× Information on this section of ECOLEX comes from the InforMEA Portal which compiled information from MEA Secretariats with the support of the European Union. The accuracy of the information displayed is the responsibility of the originating data source. In case of discrepancy the information as displayed on the respective MEA website prevails. Decision XVI/3: Duration of critical-use nominations of methyl bromide Tipo de documento Decision Número de referencia XVI/3 Fecha Nov 22, 2004 FuenteUNEP, InforMEA Estado Activo Materia Desechos y sustancias peligrosas, Aire y atmósfera Tratado Protocolo de Montreal relativo a las sustancias que agotan la capa de ozono (Sep 16, 1987) Reunión Página web ozone.unep.org Resumen The Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties decided in Dec. XVI/3: Mindful that decision Ex.I/4, under paragraph 9 (e), requested the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to review critical-use nominations on an annual basis and to apply the criteria set forth in decision IX/6 and of other relevant criteria agreed by the Parties, Recognizing that decision Ex.I/3, under paragraph 6, asked the Parties to take note of the proposal by the United States of America on multi-year exemptions, and to consider the elaboration of criteria and a methodology for authorizing multi-year exemptions, To agree that the basis for extending the duration of critical-use nominations and exemptions of methyl bromide to periods greater than one year requires further attention; To elaborate, as far as possible, at the Seventeenth Meeting of Parties a framework for spreading a critical-use exemption over more than one year and to agree that the following elements, among others, should be taken into account: Annual reporting on: Status of re-registration and review of methyl bromide; Status of registration of alternatives and substitutes for methyl bromide; Efforts to evaluate, commercialize and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives and substitutes; Assessment of requests to reconsider approved critical-use exemptions in the case of exceptional circumstances; Review of downward trends for different instances; Assessments of nominations in the light of the alternatives database referred to in paragraph 1 of decision Ex.I/4, and comparisons with management strategies; Applicability of existing decisions to methyl bromide critical-use exemptions longer than one year; Additional conditions applicable to critical-use exemptions longer than one year; To consider the technical justifications for spreading a critical-use exemption over more than one year, taking into account, among others, the following instances: Where the use patterns of methyl bromide are not regular on an annual or seasonal basis; Where, for a specific use, no alternatives or emerging solutions are anticipated for several years; Where a plan of implementation of an alternative stretches over several years; Where management strategies include a complete time-bound phase-out for a nomination or sector or use.