Annual update of the status of compliance of Article 5 countries

The Thirty-second Meeting of the Executive Committee decided:

(a) to take note of document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/32/38;

(b) to request the Secretariat to prepare an annual update of the status of compliance of Article 5 countries with the control measures of the Montreal Protocol as contained in part I of document UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/32/38, and of the implementation of Montreal Protocol through government policy controls as contained in part II of the document. In so doing, the Secretariat should attempt in future editions of the document to correlate the impact of approved non-investment projects on the status of compliance of Article 5 countries and address other policy measures such as those for end-users and implementation by customs authorities of import controls;

(c) to request the Sub-Committee on Monitoring, Evaluation and Finance to review and take action on the updated document.

The Thirty-fourth Meeting of the Executive Committee decided:

(a) to note the report contained in UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/34/16, in particular that:

(i) the remaining consumption to be phased out after accounting for approved but unimplemented projects was represented by the following consumption sectors: refrigeration, 35 per cent; foam, 16 per cent; process agents, 16 per cent; solvents, 12 per cent; halons, 12 per cent; fumigants, 6 per cent; aerosols, 2 per cent; and tobacco, 1 per cent;

(ii) regarding CFCs, 14 countries were at risk of not meeting their freeze obligations. Action by governments and the Multilateral Fund was needed in 53 countries to ensure their compliance with the 50 per cent reduction target by 2005;

(iii) regarding halons, immediate action was needed in 16 countries, three of which had to implement approved projects sooner than planned in order to ensure the freeze of halons. Action by governments and the Multilateral Fund was needed in 17 countries to ensure the reduction by 2005;

(iv) regarding methyl bromide, 43 countries had not yet ratified the Copenhagen amendment. Of those that had ratified the Copenhagen amendment immediate action was needed to enable 24 countries to comply with the freeze obligation, of which four countries needed to implement approved projects sooner than planned to achieve compliance. Urgent action by all concerned was required in order to ensure that as many countries as possible would be able to achieve compliance;

(v) regarding CTC and TCA, the baseline for compliance had to be established as soon as possible to allow for an analysis of the status in achieving compliance;

(vi) the enactment of policy measures by governments in Article 5 countries had played a crucial role in contributing towards the ability of countries to achieve compliance with the CFC freeze commitment;

(b) To take into account the results of the status report in the discussion on strategic planning and, as appropriate, in the assessment of project proposals in light of the objective of supporting countries to enable them to comply with the Montreal Protocol;

(c) To request the following countries to clarify the increase in consumption from 1999 to 2000 despite the additional phase-out from approved projects completed in 1999: Colombia, Mexico, Peru, and Sri Lanka;

(UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/34/58, Decision 34/12, para. 30).

(Supporting document: UNEP/OzL.Pro/ExCom/34/16).

---