l o c o t o r P

l a e r t n o M

e h t

h t i w

Information Paper on s e

i Synergies Between the g r Montreal Protocol and e

n Other International y S Agreements

March 2013

Touchdown Consulting

Information Paper on synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements

March 2013

Authors: Melanie Miller MSc PhD and Tom Batchelor MSc PhD Touchdown Consulting

This paper was produced for the European Commission under Service Contract No. 07.1201/2011/601842/SER/CLIMA.C2

Disclaimer This report has been prepared for the European Commission in the context of Service Contract No 07.1201/2011/601842/SER/CLIMA.C2. The views expressed herein are those of the authors alone and can in no way be taken to reflect the opinion of the European Commission. The European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained in this document.

INFORMATION PAPER ON SYNERGIES BETWEEN THE MONTREAL PROTOCOL AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

MARCH 2013

CONTENTS LIST

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 4 1.1 Aims of paper ...... 4 1.2 Examples of institutional arrangements that promote synergies ...... 4 1.2.1 Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions: Synergies Process ...... 5 1.2.2 Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) ...... 5 1.2.3 Global Environment Facility funding strategy and initiatives ...... 6 1.3 Synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements ...... 6 2. AARHUS CONVENTION ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING ...... 1 2.1 Overview of the Aarhus Convention ...... 1 2.2 Public access and participation in international fora – relevant to MP participation ...... 2 3. BASEL CONVENTION ON CONTROL OF TRANSBOUNDARY MOVEMENTS OF HAZARDOUS WASTES ...... 4 3.1 Overview of the Basel Convention ...... 4 3.2 Types of ODS covered by the requirements of the Basel Convention ...... 5 3.3 Notification and consent procedure for transboundary movement of controlled wastes – relevant to the export of ODS banks for destruction ...... 6 3.4 Infrastructure for tracking the movement of shipments – relevant to monitoring imports and exports of virgin ODS ...... 7 3.5 Cooperation and regional centres for training and technology transfer – relevant to the collection and destruction of ODS banks ...... 8 3.6 Monitoring for illegal traffic in hazardous wastes – relevant to illegal trade in ODS ...... 8 3.7 Application of WCO Harmonised System to Basel wastes – relevant to HS codes for ODS...... 9 4. CHICAGO CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ...... 11 4.1 Overview of Chicago Convention ...... 11 4.2 Requirements relating to fire-fighting systems – relevant to the use of halons ...... 11 4.3 Information on halon reserves for aircraft – relevant to the quantification of halon banks ...... 12 5. GENEVA CONVENTION ON LONG-RANGE TRANSBOUNDARY AIR POLLUTION ...... 14 5.1 Overview of the Geneva Convention on LRTAP ...... 14

5.2 Expert groups and technical centres on air pollution – relevant to emissions of N2O and other ODS ...... 14 6. GOTHENBURG PROTOCOL TO ABATE ACIDIFICATION, EUTROPHICATION AND GROUND-LEVEL OZONE ...... 17 6.1 Overview of the Gothenburg Protocol ...... 17 6.2 Limits on NOx emissions – relevant to emissions of nitrous oxide ...... 17

Synergies page 1 of 59 6.3 Limits on VOC emissions – relevant to emissions of many ODS ...... 18 7. INTERNATIONAL PLANT PROTECTION CONVENTION ...... 20 7.1 Overview of the IPPC ...... 20 7.2 International standard for wood pallets and packaging materials - relevant to MB QPS treatments...... 20 7.3 IPPC Recommendation on methyl bromide - relevant to national strategies on QPS ...... 21 7.4 International and regional infrastructure for information exchange and cooperation - relevant to information exchange on MB QPS and alternatives ...... 22 8. KIEV PROTOCOL ON POLLUTANT RELEASE AND TRANSFER REGISTERS ...... 24 8.1 Overview of the Kiev PRTR Protocol ...... 24 8.2 Reporting on emissions of substances by sector – relevant to ODS emissions data ...... 24 9. MARPOL INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE PREVENTION OF POLLUTION FROM SHIPS ...... 26 9.1 Overview of MARPOL ...... 26 9.2 Controls on ODS used on ships – relevant to ODS controls under the MP ...... 27 9.3 ODS record books on ships – relevant to the supply, use and emissions of ODS on ships ...... 27 9.4 Inspections by port states – relevant to gathering information or licensing ODS on ships ...... 28 9.5 Requirements on reception facilities for ODS in ports – relevant to unwanted ODS banks from ships ...... 29 10. ROTTERDAM CONVENTION ON PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS ...... 31 10.1 Overview of the Rotterdam Convention ...... 31 10.2 Infrastructure for implementing PIC procedures and export notifications– relevant to exports and imports of ODS ...... 31 10.3 Procedure for adding new chemicals to the Convention – relevant to MP procedures for new and uncontrolled ODS ...... 33 10.4 Working with existing regional centres – relevant to national and regional MP activities ...... 33 11. STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS ...... 36 11.1 Overview of the Stockholm Convention ...... 36 11.2 Projects for the destruction of POPs – relevant to ODS destruction projects ...... 36 11.3 National implementation plans – relevant to implementation of the MP ...... 36 11.4 Obligation to identify and deal with obsolete POPs – relevant to strategies and measures to deal with ODS banks ...... 37 11.5 Performance standards for POPs destruction – relevant to reviews of ODS destruction technologies ...... 38 11.6 Regional and sub-regional centres – relevant to regional capacity building on ODS ...... 39 12. STRATEGIC APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL CHEMICALS MANAGEMENT (SAICM) ...... 40 12.1 Overview of SAICM ...... 40 12.2 Integration of chemicals management – relevant to ODS management ...... 41 12.3 SAICM implementation plans – relevant to national ODS strategies and plans ...... 42 12.4 New orientation and guidance document – relevant to ODS management ...... 42 12.5 SAICM emerging policy issues – relevant to new issues under the MP ...... 42

Synergies page 2 of 59 12.6 Back-to-back meetings – relevant to MP meetings ...... 43 ANNEX 1: ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ...... 46

List of Tables

Table 1: Examples of synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements: infrastructure and operational activities ...... 1 Table 2: Examples of synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements: relevant substances and sectors ...... 3 Table 3: ODS and related pollutants that are subject to the reporting procedures of the PRTR Protocol ...... 25

List of Boxes

Box 1: Extracts from the Almaty Guidelines on promoting the application of the principles of the Aarhus Convention in international forums ...... 2 Box 2: Aarhus Convention reference materials ...... 3 Box 3: Examples of domestic legislation that brings specific ODS under the Basel Convention provisions ...... 5 Box 4: Basel Convention reference materials ...... 9 Box 5: Chicago Convention reference materials ...... 13 Box 6: LRTAP Convention reference materials ...... 15 Box 7: Gothenburg Protocol reference materials ...... 19 Box 8: IPPC Convention reference materials ...... 22 Box 9: PRTR Protocol reference materials ...... 25 Box 10: MARPOL reference materials ...... 30 Box 11: Rotterdam Convention reference materials ...... 34 Box 12: Stockholm Convention reference materials ...... 39 Box 13: SAICM reference materials ...... 44

Synergies page 3 of 59 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Aims of paper

This paper describes examples of international agreements that contain topics of interest to the Montreal Protocol. In particular, it aims to:

 Provide examples of international agreements that have synergies with the Montreal Protocol, identifying key topics and areas of mutual interest. It identifies areas where the Montreal Protocol might consider working more closely with other fora, to provide illustrations of areas where synergies might potentially be increased in future.

 Identify activities and concepts adopted in other agreements that might also provide useful new concepts, with appropriate adaptations, within the Montreal Protocol.

The paper is intended to provide illustrative examples only. There are many dozens of international and regional environmental agreements, and it is not possible to address all of them in this paper.1

1.2 Examples of institutional arrangements that promote synergies

Governments and United Nations (UN) organisations have for many years noted the need to avoid duplication among international environmental agreements and related implementation activities.

The Rio+20 outcome document called The Future We Want (endorsed by the UN General Assembly)2 recently stressed the importance of improving synergies among MEAs and in the UN system, as follows:

‘We emphasize the need for an improved and more effective institutional framework for sustainable development that should: be guided by the specific functions required and mandates involved; address the shortcomings of the current system; take into account all relevant implications; promote synergies and coherence; seek to avoid duplication and eliminate unnecessary overlaps within the UN system; and, reduce administrative burdens, and build on existing arrangements.’

‘... We acknowledge the work already undertaken to enhance synergies among the three Conventions in the chemicals and waste cluster (the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions). We encourage parties to MEAs to consider further measures, in these and other clusters, as appropriate, to promote policy coherence at all relevant levels, improve efficiency, reduce unnecessary overlap and duplication, and enhance coordination and cooperation among MEAs, including the three Rio Conventions as well as with the UN system in the field.’ 3

The process of achieving synergies faces many challenges and has been relatively slow in practice. Nevertheless there are existing cases where international initiatives have been adopted with the explicit aim of improving synergies. Examples include the following:  Administrative coordination between the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions;  The Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM);  The strategic policies of the Global Environment Facility (GEF).

These examples are briefly outlined below.

1 The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, for example, is not addressed by this paper, because many reports are already available on the synergies between climate and ozone issues. 2 UN General Assembly (2012) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly, 66/288: The future we want, September 2012, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/66/288&Lang=E. 3 UNCSD (2012) The future we want: Rio+20 outcome document, para. 79 and 89, http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/727The%20Future%20We%20Want%2019%20June%201230pm.pdf

Synergies page 4 of 59 1.2.1 Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions: Synergies Process The Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions are distinct and legally autonomous multilateral environmental agreements that share the common objective of protecting human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes, for the promotion of sustainable development. The Parties to the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions have developed a mechanism, called the Synergies Process, which aims to enhance coordination and cooperation among the three conventions while maintaining their legal autonomy. The Synergies Process aims to strengthen the implementation of the three conventions at the national, regional and global levels by:  Providing coherent policy guidance,  Enhancing efficiency in the provision of support to Parties,  Reducing the administrative burden, and  Maximizing the effective and efficient use of resources at all levels.

To achieve these goals, the conferences of the Parties to these three Conventions have over the years adopted a series of decisions that aim to enhance cooperation and coordination, setting a framework for the Synergies Process. In 2011 the three Conventions launched an interlinked website. The interlinked website is integrated into the clearing-house mechanism and shares information exchange capabilities. Capacity-building activities are also carried out to enhance cooperation and coordination between the three Conventions.4 The synergies arrangements have recently been reviewed by Parties, the Conventions Secretariat, UNEP and the FAO.5

Further details on these three conventions are provided in sections 3, 10 and 11 (below).

1.2.2 Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM)

In 2006, the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM)6 adopted the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) as a policy framework to foster the sound management of chemicals worldwide.

SAICM supports the achievement of a goal agreed at the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development which aims to ensure that, by the year 2020, chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on the environment and human health. When SAICM was set up, the participants made a commitment to ‘strive to integrate SAICM into the work programmes of all relevant United Nations organizations, specialized agencies, funds and programmes consistent with their mandates as accorded by their respective governing bodies.’ 7

SAICM invited GEF and the Montreal Protocol/MLF ‘within their mandates to consider whether and how they might support implementation of appropriate and relevant Strategic Approach objectives.’ 8

A recent review of SAICM highlighted the following points (inter alia): 9

 Progress might be further accelerated if Governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, including the private sector, put additional focus on achieving practical results in countries, including preventive actions.

4 Synergies webpages of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions: http://synergies.pops.int/Home/tabid/813/mctl/ViewDetails/EventModID/9163/EventID/297/xmid/8753/language/en- US/Default.aspx 5 Review of the synergies arrangements, http://synergies.pops.int/Implementation/ReviewofArrangements/tabid/2620/language/en-US/Default.aspx 6 Details on ICCM: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=480 7 Dubai Declaration adopted by the International Conference on Chemicals Management. 8 SAICM Secretariat (2007) SAICM texts – see footnote above, p.23. 9 Highlights from the President’s Summary of the high-level dialogue, and Progress in implementation of SAICM reported for 2009-2010, SAICM/ICCM.3/INF/6.

Synergies page 5 of 59  More and better collaboration among all stakeholders and intensified partnership efforts would help to promote effective and efficient implementation of the Strategic Approach.

For further details on SAICM refer to section 12 (below).

1.2.3 Global Environment Facility funding strategy and initiatives

The Global Environment Facility (GEF) provides financial assistance to developing countries for environmental measures and the implementation of multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), in particular those relating to climate, biodiversity, persistent organic pollutants, and desertification. The GEF has adopted a formal strategy for funding, which specifically aims to enhance synergies in projects, where possible.10 As a result the strategy encourages projects that address the destruction of both persistent organic pollutants and ODS banks, for example, and projects that improve energy efficiency while eliminating ODS.

The GEF has also undertaken practical initiatives to increase synergies, such as the following:

 GEF and UNEP recently piloted a joint reporting format covering the current reporting requirements of the three Rio Conventions covering climate change, biodiversity and deforestation. The aim was to streamline the national reporting requirements because they place a substantial burden on least developed countries in particular. The pilot programme also aimed to strengthen the MEAs while addressing challenges posed by communication and collaboration among the national focal points to the Conventions.11

 International institutions regularly commission comprehensive evaluations of their performance and efficacy; the total cost of 17 such evaluations has exceeded $30 million in the last decade. The benefit of lessons learned has tended to remain within each respective organisation, and no formal mechanism exists for international organisations to combine their experiences and draw more comprehensive lessons. The Evaluation Office of GEF is therefore working with the evaluation units of UN organisations and other development organisations to assess how to improve methods and approaches used in comprehensive evaluations, to increase the effectiveness of development assistance.12

1.3 Synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements

Many international agreements (including Conventions, Protocols, regional agreements, and other treaties) address topics that are linked to some of the topics addressed by the Montreal Protocol. As a result there are areas of mutual interest, and the potential for synergies, between the Montreal Protocol and other agreements. Examples of well-known synergies include:

 The need to protect the global climate by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving energy efficiency provides synergies between the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change and the Montreal Protocol in relation to ODS phase-out and the selection of low-GWP alternatives.

 The destruction of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention. Some of the technologies approved by the Montreal Protocol for the destruction of ODS are also able to destroy POPs.

 Prior informed consent systems for monitoring and tracking the exports/imports of hazardous chemicals and waste under the Rotterdam and Basel Conventions offer synergies with systems for tracking the exports and imports of ODS.

The following sections of this paper provide examples of international agreements that cover topics of relevance to the Montreal Protocol and areas of mutual interest. (As noted previously, this paper provides selected

10 GEF (2011) GEF-5 focal area strategies, http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/document/GEF- 5_FOCAL_AREA_STRATEGIES.pdf 11 http://www.thegef.org/gef/news/gef-ceo-hails-promise-joint-reporting-synergies-among-rio-conventions 12 GEF (2012) The Greenline, July 2012, http://www.thegef.org/gef/greenline/july-2012/drawing-lessons-comprehensive- evaluations-evaluation-offices-international-insti

Synergies page 6 of 59 examples for illustrative purposes; there are many other international and regional agreements that also offer areas of interest to the Montreal Protocol.)

Table 1 (below) provides a summary of the main synergies relating to infrastructure and operational activities that were identified in these examples. Table 2 provides a summary of the main relevant substances and sectors that are covered by the agreements discussed in subsequent sections of this paper.

The Montreal Protocol has many years of experience in controlling specific environmentally hazardous substances and there are clear opportunities for other conventions to benefit from the experience of the Montreal Protocol. Likewise, there are also opportunities for the Montreal Protocol to benefit from concepts and procedures that have been developed in other conventions.

There are existing cases where the Parties to the Montreal Protocol have adopted Decisions that requested the decision-making bodies of another convention to undertake specific activities that would assist the phase-out of ODS. There are opportunities for the Montreal Protocol Parties to consider making additional approaches to other bodies to collaborate more closely in specific areas.

Synergies page 7 of 59 Table 1: Examples of synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements: infrastructure and operational activities

Areas of synergy with the Montreal Protocol Information International No. Secret- Regional or National ODS Implementing Monitoring Inspection or Main aims exchange, agreement Parties ariat national strategies and green ODS imports enforcement technical infrastructure plans alternatives exports activities cooperation Aahus convention on Access to information; 48 UNECE, access to information, public participation in Geneva    public participation in environmental decision-making decision-making Basel convention on Protect health and 180 UNEP, control of environment from Geneva transboundary hazardous wastes       movements of hazardous waste Chicago convention on Safe and orderly civil 190 ICAO, international civil aviation systems Montreal    aviation Geneva convention on Reduce and prevent air 51 UNECE, long-range pollution Geneva      transboundary air pollution Gothenburg protocol Reduce emissions of 25 UNECE, to abate acidification, NOx, VOCs, other air Geneva      eutrophication and pollutants ground-level ozone International plant Prevent spread of 178 FAO, protection convention harmful pests in trade Rome      (IPPC) and protect plants International Minimizing pollution 72 - IMO convention for the from ships 152 London prevention of      pollution from ships (MARPOL)

Synergies page 1 of 59 Areas of synergy with the Montreal Protocol Information International No. Secret- Regional or National ODS Implementing Monitoring Inspection or Main aims exchange, agreement Parties ariat national strategies and green ODS imports, enforcement technical infrastructure plans alternatives exports activities cooperation Kiev protocol on National pollution 32 UNECE, pollutant release and release and transfer Geneva    transfer registers data (PRTR) Rotterdam convention Management of 152 UNEP, on prior informed hazardous chemicals to Geneva  consent procedure for protect health and and FAO,    certain hazardous environment Rome chemicals Stockholm convention Protect health and 179 UNEP,      on persistent organic environment from Geneva pollutants POPs Strategic approach to Foster the sound - UNEP, international management of Geneva     chemicals chemicals worldwide management (SAICM)

Synergies page 2 of 59 Table 2: Examples of synergies between the Montreal Protocol and other international agreements: relevant substances and sectors

Areas of synergy with the Montreal Protocol International Data on ODS Chemical Banks Main topics Relevant Refrigeration Agriculture agreement trade, use or Foam sectors Fire sectors manufacture recovery or substances sectors sectors emissions sectors destruction Aahus convention Information, public All ODS        participation Basel convention Hazardous waste Waste ODS       Chicago Civil aviation Halons    convention Geneva convention Air pollutants N2O, others    Gothenburg NOx, VOCs, other N2O, CTC,    protocol air pollutants others International plant Quarantine, plant Methyl protection protection bromide   convention (IPPC) MARPOL Pollution from CFC, HCFC,     ships halon Kiev PRTR protocol National data on CFC, HCFC, pollutants halon, CTC,    N2O Rotterdam Hazardous    convention chemicals Stockholm Persistent organic     convention pollutants SAICM Sound All ODS management of      chemicals

Synergies page 3 of 59 2. AARHUS CONVENTION ON ACCESS TO INFORMATION, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING

2.1 Overview of the Aarhus Convention

The Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters was adopted in 1998 under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) and entered into force in 2001.13 There are 48 Parties to the Convention primarily located in Europe and Central Asia at present.14 The Convention is open to accession by countries worldwide, beyond the UNECE region.

Parties are required to guarantee public access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters (Article 1). Parties are also obliged to promote the application of the Convention’s principles within the framework of international bodies in matters relating to the environment, such as the Montreal Protocol.

1. Access to information: Any citizen should have the right to obtain easy access to environmental information. Public authorities must provide all the information required and collect and disseminate them and in a timely and transparent manner. They can refuse to do it only in particular situations (such as national defence).15

2. Public participation in decision making on environmental matters: The public must be informed about all relevant initiatives and must have the opportunity to participate during the decision-making and legislative process. Decision makers can benefit from people's knowledge and expertise; their contribution provides an opportunity to improve the quality of environmental decisions and outcomes and to guarantee procedural legitimacy.

3. Access to justice in environmental matters: The public has the right to judicial or administrative recourse procedures in the event that a Party violates or fails to adhere to environmental law and the principles of the Convention.

The Convention distinguishes between ‘the public’, which is considered to be all of civil society's actors, and the ‘public concerned’, which are persons or public organisations affected by or interested in environmental decision-making, such as environmental organisations.

The Aarhus Convention has a Compliance Review Mechanism, which can be triggered in four ways:  A Party makes a submission concerning its own compliance,  A Party makes a submission concerning another Party's compliance,  The Convention Secretariat makes a referral to the Committee, or  A member of the public makes a communication concerning the compliance of a party.

The Compliance mechanism is unique in international environmental law, because it allows members of the public to communicate concerns about a Party's compliance directly to a committee of international legal experts empowered to examine the merits of the case (the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee).

The Compliance Committee does not issue binding decisions but makes recommendations to the full Meeting of the Parties (MoP). As of August 2009, 1 submission from a Party and 41 communication from the public (many originating with non-governmental organizations) had been lodged with the Convention's Compliance Committee.

13 Convention website: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/welcome.html 14 Ratification: http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13&chapter=27&lang=en. 15 UNECE (2006) Your right to a healthy environment: a simplified guide to the Aarhus convention on access to information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters, UN, New York and Geneva, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2006/pp/ece%20mp%20pp%205_E.pdf

Synergies page 1 of 59 The former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan made the following comment highlighting the significance of this Convention:

‘Although regional in scope, the significance of the Aarhus Convention is global. It is by far the most impressive elaboration of principle 10 of the Rio Declaration, which stresses the need for citizens' participation in environmental issues and for access to information on the environment held by public authorities. As such it is the most ambitious venture in the area of environmental democracy so far undertaken under the auspices of the United Nations.’

2.2 Public access and participation in international fora – relevant to MP participation

In addition to addressing issues at national and regional level, the Aahus Convention Parties are required to promote the application of the Convention’s principles within the framework of international bodies in matters relating to the environment (under Article 3(7)). Several decisions have supported this Article:

 Decision II/4 adopted a set of guidelines (called the Almaty Guidelines) on promoting the principles of public access to information, public participation in decision making in international fora that deal with environmental matters.16 Extracts from the Almaty Guidelines are shown in Box 1 below.

 Decision IV/3 noted that significant work remains to be done to implement the Convention in international fora, and appointed a Working Group of the Parties to oversee the progress and challenges.17 It calls on Parties to promote the principles of the Convention in the procedures of international fora, including work programmes, projects, decisions, instruments and other substantive outputs of those fora. The Secretariat may (inter alia) provide advisory assistance to interested international fora (Decision IV/3(12(a)).

MP synergies: The Montreal Protocol (MP) Parties might consider conducting a review of MP procedures and practices to identify areas where the Aarhus Convention principles are being applied currently and/or might be applied in future. If deemed appropriate, the secretariat of the Aarhus Convention could be requested to provide advisory assistance.

Box 1: Extracts from the Almaty Guidelines on promoting the application of the principles of the Aarhus Convention in international forums  ‘Access to information, public participation and access to justice in environmental matters are fundamental elements of good governance at all levels and essential for sustainability.’ (para. 11).  ‘In any structuring of international access, care should be taken to make or keep the processes open, in principle, to the public at large.’ (para. 14)  ‘Capacity-building may be important to facilitate international access for the public concerned, in particular NGOs promoting environmental protection, and especially in developing countries and in countries with economies in transition.’ (para. 17)  On access to environmental information: ‘Each Party should encourage international forums to develop and make available to the public a clear and transparent set of policies and procedures on access to the environmental information that they hold in order to make access by the public more consistent and reliable. Such policies and procedures should enhance and facilitate both accessibility and understanding of the relevant information.’ (para. 19) On public participation in decision-making:  ‘Participation of the public concerned in the meetings of international forums, including their subsidiary bodies and other groups established by the forums to contribute to the decision-making, in matters

16 Decision II/4 on promoting the application of the principles of the Aarhus Convention in international forums, ECE/MP.PP/2005/2/Add.5, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/pp/ece/ece.mp.pp.2005.2.add.5.e.pdf 17 Decision IV/3, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/ppif/Decision_IV-3_Promoting_the_application.pdf

Synergies page 2 of 59 relating to the environment should be allowed at all relevant stages of the decision-making process, unless there is a reasonable basis to exclude such participation according to transparent and clearly stated standards that are made available, if possible, in advance.’ (para. 29).  ‘The international processes should benefit from public participation from an early stage, including, at the international level, the negotiation and application of conventions; the preparation, formulation and implementation of decisions; and substantive preparation of events.’ (para. 32). Source: Decision II/4 on promoting the application of the principles of the Aarhus Convention in international forums, ECE/MP.PP/2005/2/Add.5, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/pp/ece/ece.mp.pp.2005.2.add.5.e.pdf

Box 2: Aarhus Convention reference materials

 Text of the Aarhus Convention: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.html

 Ratification status: http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII- 13&chapter=27&lang=en

 Map showing Parties to the Convention: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/AarhusMap.html

 Implementation guide: UNECE (2000) The Aarhus Convention: An implementation guide, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/acig.pdf

 Compliance mechanism guide: UNECE (2010) Guidance Document on the Aarhus Convention compliance mechanism, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/CC_GuidanceDocument.pdf

 Other reference material: UNECE (2006) Your right to a healthy environment: A simplified guide to the Aarhus Convention on access to information, public participation in decision making and access to justice in environmental matters, http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=21440

 Strategic plan 2009-2014: http://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/treaties/public- participation/aarhus-convention/areas-of-work/current-work-programme-and-strategic- plan/strategic-plan-2009-2014.html

 Work programme for 2012-2014: http://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/treaties/public- participation/aarhus-convention/areas-of-work/current-work-programme-and-strategic-plan/work- programme-2012-2014.html

 Regional centres: Aarhus Centres, http://www.unece.org/env/pp/acintro.html

 Secretariat: UN Economic Commission for Europe, Palais des Nations, Geneva.

Synergies page 3 of 59 3. BASEL CONVENTION ON CONTROL OF TRANSBOUNDARY MOVEMENTS OF HAZARDOUS WASTES

3.1 Overview of the Basel Convention

The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was adopted in 1989 and entered into force on in 1992.18 By December 2012 there were 180 Parties.

The overarching objective of the Basel Convention is to protect human health and the environment against the adverse effects of hazardous wastes. Its scope of application covers specific types of ‘hazardous wastes’ based on their origin or composition and their hazard characteristics.19 In cases where transboundary movement is not prohibited, it may take place only if it represents an environmentally sound solution, if the principles of environmentally sound management and non-discrimination are observed, and if it is carried out in accordance with the Convention’s regulatory system.

The provisions of the Basel Convention centre around the following principal aims:

 Reduction of hazardous waste generation and the promotion of environmentally sound management of hazardous wastes, wherever the place of disposal;

 Restriction of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes except where it is perceived to be in accordance with the principles of environmentally sound management.

The Basel Convention has placed the following restrictions on the transboundary movements of specific types of wastes that are defined as hazardous wastes (Article 4):

 Parties shall prohibit the export of hazardous wastes to any Party which has prohibited the import of hazardous wastes into its territory;  For wastes not specifically prohibited by the importing country, Parties shall prohibit the export of hazardous wastes if the importing country has not consented in writing;  Each Party shall prevent the export of hazardous wastes if it has reason to believe that those wastes will not be managed in an environmentally sound manner.

 A Party shall not permit the export and/or import of hazardous wastes involving non-Parties, unless the relevant countries have bilateral or multilateral agreements on hazardous waste management which are ‘no less environmentally sound’ than the Basel Convention (Article 11).

In 1998, Annexes VIII and IX were added to the Convention to provide further elaboration on the categories of waste that are regulated by the Convention.

In 1995, an Amendment to the Basel Convention (called the Ban Amendment) was adopted by decision III/1. The Ban Amendment provides for the following measures by each Party that is listed in the proposed new Annex VII to the Convention:

 A prohibition on all transboundary movements to countries not listed in Annex VII of hazardous wastes covered by the Convention that are intended for final disposal, and

 A prohibition on all transboundary movements to countries not listed in Annex VII of hazardous wastes covered by paragraph 1 (a) of Article 1 of the Convention that are destined for reuse, recycling or recovery operations.20

As of March 2013 the Ban Amendment was ratified by 74 Parties and has not yet entered into force.21

18 Basel Convention website: www.basel.int 19 The Convention also controls two types of wastes defined as ‘other wastes’, namely household waste and incinerator ash. 20 Details of the Ban Amendment: http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/TextoftheConvention/tabid/1275/Default.aspx

Synergies page 4 of 59 3.2 Types of ODS covered by the requirements of the Basel Convention

In the context of transboundary movements, the Basel Convention defines wastes as ‘substances or objects which are disposed of or are intended to be disposed of or are required to be disposed of by the provisions of national law’ (Article 2(1)). The following types of hazardous wastes are subject to control under the Convention:  Hazardous wastes = wastes that exhibit one or more of the hazard characteristics (H3-H33) contained in Annex III of the Convention (e.g. toxic, bioaccumulative) and arise from one of the sectors or activities (Y1-Y45) listed in Annex I or VIII of the Convention (e.g. waste from the production or use of biocides, organic solvents or resins).  Wastes that are defined as, or considered to be, hazardous wastes by the domestic legislation of the Party of export, import or transit.22

The Convention therefore applies to the transboundary movements of certain types of ODS wastes only, in the following cases:

 ODS that are explosive, flammable, corrosive, bioaccumulative or toxic to biotic systems, i.e. ODS that possess a hazard characteristic listed in Annex III of the Convention, and arise from one of the sectors listed in Annex I or VIII. Examples include carbon tetrachloride used as an organic solvent, HCFC-123 used as a thermal (heat transfer) fluid or organic solvent, and methyl bromide used as a biocide.

 ODS which contain other materials or contaminants at levels that exhibit one of the hazardous characteristics listed above. For example, CFC contaminated with a toxic substance.

 Cases where a Basel Convention Party has (a) officially notified the Secretariat that ODS are defined or considered as hazardous waste under domestic legislation23 (examples in Box 3 below), and (b) that specific Party is also involved in the import, export or transit of the waste.

However, it appears that the Basel Convention would not normally apply to the following types of ODS:

 ODS that do not possess any of the hazardous characteristics listed in Annex III of the Convention, i.e. ODS wastes that are not explosive, flammable, infectious, corrosive, toxic, bioaccumulative or toxic to biotic systems. CFCs, halons, and most of the HCFCs do not possess these hazardous characteristics, so they are excluded from the Basel Convention’s requirements (except where they are considered as hazardous waste under domestic legislation).

 ODS that have been reclaimed and purified to usable purity specifications such as ISO standards or appropriate national standards.

Box 3: Examples of domestic legislation that brings specific ODS under the Basel Convention provisions

Non-hazardous waste ODS (e.g. CFCs, halons) are subject to the Basel Convention requirements in cases where a Basel Convention Party has officially notified the Secretariat that the ODS is defined or considered as

21 Status of the ban amendment: http://www.basel.int/Countries/StatusofRatifications/BanAmendment/tabid/1344/Default.aspx 22 Basel Convention Manual for Implementation, section 2.2.3, http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/meetings/sbc/workdoc/manual.doc. 23 The Basel Convention website provides information on notifications submitted by Parties relating to their national definitions of hazardous waste, http://www.basel.int/natdef/frsetmain.php

Synergies page 5 of 59 hazardous waste under domestic legislation, and that specific Party is involved in the import, export or transit of the waste. Examples are provided below. Argentina: Decree No. 18119 prohibits the entry of all types of waste, including waste containing CFCs. Canada: CFCs and halons were listed as controlled hazardous recyclable material under the Export and Import of Hazardous Wastes Regulations of 1992 and DECO Council Decision C(92)39/Final. There are also controls on the transboundary movements of wastes or recyclable materials that are classed as UN Class 2 gases,24 i.e. compressed gases. Therefore CFC-11 (which is liquid at normal temperature and pressure) is not considered to be a hazardous waste and would not be subject to these controls, while CFC-11 in an aerosol or as a compressed gas would be subject to these controls. Croatia: Wastes that fall within the scope of the Montreal Protocol are considered to be hazardous wastes, because they are classified as ecotoxic (H14) under the Regulation on categories, types and classification of waste (Official Gazette 50/05, 39/09). The following are subject to controls: CFCs, halons, HCFC, HFC, discarded equipment containing CFCs, HCFC, HFC, and gas in pressurised containers (including halons) containing dangerous substances. Imports of hazardous waste are prohibited. EU-27: ODS destined for disposal or recovery are classified as hazardous wastes under the EU Waste Shipment Regulation (EC) 1013/200625 unless present in small amounts in end-of-life products. The EU has banned the export of hazardous wastes, including ODS, to non-OECD countries. Norway: All wastes falling under the scope of the Montreal Protocol, including ODS-containing wastes, are considered hazardous and therefore subject to prior informed consent procedures. Philippines: There is a specific classification covering waste CFCs and halons (L401), and recovered coolants containing CFCs and halons. Tunisia: The national legislation on hazardous wastes specifically includes wastes consisting of or containing CFCs or halogenated organic compounds. Source: Communication by the Secretariat of the Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, July 2009, UNEP/OzL.Pro/Workshop.3/INF/2, http://ozone.unep.org/Meeting_Documents/workshop_on_ODS_banks/WORKSHOP-3-INF2E.pdf

3.3 Notification and consent procedure for transboundary movement of controlled wastes – relevant to the export of ODS banks for destruction

Based on the concept of prior informed consent, the Basel Convention requires that, before the export of a waste covered by the Convention may take place, the authorities of the State of export must notify the authorities of the prospective States of import and transit, providing them with information on the intended shipments. Annex VA and Annex VB of the Basel Convention list the types of information to be provided in Notification Documents and Movement Documents. The Basel Convention website provides standard formats for such documents.26 The movement of the waste shipment may only proceed if and when all States concerned have given their written consent (Articles 6 and 7).

The Basel Convention has established an infrastructure to implement the procedures of notification, consent and movement of shipments. Each Party has designated a competent authority to be responsible for information relating to transboundary movements of controlled wastes (under Articles 5 and 6).27

MP synergies: As noted in section 3.2 above, ODS wastes are subject to the requirements of the Basel Convention in certain cases only, e.g. ODS that are toxic or exhibit other hazard characteristics listed in Annex III of the Convention and arise from specific sectors; ODS that are contaminated with hazardous levels of a

24 Class 2 under the UN Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods Model Regulations (UNTDG). 25 EC Official Journal series L 190 p.1, 12.07.2006. 26 Revised notification and movement documents with instructions: http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/techmatters/forms-notif-mov/vCOP8.pdf 27 Competent authorities and focal points: http://www.basel.int/Countries/CountryContacts/tabid/1342/Default.aspx

Synergies page 6 of 59 substance; and where a Party involved in import/export or transit has notified the Convention secretariat that that type of ODS is considered to be hazardous waste under domestic legislation. In cases where the ODS waste is controlled by the Basel Convention, international shipments for environmentally-sound destruction are permitted following the notification and consent procedure described above. However, the notification and consent requirements do not apply to ODS wastes that are not covered by the Basel Convention, such as non-toxic ODS. If the MP Parties would prefer all waste ODS exports to be covered by the requirements of the Basel Convention, the Parties could consider options such as the following:

 The MP could potentially adopt a Decision which states that all MP Parties agree to apply the Basel Convention requirements to all ODS that are moved across national boundaries for the purpose of destruction.

 Alternatively a MP Decision could require the use of a streamlined version of the Basel Convention’s Notification and Movement documents to accompany each transboundary shipment of ODS intended for destruction.

 The MP could request the Basel Convention Parties to specifically include all waste ODS in the list of waste substances covered by the Convention.

 The MP could request the Basel Convention to prepare, in cooperation with the MP, Technical Guidelines that provide step-by-step guidance on the expected procedures for the transboundary movement of all ODS intended for destruction, including streamlined Notification and Movement documents specifically designed for ODS.

3.4 Infrastructure for tracking the movement of shipments – relevant to monitoring imports and exports of virgin ODS

In addition to the notification and consent procedure, national authorities are also responsible for implementing procedures relating to the international movement of shipments of waste. An official Movement document travels with each consignment of waste at all times, from the moment it leaves the waste generator to its arrival at a disposal or recovery facility in another country.28 Each person who takes charge of a transboundary movement has to sign the movement document upon delivery or receipt of the wastes. The movement document also contains space for recording the passage of the consignment through the customs offices of all countries concerned. The Basel Convention’s movement tracking procedure can be applied to each shipment of waste, on each occasion, in contrast to the Rotterdam Convention’s export notification procedure which applies only once a year.

The Movement document includes information such as the following:  Contact details of exporter, importer, carriers  Actual quantity in shipment (in tonnes)  The designation and composition of the material, including identification codes and hazard codes. MP synergies: Parties to the MP are engaged in monitoring the imports and exports of virgin and recycled ODS, as part of the national licensing systems. A number of MP Parties participate in a voluntary informal prior informed consent (iPIC) procedure for ODS trade.29 The iPIC system for ODS can be applied to each shipment, and can provide quantitative data to assist NOUs in implementing ODS import quotas; however consent is not a requirement, to avoid delaying trade in ODS.

28 Basel Convention’s Movement document: http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/techmatters/forms-notif-mov/vCOP8.pdf 29 UNEP online iPIC system for ODS, http://www.unep.org/ozonaction/InformationResources/iPIConline/tabid/79051/Default.aspx

Synergies page 7 of 59 The Basel Convention’s information procedure also provide concepts relevant to the MP because the Basel procedures include data on the quantity and composition of materials. The Basel Convention’s Movement documents accompany each shipment and provide a particularly interesting concept that could potentially be taken up and adapted by the MP to track each international shipment of virgin and recycled ODS (as well as ODS intended for destruction) from origin to destination. Simplified Movement documents that accompany ODS shipments would provide a more accurate method of monitoring ODS exports and imports. Additional monitoring tools will become increasingly necessary in future, as the supply of ODS diminishes further, to assist in the prevention of illegal trade, and reduce the risk that exempted ODS will be diverted to phased-out uses.

With respect to the existing infrastructure, there is potential in future to amalgamate the national offices that implement the import/export procedures for ODS with the national offices that implement the notification and consent procedures under other Conventions, including Basel and Rotterdam, so that these activities could potentially be carried out by one administrative entity in future.

3.5 Cooperation and regional centres for training and technology transfer – relevant to the collection and destruction of ODS banks

The Basel Convention also provides for cooperation between parties, ranging from exchange of information on issues relevant to the implementation of the Convention to technical assistance, particularly to developing countries (Articles 10 and 13). The Secretariat is required to facilitate and support this cooperation, acting as a clearing-house (Article 16).

The Convention has established a network of 14 regional and coordinating centres for capacity building and technology transfer (under Article 14). They carry out training, technology transfer and capacity building activities related to the management of wastes and minimizing the generation of wastes. Activities also include information dissemination, awareness raising, workshops, seminars and pilot projects. The BC regional centres are located in Argentina, China, Egypt, El Salvador, Indonesia, Islamic Iran, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovakia, South Pacific Regional Environment Programme (Samoa), South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay. The Centres are funded by their host countries, through project-related funding and voluntary contributions.30

MP synergies: There is scope for closer cooperation and joint work between the Convention’s 14 regional centres and the MLF-funded regional networks of NOUs on matters relating to ODS banks. The Basel Convention’s 14 regional centres offer an existing infrastructure for the potential development of an international infrastructure and support system for addressing waste ODS collection and destruction.

The Basel Convention’s regional centre for Central America and Mexico is organising several projects that aim to develop a joint approach for the collection and destruction of ODS banks and persistent organic pollutants (POPs).31 The initiative is financially supported by Norway and Switzerland. The initiative will seek synergies with related efforts in the region (e.g. Reduction of Chemical Runoff in Agriculture and Tourism (REPCAR II) and remediation activities). There is scope for further joint projects related to ODS banks destruction in other Basel regional centres, within the context of waste management and environmentally sound disposal.

3.6 Monitoring for illegal traffic in hazardous wastes – relevant to illegal trade in ODS

Under the Basel Convention, illegal traffic occurs if the transboundary movement of hazardous waste takes place without the prior consent of all states concerned, or in the event that consent is obtained by falsification,

30 http://www.basel.int/Partners/RegionalCentres/Overview/tabid/2334/Default.aspx 31 Basel Convention Regional Center for Central America and Mexico (BCRC-CAM), www.sica.int/crcbcam

Synergies page 8 of 59 misrepresentation or fraud, or when the movement does not conform with the document, etc. Cases of illegal traffic are reported to the Secretariat, who informs the parties that may be affected.32

MP synergies: The customs officers who are involved in monitoring and inspecting waste shipments, and related documents, often also have the role of monitoring for illegal trade in ODS. Synergies have already been established for providing information and training to customs officers who help to enforce MEAs. UNEP OzonAction programme provides training tools, manuals and information materials for customs officers who are involved with ODS, and cooperates with the other organisations to prevent illegal trade.33 The Green Customs initiative, for example, is a collaborative effort of ten international organisations and convention secretariats concerned with the implementation or enforcement of agreements with trade-related aspects. It provides information materials and training workshops for customs officers.34

3.7 Application of WCO Harmonised System to Basel wastes – relevant to HS codes for ODS

The Basel Convention is currently developing identification codes for the wastes covered by the Convention, to be based on the WCO Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding system.35

MP synergies: There are opportunities for the MP to cooperate with the Basel Convention in identifying relevant HS codes for the types of ODS wastes that are covered by the Basel Convention. This also provides an opportunity to officially clarify which ODS waste streams are covered by the Basel Convention and by national legislation under the Convention.

Box 4: Basel Convention reference materials

 Text of the Basel Convention: http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Overview/TextoftheConvention/tabid/1275/Default.aspx

 Ratification status: 180 Parties, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-3&chapter=27&lang=en

 Map showing Parties to the Convention: http://www.basel.int/Countries/StatusofRatifications/PartiesSignatories/tabid/1290/Default.aspx

 National regulations adopted by Parties: http://www.basel.int/Countries/NationalLegislation/tabid/1420/Default.aspx

 Implementation guide: http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/meetings/sbc/workdoc/manual.doc

 Waste notification and movement documents and instructions: http://www.basel.int/Portals/4/Basel%20Convention/docs/techmatters/forms-notif-mov/vCOP8.pdf

 Compliance: http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/ImplementationComplianceCommittee/Overview/tabid/2868/ Default.aspx

32 Reporting on illegal traffic in hazardous waste: http://www.basel.int/Procedures/ReportingonIllegalTraffic/tabid/1544/Default.aspx 33 UNEP (2008) Green customs guide to multilateral environmental agreements, http://www.greencustoms.org/reports/guide/Green_Customs_Guide_new.pdf; UNEP DTIE training tools, http://www.unep.org/ozonaction/Topics/Customs/tabid/6402/Default.aspx#uneptraining. 34 Green Customs initiative website, www.greencustoms.org 35 BC developments on the identification of wastes under the WCO Harmonised System: http://www.basel.int/Implementation/TechnicalMatters/WCOHarmonisedSystemCommittee/tabid/2390/Default.aspx

Synergies page 9 of 59  Other reference materials: http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/Publications/GuidanceManuals/tabid/2364/Default.aspx

 Strategic plan: http://www.basel.int/TheConvention/StrategicPlan/tabid/1278/Default.aspx

 Work programme for 2012-2013: http://www.basel.int/Implementation/ProgrammeofWork/tabid/1283/Default.aspx

 Regional centres: 14 Basel Convention regional centres, http://www.basel.int/Partners/RegionalCentres/Overview/tabid/2334/Default.aspx

 Secretariat: UNEP, Châtelaine, Switzerland, http://www.basel.int/secretariat/ourteam/tabid/1296/default.aspx

Synergies page 10 of 59 4. CHICAGO CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION

4.1 Overview of Chicago Convention

The Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation was signed in 1944 and came into force in 1947. It has been ratified by 190 Parties.

The governing body is the Council of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). The original Chicago Convention aimed to adopt principles and arrangements to develop civil aviation in a safe and orderly manner. It requests Parties to collaborate in securing ‘the highest practicable degree’ of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures, and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To achieve this, a series of technical specifications (called standards and recommended practices) have been adopted as Annexes to the Convention. The Annexes do not have the same legal binding force as the Convention itself. Each Party may notify the ICAO Council of any difference between the Annexes and its own national regulations and practices (Article 38). The ICAO monitors conformity with the standards and recommended practices through audits of state oversight systems.

The ICAO has a well-established regional infrastructure comprising seven regional offices, located in Asia (Bangkok), Africa (Cairo, Dakar and Nairobi), Europe (Paris), North America (Mexico City) and South America (Lima).

4.2 Requirements relating to fire-fighting systems – relevant to the use of halons

The Annexes to the Chicago Convention have specified various requirements that relate to fire-fighting systems:

 In the interests of safety, aircraft must be designed, constructed and operated in compliance with the airworthiness requirements of the state where the aircraft is registered, and the aircraft must hold a Certificate of Airworthiness indicating that it meets the minimum standards established by ICAO (Annex 8). Aircraft design should minimise the possibility of in-flight fires, and the aircraft must be equipped with the means to automatically prevent emergencies or enable the crew to deal with them effectively (Annex 8).

 All international airports are required to have a fire fighting service and equipment (Annex 14). Annex 14 sets forth the agents to be used, their amounts and the time limits in which they must be delivered to the scene of an aircraft accident.

 The transport of dangerous goods by air (Annex 18) also lays down restrictions for compressed gases (e.g. HCFC in pressurised cylinders), pesticides and toxic gases (e.g. methyl bromide).

For many years halons have been important components of the fire protection systems in passenger aircraft. Following cooperation between HTOC and the ICAO (details below). In 2010 the ICAO Assembly adopted a resolution on halon replacement, which directed the ICAO Council to establish a mandate for the replacement of halons in new aircraft for lavatories, hand-held fire extinguishers, engines and auxiliary power units (Resolution A37-9).36 The ICAO in 2011 amended two Annexes to phase out halons in these applications:

 Annex 6 on operation of aircraft requires halon alternatives for lavatory fire extinguishing systems for in-production aircraft beginning in 2012, and for hand-held extinguishers for in-production aircraft beginning in 2017.37

36 ICAO (2010) Resolutions adopted by the Assembly, 37th session, p.14, Resolution 37-9 on halon replacement, http://legacy.icao.int/icao/en/assembl/A37/Docs/a37_res_prov_en.pdf 37 Annex 6 Operation of Aircraft, Part I, 6.2.2.1; Part II, section 2, 2.4.2.3; Part III, section II, 4.2.2.1 and section III, 4.1.3.2.

Synergies page 11 of 59  Annex 8 on airworthiness of aircraft requires halon alternatives for engines and auxiliary power unit fire extinguishing systems for newly designed aircraft beginning in 2015.38

Parties are due to report to ICAO on whether or not they will comply with the amended Annexes by the agreed dates.

MP synergies: The MP has promoted cooperation with the ICAO for a number of years. In 2003 the Parties to the Montreal Protocol noted that new airframes were still being designed with halons due to the regulatory requirements. It authorised the Ozone Secretariat and TEAP to engage in discussions with relevant ICAO bodies in the development of a plan of action to examine the possibility of modifying the regulatory requirements that required the use of halons on new aircraft without compromising the health and safety of airline passengers (Decision XV/11). Following this, HTOC continued to work with ICAO, and other bodies associated with the airline industry, in examining information relating to alternatives. In 2010 the ICAO Assembly directed the ICAO Council to establish a mandate for the replacement of halons in specific applications in new aircraft (Resolution A37-9).39 The resolution also encouraged ICAO to continue collaboration with the Ozone Secretariat though TEAP’s HTOC on the topic of halon alternatives for civil aviation. The Montreal Protocol Parties noted with appreciation the ICAO resolution, and requested the Ozone secretariat and TEAP to continue to engage with ICAO on other uses of halons (Decision XXII/11(4)).

Substantial progress in this field has resulted from the successful collaboration between the MP and the ICAO. HTOC continues to assist ICAO and the aviation industry the process of identifying suitable alternatives for cargo bays, which represent the largest use of halons in civil aviation.40

4.3 Information on halon reserves for aircraft – relevant to the quantification of halon banks

In October 2010 the ICAO Assembly adopted a resolution which urged Parties to inform ICAO regularly of their halon reserves, and directed the Secretary General to report the results to the Council. It also directed the Council to report on the status of halon reserves at the next session of the Assembly (Resolution A37-9).41

Following this, the ICAO secretariat sent out a letter requesting Parties to complete a questionnaire on their available halon reserves. The questionnaire requests the following information from each Party:42

 The Party’s opinion on whether there will be sufficient halon-1211, 1301 and 2402 to meet the Party’s civil aviation needs (given the MP’s ban on halon production and taking into account the timeframes for halon replacement established in the technical Annexes under the Chicago Convention).  The quantity of halon reserves accessible to civil aviation, for each type of halon (in metric tonnes), if known.

By November 2012, 55 out of 191 ICAO member states have responded.43

MP synergies: Noting the ICAO resolution in 2010, the MP Parties requested the Ozone Secretariat to ask the ICAO secretariat to send halon reserves data reported to the ICAO to the Ozone Secretariat annually (Decision XXII/11). In November 2012 HTOC reported that a few states had reported on halon quantities, but most of the states responding to the questionnaire did not know the quantity of halon reserves. HTOC reported that overall there was little evidence that national civil aviation and ozone offices worked together, although a few replies were submitted by ozone focal points. The ICAO therefore planned to send a follow-up letter to ICAO

38 Annex 8 Airworthiness of Aircraft, Part II, 1.1 b. 39 ICAO (2010) Resolutions adopted by the Assembly, 37th session, p.14-15, Resolution 37-9 on halon replacement, http://legacy.icao.int/icao/en/assembl/A37/Docs/a37_res_prov_en.pdf 40 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Report of the twenty-fourth meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol, UNEP/OzL.Pro.24/10, Annex III, p.72, para.36. 41 ICAO (2010) Resolutions adopted by the Assembly, 37th session, p.14-15, Resolution 37-9 on halon replacement, http://legacy.icao.int/icao/en/assembl/A37/Docs/a37_res_prov_en.pdf 42 ICAO state questionnaire on halon reserves, http://www.icao.int/safety/Pages/Halon-Reserves-Questionnaire.aspx 43 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Report of the twenty-fourth meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol, UNEP/OzL.Pro.24/10, Annex III, p.72, para.34.

Synergies page 12 of 59 Parties to try to collect additional information. Each letter would be sent jointly to the ozone focal points and the civil aviation offices in each Party to foster collaborative responses.44 The MP might consider encouraging ozone focal points to collaborate with their national civil aviation authorities in compiling national data on halon reserves relevant to civil aircraft. This could be accomplished, for example by a decision and/or through regional training workshops on how to compile inventories on halon reserves, along with information about halon banking and suitable alternatives identified by HTOC in collaboration with aviation experts. The ICAO’s 7 regional offices45 could potentially provide locations and support for undertaking training workshops and information exchange in key regions where information is needed.

Box 5: Chicago Convention reference materials

 Text of the Chicago Convention: http://www.icao.int/publications/pages/doc7300.aspx

 Ratification status: 191 Parties, http://www.icao.int/publications/Documents/chicago.pdf

 Implementation guide: http://www.icao.int/WACAF/AFIRAN08_Doc/9734_parta_cons_en.pdf

 Other reference material: http://www.icao.int/publications/Pages/default.aspx

 Strategic objectives 2011-2013: http://www.icao.int/Pages/Strategic-Objectives.aspx

 Work programmes: http://legacy.icao.int/icao/en/assembl/A37/Docs/a37_res_prov_en.pdf

 Regional centres: 7 regional offices, http://www.icao.int/Pages/contact_us.aspx

 Secretariat: International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Montreal, Canada, http://www.icao.int/Pages/contact_us.aspx

44 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Report of the twenty-fourth meeting of the parties to the Montreal Protocol, UNEP/OzL.Pro.24/10, Annex III, p.72, para.36. 45 ICAO regional offices, http://www.icao.int/Pages/contact_us.aspx

Synergies page 13 of 59 5. GENEVA CONVENTION ON LONG-RANGE TRANSBOUNDARY AIR POLLUTION

5.1 Overview of the Geneva Convention on LRTAP

The Geneva Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) was signed in 1979 under the auspices of the United nations Economic Commission for Europe.46 It entered into force in 1983 and has been ratified by 51 Parties including the EU.

The aim of the LRTAP Convention is that Parties shall endeavour to limit and, as far as possible, gradually reduce and prevent air pollution including long-range transboundary air pollution. Parties develop policies and strategies to combat the discharge of air pollutants through exchanges of information, consultation, research and monitoring.47 The Convention has created a framework for controlling and reducing the damage to health and the environment caused by transboundary air pollution.

The Convention has been extended by eight protocols that identify specific measures to be taken by Parties to reduce their emissions of air pollutants.48 The topics covered by the Protocols include:  The 1988 Sofia Protocol concerning the Control of Nitrogen Oxides or their Transboundary Fluxes.49  The 1991 Protocol concerning the Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds or their Transboundary Fluxes.50  The Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone – details in section 6 below.

The Parties meet annually at sessions of the Executive Body to review on-going work and plan future activities including a workplan for the coming year. Several bodies report to the Executive Body each year: The Working Group on Effects and the EMEP51 Steering Body are the main scientific and technical subsidiary bodies that provide the Convention with scientific and technical support on how to achieve environmental goals in a cost-effective way. There is also a Working Group on Strategies and Review, and the Convention's Implementation Committee.

Currently, the Convention's priority activities include review and possible revision of its most recent protocols, implementation of the Convention and its protocols across the entire UNECE region (with special focus on Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia and South-East Europe), and sharing knowledge and information with other regions of the world.

Much of the Convention’s work is carried out through its Protocols, which are described in other sections of this paper.

5.2 Expert groups and technical centres on air pollution – relevant to emissions of N2O and other ODS

The Convention’s Working Group on Strategies and Review has Task Forces and expert groups related to air pollution on topics such as:

 Task Force on Reactive Nitrogen (relevant to N2O)  Network of Experts on Benefits and Economic Instruments  Expert Group on Techno-economic Issues The Conventions’ EMEP programme provides scientific, technical and policy support to the Convention. The EMEP Steering Body has a number of Task Forces and expert groups which provide information on topics such

46 Geneva Convention website: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/lrtap_h1.html. 47 Text of the Geneva convention: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/lrtap_h1.html. 48 Text of protocols adopted under Geneva Convention: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/status/lrtap_s.html 49 1988 Sofia Protocol on NOx emissions: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/status/88n_st.html. 50 1991 Protocol on VOC emissions: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/vola_h1.html 51 The Cooperative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Convention, also called the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme of the LRTAP Convention

Synergies page 14 of 59 as air pollutant emission inventories and projections; measurements and modelling; integrated assessment modelling; and hemispheric transport of air pollution.52 EMEP works with the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and other international and regional organisations working on air pollution and long- range transmission.53

The EMEP Steering body has also established a number of Centres of relevance to the MP, including: 54  Chemical Coordinating Centre (CCC)  Centre on Emission Inventories and Projections (CEIP)  Meteorological Synthesizing Centre – West (MSC-W)  Meteorological Synthesizing Centre – East (MSC-E)  Centre for Integrated Assessment Modelling (CIAM)

The Centre on Emission Inventories and Projections, for example, has conducted detailed annual technical reviews of air pollutant emission inventories reported under the Convention and its Protocols, with the aim of improving the quality of data on emissions.55 The EMEP Chemical Coordinating Centre undertakes scientific and technical activities such as identify the sources of the pollution concentrations and depositions and to assess the effects of changes in emissions; and examining the environmental concentrations of new chemical substances that might require the attention of the Convention in the future.56

MP synergies: There is potential for closer cooperation between the MP and CLRTAP’s expert groups and technical centres on topics of mutual interest such as nitrous oxide (which is an ODS and a greenhouse gas); technical aspects of air pollution emission inventories and projections; measurements of ODS emissions; and technical and economic issues relating to air pollution. Improving the quality of emission data, for example, would be relevant to ODS areas where TEAP has reported that there are problems in obtaining reliable data, such as emissions of process agents and feedstock. There may be scope for joint scientific, technical or policy work to examine specific air pollutants of mutual interest, such as nitrous oxide or other known or suspected ODS that are not currently controlled by the MP.

Box 6: LRTAP Convention reference materials

 Text of the LRTAP Convention: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/lrtap_h1.html

 Ratification status: http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII- 1&chapter=27&lang=en

 Implementation guide: http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=10106

 Compliance mechanism: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/ic/welcome.html

 Other reference materials: http://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/treaties/air- pollution/publications.html

 Strategies and policies: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/emep/strategies.html; http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=10076

 Work programme: http://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/treaties/air-pollution/meetings-and-

52 EMEP Task Forces and Centres: http://www.emep.int/ 53 EMEP strategy: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/lrtap/conv/CLRTAP_Structure_2013.pdf 54 EMEP centres: http://www.emep.int/ 55 Technical review of air pollution inventories: http://www.ceip.at/review-of-inventories/ 56 Chemical coordinating Centre of EMEP: http://www.nilu.no/projects/ccc/

Synergies page 15 of 59 events.html

 Regional centres: Activities are carried out through the Protocols to the Convention.

 Secretariat: UNECE, Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/secretariat.html

Synergies page 16 of 59 6. GOTHENBURG PROTOCOL TO ABATE ACIDIFICATION, EUTROPHICATION AND GROUND-LEVEL OZONE

6.1 Overview of the Gothenburg Protocol

The Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone was adopted in 1999 under the Geneva Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (see Section above).57 It entered into force in 2005 and has 25 Parties to date, mainly countries in Europe and North America.

The Gothenburg Protocol aims to control and reduce emissions of sulphur, nitrogen oxides (NOx), ammonia, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter caused by anthropogenic activities and likely to have adverse effects on health and the environment (including the climate) due to acidification, eutrophication, particulate matter or ground-level ozone. The Protocol (as amended) established emission ceilings and reduction commitments for specific Parties in 2010-2020 for the following pollutants: sulphur dioxide, NOx, VOCs, ammonia and particulate matter. These ceilings were negotiated on the basis of scientific assessments of pollution effects and abatement options. Parties whose emissions have a more severe environmental or health impact, and whose emissions are relatively cheap to reduce, have to make the largest reductions.

The Protocol also set limit values for specific emission sources (e.g. combustion plant, electricity production, dry cleaning, cars and lorries) and requires best available techniques to be used to minimise / reduce emissions. VOC emissions from products such as aerosols also have to be reduced. Guidance documents adopted together with the Protocol provide a wide range of abatement techniques and economic instruments for the reduction of emissions in specified sectors.

The Protocol requires Parties to develop strategies, policies, and measures (Article 6), exchange information and technology (article 4), promote the provision of information to the public (Article 5), and report on emissions data and measures undertaken (Article 7).

The Protocol was amended in 2012 to include national emission reduction commitments to be achieved in 2020 and beyond. A number of emission limit values were updated for key stationary sources and mobile sources, as well. Each Party is also required to encourage the introduction of low-polluting processes and products, and encourage increases in energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. The revised Protocol also introduced flexibilities to facilitate the accession of new Parties, especially countries in Southern and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia.

The Gothenburg Protocol is supported by the bodies that were established under the Geneva Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution – refer to section 5 above.

6.2 Limits on NOx emissions – relevant to emissions of nitrous oxide

The Protocol adopted a guidance document in 1999 on control techniques for emissions of nitrogen oxides from stationary sources, such as installations for the production of nitric acid and combustion installations.

Although it addressed the control of nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide (expressed as nitrogen dioxide, NO2), it also encouraged reductions in nitrous oxide, an ODS and greenhouse gas.58 It encouraged the use of best available techniques and control measures.

The Protocol (as amended) has also established emission limit values for nitrogen oxides from stationary sources in 2010-2020. These limit the quantity of NOx contained in waste gases from installations, expressed in mg/m3. Compliance with the limits must be verified by continuous or discontinuous measurements or other technically sound methods. Monitoring, measurements, quality assurance and calibrations must be carried out in accordance with CEN or ISO standards (Annex V).

57 Gothenburg Protocol website: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/multi_h1.html 58 Guidance document adopted by decision 1999/1, p.15, http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/1999/eb/eb.air.1999.2.e.pdf

Synergies page 17 of 59 MP synergies: Nitrous oxide (N2O) is an ODS as well as a greenhouse gas (GHG). The MP’s Scientific

Assessment of Ozone Depletion has reported that N2O is currently the largest source of anthropogenic ODS emissions.59 The Gothenburg Protocol has a relatively small membership at present, and does not specifically control N2O (it controls NO2 primarily), but encourages reductions in N2O in the context of actions to reduce

NO2. The Kyoto Protocol is the only international agreement that currently lists N2O as a controlled substance (part of a basket of GHGs). However, the Kyoto Protocol also has a relatively small membership which has shrunk recently. A recent academic paper has noted that ‘there is increasing uncertainty as to how the GHGs currently in the Kyoto basket will be regulated in the future. Consequently, it is reasonable to explore the possibility of measures to manage N2O under the ozone regime and how they might interact with existing and future international climate regimes’. 60

The paper noted that there is potential for the MP to use the existing institutional architecture of the MP to 61 regulate anthropogenic sources of N2O. The majority of anthropogenic N2O are emitted from agricultural fertilizers, with smaller amounts from stationary and mobile combustion, and nitric and adipic acid production. MP has established an infrastructure for controlling and adopting alternatives for an agricultural pesticide, methyl bromide. This experience would be particularly valuable in addressing N2O arising from agricultural fertilizers. There is also potential for the MP to coordinate with the Gothenburg Protocol to exchange information on best available techniques and existing technical control options.

6.3 Limits on VOC emissions – relevant to emissions of many ODS

The term volatile organic compounds (VOCs) covers a wide range of chemicals that are precursors of ground- level ozone pollution; they are capable of producing photochemical oxidants by reaction with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight. This is relevant to the MP because a number of ODS are VOCs. The Gothenburg Protocol (as amended) established emission reduction commitments for VOCs for Parties in 2010-2020, calculated as a percentage reduction from the 2005 level (Annex II). Emissions limit values (ELVs) were also set for stationary sources, including some sectors that may use ODS, such as conversion of rubber, surface coatings, and the manufacture of pharmaceutical products (Annex VI). ELVs were also specified for waste gases containing substances harmful to human health, such as halogenated VOCs which are classified as health risks (this is relevant to carbon tetrachloride, for example).

The Protocol also contains guidance on implementing solvent management plans for the verification of compliance, and identification of further reduction options (Appendix to Annex VI), which may be relevant to ODS used as process agents. As noted in section x.1 , the Gothenburg Protocol requires Parties to engage in information exchange (Article 4), promote the provision of information to the public (Article 5), and report on emissions data and measures undertaken (Article 7).

MP synergies: There is potential for the MP to exchange information with the Gothenburg Protocol Parties on ODS that are VOCs, such as carbon tetrachloride used as feedstock or process agents, and related topics such as data on emissions, technically and economically feasible emission limits for specific sectors and specific categories of installations, and best available technologies for minimising emissions.

59 WMO (2010) Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 2010, World Meteorological Organisation, Geneva, p.ES-8, 60 Kanter, D. et al (2013) A post-Kyoto partner: Considering the stratospheric ozone regime as a tool to manage nitrous oxide, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110(12), 4451-4457, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1222231110 61 Kanter, D. et al (2013) PNAS 110(12), 4451-4457 (footnote above).

Synergies page 18 of 59

Box 7: Gothenburg Protocol reference materials

 Text of the Gothenburg Protocol and amendments: http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/multi_h1.html

 Ratification status: 25 Parties, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-1- h&chapter=27&lang=en

 Implementation guide: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2005/1999/eb/eb.air.1999.2.e.pdf

 Other reference materials: Refer to materials listed under the Geneva Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution in section 5

 Secretariat: UNECE, Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.unece.org/env/lrtap/secretariat.html

Synergies page 19 of 59 7. INTERNATIONAL PLANT PROTECTION CONVENTION

7.1 Overview of the IPPC

The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) was established in 1952 under the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation.62 The Convention has 178 contracting Parties.

The IPPC aims to protect agricultural plants and wild plants by preventing the introduction and spread of specific pests that are classified as harmful. Organisms that present risks to plants can be transported by people and commodities that move around the world. The IPPC’s primary focus is on plants and plant products that move in international trade. The IPPC provides an international framework for plant protection that includes International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) for safeguarding plant resources. Current international standards address topics such as:  pest surveillance, survey and monitoring;  import regulations and pest risk analysis;  compliance procedures and phytosanitary inspection methodologies;  export certification.

The IPPC aims to protect the global plant resources from pests with several strategic objectives which include suitable agriculture, environmental protection and capacity development. The IPPC also provides information exchange related to import and export requirements, pest status and regulated pest lists provided by each member country. Contracting parties to the IPPC agree to promote technical assistance to other contracting parties. Developing countries also receive technical assistance to support their ability to implement the Convention and the ISPMs, and to improve the effectiveness of their National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPOs).

The IPPC’s governing body is the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM). Inter alia, it identifies action to control the spread of pests into new areas, develops and adopts international standards, and cooperates with international organisations on matters covered by the IPPC.

7.2 International standard for wood pallets and packaging materials - relevant to MB QPS treatments

The IPPC has adopted an International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures no. 15 (ISPM 15) which aims to prevent the transfer of harmful pests on wood pallets and other wood packaging materials moving in international trade.63 This standard requires wood pallets and wood packaging materials to be treated either with methyl bromide (MB) or a heat treatment. As an alternative to such treatments, it permits the use of pallets or packaging made of processed wood, or non-wood materials such as plastic pallets.

ISPM 15 recognises that MB depletes the ozone layer, and encourages national quarantine authorities (national plant protection organisations, NPPOs) to promote the use of approved alternatives: ‘NPPOs are encouraged to promote the use of alternative treatments approved in this standard.’ 64

MP synergies: The quarantine and pre-shipment (QPS) uses of MB are exempted from the MP’s phase-out schedules, however Parties are urged to refrain from using QPS MB, to use alternatives wherever possible, and to minimize emissions (under Decision VII/5).65 TEAP has noted that the use of MB for wood pallets and

62 IPPC website: www.ippc.int 63 The latest version is: IPPC (2009) ISPM 15 Regulation of Wood Packaging Material in International Trade 2009, https://www.ippc.int/file_uploaded/1323945454_ISPM_15_2009_En_2011-11-29_Refor.pdf 64 IPPC (2009) ISPM 15 Regulation of Wood Packaging Material in International Trade 2009, p.5 and 12. 65 MP Decision VII/5 on definition of ‘quarantine’ and ‘pre-shipment applications’, http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/Treaties/decisions_text.php?dec_id=571

Synergies page 20 of 59 packaging has increased substantially following the adoption of ISPM 15, and is estimated to be one of the largest global use of QPS MB.66

Most of the Parties to the MP are also Parties to the IPPC. The MP could consider activities such as encouraging NOUs to cooperate more closely with their national quarantine authorities to undertake activities such as establishing web-based lists of local companies that supply alternatives (e.g. certified heat treatment facilities, pallets and packaging made of processed wood, plastic or other non-wood materials). The MLF might also be requested to support regional workshops and other activities with the Regional Plant Protection Organisations to exchange information and identify practical steps to promote the adoption of existing alternatives for wood pallets and packaging.

7.3 IPPC Recommendation on methyl bromide - relevant to national strategies on QPS

The IPPC has also adopted a Recommendation which provides guidance to national quarantine authorities (National Plant Protection Organisations, NPPOs) on the replacement or reduction in the use of methyl bromide in the quarantine sector.67 The document recognises the following points:  There is a need for contracting parties to continue to use methyl bromide until equivalent and feasible alternative phytosanitary measures are available.  Some countries have already successfully reduced or eliminated the use of methyl bromide.

The Recommendation (inter alia) encourages IPPC Parties ‘to put in place a strategy that will help them to reduce the use of MB for phytosanitary measures and/or reduce emissions of MB’. National strategies may include the following areas for action: replacing MB use, reducing use, physically reducing emissions, and accurately recording MB use.

The Recommendation encourages Parties to increase the use of MB alternatives where possible, as follows: ‘In recognition of the desire to minimize the use of methyl bromide, contracting parties should, where possible, take actions to replace methyl bromide usage by increasing the application of alternative phytosanitary measures. Where methyl bromide fumigation is currently used as a phytosanitary treatment for regulated pests it may be replaced by an alternative phytosanitary measure in which no methyl bromide is used.’ (section 1)

Appendix 1 of the Recommendation provides a table of examples of quarantine treatments or measures that may be used instead of MB, such as: systems approaches, pest-free areas, other chemicals, physical treatments (e.g. heating, cooling), commodity processing, pest-free methods of production.

The IPPC Recommendation also includes guidelines which encourage NPPOs to be involved in the coordination of actions such as the following:  Review and consider how to change quarantine policies or requirements to replace and/or reduce MB where viable alternatives exist;  Ensure that MB fumigation is used only for quarantine pests;  Develop and use viable alternatives;  Communicate with other NPPOs about viable alternatives.68 Notably, the IPPC Guidelines also encourage national quarantine authorities (NPPOs) to coordinate with their national ozone unit in order to:  Facilitate the annual collection and reporting of MB usage data;  Cooperate with the NOU to implement a strategy to replace and reduce MB use; and

66 TEAP (2009) Quarantine and preshipment Taskforce final report, October 2009, p.40. 67 IPPC (2008) IPPC Recommendation on Replacement or Reduction of the Use of Methyl Bromide as a Phytosanitary Measure, Recommendation CPM-3/2008, https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111098&L=0. 68 IPPC (2008) Recommendation on methyl bromide (details above), section 5, , IPPC Guidelines for Appropriate Use of Methyl Bromide as a Phytosanitary Measure.

Synergies page 21 of 59  Exchange information on MB alternatives for quarantine uses.69 MP synergies: The MP’s Decision XX/6(10) also encourages MP Parties, in accordance with the IPPC Recommendation on methyl bromide, to put in place a national strategy that describes actions that will help them to reduce the use of MB for phytosanitary measures and/or reduce emissions. It encourages Parties to make their strategies available to other Parties through the Ozone Secretariat. To date only one such strategy has been posted on the Ozone Secretariat website.70

7.4 International and regional infrastructure for information exchange and cooperation - relevant to information exchange on MB QPS and alternatives

Information exchange is carried out by the IPCC Secretariat and Regional Plant Protection Organizations (RPPOs). National quarantine authorities (NPPOs) are also expected to keep the IPPC and other Parties informed about their quarantine requirements and new issues, usually via postings on the IPPC website.71

The IPPC’s Regional Plant Protection Organizations (RPPOs) are inter-governmental organisations which function as coordinating bodies for the National Plant Protection Organisations (NPPOs) in their regions. There are ten RPPOs located in Asia, the Pacific, Africa, Latin America, North America and Europe.72 The IPPC has defined the functions of RPPOs as follows (under Article IX):  Coordination among NPPOs to promote and achieve the objectives of the IPPC;  Cooperation among regions for promoting harmonized phytosanitary measures;  Gathering and dissemination of information, in particular in relation with the IPPC;  Cooperation in developing and implementing international standards for phytosanitary measures.

MP synergies: The IPPC Secretariat and the Ozone Secretariat have cooperated in several information exchange activities, and in 2012 they signed a memorandum of understanding which aims to:  Strengthen information-gathering on how MB is currently being used for quarantine purposes in order to identify opportunities for shifting to alternative measures;  Improve regional and international coordination regarding MB management;  Foster information exchanges and cooperative research aimed at reducing emissions of the gas and developing alternative phytosanitary treatments;  Promote best fumigation practices in order to minimize MB emissions and encourage wider use of methyl bromide recovery and recycling technologies.73

Box 8: IPPC Convention reference materials

 Text of the IPPC Convention: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1110485

 Ratification status: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=7&L=0

 Implementation guides: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=6&L=0

69 IPPC (2008) Recommendation on methyl bromide (details above), section 5, IPPC Guidelines for Appropriate Use of Methyl Bromide as a Phytosanitary Measure. 70 QPS strategies submitted by Parties to the MP: http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/quarantine_and_preshipment_uses.php. 71 Information exchange activities under the IPPC, https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=information_exchange0&no_cache=1&L=0. 72 Regional Plant Protection Organisations, https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=rppos&no_cache=1&L=0 73 UNEP information note, http://conf.montreal-protocol.org/meeting/mop/mop-24/default.aspx.

Synergies page 22 of 59  Procedure manual: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=159891&L=0

 Other reference material: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=6&L=0

 Strategic framework: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1110798&tx_publication_pi1[showUid]=202496&frompage=1333 0&type=publication&L=0#item

 Work programme: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=13330&L=0

 Regional centres: 10 Regional Plant Protection Organizations, https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=rppos&no_cache=1&L=0

 Secretariat: UN Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1110673&L=0

Synergies page 23 of 59 8. KIEV PROTOCOL ON POLLUTANT RELEASE AND TRANSFER REGISTERS

8.1 Overview of the Kiev PRTR Protocol

The Kiev Protocol on Pollutant Release and Transfer Registers (commonly called the PRTR Protocol)74 was adopted in 2003 under the Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision- making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (refer to Aarhus Convention above). It came into force in 2009, and has been ratified by 32 Parties which are mainly European and CEIT countries at present.75 The Protocol is open to all countries and is by design an open global Protocol. Parties to the PRTR Protocol need not be Parties to the Aarhus Convention; the Protocol is in this sense a free-standing international agreement.

The objective of the Protocol is ‘to enhance public access to information through the establishment of coherent, nationwide pollutant release and transfer registers (PRTRs) ... which could facilitate public participation in environmental decision-making as well as contribute to the prevention and reduction of pollution of the environment.’ (Article 1).

The PRTR Protocol aims to put data on pollutants into the public domain by establishing publicly accessible national pollutant registers. Each Party is required to establish a national Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (PRTR) which is an inventory of pollution released from industrial sites and other sources, such as agriculture and transport. The PRTRs record reported data on the releases and transfers of at least 86 pollutants, including three groups of ODS.

National PRTRs must be publicly accessible through the internet, searchable and user-friendly. They must have limited confidentiality provisions and must allow for public participation in their development and modification.

The PRTRs are based on reporting schemes that are mandatory, annual, facility-specific, pollutant-specific, and covering releases to air, water and land. The Protocol therefore places indirect obligations on private enterprises to report annually to their national governments on their releases and transfers of pollutants.

The Protocol sets minimum requirements and Parties are free to include additional pollutants and facilities. Parties are required to work towards convergence between national PRTR systems.

8.2 Reporting on emissions of substances by sector – relevant to ODS emissions data

The PRTR Protocol covers reporting on the releases and transfers of at least 86 pollutants, when used in the specific sectors covered by the Protocol. The pollutants include three groups of ODS (halons, CFCs and HCFCs), nitrous oxide, HFCs, CO2, and other greenhouse gases, acid rain pollutants, heavy metals, and certain carcinogens such as dioxins.

The reporting requirements apply to releases/transfers only if they occur in the sectors/activities covered listed in Annex I to the Protocol. Data are reported by individual facilities that operate in one or more of the 64 sectors/activity areas, only if they meet the thresholds for reporting (based on releases to air (in kg/year) and other parameters such as thresholds for installed capacity or the number of employees).

The term ‘releases’ is generally understood to cover situations where pollutants are emitted or introduced into the environment from a facility and other sources. The term ‘transfers’ applies to movement of pollutants from facilities. The Protocol also requires diffuse sources to be reported, for example from road transport, shipping, aviation, and agriculture.

MP synergies: Table 3 provides a list of the ODS and other pollutants included in PRTRs that are of interest to the MP. TEAP reports have occasionally referred to PRTR data. The national PRTR databases can offer useful

74 PRTR Protocol website: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/prtr.html. 75 Parties to the PRTR Protocol: http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13- a&chapter=27&lang=en

Synergies page 24 of 59 information on emissions of CFCs, HCFCs and N2O, for example, from specific sectors and specific types of facilities. For example, some national PRTR databases allow public access to data on ODS emissions reported by facilities that produce and/or use ODS as feedstock or process agents. Although this data is limited to specific countries, it can provide examples of the levels of (and variations in) ODS emissions reported by different types of facilities.

Table 3: ODS and related pollutants that are subject to the reporting procedures of the PRTR Protocol ODS that are Halons named Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) specifically Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) Carbon tetrachloride (tetrachloromethane) Nitrous oxide (N2O) Broad categories Halogenated organic compounds (as AOX) that include ODS Non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC) Other categories Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) – relevant to ODS substitutes relevant to ODS Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) – relevant to ODS substitutes PCDD +PCDF (dioxins +furans) (as Teq) - relevant to ODS destruction technologies Compiled from Annex II to the PRTR Protocol.

Box 9: PRTR Protocol reference materials

 Text of the Kiev Protocol on PRTR: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/prtr/docs/prtrtext.html

 Ratification status: 32 Parties, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13- a&chapter=27&lang=en

 Map showing Parties to the Protocol: http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/PRTRmapf.html

 Implementation guide: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/prtr.guidancedev.html

 Compliance mechanism: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/prtr-cc.html

 Other reference material: PRTR Global Portal, http://www.prtr.net/

 Work programme for 2011-2014: http://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/treaties/public- participation/protocol-on-prtrs/areas-of-work/current-work-programme/2011-2014.html

 Secretariat: Aarhus Convention Secretariat, UNECE, Palais des Nations, Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.unece.org/env/pp/fp_secretariat.html

Synergies page 25 of 59 9. MARPOL INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION FOR THE PREVENTION OF POLLUTION FROM SHIPS

9.1 Overview of MARPOL

The Protocol of 1997 to Amend the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1973/8) was adopted under the International Maritime Organisation and entered into force in 2005.76 MARPOL has a number of Annexes, most of which are ratified separately. The number of contracting Parties varies from 72 to 152 for the individual Annexes. The annex that refers to ODS (Annex VI) has 72 contracting Parties which cover 94% of the global merchant shipping tonnage.77

The Convention includes regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships - both accidental pollution and pollution arising from routine operations. It currently includes six technical Annexes.

Annex VI of MARPOL addresses the prevention of air pollution from ships, including ODS. It entered into force in 2005.78 It limits the emissions of several air pollutants, including sulphur oxides and nitrous oxides (NOx). Regulation 12 of Annex VI regulates ODS and prohibits all deliberate releases of ODS. In 2011 the IMO adopted mandatory technical and operational energy efficiency measures which aim to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from ships (expected to enter into force in 2013).

Several other international maritime agreements also contain provisions relating to ODS, but these examples are not examined in detail in this paper:

 The International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS Convention) was adopted in 1974 under the IMO and entered into force in 1980.79 The main objective is to specify minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of merchant ships for safety purposes. Inter alia, SOLAS adopted an international fire safety systems code which addresses technical and management aspects. Fire-extinguishing systems using halon and PFCs are prohibited for new installations.80 Each year the IMO issues a circular containing a list of halon banking and reception facilities, to facilitate the deposit of decommissioned halons or the purchase of recycled halons for use on ships.

 The Hong Kong International Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships was adopted in 2009 with input from IMO member states, NGOs, the International Labour Organisation, and the Parties to the Basel Convention on transboundary movement of hazardous waste.81 The Convention has not yet entered into force. It aims to ensure that the end-of-life recycling of ships does not pose unnecessary risks to human health, safety and the environment. It plans to address issues such as environmentally hazardous substances such as ODS, asbestos and heavy metals. Ships to be sent for recycling will be required to carry an inventory of hazardous materials, which will be specific to each ship. An appendix to the Convention provides a list of hazardous materials, the installation or use of which is prohibited or restricted in shipyards, ship repair yards, and ships of Parties to the Convention. Ships will be required to have an initial survey to verify the inventory of hazardous materials, renewal surveys during the life of the ship, and a final survey prior to recycling. Ship recycling yards will be required to provide a Ship Recycling Plan, to specify the manner in which each individual ship will be recycled, depending on its particulars and its inventory. Parties will be required to take effective measures to ensure that ship recycling facilities

76 MARPOL Annex VI website: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Air- Pollution.aspx 77 Contracting states to the Annexes of MARPOL: http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/StatusOfConventions/Pages/Default.aspx 78 Amendments entered into force in 2010. 79 Overview of SOLAS: http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/ListOfConventions/Pages/International-Convention-for- the-Safety-of-Life-at-Sea-(SOLAS),-1974.aspx 80 SOLAS chapter II-2, Regulation 10.4.1.3 81 Overview of the Hong Kong Convention: http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/listofconventions/pages/the-hong- kong-international-convention-for-the-safe-and-environmentally-sound-recycling-of-ships.aspx

Synergies page 26 of 59 under their jurisdiction comply with the Convention. The Convention also aims to establish an appropriate enforcement mechanism for ship recycling, incorporating certification and reporting requirements.

9.2 Controls on ODS used on ships – relevant to ODS controls under the MP

The IMO secretariat indicates that the main use of ODS on ships is in rechargeable fire fighting and refrigeration and air-conditioning systems. ODS have also been used as blowing agents in insulation material during ship construction.

The MARPOL annex that refers to ODS (Annex VI) has 72 contracting Parties which cover 94% of the global merchant shipping tonnage.82 It applies to all types of ships, although ships of 400 gross tonnage and above have additional requirements (outlined in section x.2 below). Regulation 12 of MARPOL Annex VI regulates ODS that are related to rechargeable systems and equipment,83 as follows:

 All deliberate releases of ODS are prohibited, including emissions during maintenance, servicing, repair or disposal of ODS equipment.84

 New installations containing ODS were prohibited on all ships constructed after May 2005. However those containing HCFCs are permitted until 1 January 2020. However, a ship is required to comply with any stricter legislation applied in its flag State.

 Installations of new fire-fighting systems using halons are prohibited. However, existing systems containing halons may remain in service until replaced or required to be removed by international, national or other legislation or other requirements.

 In the event that ODS, and equipment containing ODS, is removed from ships, it must be delivered to appropriate reception facilities. The IMO Secretariat indicates that this applies also when foam containing ODS is replaced on a ship, or the ship is scrapped.

The IMO Secretariat has reported that the treatment of ODS on board ships in international traffic has been on the agenda of several recent meetings of the IMO Maritime Environmental Protection Committee.

MP synergies: The IMO secretariat has offered to bring to the attention of the Maritime Environmental Protection Committee any pertinent issues on which the parties to the Montreal Protocol may wish to seek clarification.85 This provides an opening for MP Parties to cooperate more closely with the IMO on shipping issues if they should wish.

9.3 ODS record books on ships – relevant to the supply, use and emissions of ODS on ships

MARPOL Annex VI requires each ship of 400 gross tons and above to maintain a list of any rechargeable systems and equipment containing ODS86 in the supplement to its international air pollution prevention certificate. This certificate is issued by the ship’s flag State,87 and certifies the compliance of a ship with the requirements of MARPOL Annex VI.

82 Contracting states to the Annexes of MARPOL: http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/StatusOfConventions/Pages/Default.aspx 83 The regulation does not apply to permanently sealed equipment. 84 With the exceptions of emissions necessary for the safety of a ship or saving life (e.g. halons), and emissions resulting from damage to a ship or its equipment (Regulation 3). 85 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Information on ozone-depleting substances used to service ships, OzL.Pro.WG.1/32/3, para. 43. 86 i.e. systems that are not permanently sealed. 87 The term flag State is to be understood to mean the State under whose laws a ship is registered or licensed.

Synergies page 27 of 59 Such ships must also maintain an ODS Record Book (Regulation 12.6 of Annex VI, as revised). The record book must be completed after every occasion when ODS are handled or equipment containing ODS is repaired or maintained. It must record, on each occasion:

 Supply of ODS to the ship (in kg).  Recharge of equipment containing ODS (in kg)  Repair or maintenance of equipment containing ODS  Each discharge of ODS to the atmosphere or to land-based reception facilities (in kg).

The ship’s refrigerant log book should also record information on the refrigerants used in each refrigeration system on board (type, quantity of charge, location), as well as information on stored cylinders containing replacement refrigerant (number, size, content, location).88

The purpose of this record keeping is to enable monitoring of the condition and quantity of ODS on board ships and may be used by flag States as the basis for data collection. Although ships are required to carry and fill out such records, the IMO has no mandate to review them.

MP synergies: The Ozone Secretariat has noted that there is no global database that consolidates ODS data recorded in ships’ log books and there exists no explicit international obligation to review ships’ ODS systems and equipment records to assess the extent and volume of use of such substances in international shipping. Furthermore, there exists no international compliance obligation in this regard.89 Nevertheless, the existence of record books provides an opportunity for the MP to request the IMO to require or urge ships to provide annual reports to their flag states, or for an international study to compile data on the information available in record books.

The concept of keeping ODS record books could potentially be applied to other sectors/areas, such as owners or servicing companies that maintain refrigeration and air-conditioning equipment or fire systems containing an ODS charge of a specified size. ODS record books have the potential to provide national or local authorities with useful information on ODS banks inventories if there is a requirement for record book holders to submit online annual summaries to local or national authorities responsible for compiling data on air pollutants or ODS, for example. The EU, for example, required all QPS fumigators to keep methyl bromide fumigation record books, and to submit detailed data to their national authorities annually. (This practice ceased when MB was banned by pesticide authorities in the EU). Turkey requires all QPS fumigators to keep MB fumigation record books, and to submit detailed data on each fumigation to the authorities via a web-based system.

9.4 Inspections by port states – relevant to gathering information or licensing ODS on ships

Enforcement of the requirements relating to ODS is undertaken by port State control officers in ports of countries that are contracting Parties to Annex VI of MARPOL. Guidelines have been adopted for port state control inspections for compliance with MARPOL Annex VI, to bring consistency in inspections and the application of control procedures.90 The guidelines state that the port state control officer should conduct an initial examination of documents when boarding a ship, including examination of:  The International Air Pollution Prevention Certification, including its Supplement  The ODS Record Book

88 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Information on ozone-depleting substances used to service ships, OzL.Pro.WG.1/32/3, para. 42(b). 89 Ozone Secretariat (2012) Information on ozone-depleting substances used to service ships, OzL.Pro.WG.1/32/3, para. 41. 90 Resolution MEPC.181(59) on 2009 Guidelines for port state control under the revised MARPOL Annex VI, http://www.imo.org/blast/blastDataHelper.asp?data_id=26466&filename=181(59).pdf The IMO Assembly has also adopted procedures for port state control covering MARPOL, SOLAS and other IMO agreements: IMO (2011) Assembly Resolution A.1052(27) Procedures for port state control, http://www.imo.org/knowledgecentre/indexofimoresolutions/documents/a%20-%20assembly/1052(27).pdf

Synergies page 28 of 59  The port state control officer should ascertain the date of ship construction and the date of installation of equipment subject to the Annex, in order to confirm which regulations of the Annex are applicable.

If the initial inspection reveals that there may be some deficiencies, the port state control officer should conduct a detailed inspection as described in the Guidelines. This includes verification that there are (a) effectively implemented maintenance procedures for equipment containing ODS, and (b) no deliberate emissions of ODS.91 If the ship does not comply with Annex VI, the port state control officer may determine whether to detain the ship until the identified deficiencies are corrected. Such grounds include (inter alia) cases where the master or crew are not familiar with the procedures to prevent emissions of ODS.92

Through the port state control system, Annex VI can be applied to the ships of non-Parties as well as ships of Parties. When inspecting ships of non-Parties to Annex VI, the port state control officer cannot apply more favourable treatment to ships of non-Parties than to ships of Parties.93 The inspection Guidelines therefore state that the control officer should judge whether the condition of the ship of a non-Party, and its equipment, satisfies the requirements of Annex VI.94 Through this mechanism, Annex VI is applicable to the ships of non- Parties.

MP synergies: If the MP wishes to undertake further investigation or action with respect to ODS on ships, it may be feasible to request or require all MP Parties that operate port state control systems to provide information to the MP, or to undertake specified actions, and/or to adopt obligations for national ozone units to undertake specific activities in cooperation with their national port state control organisations. Such activities might include, for example, the extension of licensing systems to cover ODS supplied to ships, or the collection of ODS data from Record Books on ships (details in section 9.3 above).

9.5 Requirements on reception facilities for ODS in ports – relevant to unwanted ODS banks from ships

Regulation 17 of MARPOL Annex VI placed the following obligations on Parties with respect to ODS and ODS- containing equipment that are removed from ships at ports or ship-breaking facilities in its jurisdiction:

 Each Party that has repair ports undertakes to ensure the provision of reception facilities that are adequate to meet the needs of ships using its repair port for the reception of ODS and equipment containing ODS when removed from ships, without causing undue delay to ships.

 Each Party that has ship-breaking facilities undertakes to ensure the provision of facilities that are adequate to meet the needs in ship-breaking facilities for the reception of ODS and equipment containing such substances when removed from ships.

 If a particular port or terminal of a Party is remotely located or lacks the industrial infrastructure necessary to manage and process ODS (and other regulated substances), and therefore cannot accept such substances, then the Party shall inform the IMO of any such port or terminal. The Party shall also notify the IMO of its ports and terminals where reception facilities are available to manage and process ODS. This information would be circulated by the IMO to all Parties and member states of the IMO for their r information and appropriate action.

MP synergies: The MP Parties or MLF could consider requesting the IMO to compile any information reported by Parties under regulation 17 on reception facilities for ODS at specific ports or terminals, and/or for a list of repair ports and ship-breaking facilities which may have reception facilities for ODS and similar substances controlled under Annex VI of MARPOL. The information may be helpful to Parties and implementing agencies when developing plans for collecting and disposing of unwanted ODS and HFC banks.

91 Resolution MEPC.181(59), chapter 2.2.1. 92 Resolution MEPC.181(59), chapter 2.3.2.7 which refers to chapter 2.2.9. 93 Article 5(4) of the MARPOL Convention requires that more favourable treatment is not given to ships of non-Parties. 94 Resolution MEPC.181(59), chapter 3.1 - 3.3.

Synergies page 29 of 59 Alternatively, the MP could consider coordinating with the IMO to investigate whether it may be feasible to work with MARPOL Parties to develop a web-based international list or register of ports and ship-breaking facilities that have appropriate reception facilities for receiving ODS and equipment containing ODS from ships.

Box 10: MARPOL reference materials

 MARPOL Annex VI on air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Default.aspx

 MARPOL Annex VI Regulation 12 on ODS: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Ozone- depleting-substances-(ODS)-–-Regulation-1.aspx

 Ratification status: 72 Parties to Annex VI, http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/StatusOfConventions/Pages/Default.aspx

 Inspections guideline: http://www.imo.org/blast/blastDataHelper.asp?data_id=26466&filename=181(59).pdf

 Other reference material: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Environment/PollutionPrevention/AirPollution/Pages/Air- Pollution.aspx

 Secretariat: International Maritime Organization, London, England, http://www.imo.org/About/Pages/ContactUs.aspx

Synergies page 30 of 59 10. ROTTERDAM CONVENTION ON PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS

10.1 Overview of the Rotterdam Convention

The Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade was adopted in 1998 and entered into force in 2004.95 It has been ratified by 152 Parties to date.

The objectives of the Convention are:  To promote shared responsibility and cooperative efforts among Parties in the international trade of certain hazardous chemicals in order to protect human health and the environment from potential harm;  To contribute to the environmentally sound use of those hazardous chemicals, by facilitating information exchange about their characteristics, by providing for a national decision-making process on their import and export and by disseminating these decisions to Parties.

The Convention creates legally binding obligations for the implementation of a Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure. The Convention has adopted a list (Annex III) of 32 pesticides and 11 industrial chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted for health or environmental reasons by some Parties.96 When a chemical is added to the list, a Decision Guidance Document is circulated to all Parties to provide information about the chemical, the reported risks and regulatory restrictions. The PIC procedure is outlined in section x.2 below.

The Convention also promotes the exchange of information on chemicals in the following ways:  A Party is required to inform other Parties of each national ban or severe restriction of a chemical;  A Party that plans to export a chemical that is banned or severely restricted within its territory, to inform the importing Party that such export will take place, before the first shipment and annually thereafter;  An exporting Party, when exporting chemicals that are to be used for occupational purposes, must ensure that an up-to-date safety data sheet is sent to the importer; and  Labelling is required for exports of chemicals included in the PIC procedure, as well as for other chemicals that are banned or severely restricted in the exporting country.

10.2 Infrastructure for implementing PIC procedures and export notifications– relevant to exports and imports of ODS

The PIC procedure adopted by the Rotterdam Convention was built on an initial voluntary PIC procedure, initiated by UNEP and UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 1989. The PIC procedure is a mechanism for formally obtaining and disseminating the decisions of importing Parties as to whether they wish to receive future shipments of pesticides and industrial chemicals listed in Annex III of the Convention, and for ensuring compliance with these decisions by exporting Parties.

National decisions on future imports: When a chemical is listed under the Convention, a Decision Guidance Document is sent to all Parties to assist governments in assessing the risks and take more informed decisions. Parties have nine months to prepare a response concerning their future import of the chemical. The response can consist of either a final decision (to allow import of the chemical, not to allow import, or to allow import subject to specified conditions) or an interim response. Decisions by an importing country must be trade neutral, that is, decisions must apply equally to domestic production for domestic use and to imports.

95 Rotterdam Convention website: www.pic.int 96 List of chemicals in Annex III of the Rotterdam Convention: http://www.pic.int/TheConvention/Chemicals/AnnexIIIChemicals/tabid/1132/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Synergies page 31 of 59 A list of the Parties’ import decisions for each controlled chemical are circulated to all Parties by the Secretariat every six months via the PIC Circular. Import responses are also available on the Convention’s website. Exporting country Parties are required by the Convention to ensure that exporters within its jurisdiction will comply with the decisions. They should ensure that import decisions in the PIC Circular are immediately communicated to their exporters and industry, and relevant authorities such as Customs.

Export notifications: In addition, exporting Parties are required to implement a system of export notifications. A Party that plans to export a chemical that is banned or severely restricted within its territory, must inform the importing Party that such export will take place, before the first shipment and annually thereafter (Article 12 and Annex V). The importing Party is obliged to acknowledge receipt of the export notification within 30 days. Article 13 of the Convention sets out the information required to accompany exported chemicals including WCO Harmonised System (HS) codes, labelling requirements, and safety data sheets. There is a standard form for export notifications,97 which includes information on:  The identity of the chemical, including common name, IUPAC chemical name, CAS number and HS customs code;  The expected date of export, contact details, and anticipated use of the chemical in the importing country);  The hazards or ecotoxicological properties of the chemical;  Regulatory restrictions on the chemical adopted in the exporting country;  Contact details of the designated national authority  A form for the importing country to acknowledge receipt of the export notification. Transit movements: Any Party that requires information on transit movements through its territory of chemicals listed in Annex III may report this to the Secretariat, and this information will be included in the PIC Circular (Article 14).

National infrastructure: Each Party has designated national authority(ies) which carry out the notification and consent procedures and perform other administrative functions required for implementing the Rotterdam Convention.

Customs authorities also play a key role in implementing the Convention, and good cooperation and coordination between customs and the designated national authorities is seen as essential for effective implementation.98 When exporting chemicals, customs authorities should be informed by their designated national authorities about the import responses from other countries relevant to Annex III chemicals (Articles 10-11), and any updates to the list of chemicals in Annex III (Articles 7 and 9). When importing chemicals, customs authorities should be informed on the chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted at national level (Article 5).

MP synergies: Parties to the MP are engaged in monitoring the imports and exports of virgin and recycled ODS, as part of the national licensing systems. A number of MP Parties participate in a voluntary informal prior informed consent (iPIC) procedure for ODS trade.99 The iPIC system for ODS can be applied to each shipment, and can provide quantitative data to assist NOUs in implementing ODS import quotas (however consent is not a requirement, to avoid delaying trade).

With respect to the existing infrastructure, there is potential in future to amalgamate the national offices that implement the import/export procedures for ODS with the national offices that implement the notification and consent procedures for the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions, so that these activities could potentially be carried out by one administrative entity in future.

97 Export notification form and guidance: http://www.pic.int/Procedures/ExportNotifications/FormandInstructions/tabid/1365/language/en-US/Default.aspx 98 http://www.pic.int/Implementation/Customs/RolesProvisions/tabid/1611/language/en-US/Default.aspx 99 UNEP online iPIC system for ODS, http://www.unep.org/ozonaction/InformationResources/iPIConline/tabid/79051/Default.aspx

Synergies page 32 of 59 The close links between customs authorities and national authorities that implement the Rotterdam Convention have parallels with the MP. This linkage is reflected in the work of UNEP and the Green Customs initiative. However, following the precedent set in the Rotterdam Convention, MP parties could also consider specifying formal requirements for Parties relating to the roles and activities at national level to involve Customs authorities and ensure adequate communications between relevant government departments.

10.3 Procedure for adding new chemicals to the Convention – relevant to MP procedures for new and uncontrolled ODS

The Convention examines pesticides and industrial chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted for health or environmental reasons by several Parties and which have been notified to the Rotterdam Convention for potential inclusion. When a Party has adopted regulatory measures that ban or severely restrict a chemical for reasons of human health or the environment, the Party must inform the Secretariat (Article 5). The Secretariat will check whether the notification is complete and meets specific information requirements (set out in an Annex to the Convention). Notifications from at least two Parties in different geographic regions will trigger consideration of a chemical for potential addition in the list of chemicals that is subject to the PIC procedure (Annex III of the Convention).

The Chemical Review Committee reviews the details of the regulatory action and risks to determine whether it meets the necessary criteria (defined in Annex II of the Convention), and makes recommendations on whether to add the chemical to the official list. The Chemical Review Committee consists of 31 qualified experts in chemicals management, appointed by CoP.100 The Secretariat also employs a number of technical staff who carry out a lot of the preparatory technical work needed for the reviews and reports of the Chemical Review Committee.

MP synergies: In the MP context, the reports on the Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion have identified several substances that are ODS, which are not controlled under the MP. The MP does not currently possess clear technical criteria for adding new substances to the MP. The Rotterdam Convention shows that a different approach is feasible. It has adopted relatively clear and transparent procedures for identifying whether or not a chemical should be added to that Convention; potential new candidate chemicals are examined against a specified list of information requirements and a set of criteria.

There is also potential for the MP to consider two levels or stages of control measures for new ODS. An initial stage might require only the monitoring and reporting of production, imports and exports, in order to collect more information. If the collected information raises concerns, the Parties might then consider moving the chemical to a second stage that involves some form of restriction, such as a freeze or reduction step.

10.4 Working with existing regional centres – relevant to national and regional MP activities

The Rotterdam Convention has not set up a system of regional centres. Instead, it works with the existing regional entities, especially the regional offices of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), UNEP regional offices, and the regional centres of the Stockholm and Basel Conventions. This approach was adopted to make the best use of existing resources and to benefit from available expertise. Regional cooperation and delivery has also been stressed as important in the context of an on-going process of implementing synergies amongst the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions. This includes the need to promote the sound management of chemicals throughout their lifecycles, and to control the transboundary movement of hazardous wastes for sustainable development as well as for the protection of human health and the environment.101

100 Chemical Review Committee membership: http://www.pic.int/TheConvention/ChemicalReviewCommittee/CRCMembers/tabid/2897/language/en- US/Default.aspx 101 Regional coordination with existing regional entities:

Synergies page 33 of 59 16 FAO regional and sub-regional offices each house a technical officer that is responsible for plant production and protection, including pesticides controlled by the Rotterdam Convention. The FAO regional and sub- regional offices, through the technical officers, support the Secretariat in developing and delivering technical assistance activities, including awareness raising and training, development of national action plans, thematic activities on proposals for severely hazardous pesticide formulations, and trade related issues and working with individual countries. The regional and sub-regional officers have taken the initiative in following up with a substantive number of countries on progress in the implementation of the national action plans for the Rotterdam Convention. They also promote the ratification of the Convention when working with non-Parties within their regions and sub-regions through their regular work with these countries. The regional staff provide a direct link between the regions and the secretariat which helps to ensure that the activities are targeted to the needs of countries.

MP synergies: The FAO has technical staff located in 16 regional FAO offices who are is responsible for plant production and protection, including pesticides controlled by the Rotterdam Convention. This offers the potential for cooperation and joint work with the MP’s work to achieve methyl bromide (MB) phase-out, particularly the work carried out by MLF projects, UNEP CAP Programme and other implementing agencies involved with MB phase-out projects. Most of the MLF’s MB phase-out projects have been completed, but several are not due to be completed until 2014. In addition, several Article 5 countries have indicated that they would benefit from additional technical assistance in order to maintain the MB phase-outs that they have achieved. There is potential for the MP to provide FAO regional offices with detailed technical information about MB alternatives which the FAO officers could be encouraged to disseminate and promote when advising and/or training local agricultural sectors about suitable plant protection methods.

With respect to using existing infrastructure, there is potential consolidate the national and regional entities that address chemicals management. For example, there is potential in future to amalgamate the national offices that implement the import/export procedures for ODS with the national offices that implement the notification and consent procedures for the Basel and Rotterdam Conventions, so that most chemicals management activities could be carried out by one national entity in future.

Box 11: Rotterdam Convention reference materials

 Text of the Rotterdam Convention: http://www.pic.int/TheConvention/Overview/TextoftheConvention/tabid/1048/language/en- US/Default.aspx

 Ratification status: 152 Parties, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII- 14&chapter=27&lang=en

 Map showing Parties to the Convention: http://www.pic.int/Countries/Statusofratifications/tabid/1072/language/en-US/Default.aspx

 Implementation guide: http://www.pic.int/Implementation/ResourceKit/tabid/1064/language/en- US/Default.aspx

http://www.pic.int/Partners/RegionalOffices/tabid/1363/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Synergies page 34 of 59  Other reference material: http://www.pic.int/Implementation/ResourceKit/tabid/1064/language/en- US/Default.aspx

 Work programme 2012-2013: http://www.pic.int/Implementation/ProgrammeofWork/tabid/1358/language/en-US/Default.aspx

 Regional centres: Rotterdam Convention works with existing regional entities, http://www.pic.int/Partners/RegionalOffices/tabid/1363/language/en-US/Default.aspx

 Secretariat: FAO in Rome, Italy and UNEP joint Secretariat of the Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions, UNEP, Geneva, Switzerland http://synergies.pic.int/Secretariat/OurTeam/tabid/2641/language/en-US/Default.aspx and http://www.pic.int/Secretariat/SecretariatStaff/tabid/2550/language/en-US/Default.aspx

Synergies page 35 of 59 11. STOCKHOLM CONVENTION ON PERSISTENT ORGANIC POLLUTANTS

11.1 Overview of the Stockholm Convention

The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants was adopted in 2001, and entered into force in 2004.102 It has been ratified by 179 Parties to date.

The Convention aims to protect human health and the environment from persistent organic (carbon-based) pollutants (POPs), mindful of the precautionary approach adopted in Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. Since POPs often become widely distributed throughout the environment, an international approach was deemed essential. The Convention contains measures that require Parties to restrict specific lists of chemicals, with the aim of ultimately eliminating their production, use, trade, release and storage (with some exceptions).

The Convention initially controlled dioxins, furans, PCBs and various pesticides. The lists of controlled substances have been amended several times in order to add new substances. The current controlled lists contain 15 pesticides and 12 industrial chemicals and unintended by-products.103 Most of the chemicals are due to be eliminated ultimately.

11.2 Projects for the destruction of POPs – relevant to ODS destruction projects

The Stockholm Convention obliges Parties to provide for the environmentally sound disposal of POPs stockpiles and wastes (Article 6). Such disposal is considered essential for achieving the Convention’s objective of protecting human health and the environment. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) provides financial support to developing and CEIT parties to carry out projects to implement the destruction of POPs (refer to Touchdown’s separate paper on sources of financial support). GEF’s strategy for addressing chemicals states that efforts to manage waste containing ODS in an environmentally sound way ‘can be supported, in parallel with managing wastes from other hazardous chemicals and efforts to mitigate climate change. This will ensure considerable synergies.’ 104 For CEIT countries, if the allocated budget for ODS is not fully used for HCFC phase-out, ‘projects to facilitate ODS destruction would be supported on a pilot basis, particularly where linkages can be established with investments to dispose of POPs and other hazardous wastes.’ 105

MP synergies: The MP Parties decided to undertake selected pilot projects on ODS destruction funded by the MLF (Decision XXI/2). Several of these projects have considered the possibility of working jointly on POPs and ODS destruction. The capital cost of an ODS destruction facility can be substantial, and a country or region may not recover sufficient ODS waste to justify a facility that destroys only ODS, therefore there can be significant economic and environmental benefits in constructing facilities that are able to destroy both POPs and ODS.

11.3 National implementation plans – relevant to implementation of the MP

Each Party to the Stockholm Convention is required to prepare a National Implementation Plan (NIP) which spell out how they will implement their obligations under the Convention. Detailed guidance is provided for such plans.106

The national plan provides a detailed inventory (or estimates) of POPs, including types, sources / sectors, quantities and locations. The NIP describes how the Party is going to implement the obligations under the

102 Stockholm Convention website: www.pops.int 103 List of controlled POPs substances: http://chm.pops.int/Convention/ThePOPs/ListingofPOPs/tabid/2509/Default.aspx 104 GEF (2011) GEF-5 focal area strategies, p.73, http://www.thegef.org/gef/sites/thegef.org/files/documents/document/GEF-5_FOCAL_AREA_STRATEGIES.pdf 105 GEF (2011) GEF-5 focal area strategies, p.80. 106 Guidance for National Implementation Plans, http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/NIPs/Guidance/tabid/2882/Default.aspx

Synergies page 36 of 59 Convention. Under provisions in Article 7 of the Convention, the NIP is not a stand-alone plan for the management of POPs but is a part of a national sustainable development strategy of the Party. Parties are required to share their plans by transmitting them to the Conference of the Parties. NIPs are intended to be dynamic documents that are reviewed and updated periodically.

MP synergies: Article 2 Parties to the MP do not have obligations to submit national inventories and plans that spell out the Party will meet is commitments under the Montreal Protocol. In contrast, Article 5 Parties are required by the MLF to provide Country Programmes which identify the ODS substances that are consumed and used by sector, as well as laying out the country’s strategy and approach for meeting its ODS phase-out commitments. The NIPs developed under the Stockholm Convention contain more detailed inventories of the controlled substances that is required in ODS Country Programmes, as well as greater detail on implementation plans. The submission of more detailed national plans such as these might assist the MP Parties in gaining a deeper understanding of the remaining sectors in which ODS are used or banked, as well as enabling an exchange of ideas on effective implementation methods. The adoption of requirements for national plans on specific topics might assist the MP in tackling difficult issues such HCFC phase-out, ODS banks, exempted uses, and any new substances that may become controlled in future.

11.4 Obligation to identify and deal with obsolete POPs – relevant to strategies and measures to deal with ODS banks

For obsolete or unwanted POPs, the Stockholm Convention requires Parties to carry out the following measures (under Article 6): a) To develop and implement appropriate strategies for identifying stockpiles, products and articles in use that contain POPs; b) To manage stockpiles and wastes in an environmentally sound manner; c) To dispose of waste so that the POPs content is destroyed or irreversibly transformed; d) To not permit the recycling, recovery, reclamation, direct reuse or alternative use of the POPs; e) To endeavour to develop strategies for identifying sites contaminated with POPs and perform eventual remediation in an environmentally sound manner.

MP synergies: The large environmental impact of ODS banks was highlighted by a major TEAP/IPCC report in 2005, however large volumes of ODS banks have continued to be emitted to the atmosphere since the problem was identified, and there has been relatively slow progress on the issue within the MP. A number of MP Parties had existing national regulations that prohibited ODS venting and required ODS recovery in selected sectors, however in many cases such legislation has not been fully implemented or expanded to deal with the ODS banks that can be recovered with low or medium levels of effort. The MP has initiated some MLF projects on ODS banks in selected A5 countries in order to collect further information on the topic. The MP has also encouraged Parties to develop national or regional strategies for managing ODS banks and to submit them to the Secretariat (Decision XX/7). However only three banks strategies have been posted on the Ozone secretariat’s website to date.107 The MP has not placed any obligations on Parties to prevent the emissions of ODS banks, nor to identify and destroy obsolete ODS banks and stocks.

There is scope for the MP to consider some of the measures adopted by the Stockholm Convention to actively deal with unwanted environmentally-damaging substances. Parties to the Stockholm Convention are required to identify stockpiles, products and articles that contain POPs; to destroy or irreversibly transform waste POPs; and to not permit the recycling or re-use of these environmentally damaging substances. They are also required to submit and update national implementation plans that spell out how a Party will meet its obligations. Commitments such as these might assist the MP in addressing ODS banks in a more environmentally sound manner.

107 Strategies submitted by MP Parties on the environmentally sound management of ODS banks under Decision XX/7: http://ozone.unep.org/new_site/en/ozone_data_tools_environmentally_sound_mgt_ods_banks.php

Synergies page 37 of 59 11.5 Performance standards for POPs destruction – relevant to reviews of ODS destruction technologies

The Stockholm and Basel Conventions have a joint mandate relating to POPs wastes, and have agreed to cooperate closely on establishing levels of destruction and irreversible transformation that are necessary to address POPs. Additionally, the Conferences of the Parties of the two Conventions determine cooperatively what methods should constitute environmentally sound disposal. The Basel Convention has developed technical guidelines on the Environmentally Sound Management of POPs wastes.108 When new chemicals were added to the Stockholm Convention, the Basel Convention was requested to update the technical guidelines to establish levels of destruction and determine methods for environmentally sound disposal for these newly listed chemicals.

The level of destruction achieved by a destruction technology can vary greatly depending on the type of technology and management practices. The guidelines for destruction contain data (where available) on the Destruction and Removal Efficiency (DRE) and/or the Destruction Efficiency (DE) of various destruction technologies.109

The destruction of POPs, ODS and other substances that contain chlorine or bromine often leads to the formation of dioxins, furans and similar hazardous substances. The Stockholm Convention’s guidelines on best available techniques for waste incinerators and hazardous waste incineration recommend ‘performance levels’ no higher than 0.1 ng/Nm3 ITEQ for air emissions of dioxins and furans (PCDDs and PCDFs), and well below 0.1 ng/l ITEQ in waste water.110 The updated general guidelines for destruction have indicated that atmospheric emissions of PCDDs and PCDFs should be no more than 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm3.111

In addition, Article 5 of the Stockholm Convention aims for the continued minimization and, where feasible, the ultimate elimination of the formation and release of dioxins and furans. Parties to the Stockholm Convention have an obligation to give priority consideration to processes which avoid the formation and release of dioxins/furans.

MP synergies: The obligation on Stockholm Convention Parties to give priority consideration to processes which avoid the formation and release of dioxins/furans applies to the destruction of ODS as well as other substances. Most of the Parties to the Stockholm convention are also Parties to the MP.

When the MP evaluates the performance of ODS destruction technologies for potential inclusion in the approved list, a threshold of 0.2 ng/Nm3 for air emissions has generally been used. This threshold does not meet the Stockholm guidelines described above, and there is an opportunity for the MP to update its approach.

When evaluating ODS destruction technologies the MP uses a Destruction and Removal Efficiency (DRE) threshold of 99.99%. In 2011 TEAP noted that the use of Destruction Efficiency (DE) had become more prevalent and provides a more comprehensive measure of destruction because it considers losses to air (stack gases) and other sources (e.g. fly ash, scrubber water, and bottom ash).112 The Stockholm/Basel guidelines have identified a number of destruction technologies that offer higher DRE and/or DE performance than the current threshold used by the MP.

108 Basel Convention technical guidelines: http://archive.basel.int/meetings/sbc/workdoc/techdocs.html 109 Updated general technical guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with POPs, http://archive.basel.int/pub/techguid/tg-POPs.pdf 110 Stockholm Convention (2008) Guidelines on best available techniques and provisional guidance on best environmental practices, UNEP/SSC/BATBEP/2008/1, Section IV, p.86-88; Section V.A, p.40. 111 Updated general technical guidelines for the environmentally sound management of wastes consisting of, containing or contaminated with POPs (see footnote above). 112 TEAP (2011) TEAP Progress Report, May 2011, p.68.

Synergies page 38 of 59 11.6 Regional and sub-regional centres – relevant to regional capacity building on ODS

The Stockholm Convention has established a regional infrastructure for capacity-building and transfer of technologies to assist developing and CEIT Parties to fulfil their obligations under the Convention. A network of regional and sub-regional Stockholm Convention centres supports Parties in establishing, implementing and strengthening their national capacities to address POPs and POPs-contaminated wastes. There are currently 15 Stockholm Convention regional and sub-regional centres located in:  Latin America: Brazil, Mexico, Panama, Uruguay  Asia: China, India, Iran, Kuwait  Africa: Algeria, Kenya, Senegal, South Africa  Europe: Czech Republic, Spain, Russian Federation.113

Additional locations are also under consideration.

MP synergies: There is potential for closer cooperation between the Stockholm Convention centres and the regional work carried out by the MP. In the longer term, there is potential to amalgamate, within each sub- region, the various regional and sub-regional centres that currently operate under different Conventions and Protocols relating to chemicals management, e.g. the MP, Stockholm Convention, Basel Convention, etc.

Box 12: Stockholm Convention reference materials

 Text of the Stockholm Convention: http://chm.pops.int/Convention/ConventionText/tabid/2232/Default.aspx

 Ratification status: 179 Parties, http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-15&chapter=27&lang=en

 Map showing Parties to the Convention: http://chm.pops.int/Countries/StatusofRatifications/tabid/252/Default.aspx

 Implementation guidance: http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/NIPs/Guidance/tabid/2882/Default.aspx

 Compliance mechanism: http://chm.pops.int/Convention/Compliance/tabid/61/Default.aspx

 Other reference material: http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/TechnicalAssistance/Overview/tabid/229/Default.aspx and http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/NIPs/Guidance/tabid/2882/Default.aspx

 Guidance on control of POPs imports and exports: http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/NIPs/Guidance/GuidanceforthecontroloftheimexportofPOPs/tabi d/3173/Default.aspx

 Stockholm Regional Centres, http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/RegionalCentres/Overview/tabid/425/Default.aspx

 Secretariat: UNEP, Châtelaine, Switzerland, http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/TechnicalAssistance/AccessingAssistance/tabid/238/Default.aspx

113 Stockholm Convention Regional Centres, http://chm.pops.int/Implementation/RegionalCentres/Overview/tabid/425/Default.aspx

Synergies page 39 of 59 12. STRATEGIC APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL CHEMICALS MANAGEMENT (SAICM)

12.1 Overview of SAICM

In 2006, the International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM) adopted the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM) as a policy framework to foster the sound management of chemicals worldwide.114 It comprises the following:

 The Dubai Declaration on International Chemicals Management;

 An Overarching Policy Strategy which sets out the scope, needs, objectives, financial considerations, underlying principles and approaches, and arrangements for implementation and review. This includes the voluntary development of SAICM implementation plans by governments and other stakeholders.115

 A Global Plan of Action which serves as a working tool and guidance document to support the implementation of SAICM and other relevant international initiatives and initiatives. Activities in the plan are to be implemented by stakeholders, as appropriate.116

SAICM aims to support the achievement of a goal agreed at the 2002 Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development which aims to ensure that, by the year 2020, chemicals are produced and used in ways that minimize significant adverse impacts on the environment and human health.

SAICM’s objectives are grouped under five themes: Risk reduction; knowledge and information; governance; capacity-building and technical cooperation; and illegal international traffic. Inter alia, SAICM aims to integrate the Strategic Approach objectives into multilateral development work, including ‘making more effective use of and building upon existing sources of relevant global funding’. 117 The Chemicals Branch of UNEP’s Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) is the host of the SAICM Secretariat.118 DTIE also houses the OzonAction Programme which provides capacity-building and clearing house functions on ozone issues (funded by the MLF).

SAICM has been formally acknowledged or endorsed by the governing bodies of a number of intergovernmental organizations, including the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Assembly (for the World Health Organisation, WH0), the Council of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).119 Support for the implementation of SAICM has also received endorsement from several regional forums, such as the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN), and the Executive Council of the African Union.

The Future We Want, the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012, recognised that the sound management of chemicals is crucial for the protection of human health and the environment. It noted the increasing global production and use of chemicals and their prevalence in the environment. The document called for effective implementation and strengthening of SAICM as part of a robust, coherent, effective and efficient system for the sound management of chemicals throughout their life cycle, including responses to emerging challenges.120

114 SAICM website: www.saicm.org 115 SAICM secretariat et al. (2009) Guidance for developing SAICM implementation plans, 2009 edition, http://www.saicm.org/images/saicm_documents/Publications/SIP%20Guidiance/Guidance%20for%20Developing%20S AICM%20Implementation%20Plans%20_3Nov09__2009%20edition_Final_En.pdf 116 Official texts of SAICM: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73&Itemid=475 117 SAICM Secretariat (2007) SAICM texts – see footnote above, p.23. 118 Mandate of the SAICM secretariat: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=478 119 Source: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74&Itemid=476. 120 UN (2012) The future we want, para. 214,

Synergies page 40 of 59 The UNEP Governing Council recently underlined the importance of mainstreaming activities for sound chemicals management at the national level and the assessment of the economic and social costs of unsound chemicals management, as reflected in the Global Chemicals Outlook report. In this context, the Governing Council: 121

 Urged all relevant stakeholders to engage in effective implementation of the Strategic Approach throughout the materials life cycle and encourages enhanced engagement, particularly of intermediate and end users, in the Strategic Approach;

 Encouraged governments and other stakeholders to promote safer, effective alternatives, including non-chemical alternatives, and to adopt measures to prevent unintended releases and emissions in order to prevent rather than remediate risks.

 Requested the Executive Director of UNEP to continue and expand work to facilitate country implementation of mainstreaming activities.

12.2 Integration of chemicals management – relevant to ODS management

The Dubai Declaration of the ICCM states that the participants ‘will strive to integrate SAICM into the work programmes of all relevant United Nations organizations, specialized agencies, funds and programmes consistent with their mandates as accorded by their respective governing bodies.’

The ICCM’s resolution I/1 on implementation arrangements ‘commended SAICM to the attention of the governing bodies of relevant intergovernmental organizations and encouraged them to endorse or otherwise appropriately acknowledge the SAICM with a view to incorporating its objectives into their programmes of work within their mandates and to report thereon to the ICCM.’

SAICM aims to make more effective use of, and build upon, existing sources of relevant global funding. SAICM therefore invited GEF and the Montreal Protocol/MLF ‘within their mandates to consider whether and how they might support implementation of appropriate and relevant Strategic Approach objectives.’ 122

A recent review of SAICM highlighted the following points (inter alia): 123

 Progress might be further accelerated if Governments, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, including the private sector, put additional focus on achieving practical results in countries, including preventive actions.  More and better collaboration among all stakeholders and intensified partnership efforts would help to promote effective and efficient implementation of the Strategic Approach.

MP synergies: If considered appropriate, the MP Parties and other stakeholders might consider practical steps to respond to the above list of activities identified by SAICM/ICCM, namely:

 Identifying practical ways to integrate the Strategic Approach into the work programmes of the MP and MLF;

 Endorsing or otherwise acknowledging the Strategic Approach and incorporating its objectives into their work programmes, and reporting on this to the ICCM;

 Considering whether and how the MP and MLF might support implementation of relevant Strategic Approach objectives;

121 UNEP Governing Council 27, Decision 27/12 on chemicals and waste management, http://www.unep.org/GC/GC27/Docs/decisions/GC_27_decisions-English.pdf 122 SAICM Secretariat (2007) SAICM texts – see footnote above, p.23. 123 Highlights from the President’s Summary of the high-level dialogue; and UNEP (2012) Progress in implementation of SAICM for 2009-2010, SAICM/ICCM.3/INF/6, http://www.saicm.org/images/saicm_documents/iccm/ICCM3/Meeting%20documents/INF%20Documents/ICCM_3_IN F6_first%20progress%20report_Final.pdf

Synergies page 41 of 59  Putting additional focus on achieving practical results in countries, including preventive actions.

 Improving collaboration to promote implementation of the Strategic Approach.

12.3 SAICM implementation plans – relevant to national ODS strategies and plans

The Strategic Approach encourages the development of voluntary national and regional implementation plans, as well as implementation plans within organisations and by other stakeholders. A related guidance document124 stresses that SAICM implementation plans should consider and use existing national and regional mechanisms where appropriate, such as national chemical safety committees or regional health and environment initiatives. Implementation plans are also encouraged to build on the significant body of materials that already exist, such as national planning documents, National Chemicals Management Profiles, and Stockholm Convention National Implementation Plans, among others.

MP synergies: Many MP Parties have adopted national ODS strategies and plans, such as HCFC phase-out plans, strategies on ODS banks management, and other ODS topics. There is scope for information exchange and/or integration with the development of national or regional SAICM implementation plans. SAICM plans could also be encouraged to build on, or cooperate with, the existing national and regional infrastructure of the MP, such as national committees related to ODS management, national ozone units, and regional networks of ozone officers.

12.4 New orientation and guidance document – relevant to ODS management

SAICM is currently developing a new orientation and guidance document to meet the 2020 goal of sound chemicals management. The SAICM secretariat has requested input and comments for the draft document,125 which is due to be adopted by ICCM in 2015. With only a few years remaining to 2020, the secretariat has noted an increased urgency for concrete collaborative actions to turn aspirations into practical delivery on the ground. The new document aims to be action-oriented, containing recommendations for SAICM stakeholders. It will identify achievements to date, gaps, and priority actions, for each of the five objectives/themes: Risk reduction; knowledge and information; governance; capacity-building and technical cooperation; and illegal international traffic.

MP synergies: SAICM’s five objectives/themes are relevant to the work of the MP, such as information exchange, capacity-building, technical cooperation and illegal trade. Parties and stakeholders involved in the MP have an opportunity to submit comments and suggestions for the new orientation and guidance document, particularly on the achievements to date, gaps, and priority actions for the five objectives/ themes, as well as the implementation of the Strategic Approach.

12.5 SAICM emerging policy issues – relevant to new issues under the MP

SAICM’s Overarching Policy Strategy calls for appropriate action on new emerging policy issues as they arise and to forge consensus on priorities for cooperative action (paragraph 24.j). To date, ICCM resolutions have identified several priority topics, and aim to request specific stakeholders to consider undertaking certain actions. Topics relevant to the MP include the following:

 Chemicals in products (CiP), including building products. The CiP programme undertakes various international and regional activates, focussing on information exchange, workshops and pilot

124 SAICM secretariat et al. (2009) Guidance for developing SAICM implementation plans, 2009 edition, http://www.saicm.org/images/saicm_documents/Publications/SIP%20Guidiance/Guidance%20for%20Developing%20S AICM%20Implementation%20Plans%20_3Nov09__2009%20edition_Final_En.pdf 125 A concept note and further details are available at: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=461:overall-orientation-and- guidance&catid=78:about-saicm&Itemid=693

Synergies page 42 of 59 projects, and aims to identify roles that could be played by major stakeholder groups to address hazardous chemicals in products such as building products.126

MP synergies: There is potential for the MP to consider joint activities or other cooperation with CiP, such as information exchange for the promotion of alternatives to ODS in foam for buildings, as well as the collection and disposal of ODS in foam products.

 Hazardous substances in the life-cycle of electrical products. The Global Plan of Action includes new activities related to hazardous substances in electrical and electronic e-products, including the work areas of green design, environmentally sound manufacturing and awareness-raising on e-products. UNIDO, UNEP and the Basel and Stockholm secretariats lead activities on this area. The ICCM recently agreed to compile an international set of best practice resources on this topic, drawing on existing initiatives and opportunities for collaboration with other international fora.127

MP synergies: There is potential for the MP bodies to contribute information and activities related to awareness-raising, ODS-free green design, ODS-free environmentally sound manufacturing of electrical products, and other life-cycle areas such as end-of-life collection of e-products and ODS destruction.

 Perfluorinated chemicals (PFCs) and the transition to safer alternatives. This initiative, coordinated by a Global PFC Group, aims to gather and exchange information on PFCs and to support the transition to safer alternatives. A web-portal (supported by the OECD) has been set up for exchanging information on government regulations, new technologies, available alternatives to PFCs, and related activities.128 Information can be submitted by any stakeholders, with priority being given to high quality information that facilitates the management of PFCs and the transition to safer alternatives.

MP synergies: PFCs are being used as ODS substitutes in several applications, and there is potential for MP Parties and other stakeholders to contribute information and cooperate in the information exchange process. SAICM operates an open and transparent procedure for any stakeholders that wish to nominate additional emerging policy issues for consideration as priority areas by the next ICCM conference.129

MP synergies: MP Parties or other stakeholders could consider nominating emerging policy issues for consideration as future SAICM activities.

12.6 Back-to-back meetings – relevant to MP meetings

The ICCM has decided that, where appropriate, sessions of the ICCM should be held back-to-back with meetings of the governing bodies of relevant intergovernmental organizations in order to enhance synergies and cost-effectiveness, and to promote SAICM’s multi-sectoral nature. Future sessions of the ICCM are due to be held in 2015 and 2020, for example.130

MP synergies: The MP Parties could consider increasing the use of back-to-back meetings, including a potential back-to-back meeting with the ICCM in 2015.

126 Details of the CiP project and programme are available at: http://www.unep.org/hazardoussubstances/UNEPsWork/ChemicalsinProductsproject/tabid/56141/Default.aspx 127 Details of the hazardous substances emerging policy issue: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=455&Itemid=690 128 OECD Portal on perfluorinated chemicals: http://www.oecd.org/ehs/pfc/ 129 Nomination procedure for emerging issues: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=452&Itemid=685 130 http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=78&Itemid=480

Synergies page 43 of 59 Box 13: SAICM reference materials

 SAICM texts: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=73&Itemid=475

 Endorsement of SAICM: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74&Itemid=476

 Implementation guides: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=120&Itemid=529; http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=461&Itemid=693

 Strategy: http://www.saicm.org/images/saicm_documents/saicm%20texts/standalone_txt.pdf

 SAICM emerging policy issues and programmes: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=452&Itemid=685

 Regional activities: http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=97&Itemid=490

 Secretariat: UNEP DTIE, Chemicals Branch, Chatelaine, Geneva, Switzerland, http://www.saicm.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=76&Itemid=478

Synergies page 44 of 59 Synergies page 45 of 59 ANNEX 1: ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

A2: Article 2 Party or non-Article 5 Party of the Montreal Protocol A5: Article 5 Party of the Montreal Protocol BCM: bromochloromethane CDM: Clean Development Mechanism of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change CFC: chlorofluorocarbon

CO2: carbon dioxide

CO2eq: carbon dioxide equivalent CTC: carbon tetrachloride CTOC: Chemicals Technical Options Committee of TEAP EC: European Commission ELV: Emission limit value

EMEP: The Cooperative Programme for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution, also called the European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme of the LRTAP Convention

EU: European Union ExCom: Executive Committee of the Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol FAO: UN Food and Agriculture Organisation

F-gas: fluorinated greenhouse gas GEF: Global Environment Facility

GHG: greenhouse gas GWP: Global Warming Potential HBFC: hydrobromofluorocarbon HC: hydrocarbon HCFC: hydrochlorofluorocarbon HFC: hydrofluorocarbon HS: Harmonised Systems customs codes of the World Customs Organisation

ICCM: International Conference on Chemicals Management

IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPPC: International Plant Protection Convention

LRTAP: Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution

MARPOL: Protocol of 1997 to Amend the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships

MB: methyl bromide MEA: multilateral environmental agreement

MoP: Meeting of the Parties MLF: Multilateral Fund

Synergies page 46 of 59 MP: Montreal Protocol

N2O: nitrous oxide NOx: nitrogen oxides ODP: Ozone Depletion Potential ODS: ozone depleting substance OEWG: Open ended Working Group of the Montreal Protocol OzSec: Ozone Secretariat QPS: Quarantine and pre-shipment uses of methyl bromide

SAICM: Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management

SAP: Scientific Assessment Panel TCE: 1,1,1-trichloroethane, methyl chloroform TEAP: Technology and Economic Assessment Panel UN: United Nations

UNECE: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

UNEP: United Nations Environment Programme UNFCCC: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change VC: Vienna Convention

VOC: volatile organic compound

WCO: World Customs Organisation

WMO: World Meteorological Organisation

Synergies page 47 of 59