United
Nations |
|
The
Fifteenth
Meeting of the Parties
to the Montreal Protocol
Nairobi,
Kenya, 10 - 14 Nov., 2003
|
|
|
|
MOP 15 HIGHLIGHTS
Wednesday, 12 Nov. 2003
Delegates met in Plenary throughout the day, and agreed to
forward several draft decisions to the high-level segment for
adoption, as outlined in bold text to follow. Contact groups met
in the afternoon to finalize outstanding draft decisions.
*
Click here for a full text report on today's events.
|
|
Entrance
to the Gigiri Complex, where MOP-15 is being held. |
|
Patrick McInerney (Australia), President of the Implementation
Committee on Non-compliance Issues. |
|
MOP-15 Panel members (left to right): Marco González, Executive
Secretary of the Ozone Secretariat; Co-Chair of the OEWG Khaled
Klaly (Syrian Arab Republic); Co-Chair of the OEWG Maria Nolan
(UK); Michael Graber, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Ozone
Secretariat. |
|
Duncan Hollis (US)
|
|
Implications of Entry in to Force of the Beijing Amendment
Regarding HCFCs:
 Listen
to:
- US present the outcome of the contact group, saying that
the group met on Saturday, 8 November, agreed that, inter alia:
the term "State not party to this Protocol" does not apply to
Article 5 Parties until 1 January 2016;
|
|
Soodsakorn Putho (Thailand) |
Tadanori Inomata, Japan
|
|
and the term "State not party to this Protocol" includes all
other States and regional economic integration organizations
that have not agreed to be bound by the Copenhagen and
Beijing amendments.
-
India, Japan and
Thailand expressing their positions on the Amendment;
-
US announcing minor editorial amendments. |
|
Shri Chand (India) |
Dapo Afolabi, Nigeria reaffirmed that the beijing amendment
did not apply to article 5 countries. |
|
Delegates from the European Community, Canada and the US met
in the hallway after the amendment was successfully put through. |
|
Liu
Yi, China
|
|
Review
of Additional exempted uses of Controlled Substances as Process
Agents
Delegates
discussed two draft decisions presented by the US: on the
list of uses of controlled substances as process agents (UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/CRP.16);
and on process agents (UNEP/OzL.Pro.15/CRP.17).
|
|
Tom Land, US |
|
Paul
Horwitz, US |
Japan |
|
Listen
to:
US
presenting the draft decisions;
Japan
indicate that the last two process agents listed in CRP.17
had not been formally reviewed by TEAP.
|
|
Gary Taylor of the TEAP (right) clarified
that the TEAP only works on instructions of the parties, and
that they do no formal or informal review of applications |
Ezra Clark, EIA,
urged Parties to take immediate actions to reduce CFC production
rather than waiting a year or more for the results of a study
by the TEAP. |
|
Hannachi Hassen, Tunisia, submitted a draft decision together
with Algeria, Australia, Canada, the EU, Switzerland, and the
US, asking to defer the compliance status of certain countries
until two years after TEAP points out methyl bromide alternatives. |
|
Pierre Pinault, Canada, called for more research on products
treated with methyl bromide, and suggested the proposal on Conditions
for Granting CUEs for Methyl Bromide should be examined at OEWG-24.
|
|
