Distr.
GENERAL

UNEP/OzL.Pro.11/Bur.2/3
12 December 2000

ORIGINAL: ENGLISH

BUREAU OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING OF THE
PARTIES TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL
ON SUBSTANCES THAT DEPLETE THE
OZONE LAYER

Second meeting

Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 9 December 2000

REPORT OF THE SECOND MEETING OF THE BUREAU OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING
OF THE PARTIES TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL ON SUBSTANCES
THAT DEPLETE THE OZONE LAYER

1. The second meeting of the Bureau of the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer was held at the Ouagadougou International Conference Centre, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on 9 December 2000.

I. OPENING OF THE MEETING

2. The meeting was opened at 10 a.m. on Saturday, 9 December 2000 by Mr. Roberto Stadthagen Vogl (Nicaragua), President of the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties.
3. It was attended by the following members of the Bureau, who had been elected to their respective posts by the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties, held in Beijing from 29 November to 3 December 1999, or nominated by their Governments in accordance with rule 24 of the rules of procedure:

President: Mr. Roberto Stadthagen Vogl (Nicaragua)

Vice-Presidents: Mr. Fidèle Hien (Burkina Faso)

Mr. Zhou Yangsheng (China)

Mr. Blaise Horisberger (Switzerland)

Rapporteur: Mr. Janusz Kozakiewicz (Poland)

4. A list of participants is annexed.
5. The President welcomed the new Minister of the Environment of Burkina Faso, Mr. Fidèle Hien, and expressed the thanks of the Bureau for the efforts expended by that country to ensure the success of the forthcoming Twelfth Meeting of the Parties.
6. Mr. Nelson Sabogal, a representative of the Ozone Secretariat, transmitted a message of welcome to the participants from Mr. Klaus Töpfer, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

II. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA

7. The Bureau adopted the following provisional agenda contained in document UNEP/OzL.Pro.11/Bur.2/1:

1. Opening of the meeting.

2. Adoption of the agenda.

3. Update on the actions taken on the decisions of the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, held in Beijing from 29 November to 3 December 1999.

4. Review of the working documents prepared for the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol, to be held in Ouagadougou from 11 to 14 December 2000.

5. Other matters.

6. Adoption of the report

7. Closure of the meeting.

III. UPDATE ON THE ACTIONS TAKEN ON THE DECISIONS OF THE ELEVENTH

MEETING OF THE PARTIES TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL, HELD IN

BEIJING FROM 29 NOVEMBER TO 3 DECEMBER 1999

8. Mr. Nelson Sabogal (Senior Scientific Affairs Officer) of the Ozone Secretariat introduced the note contained in document UNEP/OzL.Pro.11/Bur.2/2, which gave a brief summary of the actions the Secretariat had taken to implement the decisions adopted by the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties, as well as some decisions from the Tenth Meeting of the Parties.

Action taken on decisions of the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties

9. With regard to decision XI/1, the representative of the Secretariat reported that the Beijing Declaration on Renewed Commitment to the Protection of the Ozone Layer had been the inspiration behind the celebration of the International Day for the Preservation of the Ozone Layer, observed around the world on 16 September 2000. On that occasion, the United Nations Secretary-General had quoted the Beijing Declaration in his message.
10. With regard to decisions XI/2, XI/3 and XI/4, he said that the adjustments had entered into force on 28 July 2000, in accordance with article 2(9)(d) of the Montreal Protocol.
11. With regard to decision XI/5, he noted that the Amendment would enter into force on 1 January 2001, provided that at least 20 instruments of ratification, acceptance or approval had been deposited with the Depositary. He noted that if that condition had not been satisfied by that date, the Amendment would enter into force on the ninetieth day following the date on which it was satisfied. As of 30 November 2000 only one Party, Chile, had ratified the Beijing Amendment.
12. With regard to decision XI/6, a representative of UNEP, speaking in his capacity as Treasurer of the Multilateral Fund, reported that the fixed-exchange-rate-mechanism was in operation and confirmed that some small number of Parties appeared to be using the fixed-exchange-rate mechanism, although had not actually stated that they were doing so. A study of the payments made by those Parties revealed that because of the rise in the US dollar, the use of the fixed-exchange-rate mechanism had resulted in a loss in income to the Multilateral Fund of some $6.2 million, representing 13 percent of the value of those countries' contributions, or 4 percent of the total of all Parties' contributions.
13. He said that in response to that situation, the Executive Committee had decided to call on countries which qualified for the use of the fixed-exchange-rate mechanism to give more information to the Treasurer, by the 33rd Meeting of the Executive Committee, on whether they were using the mechanism or not; to request the Treasurer to submit to each Meeting of the Executive Committee in 2001 an update on the use of the fixed-exchange-rate mechanism; and to request those Parties unable to pay their full pledges by 1 June to provide the Treasurer by the 33rd Meeting of the Executive Committee with their payment schedule for the triennium. The Treasurer was keeping track of the payments to the Multilateral Fund within the mechanism with a view to undertaking a study for the review of the mechanism at the end of 2001 as called for by decision XI/6
14. With regard to decision XI/7, the Treasurer reported that invoices had been sent to the Parties at the beginning of the year for payment of the pledges for year 2000, and that several other reminders had also been sent out since that time.
15. The Treasurer of the Multilateral Fund reported that about 73 per cent of the Parties had made their payments. As a result, about $68.5 million had been available in funds for programming at the 32nd Meeting of the Executive Committee.
16. The Chief Officer of the Multilateral Fund noted that the level of funds received had never been so high in the past, at the present point of a year, and that consequently 2001 would begin with a surplus, for disposal at the 33rd Meeting of the Executive Committee
17. With regard to decision XI/11, the representative of the Ozone Secretariat reported that as of 30 November 2000, the total number of Parties to the Vienna Convention was 176, the total number of Parties to the Montreal Protocol was 175, the total number of Parties to the London Amendment was 142, the total number of Parties to the Copenhagen Amendment was 113 and the total number of Parties to the Montreal Amendment was 46. The latest ratification of the Montreal Amendment had come from the European Community. The Beijing Amendment adopted by the Eleventh Meeting of the Parties had to date been ratified by only one Party, Chile. On 11 August 2000, the Secretariat had sent a letter to those Parties whose Governments had not ratified the Amendments to the Montreal Protocol, inviting them to take the opportunity presented by the Millennium Summit, held in New York from 6 to 8 September 2000, to sign and ratify or accede to the Montreal Protocol amendments.
18. With regard to decision XI/13, the representative of the Secretariat said that the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel would report on the decision in 2003.
19. With regard to decision XI/14, he said that the countries given essential-use exemptions were required to submit their reporting accounting frameworks by 31 January 2001.
20. With regard to decision XI/16, the representative of the Secretariat reported that the latter had communicated the decision to the Parties on 18 July 2000. The decision requested each non-Article 5 Party to develop a strategy for the management of chlorofluorocarbons and submit it to the Secretariat by July 2001.
21. With regard to decision XI/17, he said that the Co-Chairs of the Scientific Assessment Panel had invited Parties in September 2000 to nominate experts to participate in the 2002 assessment, and had set a deadline of November 30 for doing so. By 3 December 2000, 32 Parties had sent their nominations of scientific experts.
22. With regard to decision XI/18, the representative of the Secretariat reported that action had been completed. The cooperation was continuing with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the International Civil Aviation Organization and the World Meteorological Organization.
23. With regard to decisions XI/19 and XI/20, he said that the Scientific Assessment and Technology and Economic Assessment Panels were requested to report in 2001.
24. With regard to decision XI/21, a representative of UNEP recalled that the approved budget for the Montreal Protocol Trust Fund for the year 2000 was $3,679,679, for which pledges had been made by Parties. As at 30 November 2000, the contributions amounted to only $1.66 million or about 45 per cent, which was slightly below the historical average of 49.2 per cent at the present time of the year.
25. Of the $4,139,955 of unpaid pledges as at the beginning of the year, $1.31 million, or 31.6 per cent, had been paid. That was short of the historical average rate of 32.2 per cent at the present time of the year. Noting that the unpaid pledges from the previous year exceeded the pledges for the current year, he said that there was a need for urgent measures to rectify that anomalous situation, as well to improve the rate of payments for the current year.
26. He also reported that the approved budget for the Vienna Convention Trust Fund for the year 2000 was $295,590, for which pledges had been made by Parties. As at 30 November 2000, the contributions amounted to only $158,538, or about 53.6 per cent, which was slightly lower than the historical average of 55.9 per cent at the present time of the year.
27. He noted that the unpaid pledges to the Vienna Convention Trust Fund from the preceding year far exceeded the pledges for the current year. The budget for the previous year had been $729,163, of which only $254,285 had been paid, representing 34.9 per cent as against the historical average of 35.6 per cent. He said that there was a need for urgent measures to rectify that anomalous situation, as well to improve the rate of payments for the current year.
28. With regard to decision XI/22, the representative of the Ozone Secretariat said that action had been completed.
29. With regard to decision XI/23, the representative of the Secretariat reported that the content of paragraphs 3 and 7 had been communicated to the Parties concerned, and that there had been a major improvement in reporting. The matter was also under study by the Implementation Committee.
30. With regard to decisions XI/24 and XI/25, he noted that a report on the progress of Bulgaria and Turkmenistan in their implementation was contained in the data report for the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties.
31. With respect to decision XI/26, the representative of the Secretariat said that the group of experts on Harmonized System Customs Codes had interacted in an Internet discussion group and had finalized the allocation of customs codes under the Harmonized System to all pure substances (not mixtures) controlled by the Montreal Protocol.
32. With regard to decision XI/27, the representative of the Secretariat said that the decision had been communicated to the Chief Officer of the Multilateral Fund Secretariat, and that in response the Executive Committee had taken an appropriate decision of its own (decision 31/48).
33. The Chief Officer of the Multilateral Fund Secretariat reported that implementation of decision 31/48 had already begun.
34. One representative inquired as to how the issue of customs training had been handled in the Executive Committee meeting.
35. The Chief Officer of the Multilateral Fund Secretariat replied that customs training was normally a permanent feature of the refrigerant management plans which were submitted to the Executive Committee, and was usually approved. The same had been the case at the 32nd Meeting.
36. With regard to decision XI/28, the representative of the Ozone Secretariat reported that the request of the Parties had been communicated to the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel, which would, in due course, take appropriate action
37. With regard to decision XI/29, he reported that the host Government agreement between the Government of Burkina Faso and the United Nations Environment Programme had been signed on 12 July 2000. The Secretariat was following closely the arrangements for the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties, to be held from 11 to 14 December 2000 in Ouagadougou. The preparatory segment of the meeting would take place on 11 and 12 December 2000 and the high-level segment on 13 and 14 December 2000. The high-level segment would be attended by the President of Burkina Faso and by some 30 Ministers.
38. The representative of Burkina Faso reported that as part of the finalization of the preparations for the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties, an additional sum of 89,171,640 CFA francs had been made available. Going beyond the undertaking under article VI of the host Government agreement, the authorities of Burkina Faso were providing transportation at no cost for the delegates between the airport, the main hotels and the conference centre. In addition, private cars would be provided for VIPs and for certain members of the Secretariat. Outstanding protocol questions had been resolved, and he assured the Bureau that all of the organizers on the Burkina Faso side were currently fully committed to taking the final measures to ensure the complete success of the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties.
39. Members of the Bureau expressed their appreciation for the quality of the preparations made and the warmth of the welcome given.
40. The representative of the Secretariat noted that no action was required with regard to decisions XI/8, XI/9, XI/10, XI/12 and XI/15.

Action taken on decisions of the Tenth Meeting of the Parties

41. With regard to decision X/7, the representative of the Secretariat informed the Bureau that twenty-five Parties had reported on the decision as of 30 November 2000. The halon-management strategies (HMSs) submitted by the Parties had been sent to the Halons Technical Options Committee (HTOC) of the TEAP. The HTOC had informed the Secretariat that it would duly assess the halon-management strategies in its regular meeting in the spring of 2001 and would report through the TEAP to the Parties.
42. The Secretariat in coordination with the Co-Chairs of the HTOC and the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) in Paris had put on the web the HMSs of developed countries and sent the HMSs of developing countries on the web site of TEAP to UNEP DTIE for dissemination to them through its clearing house.
43. With regard to decision X/8, on new substances with ozone-depletion potential, he informed the Bureau that 33 Parties had reported on new ozone-depleting substances in accord with the decision. The chemicals reported by the Parties were:

1. Hexachlorobutadiene

Hexachlorobutadiene (C₄Cl₆) had an ozone depletion potential (ODP) of 0.07. It had been reported by Canada and was classified by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) as a high-volume production chemical, which meant that at least one OECD country reported that it produced more than 10,000 tons per annum.

The Secretariat had sent the draft assessment of hexachlorobutadiene carried out by Environment Canada to the Scientific, Environmental Effects and Technology and Economic Assessment Panels for their evaluation according to decisions XI/24 and X/8. The Scientific and the Environmental Effects Assessment Panels had responded with their evaluation.

This chemical, n-propyl bromide, (also referred to as 1-bromopropane, CH₂BrCH₂CH₃ or simplified as 1-C₃H₇Br or npb) had been reported by Canada as a substance "used in solvent applications, including degreasing, vapour cleaning and cold cleaning of metal parts". China had communicated that "for n-propyl bromide which is considered uniformly as a substance threatening to the ozone layer we think it is not an ODS". Japan reported that the "estimated sales of npb-based solvent for the period of January to December 1999 totalled 765 tons". The chemical had also been reported by Netherlands and by Sweden.

1,1,1-trichloro-2,2,2-trifluoroethane (CFC-113a), also referred to as R.113a, had been reported by India. The new substance was now being synthesized by an Indian chemical company, M/S Navin Flourine Industries, for use as an agrochemical intermediate. Currently, CFC-113a was being imported into India for manufacture of synthetic pyrethoids. The communication by India had been sent to the Scientific and Technology and Economic Assessment Panels.

This chemical, referred to also as BMN, CAS number 511165-9, had been reported by Netherlands. Its feedstock was methyl bromide. It was produced by Broomchemie Terneuzen, Netherlands, part of the Dead Sea Bromine Group. The documentation sent by Netherlands had been forwarded to the Scientific and Technical and Environmental Assessment Panels.

1. One member of the Bureau asked for information about the ODP of the chemicals under (b), (c) and (d) above.
2. The representative of the Secretariat replied that the very pertinent question raised the issue of the cost of carrying out such determinations. He informed that the ODP of n-propyl bromide was approximately between 0.020 and 0.11. Whereas with existing ozone-depleting substances, the ODP was largely known, with new such substances there was a need for extensive analysis, which might cost as much as $100,000 to $150,000.
3. Concerning decision X/11, the representative of the Secretariat reported that a total of 42 Parties had either provided information on regulations in place or being prepared that required methyl bromide for quarantine and pre-shipment (QPS) treatment, or had informed the Secretariat that they had no regulations that would require methyl bromide for QPS treatments.

4. REVIEW OF THE WORKING DOCUMENTS PREPARED FOR THE TWELFTH

1. A representative of the Secretariat reviewed the documents that had been prepared for the Twelfth Meeting of the Parties.
2. One member of the Bureau raised the issue of the availability on the website of documents in languages other than English. Taking into account the relatively low cost of such activity, the Bureau recommended that at least the initial website pages, and at least the major documents, should be available in French and Spanish, United Nations languages.

4. OTHER MATTERS

1. There were no other matters.

4. ADOPTION OF THE REPORT

1. The Bureau agreed to entrust to the Rapporteur and the Secretariat the finalization of its report.

4. CLOSURE OF THE MEETING

1. The President declared the meeting closed at 11.45 a.m. on 9 December 2000.

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

SECOND MEETING OF THE BUREAU OF THE ELEVENTH MEETING OF THE PARTIES

TO THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL

OUAGADOUGOU, 9 DECEMBER 2000