United
Nations |
|
The
Fifteenth
Meeting of the Parties
to the Montreal Protocol
Nairobi,
Kenya, 10 - 14 Nov., 2003
|
|
|
|
MOP
15 HIGHLIGHTS
Tuesday, 11 Nov. 2003
Delegates met in Plenary throughout the day to continue discussion
on numerous issues relating to exemptions of ozone-depleting
substances (ODS) and other agenda items, whcih listed in bold
headings to follow.
*
Click
here for a full text report on today's events
|
|
Girigi
conference room 2, where MOP-15 plenary is being held. |
|
Michael Graber, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Ozone Secretariat
|
|
The
contact group on CFC MDIs convened in the morning. The contact
groups on phase-out of methyl bromide and on conditions for
granting CUEs for methyl bromide held meetings in the afternoon.
The contact group on adjustment reductions of methyl bromide
met in the evening. The Budget Committee and the Executive Committee
also met in the afternoon. |
|
Gilbert Bankobeza (on right) Senior Legal Officer and member of
the Ozone Secretariat since its foundation |
Co-chair of the OEWG Maria Nolan (UK) |
|
Further
Specific Interim Reduction of Methyl Bromide:
Co-Chair Nolan established a contact group to further discuss
the adjustments of the Montreal Protocol for further reductions
of methyl bromide and suggested it meet in afternoon.
|
|
Left to right: Marco González, Executive Secretary of the
Ozone Secretariat and Co-chair
of the OEWG Khaled Klaly (Syrian Arab Republic) |
Australia's Tamara Curll |
|
The Status of destruction technologies for ozone- depleting
substances and code of good housekeeping.
El Salvador
and Kenya expressed concern that this draft decision was not
economically feasible for many Article 5 Parties.
Australia
presented the revised draft decision, which states that the
Montreal Protocol does not require its Parties to destroy
ODS.
 Listen
to:-
Australia's Proposal;
El
Salvador's reaction; Australia's
response; Kenya's
doubts
|
|
El Salvador's Francisco Guevara |
Patrick McInerney, Australia |
|
Update
on the status of classification and labeling of controlled
substances under the Montreal Protocol
Australia,
the US and Canada wanted to discuss the proposal internally
before proceeding to consultations among parties, voicing
concern with the process as recommended by the Secretariat.
Iran
said that while a uniform coding system is desirable, countries
still have their national systems, and concluded that in any
case the Secretariat paper came too late.
|
|
Delegate of Iran |
Hugo
Figueroa, Guatemala |
|
Discussion
on Nominations for Critical-use Exemptions for Methyl Bromide
Listen
to:
-
Canada's position
-
Mexico's position
California
Strawberry Growers Association stressed farmers' necessity
of CUEs.
|
|
Claudia McMurray and Duncan Hollis, US delegation
|
Mark Murai, California Strawberry Commission |
|
Mexico,
supported by Argentina and Guatemala, said that CUEs would
create difficulty for Article 5 Parties in their ability to
compete in the international market and lead to increases
of methyl bromide consumptions.
A fumigation
industry group representative stated that industries that
have been attempting to phase out methyl bromide should not
be punished by CUE grants.
|
|
Marcia Levaggi (Argentina) expressed concerns about the CUEs |
K enya
|
|
Conditions
for Granting CUEs for Methyl Bromide:
Kenya requested Parties to reconsider the importing ban
of products grown on soils treated with methyl bromide,
since it causes a conflict with WTO rules and harms Article
5 Parties' economy, especially in Africa.
Canada
and the US reserved the right to address the issue again
after consulting with their capitals.
|
|
Pierre Pinault (Environment Canada) |
A
waterfall in the Gigiri Complex |
|
Phillipe
Chemouney, Environment Canada (far left) and Tom Land, USEPA
(far right) with Gary Taylor of the TEAP, who made a presentation
on the Use of Halons in New Airframes during the morning plenary |
|
