States 

Peppers (field) 

1,094.782 1,243.542 1,106.753 756.339 548.984 463.282 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 206.234 tonnes for this use in 2011. The reduction is based on 

dosage rates from 150-175kg/ha (15 to 17 g/m2) to 125-150 kg/ha (12.5 to15 g/m2) for MB/Pic mixtures with barrier films, which are th

necessary by MBTOC for this crop. The Party has made a 53.4% reduction in MB use from the amount approved by the Party’s for 2substantial reduction by the Party for uptake of alternatives. Of this amount, 32.926 t is for Georgia, 164.158 t is for Florida and 9.150 did not submit a CUN for Michigan for 2011. The Party is projecting rates of 150 kg/ha (15 g/m2) for pathogens and 170 kg/ha g/m2) fo

party states that the treatment, known as the “UGA 3-WAY”, consisting of three successive soil fumigations, beginning with 1,3-D + Papplication, followed by a metham-sodium or metham-potassium application (Culpepper, 2007a) is an alternative for MB in spring crothis system needs further development for use in areas with moderate to high nutsedge pressure. In addition, 1,3-D is restricted in arground water is vulnerable to leaching from 1,3-D. In addition, metham sodium and metham potassium 1,3-D in the fall require longeMB. Delays could result in missed market windows. The time limitations on the registration of Midas, a mixture of MI and Pic have beshown good efficacy against key pepper pests, including nutsedge, in a number of trials with peppers and related vegetables such as state-level approval in 47 US states (California, Washington, and New York are the exceptions at this time). However, the Party statenecessary before Midas achieves a full adoption. Constraints: (1) the cost of MI formulations which is higher than MB, (2) growers aevaluate MI use in the various local production conditions covered by this nominations, and (3) growers and applicators will need to mmodifications to adapt to the lower flow rates typical with less expensive MI application rates and to avoid the corrosion of some meta2005, Noling et al., 2006).The Party states that trials with dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) plus Pic are promising, but does not effectively c

continue with this alternative. An application to register DMDS is under consideration at US EPA. MBTOC considers that further redwith changes to formulations of 50:50 MB/Pic or less (e.g. to 30:70) used in combination with barrier films, however the reduction in thbased on use of these formulations.According to the Party, non chemical alternatives such as grafting soilless culture, are not commeconsiders that the Party should develop these alternatives which are widely used in many countries and regions with similar climate athat MB is not used in other country on pepper.
280 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was partly based on economic arguments. CUN describes the economic inegligible; as a result it appears to be technically feasible in all parts of the US where it has been registered. However, growers requiramount of MB nominated has been adjusted downward. In Georgia, Florida, and the Southeastern U.S., the Georgia 3-Way on spring technically (and thus economically) feasible alternatives, although some limitations exist. The loss of gross revenue using the Georgia and the Southeastern U.S., while gains in gross revenue are expected in Georgia. Although no gains in gross revenue are expected wrevenue are negligible. One drawback to the Georgia 3-Way is that yield losses are expected in fall plantings, with studies in Georgialoss. These losses are not expected when MI is used. The Georgia 3-Way also cannot be used on peppers that are grown in karst sohowever, MI can. 

United States 

Strawberry (field) 

2,052.846 1,730.828 1,476.019 1,349.575 1,269.321 1007.477 - 

MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 812.709 tonnes for this use in 2011. The reduction is based on adjustment for the standa

175kg/ha to 125-150 kg/ha for MB/Pic mixtures with barrier films in the Eastern States, which are the highest use rates considered neand greater uptake of alternatives (Pic EC, 1,3-D/Pic) and mixtures of MBPic with lower rates of MB (MB/Pic 50:50 or less) in Californare 751.596 tonnes for California, 20.009 tonnes for Eastern USA and 41.104 tonnes for Florida. For California, the Party nominated However the volume that approved by the Party’s for 2010 was 856.598 t on 4,370 ha and hence there is an increase in the area and 

nomination is based on township caps limiting further adoption of 1,3-D and county regulations affecting use of high rates of Pic in sobasis. The nomination states that two emerging disease problems in California and the persistence of yellow nutsedge are the main ralternatives is unlikely. In California the nomination was reduced to account for uptake of alternatives where township caps have not been exceeded and to aformulations of MB/Pic 50:50. PUR use data for 2007 show that 98:2 and 67:33 formulations are still being used, and even though thCalifornia strawberry area, MBTOC considers that transition to MB/Pic 50:50 is still possible (2.5% adjustment). The 2007 use rates 

50:50 mixtures are 170 kg MB/ha (i.e. 170 kg Pic/ha) compared to 57:43 mixtures at 209 kg MB/ha (i.e. 158 kg Pic/ha) respectively. Brestrictions on use of Pic and should enable 50:50 formulations to be used more widely. The most recent PUR data (2003-2007) show

1,3-D, Pic and metham have been widely adopted in some counties, but not others, (i.e. good adoption in Ventura but little adoption In California, 1,3-D use increased from 2,001 ha (2003) to 4,752 ha (2007) and metham sodium increased from 384 ha (2001) to 745 

that in Ventura county alone the adoption rate of MB alternatives has been about 800 ha per year, across the years between 2003 anCruz, the historical proportional use of MB in this expanding area has been approximately 75% of the production area and this shows alternatives. Data on 2009 township caps have shown that there is room for further uptake of alternatives based on 1,3-D and other aEC, Metham and Pic) and MBTOC has calculated a 10% reduction for uptake of alternatives. In the areas affected by township caps, 

contain 1,3-D (such as Pic, Pic EC, Pic + metham, Pic + dazomet, often with LPBF) provided yields that are statistically comparable w2004, 2005, 2006; Nelson et al., 2001ab; Shem-Tov et al., 2005, 2006ab). Pic EC provided an average 99% yield compared to MB, w

TEAP, 2006). Further clarification of the restrictions on the use of alternatives is required in future nominations. VOC regulations may 

growers to use barrier films in California, and the Party is urged to to consider their implementation. These films can be used with alt
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

dosage rates required for effective pathogen and weed control. In California, weed management research showed that the herbicide to strawberry for control of common weed species in annual plasticulture strawberry production, thereby reducing time required for ha2008). In Eastern states, the Party reports a transition rate of 52%. MBTOC considers this transition appropriate progress, given that IM/Pic is technically feasible for the total nomination area, but note that the Party applies a dose rate above the standard presumptions (12.5

reports a transition rate of 53%. Given that technically and economically feasible alternatives are available, MBTOC commends this tadjustment based on uptake of alternatives, but did adjust dosage rates to conform to the standard presumptions. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that eastern growers 

experience a decline of 1-4% in gross revenue in the first year of use due to increased costs to retrofit application equipment (hoses, allow the use of IM. Southeastern and Florida strawberry growers that use IM are expected to experience no change in yield or qualitproducers, there is no change in impacts from previous year estimates as IM is under registration review but registration is not expecgross revenue for growers using the best alternative to MB is estimated to remain about 14%. 

United States 

Strawberry runners 

54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 7.944 4.690 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 4.69 tonnes for California, but does not recommend amounts for the south east. T

for California and 2.691 tonnes for SE. The key pests affecting strawberry runners are weeds (purple and yellow nutsedge), fungi (Rh

Phytophthora, Verticillium in California), nematodes (root-knot, sting in CA). The CUN is for MB use on 28 ha of 2172 ha, however 99

under QPS. MBTOC does not recommend use of MB for North Carolina and Tennesee, as IM/Pic formulations are registered and ar2006). These formulations have been shown to give similar pathogen control in soils and will meet requirements of certification (Kab

2007, 2008; MBAO). MBTOC also believes distribution of IM/Pic across 11 ha should be very rapid and training is possible within the adoption. For California, MBTOC recommends the nomination, but expects that future nominations will show reports of trials with key years in order to satisfy the criteria of Decision IX/6. The CUN states that MB at a dosage of 26.3 g/m2 in CA and 25.5 g/m2 in SE is r

standards for strawberry runners. The Party's request exceeds MBTOC's standard presumption of 200 kg/ha (20 g/m2) of MB which is 

production of 'high health' strawberry runners using LPBF and other emission control technologies (TEAP 2005); however, California’specify minimum amounts of MB that must be applied. Furthermore, California regulations prohibit the use of LPBF with MB. The Painclude 1,3-D + PIC followed by dazomet, PIC followed by dazomet and MI/Pic, but that these have not been sufficiently tested on a cencourages the Party to expedite the commercial scale testing of these alternatives as well as the registration of MI in CA and to conscertification regulations in CA.
282 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN states that IM is under regishowever registration is expected to be at least one year in the future. The loss to gross revenue for growers using 1,3-D + Pic followesodium at a rate of up to 250 lb ai./ha is estimated to be about 11%. California strawberry nursery growers are not expected to see an1,3-D + Pic plus metham sodium. Eastern growers that have access to MI are expected to experience a loss of 13% in gross revenue increased costs to retrofit application equipment (hoses, nozzles, flow meters) that will allow the use of MI. Southeastern Strawberry nexpected to experience no change in yield or quality.

United States 

Sweet Potatoes slips 

None 0.000 0.000 18.144 18.144 14.515 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 11.612 tonnes for this use in 2011. The nomination was base

The basis of the nomination is that township caps limit the use of 1,3-D and 1,3-D combinations, however MBTOC notes that fungal pand not nematodes. MBTOC considers MS and Pic should be considered. The industry sector is now carrying out extensive trials for indicate that Pic is providing transplants that give yields and returns above that of MB and new herbicides can control weeds. Varietienematodes are available. If Pic proves successful in the forthcoming trials, MBTOC considers it can be adopted as a suitable alternatsubstantial adoption by 2011. Telone, the alternative to MB, cannot be used in Dec-Jan and township caps are exceeded in Nov whicslips. MBTOC recognizes the importance of producing pest free seed stock. Test of reduced rates of Telone are being carried out as growers. Trials by Stoddard (2008) show Pic to be a good alternative and to provide better yields and returns to growers than MB. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was not based on economic arguments. CUN shows trial data that reflect 

the use of Pic, resulting in a gain in gross and net operating revenue of 7 and 22% respectively.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (1ExMOP and 16MOP 

CUE for 2006 (16MOP +2ExMOP+17MOP) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+ MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC for 2010 (addtl or new) 

United States 

Tomatoes (field) 

2,876.046 2,476.365 2,065.246 1,406.484 1,003.876 737.584 - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced amount of 292.751 tonnes for this use in 2011. The reduction is based odosage rates from 150-175kg/ha to 125-150 kg/ha for MB/Pic mixtures with barrier films, which are the highest use rates considered crop. The Party has made a 54% reduction in MB use from the amount approved by the Party’s for 2010. Of this amount, 19.411 t is Florida and 40.821 t is for the Southeast, 12.914 t is for Virginia and 0.365 t is for Maryland. The Party did not recommend a CUN for projecting rates of 150 kg/ha for pathogens and 175 kg/ha for nutsedge. The transition rate included in the nomination is based on an “UGA 3-WAY”, consisting of three successive soil fumigations, beginning with 1,3-D + Pic application, followed by a Pic application, fometham-potassium application as well as the increased use of MI (Culpepper, 2007a). The UGA 3-WAY has been shown to be effechas not yet been successful in other parts of the Southern US and needs further development. In addition, 1,3-D is restricted in areas ground water is vulnerable to leaching from 1,3-D. The time limitations on the registration of Midas, a mixture of MI and Pic have beeshown good efficacy against key pepper pests, including nutsedge, in a number of trials with peppers and related vegetables such as state-level approval in 47 US states (California, Washington, and New York are the exceptions at this time). However, the Party statenecessary before Midas achieves a full adoption. Constraints: (1) the cost of MI formulations which is higher than MB, (2) growers aevaluate MI use in the various local production conditions covered by this nominations, and (3) growers and applicators will need to mmodifications to adapt to the lower flow rates typical with less expensive MI application rates and to avoid the corrosion of some meta

2005, Noling et al. 2006).The Party states that trials with DMDS plus Pic are promising, but DMDS is not registered in the US. An ap

under consideration at USEPA (MacRae and Culpepper, 2008). According to the Party, non chemical alternatives such as grafting soeconomically feasible. MBTOC considers that the party should develop these alternatives which are widely used in many countries aand pest (Besri 2008). It is important to note that MB is not used in other country on tomato.

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: The nomination was partially based on economic arguments. CUN concludes that MI wou

alternative for use in Eastern and Florida US tomato production in areas exhibiting karst topographical features, but a transition period features are not present it appears that tomato growers can use a combination of three fumigants applied sequentially (1,3-D, Pic, anand achieve yields that are comparable to those produced by using MB for spring crops only. 
284 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

14.4 Interim CUN Report – Issues Specific to MBTOC Quarantine, Structures and 

Commodities 

MBTOC notes a continuing concern about the difficulty its Non(A) 5 members experience 

in obtaining funding to attend MBTOC meetings. It is not sustainable for Parties to 

continue to expect many MBTOC members to pay own their travel expenses to attend 

meetings during which they work on the requirements of Parties and the Montreal Protocol. 

The MBTOC QSC meeting was attended by 14 of 19 members for part or all of the 

meeting; in addition, two MBTOC economists attended for two days of the meeting. 

The Russian Federation has not previously submitted a Critical Use Nomination for methyl 

bromide use post phaseout. However, this year a nomination was made to use methyl 

bromide for control of a wide range of stored product uses and pests, in structures and 

commodities in trade. Initial review by MBTOC QSC indicated that almost all the pests 

concerned are on various quarantine pest lists, including that of the Russian Federation 

NPPO. At least part of the nomination would thus fall under the QPS exemption, and thus 

should not be included in a critical use nomination. The Ozone Secretariat and MBTOC are 

in correspondence with the Russian Federation to clarify this issue. A revised nomination, 

if made, may be considered at the next MBTOC meeting or intersessionally. 

Parties continue to make progress reducing MB use for many of the repeat critical use 

nominations. For example, use of methyl bromide in Canadian and US flour milling 

continues to decrease. Israel completed its transition to heat treatment this year for 

disinfestation of flour mills and did not submit a CUN for 2010. Use of MB for postharvest 

disinfestation of tree nuts in the US has also almost entirely transitioned to alternatives; 

only a small CUN for a small portion of the walnut harvest remains. 

In some cases, however, progress in adopting alternatives has stalled. For example, lack of 

regulatory approval to expand the use of technically effective alternatives, and/or concerns 

about the increased costs of using alternatives, has stalled adoption of alternatives for 

treatment of Canadian pasta facilities, US pet food facilities and US rice mills. 

There has been no adoption of alternatives for packaged rice in Australia. Australia reports 

this is because the exceptionally low harvest volumes have prevented conduct of 

appropriate proving trials and prevented investments in alternatives. The Australian 

applicant has, however, invested in expansion by purchasing rice processing facilities in the 

US. 

Logistical difficulties caused by short times between harvest and product delivery slow the 

adoption of alternatives for dried beans and some dried fruit in the US. 

Lack of effective and registered alternatives for US dry cured pork, fresh chestnuts in Japan 

and US cheese stores results in continuing CUNs for methyl bromide, although at lower 

levels than in previous years. An active research program is in place to investigate 

alternatives for these commodities. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 285

Continuing CUNs for methyl bromide have been made for some date varieties in Israel and 

the United States. In Israel, a successful heat treatment, developed for Medjool dates, is 

being tested to see if it can be expanded to other varieties. The use of methyl bromide for 

high moisture dates by some date-producing countries continues, in spite of their deep 

concern about this. This concern is expressed in Decision XV/12. 

Additionally, since some prominent retailers in date-importing countries have indicated 

they will not accept methyl bromide treated dates and other foods produced by A5 

countries, there is concern about trade losses. This year, UNIDO launched a project, with a 

MBTOC QSC member as lead scientist, to try to develop suitable alternatives, followed by 

a workshop to share information among interested Parties and experts, including MBTOC. 

An interim report on this project and workshop can be found in the Progress report. 

14.4.1 Standard Dosage Presumptions and Adjustments for standard dosage rates 

MBTOC assessed CUNs for appropriate MB dosage rates and deployment of MB emission/use 

reduction technologies, such as appropriate sealing techniques. 

Decision IX/6 requires that critical uses should be permitted only if ‘all technically and 

economically feasible steps have been taken to minimize the critical use and any associated 

emission of methyl bromide’. Decision Ex.II/1 also mentions emission minimization techniques, 

requesting Parties “...to ensure, wherever methyl bromide is authorized for critical-use exemptions, 

the use of emission minimization techniques that improve gastightness or the use equipment that 

captures, destroys and/or reuses the methyl bromide and other techniques that promote 

environmental protection, whenever technically and economically feasible.” 

With the beginning of the CUN process in 2005, MBTOC published its standard presumptions for 

dosage rates for fumigation of structures (20g m-3) and indicated that the European Plant Protection 

Organization’s (EPPO) published dosage rates for commodities should be considered standard best 

practice for fumigation world wide. The EPPO dosage rates for commodity treatment vary by 

commodity, sorption rate and environmental conditions. They can be found in annexes to the 

MBTOC 2006 Assessment Report (MBTOC, 2007). Where possible, the use of lower dosages, 

combined with longer exposure periods, can reduce MB use while maintaining efficacy. Since 

agreeing the standard presumptions in 2005, with very little delay, all postharvest and structural 

CUNs have adhered to those presumptions. 

14.4.2 Details of evaluations 

Parties have submitted nine CUNs for the use of MB in structures and commodities in 2009. This 

total does not include the Russian Federation CUN which is on hold as discussed below. The total 

MB volume nominated in 2009 for non-QPS post-harvest uses was 197.802 tonnes, not including 

the nomination for 135 tonnes from the Russian Federation. 

In this 2009 round, two nominations were for 2010 for a total MB amount of 6.30 tonnes and seven 

were for 2011 for a total MB amount of 191.502 tonnes. 

Of these nominations, MBTOC recommended 4.569 tonnes for 2010 and, for 2011, 182.686 tonnes. 

MBTOC did not recommend 1.731 tonnes for 2010 and 8.816 for 2011. MBTOC was able to assess 
286 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report

all nominations, although the CUN from the Russian Federation is still on hold pending further 

correspondence, 

Table 14-12 provides the MBTOC QSC interim recommendations for the CUNs submitted in 2009. 

SUMMARY 

 Total post harvest CUN amounts 

(metric tonnes) 

Total recommended 

amounts 

2010 6.30 (a) 4.569 

2011 191.502 182.686 

(a) Nomination for 135 tonnes by the Russian Federation not included
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Table 14-12: MBTOC QSC Interim Recommendations for the CUNs Submitted in 2009 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Australia Rice 6.150 6.150 9.205 9.200 7.820 6.650 - - MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 4.87 tonnes, a 14% reduction of the nominated amount for packed rice for Australia in 2011. Au

tonnes. In preparing this calculation MBTOC reviewed the actual MB use for packaged rice as reported in the Party’s accounting frameworks for 2the average of these three years as a baseline (6.085 tonnes), we then applied a 20% transition rate with the result of 4.87 tonnes. To date, Austraalternatives to methyl bromide for packaged rice. Other countries are achieving an average of 20% transition to alternatives per year. It is clear thacontrolled atmosphere treatments would provide the necessary pest efficacy for packaged rice and these alternatives are registered for this use in A(5) countries worldwide and many A(5) countries use methyl bromide alternatives for rice. 

As we have noted in previous years, MBTOC does not find Australia’s continued zero adoption of alternatives to be consistent with Decis

recommend the full 2011 nomination, MBTOC thought would be quite unlikely that there would be any adoption of alternatives, given the region’s warrangements and the drought described by the Party in this and previous CUNs. On page 5 of Party correspondence of March 31, the Party said fumigating packaged rice is a quality control step, not a disinfestation step per se in order to guarantee a supply of high quality rice that is insect frfumigate rice prior to processing nor are such facilities available to the applicant.” MBTOC finds that the continued use of MB as a contingency agof pests after milling, as opposed to using MB only in response to a known infestation, is an unacceptable use. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is partly based on economic arguments. CUN states that two potential technically and economically feasible alternatives, namely sulfuryhave been identified. Sulfuryl fluoride, which requires less significant process changes and investment to implement, was registered in 2007 and trJanuary 2009. If trials prove it to be technically and economically feasible, the applicant indicates they may not require methyl bromide beyond 20phosphine fumigation is considered to be the best solution, both technically and economically, even though it would require a considerable change and a substantial infrastructure investment. It is not clear to MBTOC on what basis the applicant argues that phosphine is ‘the best solution

CUN, in fact, relates the difficulties faced by the applicant in raising the capital for transition to phosphine. Economic data are presented to show with phosphine are expected to be 15.5 times as large as with methyl bromide, but this would not be the case if phosphine were to be usMB for packaged goods,.. CUN states further that the applicant has been unable to finance a transition to phosphine due to continued severe dro

growing area; hence it is unaffordable to them. MBTOC cannot substantiate this claim based on an analysis of the financial statements of o2008, the applicant purchased a majority share in a US rice processing company. When questioned by MBTOC about the conflicting clato invest in alternatives with this large investment in a facility, the applicant responded by pointing to the strategic nature of these inveturbulence in the global rice market.
288 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Canada Mills 47 (included 

mills and pasta) 

34.774 30.167 

(included mills only) 

28.650 26.913 22.878 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends the nominated 14.107 tonnes for the treatment of flour mills in 2011. The Party’s nomination for 2011 is 38% less than the athe Parties for 2010. The CUN includes 20 facilities, but the amount nominated only allows for one fumigation per year of 9 or 10 mills. Therefore tamount requires about 50% of the flour milling sector to transition to alternatives by 2011. 

This is accomplished through two means: first, in the past few years the Party has conducted numerous trials and demonstrations of alter

reported to MBTOC. These trials, while not all entirely successful for pest efficacy, have allowed the sector to better understand and improve efficaImprovements in IPM techniques, including investments in new equipment and facility dust control, have also contributed to the reduced need for m

The Party has indicated concern about the difficulty in obtaining successful pest efficacy with alternatives and points out that Canadian m

climate zones (defined as “considerable variation in ambient temperatures, including extended periods (4 to 5 months) of cold winter weather”). As 

that fumigations in winter months are essentially impractical. The CUN asserts that this heightens the importance of predictable and lasting (20 to control by chemical fumigation or heat treatment alternatives. 

The Party has submitted test results indicating that the main mill pests require a higher than originally first considered dosage rate of sulf

sufficient efficacy. MBTOC acknowledges this and has seen this reported by Bell et al, 1999 and Bell et al, 2003. Reichmuth and Klementz, 2008 dcombine treatments to overcome the difficulty to obtain pest efficacy with some pest species found in mills during SF fumigations. As noted in MBT

milling alternatives, best efficacy with SF is seen when mill temperature is maintained throughout the fumigation period at or above 27 ̊ C, in all pa2008). 

The second factor allowing the Party’s nominated transition to alternatives is that Canadian regulation now allows those companies which 

to share the MB domestic allocation so that only those mills most in need of MB will receive the allocation. As part of its domestic regulations allowallocation, Government of Canada has further approval and reporting requirements, pursuant to Canada’s Ozone-depleting Substances Regulatiowas the first full calendar year in which the amended ODSR 1998 were in effect. Therefore, the mills which might be fumigated with MB may chanbetween the mills within the mill sector already included in the CUN. 

The Party and MBTOC acknowledge the higher costs associated with alternative treatments. Additionally, MBTOC acknowledges that reg

fluroride in Canada is not yet complete and the lack of MRLs for fluorine residues arising from SF treatment makes the use of SF more difficult for 

Differences in regulation between Canada and the US, the only other Party with a CUN for flour milling, only partly explain the differences 

over time. As reported in TEAP 2008, MBTOC is examining sector structural differences to improve its understanding of the prospects for adoption 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

future. For example, in the US MBTOC has been told that 42% of mills also produce bakery or cereal mixes. On the other hand, the majority of the member companies are wheat milling establishments but the CUN also includes oat milling companies. Some of the mill locations participating in 

flour milling industry operate bakery mix capacity that is co-located with the primary milling activity. Approximately 25% of mill locations participatimix capacity on site. This difference may partly explain how Canada mills have been able to maintain a nearly similar transition rate to US mills evapproval for sulfuryl fluoride is different in the two different countries. 

MBTOC also notes the interconnection between Canadian CUNs for flour mills and pasta facilities. The CUN for flour mills includes four m

wheat into semolina used in the manufacture of pasta and one of these is both a durum mill and a pasta facility. Control of pests in the flour mill wireduction of pests coming into the pasta facility. MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based solely on economic arguments, although economic concerns are indicated. CUN argues that market penetration of the techalternatives is being hampered by: 

Insufficient evidence that SF can be effective under Canada’s typically cold weather conditions. Lack of full registration of SF Current market cost of heat treatment technology and services. Concerns by the milling industry that repeat fumigations using phosphine may have a cumulative effect of corroding conductive metals presen

equipment and controls CUN also states that, while the amount of sulfuryl fluoride required to fumigate for the exclusive presence of confused flour beetle is comparable in methyl bromide, the results of field trials already completed have demonstrated that 2 to 6 times as much SF is actually required to fumigate when present, which represents a significant increase in cost. CUE notes that the required use of alternatives within a short time period would add an esmanufacturing costs of wheat flour, semolina and other milled grain products. In the current economic climate this added cost cannot be passed oFurthermore, there are still no subsidies available to offset these increased costs. MBTOC notes that lack of government financial assistance consideration in assessments of economic feasibility.
290 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Canada Pasta (see 

Canada mills) 

10.457 6.757 6.067 4.74 - 4.740 3.529 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 3.529 tonnes, a 25.5% reduction of the nominated amount for pasta facilities in 2010. The Party nominated 4.740 tonnes foany adoption of alternatives over the amount granted by the Parties for 2009. The CUN includes three pasta facilities, each requesting one MB fumMBTOC’s reduced nomination allows for just two fumigations in this sector, thus necessitating one facility to transition to alternatives. 

The method for sharing the MB domestic allocation amongst companies included in the CUN in the same sector is allowed under Canadi

its domestic regulations allowing this transfer of allocation, Government of Canada has further approval and reporting requirements, pursuant to CSubstances Regulations (ODSR 1998). 2008 was the first full calendar year in which the amended ODSR 1998 were in effect. 

MBTOC’s recommendation allows for a consistent approach to that taken by the Party for flour milling. Furthermore MBTOC notes that th

US, (the reader is referred to MBTOC text box for US NPMA), which is the only other CUN for pasta, has declined significantly each successive yereduction in the nomination for 2011. 

MBTOC acknowledges that registration for sulfuryl fluroride in Canada is not yet complete and the lack of MRLs for fluorine residues aris

makes the use of SF more difficult for some pasta processing facilities. In Canada full registration of SF, including MRLs for fluorine residues in foofumigation of the facility, is expected in 2009. If that occurs, the Party indicates it will conduct another full site trial. 

In the meanwhile, the sector conducted one trial using sulfuryl fluoride in 2008, and two trials in parts of facilities in 2007. The result of the

MBTOC (CPMA, 2009). Red flour beetle was the test species and the Party has noted that this species, common in mills and food processing facimore difficult to kill than other species with SF. MBTOC acknowledges this and refers the reader to Canada flour mills text box for references. The three plants achieved 100% mortality for adults, but egg stage resulted in some survival with egg mortality ranging from 69-94%. Pest rebound occfumigation than in comparable MB fumigations. Again as noted in MBTOC’s review of flour milling alternatives improved efficacy with SF is seen wmaintained throughout the fumigation period at or above 27degrees C, in all parts of the mill (TEAP,2008). The cost of SF treatment was higher thtreatment. The CUN page 10 says they can not use heat because heat would damage finished goods. MBTOC believes there are methods of circumventing example, segregating finished goods from the treatment. CUN Page 10 also gives some heat cost estimates, but no supporting evidence is includenote that heat treatment is used in pasta facilities in other countries, for example, 13 pasta facilities in Italy use heat treatment to control pests. The about the potential of heat treatment to damage equipment and facilities, but the Party has not substantiated this concern with tests, engineering rfacilities operate at quite high temperatures resulting from the operation of equipment and just a small additional heat increase might be all that is 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

heat treatment. In addition, if pasta facilities had understanding of the location of pests and if that understanding indicated that pests were mostly lequipment, spot heat treatment with appropriate additional methods to prevent pest escape might also be used. The requirements for full site and reviewed in MBTOC’s flour mill review (TEAP, 2008). MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based on economic arguments. CUN argues that heat treatment remains a costly alternative, estimating that the cost to carry out the cost of doing a methyl bromide treatment. This increases to three or four times when the cost of monitoring (ensure comparable results) is inclsupplied and MBTOC requires substantiation of these cost estimates.Israel Dates 3.444 2.755 2.200 1.800 None 2.100 1.56 1.04 MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends a reduced nomination of 1.04 tonnes, about 60% of the nominated amount for dates in 2010. The Party nominated 1.56 tonbromide is only used for those date varieties for which heat treatment or other alternatives have not been shown to be effective. 

The basis for the reduction in the nomination was to decrease the dosage rate to 20g m-3 from 30g m-3 as specified in correspondence. M

the excessively high dosage rates reported in the CUN, page 17 which indicated a MB dosage rate of 300g per tonne of dates, however, the CUN dosage rate used is 20 g m-3, which is the dosage rate recommended by MBTOC as technically effective. Later correspondence indicated a dosag

The CUN gives a packing factor for non-Medjool dates as 400kg m-3; the correspondence indicates 300kg m-3 . At 20 g m-3, a reasonable 

product stack should use about 22 g for each 400kg (10% allowance for packing) or 55 g m-3. Based on the reported dosage rate and the packing 

surmise that the chambers used must have low load factors (lots of free space), which seems to be an inappropriately inefficient use of MB. MBTObased on its understanding of reasonable packing density and dosage rates. MBTOC also notes that in April 2009, VapormateTM, a formulation of ethyl formate and CO2, was registered for disinfestation of dried fruit in Israel

is an effective disinfestation method for dried fruit, and Israel is currently testing to measure its efficacy on dates. 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based on economic arguments. CUN argues that the economic feasibility of heat treatment is clear because of the experience witMedjool dates: it is critical in maintaining their quality. CUN states further that it is too early for economic feasibility for other (non-heat) alternatives stage, but that it is highly possible that this will reveal that one or more of these alternatives are economically feasible. 
292 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

Japan Chestnuts 7.100 6.800 6.500 6.300 5.800 5.400 - - MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends the Party’s nominated amount of 5.350 tonnes for 2011, which is a 1% reduction over the amounts granted by the Parties fodifferent possible alternatives (reported in its CUN of 2005, JPN13, 2005) and decided that methyl iodide was technically and economically feasiblawaiting registration for this purpose. 

In Japan, there are two levels for registration: 1) toxicological assessment of methyl iodide that has been completed; 2) worker safety issu

approval that still have to be completed by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW). The Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries MHLW to declare the need for a high priority for setting the corresponding MRLs. On March 6, 2009, the evaluation by MHLW was completed. Nowregistration is expected for 2009. If this occurs, MBTOC expects that the Party will not authorize the full nominated amount of MB for 2011. On theexpects a significant and quick phase-in of the newly registered alternative. 

In the instance that registration of MI for this purpose is not achieved, SF also works well to control pests of chestnuts, but Japan is conce

control of the eggs of the chestnut weevil Curculio sikkimensis (Soma et al, 2005; Kawakami, et al, 2003; Vinghes and Ducom, 2001). Japanese c

chestnuts as special gifts and so the consumers might keep product in their homes for a few weeks. Under these circumstances, the presence of lchestnuts following SF treatment would be unacceptable. 

Chestnut consumption in France and other countries is different in that the chestnuts are consumed directly after purchase. On the other 

just occurred in France and it is yet unclear if consumers in France may eventually have the same complaints due to surviving eggs and larvae. 

MBTOC asked about the use of hot water treatment, as used in some countries. But, the skin of hot-water-treated chestnuts becomes du

might think the product is not fresh. CO2 under high pressure (20 bar) is used in one location in Portugal for disinfestation of fresh chestnuts with e

chambers, that are also used for other products. In 2003, Japan tested the efficacy of this method. Despite the sufficient efficacy, the high investm

(several million € per chamber) - when they would be intended to be used only for this purpose – was considered to be far too costly. This work waof the high investment costs for this treatment. 

In Japan, disinfestations have to take place in numerous wide spread small farm holdings. So, there is a strong logistic argument against 

that gathers product from several small farms. In the light of the scientific work of the Party and the lack of any alternative other than methyl iodidereplacement of this difficult application seems to be quickly achievable when registration occurs. MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based on economic arguments. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

United States 

Commodities 89.166 87.719 78.983 58.921 45.623 19.242 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 1.965 tonnes methyl bromide for commodities in 2011. The Party nominated the following amount for the commodities listedwalnuts 1.17 tonnes; California Dried Plum Board 6.266 tonnes; beans 0.595 tonnes. The total nomination was 10.041 tonnes (USG has rounded recommendation includes 0.0 tonnes for dates; 1.17 tonnes for walnuts; 0.2 tonnes for California Dried Plum Board. Of the commodities included iBoard nomination, MBTOC did not recommend the use of MB for dried plums and raisins. Additionally, MBTOC recommends 0.595 tonnes for bea

The US nomination for dates was for the Deglet-Noor variety harvested in California. In recent years there has been a lack of understand

parameters such as date variety, conditions at harvest and particularly moisture content of the dates at time of fumigation, and how these parametpests and fungi in dates. Consequently, the US believed that its Deglet-Noor dates at harvest were similar to the Deglet-Noor dates harvested in NNorth African countries have indicated considerable concern to Parties that alternatives for their high moisture dates were not currently known. In it did not, at that time, know of pest control alternatives to high moisture fresh dates. However, MBTOC has recently gained the understanding thaUS dates at time of harvest is between 18-23%. In the instance of US dates it appears that the length of time needed to achieve date maturity on tconsiderable drying, while the dates are still on the tree. Thus, US dates were referred to as ‘fresh’ but the American definition stands in contrast to North African countries which are also harvested ‘fresh’ at maturity but are at 35-40% moisture content. It is the moisture content and not the freshimpacts the potential for alternatives to be effective. When dates are at 18-23% moisture content, they are a dried fruit. In the case of the US, the wis a marketing term. Therefore, the alternatives used for other dried fruit are technically effective. So, for example, heat, phosphine, controlled atmtreatment would all be effective and registered for use in the US. In addition, sulfuryl fluoride is also registered for treatment of dates and recent triat least for adults and larvae. MBTOC believes that by 2011 it is reasonable to expect the US dates sector can adopt alternatives. For further discuand treatment issues, the reader is referred to the review of date treatment elsewhere in May 2009 TEAP/MBTOC Progress report .

Walnut sector has virtually completed its transition to sulfuryl fluoride for commodity exported to the EU; the remaining small use of MB is 

treatment of packaged product when the other treatments would be too slow. MBTOC expects that even this use will quickly diminish as logistics fimproved. In the instance of a future CUN for walnuts, MBTOC will expect considerable information supporting that logistical problems still require numerous alternatives that are available for walnuts and indicating practical phase out plans. The California Dried Plum Board nomination has been disaggregated to 1.44 tonnes for dried plums, 4.637 tonnes for dried raisins and 0.2 tonnes recommend methyl bromide for dried plums or raisins. Therefore MBTOC’s recommendation for the California Dried Plum Board is 0.2 tonnes. Plprocess which also results in disinfestation. Plums can be stored in cool or cold storage without risk of sugar crystallization and if they are infested treated with phosphine. USG has not sufficiently substantiated a need for methyl bromide for dried plums. Figs are infested at harvest and need a MBTOC has not been given the volumes of figs treated by alternatives and the volume of figs intended to be treated by MB, but from the MB volum
294 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MB is used for a small portion of the harvest. MBTOC recommends the nominated amount for figs, but encourages the Party to supply information logistical need for MB in any future CUN, and indicating a practical phase out plan. MBTOC does not recommend the use of MB for raisins for 201phosphine, controlled atmosphere, sulfuryl fluoride or cool storage. Bean sector is currently quickly transitioning to sulfuryl fluoride and the remainneeded in the instance of lack of available treatment facilities or options. MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based solely on economic arguments. CUN summarizes economic losses due to use of: 

Phosphine. Losses arise from additional production downtimes due to longer fumigation time and from capital expenditures required to adopt a

losses due to downtime with phosphine are persistent. MBTOC agrees with this analysis. 

Sulfuryl Fluoride. SF is shown to be a viable alternative to MB; costs per lb are comparable although application rates may be higher. Walnuts havincrease can be passed to consumers. Sulfuryl fluoride was found to be technically and economically feasible for walnuts, dried fruit, and dried be

United States 

NPMA food processing structures (cocoa beans removed) 

83.344 69.118 82.771 69.208 54.606 37.778 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends the nominated amount of 17.365 tonnes for food processing facilities in 2011. The Party’s nomination reflects a 54% decreaprocessing sector over the amount of MB granted by the Parties for 2010. 

This CUN includes facilities that prepare processed foods (such as chips, crackers, cookies and pasta), spices and herbs processing faci

processing plants (with cheese present in storage). The food processing sector represents by far the largest portion of the MB nomination in this Cand spice blending facilities (1.055 tonnes) and cheese storages (1.812 tonnes) are relatively small. 

Food processing facilities in the United States have reduced the number of methyl bromide fumigations by incorporating many different te

The most critical strategy implemented is IPM, especially sanitation, in all areas of a facility. Facilities are now being monitored for pest populationpheromone traps, light traps and electrocution traps. When insect pests are found, facilities will attempt to contain the infestation with treatments oapplied to both surfaces and cracks and crevices; spot treatments with heat or phosphine will be used in areas that are suitable. Incoming ingrediinsect pests and may be treated with phosphine. These techniques contribute to reduced pest pressure and avoid the need for full site treatment. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC notes that perhaps especially with herb and spice processing equipment, in the instance of pest infestation centered in a particu

spot heat treatment with additional measures to prevent pest escape might be effective. MBTOC described a suitable spot heat method in its flour 2008. 

With this nomination, the Party has moved ahead of its transition plan indicated in earlier CUNs. The Party’s CUN in 2007 indicated that 1

included in its food processing nomination would not be able to transition. But, with the 2009 nomination, the transition to alternatives in food proceapproaching the level previously indicated as unable to transition. MBTOC inquires if the part of the sector previously designated as unable to tranable to transition to alternatives? Although the other sectors included in this CUN have made very substantive reductions in MB nominated, cheese storage sector has not reduced 

acknowledges a lack of knowledge of currently technically effective MB alternatives. The CUN indicates that, “Cheese manufacturers may target thfumigations with methyl bromide when a mite infestation is identified by USDA inspection and a fumigation is ordered.” MBTOC assumes that undrecords of the fumigation must be kept by government inspectors or by the processing facility. Therefore MBTOC requests that as part of any futurfigures for cheese processing sector be submitted. MBTOC needs these records to monitor that the amounts it recommends are consistent with thneeded. The Party has reported that the ongoing multi-state research project on mite infestation in cured pork also includes investigations of mites MBTOC also encourages the Party to contact EU and Canadian cheese producers to see how they manage pests in cheese storages without MB

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based solely on economic arguments. CUN summarizes economic losses due to use of: 

Heat treatment. Heat treatments are technically and economically feasible in some cases. However, in very cold regions, heat is costly and pro

facilities, high heat could inflict structural damage; heat is not feasible for treating commercial-scale commodity volumes, as heat is a poor penetraand commodities; structures with many concrete partitions are not good candidates for heat treatment because heat may not be evenly distributeddowntime with heat treatment are persistent. MBTOC does not agree that production time is lost, although the treatment cost may be highe

Phosphine. Although phosphine kills insects, it is corrosive to components of the electronics that run the manufacturing equipment. Phosphine 

application time. Phosphine is not a suitable alternative to methyl bromide when rapid fumigations are needed to meet customer timelines. Resistareported for several stored product pests. Furthermore, cheese makers claim that phosphine causes damage to the cheese 

Carbon dioxide. Facilities in the United States are not airtight enough for modified atmospheres or carbon dioxide to be effective primarily due 

specifically, most facilities are more than 25 years old. Sulfuryl fluoride. A portion of the food processing facilities can economically convert to sulfuryl fluoride. Other facilities cannot due to economic loshigher treatment costs which arise at lower temperatures. For a small percentage, SF is not technically feasible due to cold temperatures. Adding 
296 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

efficacy of SF is also not an economically feasible option. MBTOC requires substantiation of these claims. United States 

Mills and processors 

483.000 461.758 401.889 348.237 291.418 173.023 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends 135.299 tonnes, the nominated amount for 2011. In 2007, the Party implemented an acceptable transition plan for this sectodecreases of 18-20%, depending on the type of facility. This plan continues to be implemented, and sometimes exceeded, by the Party, although year increments. Thus MBTOC notes that for 2011, the pet food and rice milling sector nominations have not decreased over 2010 levels, perhaps transitions were higher than originally planned. 

The CUN indicates that continued lack of regulatory approval for fluorine residues in pet foods and in food mixes that are sometimes pres

reason for lack of progress in adopting alternatives in these sectors. However, MBTOC notes that this was also the reason given last year for a sloalternatives in rice milling and pet food facilities. MBTOC continues to express its concern about the possibility of continued lack of adoption of alteresearch to overcome the problem of segregating commodities during SF fumigation of facilities is not conducted. 

In its text boxes of 2008, MBTOC noted, “Pet food facilities could, however, expand use of full site or spot heat treatment, utilizing approp

to prevent pest escape from spot heat treatments.” And, “The three sectors included in this CUN are expected to work to improve treatment logistsegregation so that more adoption of alternatives can be accomplished even if regulatory barriers to the use of SF persist. When conducting SF fumixes are present, the applicant could trial tarping off the food under positive pressure or removing food ingredients and mixes to non-fumigated aproduct warehouses to allow SF treatment of facility while ensuring that food is not exposed (TEAP October 2008)”. Food isolation techniques durcommonly commercially used in Germany and the UK, for example. In the EU the need to segregate food commodities has not stymied the adoptiprocessing facilities and mills. The CUN for 2009 and Party correspondence indicated that this research recommended by MBTOC was not done. without the conduct of suitable research to overcome the regulatory problem, it can not continue to recommend MB use in pet food and rice millingto be another year of CUN without re-implemeting the previous years’ transition rates. 

In addition to this concern, we note that CUNs and Party correspondence indicates there is a segment of the pet food facilities and rice m

transition to alternatives, at all. The CUN of 2008 and earlier years indicates about 5 tonnes of MB use in rice milling and 6 tonnes in pet foods secadopt alternatives at all. MBTOC has insufficient information to allow it to agree that there is a segment of these two sectors unable to transition aWithout very considerable information and examination of these sectors by the Party and MBTOC, we will assume that a transition of 18-20% of thachievable. MBTOC notes that flour milling has continued its transition at acceptable levels and makes no further comment about this sector. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based solely on economic arguments. CUN summarizes economic losses due to use of: 

Heat treatment. Food processing facilities located in cold climates (which are able to convert to heat treatment) may experience economic loss

production downtimes associated with heat-up time. Economic losses in cold weather facilities due to downtime with heat treatment are persistentSulfuryl Fluoride. A portion of the food processing facilities can economically convert to sulfuryl fluoride. Other facilities cannot due to economic loshigher treatment costs which arise at lower temperatures. For a small percentage, SF is not technically feasible due to cold temperatures. Accordito increase the efficacy of SF is also not an economically feasible option. With regard to pet food, it would be desirable to analyze the cost of exposure to sulfuryl fluoride.

United States 

Cured pork 67.907 40.854 18.998 19.669 18.998 4.465 - - 

MBTOC comments 2009: MBTOC recommends the Party’s nominated amount of 3.73 tonnes for Southern cured pork in 2011. The Party nominated 16% less MB for 2011 Parties for this use in 2010. This reduction was taken on the previous year’s 25% reduction. Formerly, the frequency of fumigation was up to five tfumigation is reported to occur only one time per year. 

The pork becomes infested with Tyrophagus putrescentiae (Ham or cheese mites) and Necrobia rufipes (Redlegged ham beetle) (Phillips 

currently no technically effective and registered alternative for the treatment of these pests of cured pork, but decreases in MB use have resulted fthe processing facilities, reduced frequency of fumigations, and improvements in reporting historical MB use. This sector is collaborating in a multi(Phillips et al, 2008). This program has resulted in IPM improvements in the facilities which contributed to a reduced need for fumigation. 

Additionally, this research program has resulted in an improved understanding of the inter-reaction between ham curing time and the inci

When cured pork is stored longer than 6 months, there is a higher incidence of infestation. So, managing the overall ham process might assist to r

The use of sulfuryl fluoride as a pest control method was investigated through this program, but it was not effective on mites. Effective tre

when 3x the allowed label rate was used, and at that point, fluorine residues were unacceptably high (Sekhorn et al, 2008). The researchers are npotential effectiveness of phosphine, or low O2 and high CO2. ,but they are concerned that the poorly structured traditional ham storage houses in t
298 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Country Industry CUE for 

2005 (ExMOP1 and MOP16 

CUE for 2006 (MOP 16 +ExMOP2+MOP17) 

CUE for 2007 (MOP17+ MOP18) 

CUE for 2008 (MOP18+ MOP19) 

CUE for 2009 (MOP19+MOP20) 

CUE for 2010 (MOP20) 

CUN for 2010 

MBTOC rec. for 2010 (addtl or new) 

In its text box of October 2008, MBTOC recommended that the Party test the method used in Spain which involves dipping the hams in a 

90°C. At the 2008 MBAO conference, the researchers informed us that they are planning to investigate these alternative techniques. When the restart these investigations they intend to contact MBTOC for more specific information. MBTOC comments on economics 2009: This CUN is not based on economic arguments. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 299

14.5 References 

Abanga, M.A., B. Bayaaa, B. Abu-Irmailehb and A. Yahyaouia (2007). A participatory farming system approach 

for sustainable broomrape (Orobanche spp.) management in the Near East and North Africa Crop 

Protection 26(12): 1723 - 1732 

Ajwa, A.H., S. Shem-Tov, S. Fennimore, and B. Weber (2006). Efficacy of two formulations of MIDAS for 

strawberry production. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, USA, 2006. 

Ajwa H.A., S. Fennimore, Z. Kabin, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, T. Trout, A. Kahn and O. Daugovish, 

(2004). Strawberry yield with chloropicrin and inline in combination with metam sodium and VIF. 

In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions 3-6 November 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Ajwa, H. A., S. Fennimore, G. Browne, F. Martin, T. Trout, J. Duniway, S. Shem-Tov, and O. Daugovish, (2005). 

Strawberry yield with various rates of chloropicrin and Inline applied under VIF. Proceedings of 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. 

Ajwa, H.A. T. Trout, S. Fennimore, C. Winterbottom, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, B. Westerdahl, R. 

Goodhue and L. Guerrero (2002). Strawberry production with alternative fumigants applied 

through drip irrigation systems. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 6-8 November 2002, Orlando, Florida, USA. 

Ajwa, H.A., S. Fennimore, Z. Kabir, F. Martin, J. Duniway, G. Browne, T. Trout, R. Goodhue, and L. Guerrero. 

(2003). Strawberry yield under reduced application rates of chloropicrin and InLine in 

combination with metam sodium and VIF. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-6 November 2003, San Diego, 

California, USA. 

Akkaya, F., A. Ozturk, A. Deviren, A. Ozcelik and B. Ozkan. (2004). An economic analysis of alternatives to 

use of Methyl Bromide for greenhouse vegetables (Tomatoes, Cucumbers) and cut flowers 

(Carnation). Acta Horticulturae 638, 479-485. 

Allen, M. (2008). Personal communication. Arysta Lifesciences Inc. 

Babadost M. and S.Z. Islam (2002). Bell peppers resistant to Phytophthora blight . Phytopathology, (Abstr), 92: 55. 

Bangarwa, S.K., J. K. Norsworthy, P. J., and M. Malik (2008). Purple Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) Management 

in an Organic Production System. Weed Science 56:606–613 

Bartual, R., Cebolla, V., Bustos, J., Giner, A., López-Aranda, J. M. (2002). The Spanish project on alternatives to 

methyl bromide. (2): The case of strawberry in the area of Valencia. Acta Hort. 567: 431-434. 

Bar-Yosef, B., T. Markovich, I. Levkovich and Y. Mor, (2001). Gypsophyla paniculata response to leachate recycling 

in a greenhouse in Israel Acta Horticulturae 554: 193 – 204 

Batchelor, T.A. (2002). International and European Community controls on methyl bromide and the status of 

methyl bromide use and alternatives in the European Community. In: Proc.International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 5-8 March 2002, Sevilla. Office for Official 

Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg. pp. 35-39. 

Batchelor, T.A. (ed.) (2000). Case Studies on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. Technologies with Low 

Environmental Impact. UNEP. Paris. 77pp. 

Bello, A., J. López –Pérez, M. Arias, A. Lacasa, C. Ros, M. Herrero and P. Fernández. (2001). Biofumigation and 

grafting in pepper as alternative to Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California, USA. Paper 

31. 
300 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Bello, A., M. Arias, J. López-Perez, A. García-Álvarez, J. Fresno, M. Escuer, S.C. Arcos, A. Lacasa, R. Sanz, P. 

Gómez, 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. 

Besri, M. (2008) Cucurbits grafting as alternative to Methyl Bromide for cucurbits production in Morocco. In: 

2008 Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Brandenberger, L., R. E. Talbert, R P. Wiedenfeld, J. W. Shrefler, C.I. Webber and M.S. Malik (2005),Effects of 

Halosulfuron on Weed Control in Commercial Honeydew Crops. Weed Technology (19): 346–350 

Browne, G., B. Lampinen, B. Holtz, S. Upadhyaya, D. Wang, S. Gao, D. Doll, 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. In: Proceeding of the Annual International conference on 

Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductios, October 29-November 1, 2007, San Diego, 

California, 20-1, 20-5 

Browne, G., B. Lampinen, B. Holtz, D. Doll, J. Edstrom, L. Schmidt, S. Upadhyaya, M. Shafii, B. H, D. Wang, S. 

Gao, N. Goodell and K. Klonsky (2008). Integrated pre=lant alternatives to methyl bromide for 

almonds and other stone fruits. In: 2008 Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Budai, C. (2002) Case Study 1. Substrates for greenhouse tomatoes in peppers. In: Batchelor, T. (ed). Case 

Studies on alternatives to methyl bromide – Vol. 2. UNEP, Paris 

Carey, W. and Godbehere, S. (2004). Effects of VIF and solvent carrier on control of nutsedge and on 

populations of Trichoderma at two nurseries in 2003. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, California, 

USA, 2003. 

Cebolla, V., Bartual, R., Giner, A and. Bustos, J. (1999). Two years effect on some alternatives to Methyl Bromide 

on strawberry crops. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 1999. 1-4 November, 1999, San Diego, California, USA. 

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. 

Chism, W. (2009) Personal communication 2009 Bilateral meeting US-MBTOC, Agadir, Morocco, April 2009 

Cohen, R., Y. Burger and C. Holev (2007) Introducing grafted cucurbits to modern agriculture. The Israeli 

experience. Plant Disease 91(8): 916 - 923 

Culpepper A. S., P. Sumner, D. Langston, K. Rucker, G. Beard, and J. Mayfield; T. Webster; W. Upchurch , 

(2007). Can Georgia growers replace methyl bromide? In: Proceeding of the Annual International 

conference on Methyl Bromide alternatives and emissions reductios, October 29-November 1, 

2007, San Diego, California, 20-1, 20-5 

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. 

Daugovish, O., S.A. Fennimore and M.J. Mochizuki (2008). Integration of Oxyfluorfen into Strawberry 

(Fragaria3ananassa) Weed Management Programs Weed Technology 22:685–690

De Cal, A., Martínez-Terceno, A., López-Aranda, J.M. and Melgarejo P. (2004). Alternatives to methyl 

bromide in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Plant Disease 88(2): 210-214. 

Dow Agrosciences, 2007

Driver J.G. and F. Lows, (2003). Management of Phytophthora crown and root rot in peppers (Abstr), 

Phytopathology, 93, S22 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 301

Duniway, J. M., Xiao, C. L. and Gubler, W. D. (1998) Response of strawberry to soil fumigation: Microbial 

mechanisms and some alternatives to Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 1998. 7-9 December, 1998, 

Orlando, Florida, USA pp. 6-1. 

EC. European Community (2008). European Community Management Strategy for the phase-out of critical uses 

of Methyl Bromide. July, 2008

Enebak, 2007. Methyl bromide and the Montreal Protocol: An update on the Critical Use Exemption and 

Quarantine Pre-shipment process. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-50 pp 135 - 141 

Engindeniz, S. (2004). The economic analysis of growing greenhouse cucumber with soilless culture system: 

the case of Turkey. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 23, 5-19. 

Fennimore,S,, H. Ajwa, S. Shem-Tov, K. Subbarao, F. Martin, G. Browne, S. Klose (2007) Facilitating adoption 

of alternatives to methyl to methyl bromide in California strawberries . In: Proceedings of Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 

San Diego, CA, USA. 

Fennimore, S., A. Spataru and N. Leslie (2008). Steam and heat for soil disinfestations. In: 2008 Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 

Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Fritsch, J. (1998). Strawberries crops in France: different methods to apply methyl bromide and metam sodium in 

open fields. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reduction 1998. 7-9 December, 1998, Orlando, Florida 

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 

 García-Sinovas D. , E. García-Méndez , M.A. Andrade, M. Becerril, A. De Cal , P. Melgarejo, T. Salto , M.L. 

Martínez-Beringola, C. Redondo, A. Martínez-Treceño, J.J. Medina, C. Soria, and J.M. LópezAranda (2008). mbao.org/2008/Proceedings/067Lopez-Aranda2SpainNursery2007mbao 2008.pdf 

Gilreath, J.P., Motis, T.N., Santos, B.M. (2005). Cyperus spp. Control with reduced methyl bromide plus 

chloropicrin doses under virtually impermeable films in pepper. Crop Protection. 24: 285-287. 

Grinstein, A. & A. Hetzroni. (1991). The technology of soil solarization. Pp 159 – 170 In: J. Katan & J. E. DeVay 

(eds.) Soil Solarization. CRC Publications, Boca Raton, FL, USA 

Grinstein, A. (1992). Introduction of a new agricultural technology - soil solarization - in Israel. Phytoparasitica 20 

(Suppl.):127S-131S. 

Gullino, M.L. and A. Garibaldi (2007). Critical aspects in management fo fungal diseases of rnamental plants and 

directions in research. Phytopathologia Mediterranea 46: 135 – 149 

Gullino, M.L., A. Camponogara, G. Gasparrini, V. Rizzo, C. Cini and A. Garibaldi (2003). Replacing methyl 

bromide for soil disinfestation. The Italian experience and its implications for other countries. Plant 

Disease 87 (9): 1012 – 1019. 

Hamill, J. E., Dickson, D. W., T-Ou, L., Allen, L. H., Burelle, N. K. and Mendes, M. L. (2004). Reduced rates of 

MBR and C35 under LDPE and VIF for control of soil pests and pathogens. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 31 

October - 3 November, 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA, pp. 2-1. 

Hanson, B., J. Gerik and S. Schneider (2006). Evaluation of reduced Methyl Bromide rates and alternative 

fumigants in field grown perennial crop nurseries. In: Annual International Research Conference 

on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, USA, 2006. 

Hausbeck M.K and Lamour K.H., (2004). Phytophthora capsici on vegetable crops: Research progress and 

management. Plant Disease 88(12):1992-1303 

Horner, I.J. (1999). Alternative soil fumigant trials in New Zealand strawberry production. In: Annual 

International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions,San 

Diego, California, USA 
302 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Johnson, W. C. and B. G. Mullinx (2007). Yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) control with metham-sodium in 

transplanted cantaloupe (Cucumis melo). Crop Protection 26(6): 867-871. 

Johnston S.A., Kleinn W.L. ,Fogg M.L., and Zimmerman M.D, (2002). Varietal resistance evaluation for control 

of Phytophthora blight of pepper (Abstr). Phytopathology, 92, S40 

Kabir et al (2005). Alternatives to MB for strawberry runner plant production. HortScience 40:1709-1715 

Kanda, A. (2008) A plant virus vaccine for prevention of a mosaic disease on green pepper Journal of the Japanese 

Forestry Society 83, (9): 967-975 

Kaneko, Y. (2006) Development of Polyethylene Bag Tomato Cultivation System with Simple Setup and Low 

Cost. Res.Bull.Aichi Agric.Res.Ctr.38: 45-50

Klose, S., J. Gerik, H.A. Ajwa, C. Wilen, and M. A. Mellano (2008) Pest Control in Field-Grown Ranunculus 

without Methyl Bromide. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

Klose, S., J. Gerik, Ajwa, H. and C. Wilen (2007). Pacific area-wide MB alternatives program for cut flower and 

bulb crops. In: Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, San Diego, CA, USA. 

Leoni, S and Ledda, L. (2004). Influenza delle limitazioni nell'uso del bromuro di metilo sull'ortcoltura in serra 

della Sardegna. Workshop Internazionale: La Produzione in Serra dopo l'era del Bromuro di 

Metile. April 1-3, 2004, Comiso, 253-263. 

Lieten, F. 2004. (2004). Substrates as an alternative to methyl bromide for strawberry fruit production in 

Northern Europe in both protected and field production. In: Proceedings of International 

Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, 27-30 September 2004, Lisbon, Portugal. 

Lopez-Aranda, J. M., Medina, J. J., Miranda, L., De Los Santos, B., Dominguez, F., Sanchez-Vidal, M. D., 

Lopez-Medina, J., and Flores, F. (2001). Agronomic Behaviour of Strawberry Coming From 

Different Types of Soil Fumigation in Nurseries. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions 2001. 5-9 November, 2001, San Diego, 

California, USA, pp. 38-1. 

Lopez-Aranda, J. M., Medina, J. J., Miranda, L., and Dominguez, F. (2000). Three Years of Short-Term 

Alternatives To MB on Huelva Strawberries. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduction 2000. 6-9 November, 2000, Orlando, 

Florida, USA, pp. 10-1. 

López-Aranda, J. M., Miranda, L., Romero, F., De Los Santos, B., Montes, F., Vega, J. M., Paez, J. I., Bascon, J., 

Medina, J. J. (2003). Alternatives to MB for Strawberry Production in Huelva (Spain). 2003 

Results. Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions 2003. November, 2003, San Diego, California, USA pp. 33-1. 

López-Medina, J., A. Peralbo, M.A. Fernández, D. Hernanz, G. Toscano, M.C. Hernández and F. Flores (2004). 

Substrate systems for production of strawberry fruit in Spain and Mediterranean climates. 

Proceedings of International Conference on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide. 27-30 September 

2004. Lisbon. 

Macrae, A., A. S. Culpepper, R. B. Batts, and K L. Lewis (2008) Seeded Watermelon and Weed Response to 

Halosulfuron Applied Preemergence and Postemergence. Weed Technology 22:86–90 

Martyn, R.D. (2002). Monosporascus root rot and vine decline of melons. Plant Disease Lessons. The Plant Health 

Instructor. DOI: 10.1094/PHI-I-2002 0612-01. American Phytopathological Society. 

Matsuo K. and 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 

Mattner, S.W., Porter, I.J., Gounder, R.K., Mann, R.C., Williams, E., Milinkovic, M.,Horner, I.J., Bigwood, 

E., Fraser, P., and S. Coram (2008). Breaking the critical-use barriers preventing Australian 

horituclure from phasing out methyl bromide. Horticulture Australia Limited, Final Report, Project 

No. BS04009. Sydney, NSW. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 303

MBTOC, (2007). 2006 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi 482 pp. 

MBTOC. (2002). 2002 Assessment Report of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee. UNEP, 

Nairobi. 468pp. 

McKenry, M., T. Buzo, and K. Stephanie (2006). Replanting stone fruit orchards without soil fumigation. 

Proceedings of Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. 

McSorley, R., Koon-Hui Wang and E.N. Rosskopf (2008) Methyl Bromide alternatives for floriculture 

production in a problem site. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide 

Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

McSorley, R., K.H. Wang and N. Kokallis-Burelle. (2006a). Solarization as an alternative to Methyl Bromide in 

Florida floriculture. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives 

and Emissions Reductions, November 6-9, 2006 Orlando, Florida, USA-337. 2004. 

McSorley, R., K-H. Wang and S.K. Saha. (2006b). Can solarization match methyl bromide fumigation in sites 

colonized by fungi? Phytopathology 96(6), suppl., p. S187 

Melgarejo, P., A. De Cal, T. Salto, M. L. Martínez-Beringola, A. Martínez-Treceno, E. Bardon, J. Palacios, M. 

Becerril, J.J. Medina, J., Gálvez and J.M. López-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, USA pp. 93-1. 

Melgarejo, P., A. Martínez-Treceño, A. de Cal, T. Salto, M.L Martínez-Beringola, J.M. García-Baudín, I. Santín, E. 

Bardón, J. Palacios, M. Becerril, J.J. Medina and J.M. López-Aranda (2003). Chemical alternatives 

to MB for strawberry nurseries in Spain. 2002 Results. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emission Reductions, November 3-6, 2003, San 

Diego, California, USA. 

Miller et al, 2009 

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. 

Nadal, S. , M.T. Moreno and B. Roman (2008). Control of Orobanche crenata in Vicia narbonensis by glyphosate, 

Crop Protection (27) 873–876 

Nelson M. et al. (2001a). Marketable berry yield cv. Camarosa – Oxnard trial, CA. 2000-01 USDA IR-4 Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives Program in Strawberries. 

Nelson M. et al. (2001b). Marketable berry yield cv. Diamante – Salinas trial, CA. 2000-01 USDA IR-4 Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives Program in Strawberries. 

Njoroge, S.M.C., Riley, M.B., Keinath, A.P. (2008) Effect of incorporation of Brassica spp. residues on 

population densities of soilborne microorganisms and on damping-off and fusarium wilt of 

watermelon. Plant Disease (92) 2:, 287-294 

Noling, J. W. and Gilreath, J. P. (2004). Use of virtually impermeable plastic mulches (VIF) in Florida strawberry. 

In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, November 3-6, 2004, Orlando, Florida, USA. pp. 1-1. 

Noling, J. W., Gilreath, J. P. and Rosskopf, E. R. (2001). Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Field Research Efforts 

For Nematode Control in Florida. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions , 5-9 November, 2001, San Diego, California, 

USA. pp. 14-1. 

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. 
304 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Nomisma. (2006). Pest Control in the Italian food industry: Selected case studies. 

Norsworthy, J.H., J. Schroeder, S.H. Thomas and L.W. Murray (2007) Purple Nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) 

Management in Direct-Seeded Chile Pepper Using Halosulfuron and Cultivation. Weed Technology

21:636–641 

Pivonia, S., R. Levita, A. Maduel and R. Cohen (2008) Chemical Control of the Melon Sudden Wilt Caused 

by Monosporascus cannonbalus ARO, Neve Ya'ar. Paper sumbmitted with the Israel Melon 

CUN 2009 

Porter, I., R. Brett B. Wiseman and J. Rae. (1997). Methyl bromide for preplant soil disinfestation in temperate 

horticultural crops in Australia in perspective. Annual International Conference on Methyl 

Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, 3-5 November, San Diego, California USA. 

Porter, I.J., L. Trinder and D. Partington. (2006). Special Report Validating the Yield Performance of 

Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for Preplant fumigation. TEAP/MBTOC Special Report, UNEP 

Nairobi, May 2006 97pp. 

Quicke, M., T. Starkey and S. Enebak (2008) Area-Wide demonstration of alternatives: Forest nurseries in the 

southern US . In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 

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. 

Ristaino J.B. and S.A. Johnston. (1999). Ecologically based approaches to management of Phytophthora blight on 

bell pepper. Plant Disease, 83, 1080-1089 

Sakuma, H. and Suzuki, K. (1995) Development of energy-saving hydroponics systems without requiring 

electricity. JIRCAS J. 4: 73-77. 

Santos, B., J.P. Gilreath and T.N. Motis (2005). Managing nustedge stunt nematode in peppers with reduced 

Methyl Bromide plus chloropicrin rates under Virtually Impermeable Films. HortTechnology 15(3): 

596 - 599 

Santos, B.M. and J.P. Gilreath (2004). Cyperus spp. control with reduced Methyl Bromide rates under VIF in 

pepper. In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and 

Emissions Reductions, Orlando, Florida, USA, 2004. 

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 

Savvas D., and H. Passam (eds) (2001). Hydroponic Production of Vegetables and Ornamentals. Embryo 

Publications, Athens, Greece, 242 pp. 

Schneider, S., Trout, T., Browne, G. and Ajwa, H. (2004). Vineyard replant - performance of methyl bromide 

alternatives over time. Pp 8-1 - 8-5 In: Annual International Research Conference on Methyl 

bromide Alternatives, Orlando, Florida, USA 

Shem-Tov, S, H.A. Ajwa, S.A. Fennimore and J. Hunzie. (2006b). Strawberry production and weed control in 

soils treated with basamid and chloropicrin. In: Annual International Research Conference on 

Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. 

Shem-Tov, S., H.A. Ajwa and S.Fennimore (2006a). Strawberry yield and weed control with alternative fumigants 

applied in combination with metam under various tarps. In: Annual International Research 

Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions, Orlando, FL, USA. 

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 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 305

Stodard (2008). Methyl bromide fumigation alternatives for sweet potato hotbeds in Califronia 

http://mbao.org/2008/027Stoddard.pdf. 

TEAP (2006) Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2006. Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP (2005). Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, October 2005. Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. 

TEAP (2008) Report of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, May 2008. Montreal Protocol on 

Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi. 

Trader, B. W., H. P. Wilson and T.E. Hines (2008) Control of yellow nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) and smooth 

pigweed (Amaranthus hybridus) in summer squash with halosulfuron. Weed Technology 22: 660 - 665

Urrestarazu, M. (2004). Tratado de cultivo sin suelo Mundi Prensa Libros, España, 928 pp. 3a edición. 

Urrestarazu, M. (2005) International symposium on soilless culture and hydroponics. Acta Horticulturae 557, 565pp 

Webster, T. M., T. L. Grey, et al. (2008). Glyphosate hinders purple nutsedge (Cyperus rotundus) and yellow 

nutsedge (Cyperus esculentus) tuber production.Weed Science 56(5): 735-742. 

Weiland, J., J. N. Pinkerton, W. Littke, J. Browning, C. Masters, R. Rose, D. Haase, T. Miller, B. Edmonds and A. 

Leon (2008) Methyl Bromide alternatives in Oregon and Washington forest tree nurseries . In: 

Annual International Research Conference on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions 

Reductions, Orlando, Florida, November 11 – 14, 2008 
306 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

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 Community 

EMOP Extraordinary Meeting of the Parties 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

EPPO European Plant Protection Organisation 

MI Methyl iodide (or Iodomethane) 

IPM Integrated Pest Management 

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention 

ISPM International Standard Phytosanitary Measure 

LPBF Low Permeability Barrier Film (including VIF films) 

MB Methyl Bromide 

MBTOC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee 

MBTOC QSC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee Quarantine, Structures and 

Commodities Subcommittee 

MBTOC S Methyl Bromide Technical Options Soils Subcommittee 

MDI Metered Dose Inhalers 

MITC Methyl isothiocyanate 

MOP Meeting of the Parties 

MS Metham sodium 

OEWG Open Ended Working Group 

Pic Chloropicrin 

QPS Quarantine and Pre-shipment 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 307

QPSTF Quarantine and Pre-shipment Task Force 

SF Sulfuryl fluoride 

TEAP Technology and Economic Assessment Panel 

TIF Totally impermeable films 

USA United States of America 

VIF Virtually Impermeable Film 

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds
308 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX 1 TO CHAPTER 14 - Decision IX/6 

1. To apply the following criteria and procedure in assessing a critical methyl 

bromide use for the purposes of control measures in Article 2 of the Protocol: 

(a) That a use of methyl bromide should qualify as “critical” only if the nominating 

Party determines that: 

(i) The specific use is critical because the lack of availability of methyl bromide 

for that use would result in a significant market disruption; and 

(ii) There are no technically and economically feasible alternatives or 

substitutes available to the user that are acceptable from the standpoint of 

environment and health and are suitable to the crops and circumstances of 

the nomination; 

(b) That production and consumption, if any, of methyl bromide for critical uses 

should be permitted only if: 

(i) All technically and economically feasible steps have been taken to minimise 

the critical use and any associated emission of methyl bromide; 

(ii) Methyl bromide is not available in sufficient quantity and quality from 

existing stocks of banked or recycled methyl bromide, also bearing in mind 

the developing countries’ need for methyl bromide; 

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

commercialise and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives and 

substitutes, taking into consideration the circumstances of the particular 

nomination and the special needs of Article 5 Parties, including lack of 

financial and expert resources, institutional capacity, and information. NonArticle 5 Parties must demonstrate that research programmes are in place to 

develop and deploy alternatives and substitutes. Article 5 Parties must 

demonstrate that feasible alternatives shall be adopted as soon as they are 

confirmed as suitable to the Party’s specific conditions and/or that they have 

applied to the Multilateral Fund or other sources for assistance in 

identifying, evaluating, adapting and demonstrating such options; 

2. To request the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to review nominations 

and make recommendations based on the criteria established in paragraphs 1 (a) (ii) and 

1 (b) of the present decision; 

3. That the present decision will apply to Parties operating under Article 5 and 

Parties not so operating only after the phase-out date applicable to those Parties. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 309

Para. 2 of Decision IX/6 does not assign TEAP the responsibility for determining the existence of 

“significant market disruption” specified in paragraph 1(a)(i). 

TEAP assigned its Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) to determine 

whether there are no technically and economically feasible alternatives or substitutes 

available to the user that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and health 

and are suitable to the crops and circumstances of the nomination, and to address the 

criteria listed in Decision IX/6 1(b).
310 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX II TO CHAPTER 14 - Decision XVI/4 

Review of the working procedures and terms of reference of the Methyl 

Bromide Technical Options Committee

Report of the Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol (Annex I), Prague, 

22–26 November 2004), paragraph 15. 

A. Working procedures of the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee relating 

to the evaluation of nominations for critical uses of methyl bromide 

15. An annual work plan will enhance the transparency of, and insight in, the operations of 

MBTOC. Such a plan should indicate, among other things: 

(a) Key events for a given year; 

(b) Envisaged meeting dates of MBTOC, including the stage in the nomination and 

evaluation process to which the respective meetings relate; 

(c) Tasks to be accomplished at each meeting, including appropriate delegation of 

such tasks; 

(d) Timing of interim and final reports; 

(e) Clear references to the timelines relating to nominations; 

(f) Information related to financial needs, while noting that financial considerations 

would still be reviewed solely in the context of the review of the Secretariat’s 

budget; 

(g) Changes in the composition of MBTOC, pursuant to the criteria for selection; 

(h) Summary report of MBTOC activities over the previous year, including matters that 

MBTOC did not manage to complete, the reasons for this and plans to address 

these unfinished matters; 

(i) Matrix with existing and needed skills and expertise; and 

(j) Any new or revised standards or presumptions that MBTOC seeks to apply in its 

future assessment of critical-use nominations, for approval by the Meeting of the 

Parties. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX III TO CHAPTER 14 - Relative effectiveness of MB/Pic formulations applied in combination with barrier films (LPBF) compared to the commercial standard MB/Pic formulation applied under standard low 

films (LDPF). 

 Untreated MB/Pic Mixtures (Product rate per treated area) 

Std film Barrier Film – Relative yield compared to standard polyethylene 

Yield 

MB/Pic 

Formuln.

Product 

Rate Not Spec 98:2 98:2 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 50:50 33:67

Country Region Commodity Brand or Type of 

Barrier Film 

 kg/ha 300 400 300 98 196 200 294 336 392 200 200 

Notes 

MB Dosage rate (g/m2) 392 294 66 131 134 197 225 263 100 66 

Spain Vinderos Strawb. Runner VIF – NotSpec 74 50:50 400 93 De Ca

Navalmanzano 78 50:50 400 80 

Fusarium, Phytophthora, Pythium, Rhizoctonia and Verticillium 

Spain Vinderos Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 68 50:50 400 114 102 Melga

Navalmanzano 34 50:50 400 76 75 

Fusarium, Cladosporium, Rhizoctonia 

Spain Avitorejo Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 50:50 400 97 2003 results Lopez

 Malvinas 50:50 400 99 

1998 Fusarium 

Spain Valencia Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 59 Not Spec 600 94 

 At 10cm & 30cm Bartu

53 Not Spec 600 93 1999 results 

Spain Avitorejo Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 80 67:33 400 112 

 Lopet a

Tariquejo 54 67:33 400 106 

Meloidogyne and weeds (unspec.) 

Spain Moguer/Cartaya Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 50:50 392 99 

Inoculum not specified Lopez

Spain Cabeza, Nav. Strawb. Runner VIF - Not Spec 74 67:33 400 105, 92 1998 Two sites Melga

Arevalo, Nav. 84 50:50 400 

104, 

104 

1999 results, nurseries 
312 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

 Untreated MB/Pic Mixtures (Product rate per treated area) 

Std film Barrier Film – Relative yield compared to standard polyethylene 

Yield 

MB/Pic 

Formuln.

Product 

Rate Not Spec 98:2 98:2 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 50:50 33:67

Country Region Commodity Brand or Type of 

Barrier Film 

 kg/ha 300 400 300 98 196 200 294 336 392 200 200 

Notes 

MB Dosage rate (g/m2) 392 294 66 131 134 197 225 263 100 66 

Vinaderos, Nav. 49 50:50 400 95, 123

2000 results, nurseries 

Spain Huelva Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 82 67:33 400 101 

1997-1998 Inoc.unspecified Lopez

72 67:33 400 102 

1998-1999 Inoc. Unspecified 

68 67:33 400 109 

1999-2000 Inoc. Unspecified 

Spain Moncada Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 60 98:2 600 95 Cebo

54 98:2 600 91 

1998 No major pathogens but Fusarium buried 10cm&30cm. 

France Douville Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 65 Not Spec 800 99 

Inoculum not specified Fritsc

NZ Havelock North Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 83 67:33 500 98 

Phytophthora present Horne

USA Florida Pepper VIF Plastopil 69 67:33 392 78 Nutgrass Gilrea

VIF Plastopil 69 67:33 392 99 Present 

VIF Vikase 69 67:33 392 83 VIF Vikase 69 67:33 392 86 

USA Florida 

Strawb Fruit, 

Cantaloupe 

Barrier - Pliant, 

Metallised 

98:2 

67:33 

 Trials on 18 Commercial Farms between 2000-2004; no increase in disease or weeds when rates reduced up to 50% under VIF wrt. polyethylene 

Nutgrass and pathogens present Noling 

USA California 72 67:33 336 108 

Inoculum not specified Ajwa 

Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 

80 67:33 392 96 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

 Untreated MB/Pic Mixtures (Product rate per treated area) 

Std film Barrier Film – Relative yield compared to standard polyethylene 

Yield 

MB/Pic 

Formuln.

Product 

Rate Not Spec 98:2 98:2 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 67:33 50:50 33:67

Country Region Commodity Brand or Type of 

Barrier Film 

 kg/ha 300 400 300 98 196 200 294 336 392 200 200 

Notes 

MB Dosage rate (g/m2) 392 294 66 131 134 197 225 263 100 66 

USA Florida Tomato VIF - Not Spec 31 67:33 392 111 93 114 

Nutgrass and rootknot nematodes Hami

USA California Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 75 67:33 392 106 Ajwa 

83 67:33 392 111 65 67:33 392 102 

Watsonville, high pathogen pressure 

USA Florida Tomato VIF - Not Spec 67:33 392 "No significant reduction in yield" Noling USA California Strawb. Fruit VIF - Not Spec 45 67:33 364 116 Duniw

 USA Georgia Nurseries VIF – not spec 67:33 389 See reference 

Car

USA California Roses 

67:33 

98 ̈2 

392 392 See reference H

USA Florida Pepper VIF – not spec 67:33 392 See reference SantoUSA Florida Pepper VIF – not spec 67:33 392 See reference SUSA California Ornamentals VIF – not spec 67:33 392 See reference K

Spain Several 

Strawberry 

nurseries 50:50 at 300 kg/.ha (15 g/ha) Lo

USA California Strawberries 

VIF – Pliant 

Blockade 67:33 applied at 196 and 241kg/ha (ie. 13.1 and 16.1 g MB/ha) 

 Unweighted averages (relative % yield) 66 94 99 93 93 102 103 108 104 91 
314 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Figure 1: Relative yield of crops (strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, 

cantaloupes) grown under barrier films with different MB/Pic formulations 

compared to the standard commercial treatment using standard polyethylene 

from trials between 1998 and 2004 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

MB dosage rate (kg/ha) under barrier film

Relative Yield 

(▲MB/Pic 98:2; ● MB/Pic 67:33; ♦ MB/Pic 50:50; ■ MB/Pic 33:67). Data from Table 3. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX IV TO CHAPTER 14 - Methyl bromide reduction trends, based on historical rates of adoption in the EC 

(EC National Management Strategy, 2008. CUNA = Critical Use Nomination Assessment; MS = Member State of the E

Major MB 

CUEs 

in 2006 

1991 

MB use 

estimate1

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2005 

MB use2

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2008 

MB quota 

allocation 

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB 

alternatives3

Historical rates of adoption 

in individual MSs 

from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A 

(ha/year per MS) 

F

(d

Fumigants: 1,3-D, PIC, Metham Sodium, Dazomet 

up to 1193 ha/year/MS 

Grafting on resistant root stock up to 1000 ha/year/MS 

Tomato > 4980 t 

> 7000 ha > 12 MS 

733 t 2423 ha 4 MS 

0 t 0 ha 0 MS Substrates up to 1570 ha/year/MS 

Ra15Aen

Fumigants: 1,3-D, PIC, Metham Sodium 

up to 2090 ha/year/MS 

Substrates up to 80 ha / year/MS 

Strawberry fruit 

~ 3420 t ~ 5200 ha (>8000 ha in yr 2000) > 12 MS 

497 t 3879 ha 4 MS 

0 t4

0 ha 0 MS 

Resistant varieties no data 

Ra21Acofru20

1 Refer to Section 3 for data. 2 MB use data from EC Accounting Framework Report. Hectares calculated on doses stated in CUNs and CUNAs. If not stated, estimated bas

this use (tomato: 300 kg/ha; strawberry runners: 300 – 470 kg/ha; strawberry fruit: 100 – 300 kg/ha; cutflowers: 200 – 500 kg/ha; peppers: 1food processors: 20 g/m3) 

3 Further details and alternatives in Annex 4.C. 4 Excluding 151 kg for research on strawberry fruit and peppers in Spain in 2008. 
316 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Major MB 

CUEs 

in 2006 

1991 

MB use 

estimate1

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2005 

MB use2

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2008 

MB quota 

allocation 

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB 

alternatives3

Historical rates of adoption 

in individual MSs 

from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A 

(ha/year per MS) 

F

(d

Fumigants: 1,3-D, PIC, Metham Sodium, Dazomet 

up to 313 ha/year/MS 

Substrates up to 60 ha/year/MS Steam up to 917 ha/year/MS 

Cut flowers ~ 1610 t 

~ 1,800 ha > 12 MS 

259 t 855 ha 6 MS 

0 t5

0 ha 0 MS Resistant varieties ?? 

Ra91Acopr20

Fumigants: 1,3-D, Metham Sodium, Dazomet 

Peppers ~ 2410 t up to 667 ha/year/MS 

~ 3,000 ha > 11 MS 

250 t 1336 ha 3 MS 

0 t6

0 ha 0 MS 

Substrates 175 ha / year/MS 

Ra84Acopr20

Fumigants: 1,3-D, PIC, Metham Sodium 

Strawberry up to 94 ha/year/MS runners 

~ 740 t ~ 930 ha ~ 5 MS 

346 t ~ 1500 ha 4 MS 

212 t 1364 ha 2 MS 

Plug plants ?? 

RahaAalexAto 20

5 Excluding 25 kg for research on cut flowers in Spain in 2008.. 6 Excluding 151 kg for research on strawberry fruit and peppers in Spain in 2008. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Major MB 

CUEs 

in 2006 

1991 

MB use 

estimate1

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2005 

MB use2

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

2008 

MB quota 

allocation 

(tonnes) 

(ha) 

(No. MSs) 

Short-listed existing MB 

alternatives3

Historical rates of adoption 

in individual MSs 

from Table 4.3, Annex 7.A 

(ha/year per MS) 

F

(d

Heat + IPM Sulfuryl fluoride (+ heat) 

up to 3,500,000 – 4,600,000 m3 / year/ MS 

Phosphine (+ heat) ?? 

Mills and food processing structures 

640t 12,800,000 m3 7 

~ 15 MS 

150 t ~7,500,000 m3 8

5 MS 

0 t 0 m3

0 MS Modified atmosphere 

(structures) 

200.000 m3 / year 

Ra0.m

Aen

Phosphine solid formulations + heat if necessary 

?? 

Phosphine gas generation ?? Vacuum-hermetic treatments, low pressure 

?? 

Controlled atmosphere + heat if necessary 

?? 

Coffee beans 

Modest use. No data 

< 1.6 t <172,800 m3

1 MS 

0.5 t 54,000 m3

1 MS 

High pressure + CO2 46,400 m3/year 

46

AexAby 

7 Assuming average dose was about 50 g/m3 in 1991. 8 Assuming dose of about 20 g/m3
318 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX V TO CHAPTER 14 - Part A: Trend in Preplant Soil Applications List of nominated (2005 – 2011 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2010 in part) amounts of MB granted by Parties under the CUE pcommodity. Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2005 2006 2007 2008 Australia Cut Flowers – field 40.000 22.350 18.375 22.350 Australia Cut flowers – protected 20.000 10.425 Australia Cut flowers, bulbs – protected Vic 7.000 7.000 6.170 6.150 7.000 7.000 3.598 3.500 Australia Strawberry Fruit 90.000 67.000 Australia Strawberry runners 35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 29.790 29.790 29.790 35.750 37.500 35.750 35.750 Belgium Asparagus 0.630 0.225 0.630 0.225 Belgium Chicory 0.600 0.180 0.180 0.180 Belgium Chrysanthemums 1.800 0.720 1.120 Belgium Cucumber 0.610 0.545 0.610 0.545 Belgium Cut flowers – other 6.110 1.956 4.000 1.956 Belgium Cut flowers – roses 1.640 Belgium Endive (sep from lettuce) 1.650 1.650 Belgium Leek & onion seeds 1.220 0.155 0.660 Belgium Lettuce(& endive) 42.250 22.425 25.190 Belgium Nursery Not Predictable 0.384 0.900 0.384 Belgium Orchard pome & berry 1.350 0.621 1.350 0.621 Belgium Ornamental plants 5.660 0.000 Belgium Pepper & egg plant 5.270 1.350 3.000 1.350 Belgium Strawberry runners 3.400 0.900 3.400 0.900 Belgium Tomato (protected) 17.170 4.500 5.700 4.500 Belgium Tree nursery 0.230 0.155 0.230 0.155 Canada Strawberry runners (PEI) 14.792 6.840 7.995 7.462 7.462 7.462 5.261 (a)14.792 6.840 7.995 7.462 Canada Strawberry runners (Quebec) 1.826 (a) 1.826 1.826 Canada Strawberry runners (Ontario) 6.129 France Carrots 10.000 8.000 5.000 8.000 8.000 1.400 France Cucumber 85 revised to 60 60.000 15.000 60.000 60.000 12.500 France Cut-flowers 75.000 60.250 12.000 60.000 52.000 9.600 France Forest tree nursery 10.000 10.000 1.500 10.000 10.000 1.500 France Melon 10.000 10.000 7.500 6.000 France Nursery: orchard, raspberry 5.000 5.000 2.000 5.000 5.000 2.000 France Orchard replant 25.000 25.000 7.500 25.000 25.000 7.000 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2005 2006 2007 2008 France Pepper Incl in.tomato cun 27.500 6.000 27.500 6.000 France Strawberry fruit 90.000 86.000 34.000 90.000 86.000 France Strawberry runners 40.000 4.000 35.000 40.000 40.000 28.000 France Tomato (and eggplant for 2005 

only) 

150(all solanaceous) 

60.500 33.250 125.000 48.400 

France Eggplant 27.500 33.250 48.400 Greece Cucurbits 30.000 19.200 30.000 19.200 Greece Cut flowers 14.000 6.000 14.000 6.000 Greece Tomatoes 180.000 73.600 156.000 73.600 Israel Broomrape 250.000 250.000 125.000 12.500 250.000 250.00Israel Cucumber - protected new 2007 25.000 18.750 18.750 25.000 18.750 Israel Cut flowers – open field 77.000 67.000 80.755 53.345 42.777 42.554 77.000 67.000 74.540 44.750 Israel Cut flowers – protected 303.000 303.000 321.330 163.400 113.821 72.266 303.000 240.000 220.185 114.45Israel Fruit tree nurseries 50.000 45.000 10.000 50.000 45.000 7.500 Israel Melon – protected & field 148.000 142.000 140.000 87.500 87.500 87.500 125.650 99.400 105.000 87.500 Israel Potato 239.000 231.000 137.500 93.750 75.000 239.000 165.000 137.500 93.750 Israel Seed production 56.000 50.000 22.400 56.000 28.000 Israel Strawberries – fruit (Sharon) 196.000 196.000 176.200 64.125 52.250 47.500 196.000 196.000 93.000 105.96Israel Strawberry runners (Sharon) 35.000 35.000 20 15.800 13.570 35.000 35.000 28.000 31.900 Israel Strawberry runners and fruit Ghaza 87.875 67.500 67.500 Israel Tomatoes 90.000 22.750 Israel Sweet potato 95.000 20.000 111.50Italy Cut flowers (protected) 250.000 250.000 30.000 250.000 187.000 30.000 Italy Eggplant (protected) 280.000 200.000 15.000 194.000 156.000 Italy Melon (protected) 180.000 135.000 10.000 131.000 131.000 10.000 Italy Pepper (protected) 220.000 160.000 67.000 160.000 130.000 67.000 Italy Strawberry Fruit (Protected) 510.000 400.000 35.000 407.000 320.000 Italy Strawberry Runners 100.000 120.000 35.000 120.000 120.000 35.000 Italy Tomato (protected) 1300.000 1030.000 418.000 871.000 697.000 80.000 Japan Cucumber 88.300 88.800 72.400 68.600 61.400 34.100 29.120 88.300 88.800 72.400 51.450 Japan Ginger – field 119.400 119.400 112.200 112.100 102.200 53.400 47.450 119.400 119.400 109.701 84.075 Japan Ginger – protected 22.900 22.900 14.800 14.800 12.900 8.300 7.770 22.900 22.900 14.471 11.100 Japan Melon 194.100 203.900 182.200 182.200 168.000 90.800 77.600 194.100 203.900 182.200 136.65Japan Peppers (green and hot) 189.900 200.700 169.400 162.300 134.400 81.100 68.260 187.200 200.700 156.700 121.72Japan Watermelon 126.300 96.200 94.200 43.300 23.700 15.400 13.870 129.000 98.900 94.200 32.475 Malta Cucumber 0.096 0.127 Malta Eggplant 0.128 0.170 
320 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities  2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2005 2006 2007 2008 Malta Strawberry 0.160 0.212 Malta Tomatoes 0.475 0.594 New Zealand Nursery material 1.085 1.085 0.000 New Zealand Strawberry fruit 42.000 42.000 24.780 42.000 34.000 12.000 New Zealand Strawberry runners 10.000 10.000 5.720 8.000 8.000 6.234 Poland Strawberry Runners 40.000 40.000 25.000 12.000 40.000 40.000 24.500 Portugal Cut flowers 130.000 8.750 50.000 8.750 Spain Cut Flowers – Cadiz 53.000 53.000 35.000 53.000 42.000 Spain Cut Flowers – Catalonia 20.000 18.600 12.840 17.000 

(+Andalucia) 

20.000 15.000 43.490 

(+Andalucia) 

Spain Pepper 200.000 155.000 45.000 200.000 155.000 45.000 Spain Strawberry Fruit 556.000 499.290 80.000 556.000 499.290 0.0796 Spain Strawberry Runners 230.000 230.000 230.000 215.000 230.000 230.000 230.000 UK Cut flowers 7.560 6.050 UK Ornamental tree nursery 12.000 6.000 6.000 6.000 UK Strawberry (& raspberry in 2005) 80.000 63.600 68.000 54.500 UK Raspberry nursery 4.400 4.400 USA Chrys. Cuttings/roses 29.412 29.412 0.000 USA Cucurbits – field 1187.800 747.839 598.927 588.949 411.757 340.405 218.032 1187.800 747.839 592.891 486.75USA Eggplant – field 76.761 101.245 96.480 79.546 62.789 34.732 21.561 76.721 82.167 85.363 66.018 USA Forest nursery seedlings 192.515 157.694 152.629 133.140 125.758 120.853 106.043 192.515 157.694 122.032 131.20USA Ginger 9.200 9.200 0.000 USA Orchard replant 706.176 827.994 405.415 405.666 314.007 226.021 203.591 706.176 527.600 405.400 393.72USA Ornamentals 210.949 162.817 149.965 138.538 137.776 95.204 70.178 154.000 148.483 137.835 138.53USA Nursery stock - fruit trees, 

raspberries, roses 

45.789 64.528 12.684 51.102 27.663 17.954 7.955 45.800 64.528 28.275 51.102 

USA Peppers – field 1094.782 1498.530 1151.751 919.006 783.821 463.282 212.775 1094.782 1243.542 1106.753 756.33USA Strawberry fruit – field 2468.873 1918.400 1733.901 1604.669 1336.754 1103.422 1023.471 2052.846 1730.828 1476.019 1349.5USA Strawberry runners 54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 8.837 7.381 7.381 54.988 56.291 4.483 8.838 USA Tomato – field 2876.046 2844.985 2334.047 1840.100 1406.484 994.582 336.191 737.584 2476.365 2065.246 1406.4USA Turfgrass 352.194 131.600 78.040 52.189 0 131.600 78.04 0 USA Sweet potato 224.528 18.144 18.144 18.144 14.515 18.144 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

ANNEX VI TO CHAPTER 14 – Part B: Post-harvest Structural and Commodity Applications List of nominated (2005 – 2010 in part) and exempted (2005 – 2009 in part) amounts of MB granted by Parties under the CUE pcommodity. Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 200

Australia Almonds 1.900 2.100 1.900 2.100 Australia Rice consumer packs 12.300 12.300 10.225 9.200 

+1.8 

9.200 7.820 6.150 6.150 9.205 9.2

Belgium Artefacts and structures 0.600 0.307 0.590 0.307 Belgium Antique structure & furniture 0.750 0.199 0.319 0.199 Belgium Churches, monuments and ships' 

quarters 

0.150 0.059 0.150 0.059 

Belgium Electronic equipment 0.100 0.035 0.100 0.035 Belgium Empty silo 0.050 0.043 0.050 0.043 Belgium Flour mill see mills below 0.125 0.072 See mills 

below 

0.072 

Belgium Flour mills 10.000 4.170 9.515 4.170 Belgium Mills 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200 Belgium Food processing facilities 0.300 0.300 0.300 0.300 Belgium Food Processing premises 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 Belgium Food storage (dry) structure 0.120 0.120 0.120 0.000 Belgium Old buildings 7.000 0 .306 1.150 0.306 Belgium Old buildings and objects 0.450 0.282 0.000 0.282 Belgium Woodworking premises 0.300 0.101 0.300 0.101 Canada Flour mills 47.200 34.774 30.167 28.650 26.913 22.878 (a)47 34.774 30.167 28.Canada Pasta manufacturing facilities (a) 10.457 6.757 6.067 4.740 (a) 10.457 6.757 6.0Canada Commodities 0.068 France Seeds sold by PLAN-SPG company 0.135 0.135 0.100 0.135 0.135 0.096 France Mills 55.000 40.000 8.000 40.000 35.000 8.000 France Rice consumer packs 2.000 2.000 2.000 2.000 France Chestnuts 2.000 2.000 1.800 2.000 2.000 1.800 Germany Artefacts 0.250 0.100 0.250 0.100 Germany Mills and Processors 45.000 19.350 45.000 19.350 Greece Dried fruit 4.280 3.081 0.900 4.280 3.081 0.45 Greece Mills and Processors 23.000 16.000 1.340 23.000 15.445 1.340 Greece Rice and legumes 2.355 2.355 Ireland Mills 0.888 0.611 0.888 
322 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 200

Israel Artefacts 0.650 0.650 0.600 0.650 0.650 Israel Dates (post harvest) 3.444 3.444 2.200 1.800 2.100 3.444 2.755 2.200 1.8Israel Flour mills (machinery & storage) 2.140 1.490 1.490 0.800 0.300 2.140 1.490 1.040 0.3Israel Furniture– imported 1.422 1.422 2.042 1.422 0.000 Italy Artefacts 5.500 5.500 5.000 5.225 0.000 5.000 Italy Mills and Processors 160.000 130.000 25.000 160.000 65.000 25.000 Japan Chestnuts 7.100 6.500 6.500 6.300 5.800 5.400 7.100 6.800 6.500 6.3Latvia Grains 2.502 2.502 Netherlands Strawberry runners post harvest 0.120 0.120 0.120 0 0.120 Poland Medicinal herbs & dried mushrooms 

as dry commodities 

4.000 3.560 1.800 0.500 4.100 3.560 1.800 1.8

Poland Coffee, cocoa beans (a) 2.160 2.000 0.500 2.160 1.420 1.4Spain Rice 50.000 42.065 Switzerland Mills & Processors 8.700 7.000 8.700 7.000 UK Aircraft 0.165 0.165 UK Mills and Processors 47.130 10.195 4.509 47.130 10.195 4.509 UK Cereal processing plants 8.131 3.480 (a) 8.131 3.480 UK Cheese stores 1.640 1.248 1.248 1.640 1.248 1.248 UK Dried commodities (rice, fruits and 

nuts) Whitworths 

2.400 1.256 2.400 1.256 

UK Herbs and spices 0.035 0.037 0.030 0.035 0.037 UK Mills and Processors (biscuits) 2.525 1.787 0.479 2.525 1.787 UK Spices structural equip. 1.728 1.728 0.000 0.479 UK Spices stored 0.030 0.030 0.000 UK Structures buildings (herbs and 

spices) 

3.000 1.872 0.908 3.000 1.872 0.908 

UK Structures, processors and storage 

(Whitworths) 

1.100 0.880 0.257 1.100 0.880 0.257 

UK Tobacco equipment 0.523 0.050 UK Woven baskets 0.770 0.770 USA Dried fruit and nuts (walnuts, 

pistachios, dried fruit and dates and dried beans) 

89.166 87.719 91.299 67.699 58.912 19.242 89.166 87.719 78.983 58.

USA Dry commodities/ structures (cocoa 

beans) 

61.519 61.519 64.028 52.256 51.002 61.519 55.367 64.082 53.

USA Dry commodities/ structures 

(processed foods, herbs and spices, dried milk and cheese processing facilities) NPMA 

83.344 83.344 85.801 72.693 66.777 37.778 83.344 69.118 82.771 69.
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Party Industry Total CUN MB Quantities Total CUE MB Quantities 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2005 2006 2007 200

USA Smokehouse hams (Dry cure pork 

products) (building and product) 

136.304 135.742 40.854 19.669 19.699 4.465 67.907 81.708 18.998 19.

USA Mills and Processors 536.328 505.982 401.889 362.952 291.418 173.023 483.000 461.758 401.889 348

May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 325

15 TEAP and TOC Organisation Issues 

15.1 Current TEAP and TOC membership 

Currently TEAP has 22 members; this number includes, the TEAP co-chairs, the TOC cochairs, Senior Expert members and one temporary member. Of the 22 members, 8 are from 

Article 5 Parties and 14 are from non-Article 5 Parties. 

As of April 2009, the total membership of the the TEAP and its six TOCs have 151 

members, including 54 experts from Article 5 Parties and 97 experts from non-Article 5 

Parties (which includes a small number of experts from non-A5 former CEITs in Eastern 

Europe and Central Asia). There are an additional 12 consulting (non-voting) members in the 

Halons and Refrigeration Technical Options Committees. 

During the period between the end of the first quarter 2008 and the end of the first quarter 

2009, 25 experts retired, resigned, or were asked to resign in the context of continuous efforts 

to rationalize the TEAP structure. In total, 12 new experts were appointed to the TEAP and 

the TOCs during that same period. 

15.2 Financial constraints and challenges encountered by TEAP and TOC 

members 

TEAP is grateful for the continuing support of national governments, the European 

Commission, associations and companies that finance time and expenses for the participation 

of experts in the TEAP, TOCs and Task Forces. Over the years it has become increasingly 

difficult for non-Article 5 experts, who work in the private sector, to find funding for travel 

and miscellaneous meeting expenses. Taking also into account the current financial 

circumstances, it is becoming almost impossible for non-Article 5 experts to get enough 

support from their employers to cover the time spent to complete tasks and to travel to and 

stay at meetings; as a result, the TEAP and TOC operations are becoming even more difficult. 

TEAP would like to remind Parties here that TEAP and its TOCs are producing reports and 

technical papers at a cost much lower than if consultants would be contracted for the same 

assignments, due to the fact that TEAP and TOC experts spend huge amounts of voluntary 

time in the completion of reports requested by Parties. 

Mindful that Parties have repeatedly rejected requests for financing from the Ozone Trust 

Fund or other UN modalities, TEAP is urgently requesting all non-Article 5 Party 

governments to once more look into all possibilities to fund certain costs for their national 

experts. Individual TEAP and TOC members, from their side, will also continue to seek 

funding from governments, associations, and companies. 

As also mentioned in earlier reports, TEAP and its TOCs continue to look for ways to 

minimise costs including: choosing cost-effective locations for meetings; seeking hosts for 

meetings and discounts for hotel rooms; and at the same time rationalising membership, as 

needed. 

15.3 Technology and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP) 

Mr. Jose Pons-Pons, co-chair of the TEAP (and its MTOC), has indicated that he plans to 

resign from the TEAP by the end of 2010, after nineteen years of membership. 

TEAP has also started to work out succession planning for several of its members, both TOC 

co-chairs and Senior Experts, and will report on progress made in its 2010 Progress Report. 
326 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP --and its TOCs-- are concerned over the resignations and retirements of some of their 

most experienced members. It is important to maintain quality, objectivity, and timeliness of 

TEAP findings; currently much of this has been possible thanks to the motivation of many 

members, however, it is absolutely necessary to maintain this motivation and provide 

sufficient support to make the membership in TEAP and its TOCs feasible, desirable and 

professionally rewarding. 

This also involves the addition or retirement of experts in some TOCs in order to adequately 

cope with the changing emphasis in many of the requests made by Parties for the submission 

of TEAP reports. 

Of course, one of the main tasks of TEAP and all its TOCs is the completion of the 

assessment reports, where the next series of reports have to be submitted to UNEP by 31 

December 2010 (following Decision XIX/20 taken in 2007). 

15.4 Medical Technical Options Committee (MTOC) 

The resignation of Mr. Jose Pons-Pons from TEAP will also lead to a vacancy in the co-chair 

group for the MTOC. While Mr. Pons plans to continue as an ordinary MTOC member after 

2010, the MTOC co-chairs are investigating how the succession could best be handled and 

will report to Parties in the 2010 Progress Report. . 

15.5 Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) 

The recent strengthening and adjustment of the MBTOC has improved the efficiency of 

meetings and the consensus process. The two MBTOC Sub-Committees, Soils and QSC, 

have met in different locations in 2009, in order to reduce costs and to make important field 

visits. 

TEAP and its MBTOC have established the QPS Task Force, which is chaired by Ms. Marta 

Pizano (MBTOC co-chair) and Dr. Jonathan Banks (MBTOC member). For the duration that 

the the Task Force will be active, Dr. Banks will be a temporary TEAP member, as set out in 

the TEAP Terms of Reference. 

A first interim report by the QPS Task Force is part of this 2009 Progress Report. 

15.6 Refrigeration, AC and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee (RTOC) 

Dr. Radhey S. Agarwal decided to resign as a co-chair of the RTOC, and will continue as an 

ordinary RTOC member. In a recent RTOC meeting, held in Montreal in March 2009, the 

RTOC members considered his resignation and decided by consensus that Dr. Roberto de 

Aguiar Peixoto from Brazil should be Dr. Agarwal’s successor, dependent on the Parties 

approval of his appointment at MOP-21. Dr. Peixoto is a long-standing member of the RTOC 

and his possible co-chairmanship has already been supported in a letter to UNEP by the 

Brazilian government. 

RTOC has reviewed its membership in 2008. This has resulted in a small reduction in the 

number of members; however, some new members were added to chapters where there was 

under-representation. The RTOC is still looking for an expert from non-Article 5 countries 

for the RTOC heat pump chapter (e.g. from the IEA Heat Pump Centre in Sweden and/or 

from certain institutions in Japan) and for some Article 5 members, who have adequate 

oversight in Article 5 regions in order to be able to report on the CFC phase-out process, on 

recovery and recycling, and on the management of banks of ozone depleting substances. 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 327

16 TEAP Member Biographies 

The following contains the background information for all TEAP members as at April 2009. 

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 

Stephen O. Andersen, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel since 1989, is Director of 

Strategic Climate Projects in the Climate Protection Partnerships Division of the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency and previously Deputy Director of the Stratospheric Protection Division. He created EPA’s first 

voluntary partnerships including accelerated phase-out agreements in food packaging foam, mobile AC, and 

solvents and he helped organise the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation and the Industry Cooperative for 

Ozone Layer Protection Prior to joining EPA he was a university professor, a consultant, and an employee of 

environmental, law, and energy NGOs. With K Madhava Sarma he is author of “Protecting the Ozone Layer: 

The United Nations History,” (Earthscan 2002); with Durwood Zaelke he is author of “Industry Genius: 

Inventions and People Protecting the Climate and Fragile Ozone Layer,” (Greenleaf 2003); with K. Madhava 

Sarma and Kristen N. Taddonio he is author of “Technology Transfer for the Ozone Layer: Lessons for Climate 

Change,” (Earthscan 2007); and with Guus J.M. Velders, John S. Daniel, David W. Fahey, and Mack McFarland 

he is author of “The Importance of the Montreal Protocol in Protecting Climate,” Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences, 20 March 2007. He earned his M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of California 

Berkeley. He chaired and co-chaired the Solvents TOC from 1989 to 1995, chaired the 1999 HFC and PFC Task 

Force, and co-chaired several Task Forces. He served on the Steering Committee to the “IPCC/TEAP Special 

Report Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related to Hydrofluorocarbons and 

Perfluorocarbons” and he participated in the Science Assessment Panel in 2006. Dr. Andersen’s spouse works 

for the U.S. EPA Office of Pesticide Programs and Toxic Substances in a division that registers bio-pesticides, 

including potential substitutes for methyl bromide. The U.S. EPA makes in-kind contributions of wages, travel, 

communication, and other expenses and some travel is sponsored by the U.S. DoD. With approval of its 

government ethics officer, EPA allows expenses to be paid by other governments and organisations such as the 

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 

Mr. Paul Ashford 

(Foams TOC Co-chair) 

Principal Consultant 

Caleb Management Services 

The Old Dairy, Woodend Farm Cromhall, 

Wotton-under-Edge 

Gloucestershire, GL12 8AA 

United Kingdom 

Telephone: 44 1454 269330 

Fax: 44 1454 269197 

Mobile: 44 7774 110 814 

Paul Ashford, Co-chair of the Rigid and Flexible Foams Technical Options Committee since 1998, is the owner 

and managing director of Caleb Management Services Ltd., a consulting company working in the chemical 

regulatory and sustainability arenas. He co-chaired the TEAP Task Force on the Supplement Report to the 

“IPCC/TEAP Special Report: Safeguarding the ozone layer and the global climate system: issues related to 
328 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons” (2005) and the Task Force on Emissions Discrepancies in 2006. 

Paul Ashford has been involved in the work for the Task Force for Decision XX/8 and co-ordinated the Interim 

Report of the Task Force for Decision XX/7. Until 1994, he worked for BP Chemicals in the division that 

developed licensed foam technology using ODS and was responsible for the adoption of alternatives. He has 

over 25 years direct experience of foam related technical issues and has conducted numerous studies to 

characterise the foam sector and inform future policy development. His funding for TEAP activities, which 

includes some sponsorship of time, is provided jointly under contract by the Department of Business, Enterprise 

and Regulatory Reform (BERR) and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in the 

UK. Much of his earlier work on banks, emissions and foam end-of-life management, performed to inform both 

IPCC and TEAP processes was supported by the US EPA. There is increasing overlap with IPCC and 

UNFCCC climate objectives in support of greenhouse gas emissions reporting and reduction by Governments, 

including the assessment financial mechanisms to support this process. This and other related non-TEAP work 

is covered under separate contracts from relevant commissioning organisations including international agencies 

(e.g. UNMFS, UNDP and 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. 

Dr. Jonathan Banks 

(QPS Taskforce Co-chair) 

Grainsmith Pty Ltd 

10 Beltana Rd 

Pialligo ACT 2609 

Australia 

Telephone: 61 2 6248 9228 

Fax: 61 2 6248 9228 

Dr. Jonathan Banks, Cochair of TEAP’s QPS Task Force, is a private consultant. He was a member of the 1992 

Methyl Bromide Assessment and from 1993 to 1998 and 2001 to 2005 co-chaired the Methyl Bromide TOC. He 

worked as a Research Scientist with the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research 

Organization (CSIRO) from1972 to 1999 on grain storage technologies, including use of improved use of 

fumigants. He is co-inventor of carbonyl sulfide, an alternative fumigant to methyl bromide in some 

applications. Patent rights have been assigned to his employer, CSIRO. Dr Banks has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs. He has stock in Brambles Ltd, a company that inter alia leases wooden pallets for freight. 

The pallets may or may not be treated with methyl bromide or alternatives. His spouse is co-owner of their 

commercial organic apple orchard. She has no financial interests relating to ozone-depleting substances. He has 

served on some national committees concerned with ODS and their control; within the last 4 years he has 

received contracts from UNEP, other institutions and public companies related to methyl bromide alternatives 

and grain storage technology--including training in fumigation (methyl bromide and alternatives), fumigation 

technology and recapture systems for methyl bromide. In 2005, 2006 and 2009 he received some support from 

UNEP for TEAP activities. Other funding for his current activities has been 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 

Prof. Mohamed Besri, is a full time Professor of Plant Pathology, ecology of soil borne pathogens, and 

Integrated Pest Management at the Hassan II Institute of Agronomy and Veterinary Medicine, Rabat, Morocco 

(HII IAVM). The HII IAVM has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it houses specialists 

in Soil-borne Plant Pathogens and MLF projects (strawberries, bananas, cut flowers , vegetables ). 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 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 329

them own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Dr Besri works 

occasionally as a consultant to UNEP, UNIDO and other international organisations 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. 

Mr. David Catchpole 

(Halons TOC Co-chair) 

Technical Consultant 

Petrotechnical Resources Alaska 

Anchorage 

Alaska, U.S.A. 

Telephone 

And fax: 1 907 868 3911 

Mr. David V. Catchpole, Co-Chair of the Halons Technical Options Committee and Member of the Technology 

and Economics Assessment Panel since 2005, works part time for Petrotechnical Resources Alaska (PRA), an 

Anchorage, Alaska based company that provides consulting services to oil companies in Alaska. From 1991 to 

2004 he was a member of the HTOC. From 1970 until 1999, he was an employee of the BP group of companies, 

most recently BP Exploration Alaska, where he worked for nine years in the environmental department on 

alternatives to halon and on halon banking. Mr. Catchpole advises BP Exploration Alaska on fire protection and 

halon issues as his main activity for PRA. BP Exploration Alaska has an interest in the topics of the Montreal 

Protocol because it uses halon 1301 for explosion prevention and fire suppression in its enclosed oil and gas 

processing modules on the North Slope of Alaska. Mr. Catchpole has no proprietary interest in alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, 

however his retirement portfolio contains stock in BP plc. Mr. Catchpole’s spouse does not work for or consult 

for any organisation that has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. His spouse has no proprietary 

interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives 

or substitutes to ODSs and does not consult for organisations seeking to phase-out ODSs. Mr. Catchpole 

typically receives funding to support salary and travel to TEAP/TOC meetings from the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Department of Defense; and the Halon Recycling 

Corporation and the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation, which are not-for-profit industry coalitions that in 

turn receive contributions for this funding from members. Contributors are: BP Exploration Alaska, 

ConocoPhillips Alaska, DuPont, Chemtura, American Pacific, Firetrace, Halon Banking Systems, Westco and 

Remtec. 

Prof. Dr. Biao Jiang 

(Chemicals TOC Co-chair) 

Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry 

(SIOC), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) 

354 Fenglin Road 

Shanghai 200032 

The People’s Republic of China 

Telephone: 86 21 54925201 

Fax: 81 21 64166128 

Dr Biao Jiang, Co-chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee and TEAP member since 2005, is 

Professor of Chemistry of Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy Of Sciences and a 

member of editorial advisory board of Chemical Communication, Royal Society of Chemistry, United Kingdom. 

He received his Ph. D. in 1988 form Lanzhou University. After two years as postdoctoral research in the 

organometallic chemistry at Shanghai institute of organic chemistry, he spent three years as a visiting scientist 

working on the medicinal chemistry in Dupont-Merck Pharmaceutical Co. at the Dupont experimental station, 

Delaware, USA. In 1995, he returned to SIOC, where he is currently professor of Chemistry and Director. The 

research projects of Professor Jiang’s group involve the development new methodology of asymmetric synthesis, 

total synthesis of marine natural alkaloids and steroids, fluorine-containing bioactive molecular, as well as 

organic process research and development of green chemistry. Professor Jiang has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, nor does he own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs. Costs of travel, communication, and other expenses related to participation in the TEAP, its 

Chemicals TOC, and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 
330 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Dr. Sergey Kopylov

(Halons TOC Co-chair) 

Head of Research Centre 

All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection 

VNIIPO 

12, Balashikha 

Moscow Region 

Telephone: 7 495 5219747 

Fax: 7 495 5214394 

Dr. Sergey Kopylov, Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) Consulting Expert, is the Head of the 

Scientific Centre of the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute for Fire Protection (VNIIPO). VNIIPO has an 

interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol as a body responsible for technical control of Montreal Protocol 

related issues in Russia. VNIIPO has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own 

or own stock in companies producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs. Dr. Kopylov works as a 

technical expert to the Russian government on matters related to the implementation of the Montreal Protocol. 

Dr. Kopylov's spouse does not work for or consult for any organisation or company. Dr. Kopylov's spouse and 

children have no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, do not own or own stock in 

companies producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and do not consult for organisations seeking to 

phase-out ODSs. Dr. Kopylov's travel to HTOC meetings is paid for by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 

Dr. Lambert Kuijpers 

(Panel Co-chair, Refrigeration TOC Co-chair) 

Technical University, Connector 1.15b 

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 

Lambert Kuijpers, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel since 1992 and Co-chair of the 

Refrigeration, Air-conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee since 1989, works on a part-time 

basis for the Department “Technology for Sustainable Development” at the Technical University Eindhoven, 

The Netherlands. He co-chaired the TEAP Replenishment Task Forces since 1996 (the last one being the 2008 

TEAP Replenishment Task Force). He served on the Steering Committee to the “IPCC/TEAP Special Report 

“Safeguarding the ozone layer and the global climate system: issues related to Hydrofluorocarbons and 

Perfluorocarbons”. Dr. Kuijpers co-chaired the 2005 Task Force for the TEAP Supplementary Report to the 

IPCC/TEAP Special Report, the 2006 Task Force on Emissions Discrepancies and the 2007 Task Force on the 

Response to Decision XVIII/12. He co-ordinated the activities for the Task Force on Decision XX/8 and was 

involved in the work of the Task Force for Decision XX/7. He was a Lead Author for both the Third and the 

Fourth IPCC Assessment Report. He also was a member of the Ozone Science Assessment Panel in 2005-2006. 

Until 1993, he worked for Philips Eindhoven (NL) in the development of refrigeration, air conditioning, and heat 

pump systems to use alternatives to ozone-depleting substances. He is financially supported (through the UNEP 

Ozone Secretariat) by the European Commission (and in certain years by some EU member state governments) 

for his activities related to the TEAP and the Refrigeration TOC. Dr. Kuijpers has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODS. He occasionally is a consultant to governmental and non-governmental organisations, such 

as the World Bank, UNIDO, UNEP DTIE and the Multilateral Fund. 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 (this 

company is involved in the R&D of components and equipment for refrigeration, air-conditioning and heating). 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 331

Ms. Michelle Marcotte 

Marcotte Consulting Inc. 

(Marcotte Consulting is a Canadian corporation) 

home address: 

10104 East Franklin Ave 

Glenn Dale, Maryland 20769 

USA 

Telephone: 1-301-262-9866 

www.marcotteconsulting.com 

Ms Michelle Marcotte was a member of the 1992 Methyl Bromide Assessment and subsequently a member of 

the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee between 1992 and 2005; she was confirmed as Co-Chair in 

2005. Until 1993 she worked for MDS Nordion, a supplier of radiation processing equipment which is an 

alternative to the use of methyl bromide in some commodity and quarantine situations. Since then, Ms Marcotte, 

through Marcotte Consulting, has provided consulting services to governments and agri-food companies in eight 

countries on agri-environmental issues, food technology, regulatory affairs and radiation processing. Marcotte 

Consulting has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because of its long time market development 

work in food irradiation, an alternative to some methyl bromide uses, and because of its interest in food 

processing, food safety and trade. In the field of methyl bromide alternatives, Ms Marcotte has published case 

studies in pest control in food processing, in stored commodities, in alternatives for quarantine and in greenhouse 

use. She is a member of the Canada Industry-Government Methyl Bromide Working Group and the Canada-US 

Methyl Bromide Working Group; both organisations work to achieve the phase-out of methyl bromide in the 

agri-food sector. Marcotte has consulted to companies, industry associations, the International Atomic Energy 

Agency and US AID on irradiation as a methyl bromide alternative in food processing, quarantine and trade. She 

has also prepared consulting reports summarising research in methyl bromide alternatives and case studies on 

food processing for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Ms Marcotte has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs. Ms Marcotte’s spouse works for United States Department of Agriculture managing 

research in methyl bromide alternatives and is a member of MBTOC. He does not have proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS and does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or 

substitutes to ODSs. Ms Marcotte receives a consulting contract from the Government of Canada, Environment 

Canada. The funds for Ms Marcotte for travel to TEAP, MBTOC and Montreal Protocol meetings and to support 

her work on the MBTOC are provided by the the Government of Canada, Environment Canada. 

Mr. E. Thomas Morehouse Jr. 

(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 

Thomas Morehouse, Senior Expert Member for Military Issues since 1997, is a Research Adjunct at the Institute 

for Defense Analyses (IDA), Washington D.C., USA. From 1989 until 1996 he co-chaired 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. IDA makes in-kind contributions of communications 

and miscellaneous expenses. IDA is a not-for-profit Federally Funded Research Center (FFRDC) that undertakes 

work exclusively for the US Department of Defense. Funding for wages and travel is provided by grants from 

the 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’s 

spouse consults occasionally for the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on 

management issues. NOAA conducts research on stratospheric ozone and climate. 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. 
332 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

Ms. Marta Pizano 

(MBTOC Co-chair and QPSTF Co-chair) 

Consultant 

Calle 85 No. 20 – 25 Of 202B 

Bogotá, Colombia 

Telephone: 57 1 6348020 or 5302036 

Fax: 57 1 2362554 

Ms Marta Pizano is a consultant on methyl bromide alternatives, particularly for cut flower production, and has 

actively promoted methyl bromide alternatives among growers in many countries. She is a regular consultant for 

the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund (MLF) and its implementing agencies. In this capacity, she has 

contributed to the methyl bromide phase-out programs in nearly twenty Article 5 Parties around the world, 

assisting growers with the adoption of sustainable alternatives and the implementation of IPM programs. She is a 

frequent speaker at national and international methyl bromide conferences and has authored numerous articles 

and publications on alternatives to this fumigant. She has been a member of MBTOC since 1998 and a co-chair 

since 2005. She became co-chair of the revitalised QPS Task Force in 2008. 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 with travel, communication, and others related to participation in the TEAP, 

MBTOC, and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 

Mr. Jose Pons Pons 

(Panel Co-chair, Medical TOC Co-chair) 

Spray Quimica 

Urb.Ind.Soco, Calle Sur #14 

La Victoria 2121, Edo Aragua 

Venezuela 

Telephone: 58 244 3223297 or 3214079 or 3223891 

Fax: 58 244 3220192 

Jose Pons, Co-chair of the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel since 2004 and of the Medical 

Technical Options Committee since 1991, is President of Spray Química C.A. . Spray Química had an interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it used ODS in some of its aerosol products for industrial 

maintenance. Mr. Pons is president of the Venezuelan Chamber of Aerosols, CAVEA and has worked in ozone 

layer protection since 1989. He has participated in several TEAP Task Forces and on the Steering Committee to 

the “IPCC/TEAP Special Report Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System: Issues Related 

to Hydrofluorocarbons and Perfluorocarbons”. Mr Pons has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes 

to ODS, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not have an 

interest in the outcome of essential use nominations, and does not consult for organisations seeking to phase out 

ODS. Mr Pons’s spouse has no interest in matters before the Protocol; she is also a manager/engineer at Spray 

Química. Mr Pons has worked occasionally as a project reviewer for the MLF and implementing agencies on 

matters related to the Montreal Protocol. 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 2009 TEAP Progress Report 333

Dr. Ian J. Porter 

(MBTOC Co-chair) 

Consultant and Principal Research Scientist 

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 

Dr Ian Porter is an Associate Professor with LaTrobe University and Principal Research Scientist with the 

Victorian Department of Primary Industries (DPI), but takes leave from his organisation to conduct Montreal 

Protocol duties. DPI has an interest in developing sustainable alternatives to methyl bromide and integrated pest 

management strategies for control of plant pathogens and pests, and issues related to biosecurity. He has been a 

member of a number of National Committees regulating ODS, has led the Australian research program on 

methyl bromide alternatives for soils since 1992 and has 28 years experience in researching sustainable methods 

for soil disinfestation of plant pathogens with over 250 research publications. He has been a member of MBTOC 

since 1997, chair of the Soils sub committee from 2001 to 2005 and MBTOC Co-chair since 2005. Neither Ian, 

his 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 leading national 

programs on integrated pest management and soil health in the Australian horticultural industries. He has acted 

as a key consultant for UNEP and UNIDO in developing programmes to assist China, Mexico and CEIT 

countries to replace methyl bromide. He regularly participates in workshops to assist countries with alternatives 

to methyl bromide and gives keynote addresses to international conferences on alternatives to methyl bromide in 

horticultural industries. He is presently funded by the European Commission through the Ozone Secretariat to 

support and attend MBTOC and TEAP meetings. In kind contributions from the Victorian Department of 

Primary Industries and Australian Federal Government Research Funds have provided past support. 

Prof. Miguel W. Quintero 

(Foams TOC Co-chair) 

Consultant 

Avenida Carrera 1 # 78-10, IV-601 

Bogotá, Colombia 

Telephone: +57 1 3492325 

Mobile: +57 314 263 7857 

Prof. Miguel W. Quintero, Co-chair of the Foams Technical Options Committee since 2002, is a consultant in 

the area of polyurethane technology. He 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. Prof. Quintero worked during 21 years (until 2000) for Dow Chemical at the Research & 

Development and Technical Service & Development Departments in the area of rigid polyurethane foam. In the 

period January 2007- October 2008, 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 ozone depleting substances and 

their substitutes and alternatives. He is a regular consultant for the Montreal Protocol’s implementing agencies. 

Costs associated to travel, communication, and others related to participation in the TEAP, FTOC and relevant 

Montreal Protocol meetings are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 
334 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

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 

Dr. Rae, Co-chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee since 2005, is a Honorary Professorial Fellow 

at the University of Melbourne, Australia, and a member of advisory bodies for several Australian government 

agencies dealing with chemical issues and in particular the Stockholm Convention. He co-chaired the 2001 and 

2004 Process Agent Task Forces. He is a member of the POPs Review Committee for the Stockholm 

Convention. On occasions, he acts as consultant to government agencies and to universities and companies and 

he has been an expert witness in a case involving alleged patent infringement involving HFC- 134a and its 

lubricants. Neither he nor his wife owns stock in any company dealing with ozone depleting substances or their 

alternatives. He contributes the time for his own participation in TEAP activities. The Australian Government 

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts finances the cost of travel and accommodation for 

Dr. Rae’s attendance at meetings of the CTOC, TEAP, OEWG and MOP. 

Mr. K. Madhava Sarma 

(Senior Expert Member) 

AB50, Anna Nagar, 

Chennai 600 040 

India 

Telephone: 91 44 2626 8924 

Fax: 91 44 4217 0932 

K. Madhava Sarma, Senior Expert Member since 2001, and member of the Task Force on the TEAP Legacy, 

retired in 2000, after nine years as Executive Secretary, Ozone Secretariat, UNEP. Earlier, he was a senior 

official in the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MOEF), Government of India and held various senior 

positions in a state government in India. He works occasionally as a consultant to UNEP and is an unpaid 

member of the Technical and Finance Committee of the Ozone Cell, MOEF, Government of India. He has 

worked as consultant for two chemical companies to work out the likely amendments needed to the Montreal 

Protocol if HFCs were made controlled substances under the Protocol. He is working as consultant to the 

UNFCCC Secretariat to assist its Expert Group on Technology Transfer to prepare a Strategy for scaling up 

Technology Development, Deployment and Diffusion. Neither he or his spouse own stock in any company 

connected to ODS or alternatives or substitutes. Costs of travel, communication, and other expenses related to 

participation in the TEAP and relevant Montreal Protocol meetings, are paid by UNEP’s Ozone Secretariat. 

Dr. Helen Tope 

(Medical TOC Co-chair) 

Principal Consultant 

Energy International Australia 

Director, Planet Futures 

Unit 2, 9 Osborne Street 

Williamstown, Victoria 3016 

Australia 

Telephone: 61 414 563 474 

Fax: 61 3 9397 0341 

Helen Tope, Co-chair Medical Technical Options Committee since 1995, is Principal Consultant of Energy 

International Australia and also Director of Planet Futures with whom she is an independent consultant providing 

strategic, policy and technical advice and facilitation services to government, industry and other nongovernmental organisations on climate change, ozone-depleting substances, and other environmental issues. Dr 

Tope’s business has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because her potential clients are also 

interested in these topics. Dr Tope has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not own 

stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not have an interest in the 

outcome of essential use nominations, and does not currently consult for organisations seeking to phase out 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 335

ODS. Dr Tope’s spouse has no interest in matters before the Protocol. At the invitation of UNEP ROAP, Dr 

Tope participated as MTOC co-chair in the 2008 Langkawi regional workshop on MDIs. UNEP ROAP has 

contracted the National Asthma Council Australia to produce a package of resources on awareness raising on the 

transition to CFC-free MDIs to assist countries preparing for CFC MDI phase-out. At the invitation of the 

National Asthma Council Australia, Dr Tope is a member of the Advisory Panel for this project. In 2009 Dr 

Tope’s funding for travel to MTOC, TEAP and Montreal Protocol meetings are provided from two sources. The 

Ozone Secretariat provides a grant for Dr Tope’s travel to the MTOC and TEAP meetings from funds granted to 

the Secretariat unconditionally by the International Pharmaceutical Aerosol Consortium (IPAC), which is a nonprofit corporation. The Australian Government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts 

provides funding for the cost of travel and accommodation for Dr Tope’s attendance of the OEWG-29 and MOP21. 

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 

Dr. Daniel P. Verdonik, Co-Chair, Halons Technical Options Committee and Member, Technology and 

Economic Assessment Panel, is the Director, Environmental Programs, Hughes Associates, Inc. Dr. Verdonik is 

a full time, salaried employee at Hughes Associates, Inc., in Baltimore, MD and Arlington, VA providing 

consulting services in fire protection and environmental management. Hughes Associates, Inc. has an interest in 

the topics of the Montreal Protocol because it provides a wide range of fire protection research, design and 

consulting services to government and corporate clients, including work related to halons and halon alternatives. 

Dr. Verdonik has no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, does not own stock in companies 

producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs and through Hughes Associates, Inc. provides consulting 

services for organisations seeking to phase-out ODSs. Dr. Verdonik is a share holder in Hughes Associates, Inc., 

which does not own stock in companies producing ODSs, 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 (now DuPont). Dr. Verdonik’s spouse 

works for the USEPA, which has an interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol because the Agency is 

responsible for implementing national regulations and policies to meet the US commitments under the Protocol. 

Dr. Verdonik’s spouse and dependent child have no proprietary interest in alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, do 

not own stock in companies producing ODSs or alternatives or substitutes to ODSs, and do not consult for 

organisations seeking to phase-out ODSs. Hughes Associates, Inc. typically receives funding to support Dr. 

Verdonik’s salary and travel to TEAP/HTOC/TSB meetings from MLF, UNEP, the U.S. Department of Defense, 

the U.S. EPA, the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Halon Recycling Corporation, and 

the Halon Alternatives Research Corporation, who in-turn currently receives funding to support these efforts 

from the following sponsors: BP Exploration, Alaska; ConocoPhillips, Alaska; DuPont; American Pacific; 

Firetrace; Halon Banking Systems; Wesco; Remtec. From time-to-time, Hughes Associates, Inc may also 

provide support for labour 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 

Prof. Ashley Woodcock, Co-chair of the Medical Technical Options Committee and Member of the Technology 

and Economic Assessment Panel, is a Respiratory physician at the University Hospital of South Manchester, and 

Head of the School of Translational Medicine for the University of Manchester. The Hospital and University 
336 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

have no direct interest in the topics of the Montreal Protocol. Prof. Woodcock has no proprietary interest in 

alternatives or substitutes to ODS, does not own stock in companies producing ODS or alternatives or substitutes 

to ODS, does not have an interest in the outcome of essential use nominations. Prof. Woodcock carries out 

unrelated consulting, research and educational lectures for pharmaceutical companies, all of which are near 

completion of 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) 

Onogawa 16-1 AIST West, Tsukuba 

Ibaraki 305-8569 

Japan 

Telephone: 81 29 861 2926 

Fax: 81 29 861 8195 

Dr. Masaaki Yamabe, Co-Chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee since 2005, is a research advisor 

of the Research Institute of Science for Safety and Sustainability at the AIST. He was a member of the Task 

Force on the TEAP Legacy and he co-chaired the 2004 Process Agent Task Force. He was a member of the 

Solvents TOC during 1990-1996. Until 1999, Mr. Yamabe was Director of Central Research for Asahi Glass 

Company, which previously produced CFCs, methyl chloroform, and carbon 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 stocks 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, JICOP and the Ministry 

of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) share the financing involved in the travel and accommodation for Mr. 

Yamabe’s attendance at the meetings of the CTOC, TEAP, OEWG and MOP. 

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 

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 and Engineering of Peking 

University. She co-chaired the 2002, 2005 and 2008 Replenishment Task Forces. 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 2009 TEAP Progress Report 337

17 TEAP TOC Membership List Status April 2009 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Stephen O. Andersen U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USA 

Lambert Kuijpers Technical University Eindhoven Netherlands 

Jose Pons Pons Spray Quimica Venezuela 

Senior Expert Members Affiliation Country 

Thomas Morehouse Institute for Defense Analyses USA 

K. Madhava Sarma Consultant India 

Shiqiu Zhang Center of Environmental Sciences, Peking University China 

TOC Chairs Affiliation Country 

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 

Sergey Kopylov All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection Russian Federation 

Michelle Marcotte Marcotte Consulting LLC and Marcotte Consulting Inc Canada 

Roberto de A. Peixoto 

(preliminary) 

Maua Institute (IMT), Sao Paulo Brazil 

Marta Pizano Consultant Colombia 

Ian Porter Department of Primary Industries Australia 

Miguel Quintero Consultant Colombia 

Ian D. Rae University of Melbourne Australia 

Helen Tope EPA, Victoria Australia 

Ashley Woodcock Wythenshawe Hospital Manchester UK 

Daniel Verdonik Hughes Associates USA 

Masaaki Yamabe National Inst. 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 D. Rae University of Melbourne Australia 

Masaaki Yamabe National Inst. Advanced Industrial Science and Technology Japan 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

D. D. Arora The Energy and Research Institute India 

Steven Bernhardt Honeywell USA 

Olga Blinova Russian Scientific Center for Applied Chemistry Russia 

Nick Campbell Arkema Group France 

Bruno Costes Airbus Industries France 

Jianxin Hu College of Environmental Sciences & Engineering, 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 Inst. Advanced Industrial Science and Technology Japan 

Claudia Paratori Coordinator Ozone Programme -CONAMA Chile 

Hans Porre Teijin Aramids Netherlands 

Shuniti Samejima Asahi Glass Foundation Japan 

John Stemniski Consultant USA 

Fatemah Al-Shatti Kuwait Petroleum Corporation Kuwait 

Peter Verge Boeing Manufacturing USA 

Nee Sun Choong Kwet 

Yive (Robert) 

University of Mauritius Mauritius 
338 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP Flexible and Rigid Foams Technical Options Committee (FTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Paul Ashford Caleb Management Services UK 

Miguel Quintero Consultant Colombia 

Members Affiliation Country 

Chris Bloom Dow USA 

Kyoshi Hara JUFA Japan 

Mike Hayslett Maytag/AHAM USA 

Mike Jeffs ISOPA Belgium 

Candido Lomba ABRIPUR Brazil 

Yehia Lotfi Technocom Egypt 

Christoph Meurer Solvay Germany 

Ulrich Schmidt Haltermann/Dow Germany 

Bert Veenendaal RAPPA USA 

Shigeru Wakana Dow Japan 

Mark Weick Dow USA 

Tom Werkema Arkema 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 

Sergey Kopylov All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection Russian Federation 

Daniel P. Verdonik Hughes Associates USA 

 

Members 

Tareq K. Al-Awad King Abdullah II Design & Development Bureau Jordan 

Jamal Alfuzaie Kuwait Fire Department Kuwait 

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 

Bryan Jolly European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) UK 

Zhou Kaixuan CAAC-AAD PR China 

H. S. Kaprwan Consultant – Retired India 

Nikolai Kopylov All Russian Research Institute for Fire Protection Russian Federation 

David Liddy UK Government/European Commission UK 

Bella Maranion United States EPA USA 

John J. O’Sullivan Bureau Veriitas UK 

Emma Palumbo Safety Hi-tech srl Italy 

Erik Pedersen Consultant – World Bank Denmark 

Donald Thomson Mantoba Hydro & MOPIA Canada 

Robert T. Wickham Consultant-Wickham Associates USA 

Mitsuru Yagi Nohmi Bosai Ltd & Fire and Environment Prot. Network Japan 

Robert T. Wickham Consultant-Wickham Associates USA 

 

Consulting Experts 

Thomas Cortina Halon Alternatives Research Corporation USA 

Matsuo Ishiyama Nohmi Bosai Ltd & Fire and Environment Prot. Network Japan 

Steve McCormick United States Army USA 

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 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 339

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 

Emmanuel Addo-Yobo Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Ghana 

Paul Atkins Oriel Therapeutics Inc. USA 

Sidney Braman Rhode Island Hospital USA 

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 

Antoine Haddad Chiesi Farmaceutici Italy 

Charles Hancock Charles O. Hancock Associates USA 

Eamonn Hoxey Johnson & Johnson UK 

Javaid Khan The Aga Khan University Pakistan 

Nasser Mazhari Sina Darou Laboratories Company Iran 

Robert Meyer Merck Incorporated USA 

Hideo Mori Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company Japan 

Tunde Otulana Aradigm Corporation USA 

John Pritchard AstraZeneca UK 

Raj Singh The Chest Centre India 

Roland Stechert Boehringer Ingelheim (Schweiz) Switzerland 

Ping Wang Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission China 

Adam Wanner University of Miami USA 

Kristine Whorlow National Asthma Council Australia Australia 

You Yizhong Journal of Aerosol Communication China 
340 May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 

TEAP Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) 

Co-chairs Affiliation Country 

Mohamed Besri Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II Morocco 

Michelle Marcotte Marcotte Consulting Canada 

Marta Pizano** Consultant Colombia 

Ian Porter Department of Primary Industries Australia 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

Jonathan Banks** Consultant Australia 

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 

Kathy Dalip CABI Jamaica 

Ricardo Deang Consultant Philippines 

Patrick Ducom Ministère de l’Agriculture France 

Abraham Gamliel Agricultural Research Organisation Israel 

Raquel Ghini EMBRAPA Brasil 

Ken Glassey MAFF New Zealand 

Eduardo Gonzalez Fumigator Philippines 

Darka Hamel Inst. For Plant Protection in Ag. And Forestry Croatia 

George Lazarovits Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Canada 

Andrea Minuto CERSAA, Albenga 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 

John Sansone SCC Products USA 

Jim Schaub US Department of Agriculture USA 

Sally Schneider US Department of Agriculture USA 

JL Staphorst Plant Protection Research Institute South Africa 

Akio Tateya Japan Fumigation Technology Association Japan 

Robert Taylor Consultant UK 

Alejandro Valeiro Department of Agriculture Argentina 

Ken Vick United States Department of Agriculture USA 

Nick Vink University of Stellenbosch South Africa 

Janny Vos CABI International The Netherlands 

Chris Watson IGROX UK 

Jim Wells Environmental Solutions Group USA 

Eduardo Willink Ministerio de Agricultura Argentina 

Suat Yilmaz BATEM Horticulture Research Station Turkey 

 **QPSTF Co-chairs 
May 2009 TEAP Progress Report 341

TEAP Refrigeration, Air Conditioning and Heat Pumps Technical Options Committee (RTOC) 

Co-chair Affiliation Country 

Lambert Kuijpers Technical University Eindhoven Netherlands 

Roberto de A. Peixoto 

(preliminary) 

Maua Institute, IMT, Sao Paulo Brazil 

 

Members Affiliation Country 

Radhey S. Agarwal IIT, New Delhi India 

Julius Banks Environmental Protection Agency USA 

James M. Calm Engineering Consultant USA 

Radim Cermak Ingersoll Rand Czech Rep. 

Guangming Chen Inst. For Refrigeration and Cryogenic Eng., Shanghai China 

Denis Clodic Ecole des Mines France 

Daniel Colbourne Consultant UK 

Sukumar Devotta Consultant India 

Kenneth E. Hickman Consultant USA 

William Hill GM USA 

Martien Janssen Re/genT Netherlands 

Makoto Kaibara Panasonic, Research and Technology Japan 

Michael Kauffeld Fachhochschule Karlsruhe Germany 

Fred Keller Consultant USA 

Jürgen Köhler University of Braunschweig Germany 

Holger König Jaeggi / Guentner Germany 

Edward J. McInerney Consultant USA 

Petter Nekså SINTEF Energy Research Norway 

Andy Pearson Star Refrigeration Glasgow UK 

Per Henrik Pedersen Danish Technological Institute Denmark 

Paulo Vodianitskaia Whirlpool Brazil Brazil 

 

Consulting Experts 

Takuo Hirahara Mitsubushi Electric Corp. Japan 

Horace Nelson (prel.) Jamaica 

Lindsey Roke Fisher and Paykel New Zealand 

Jongmin Shin LG Korea 

Sulkhan Suladze (prel.) Georgia