The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer is a global agreement to protect the Earth’s ozone layer by phasing out the chemicals that deplete it. This phase-out plan includes both the production and consumption of ozone-depleting substances. The landmark agreement was signed in 1987 and entered into force in 1989.

The parties to the Protocol meet once a year to make decisions aimed at ensuring the successful implementation of the agreement. These include adjusting or amending the Protocol, which has been done six times since its creation. The most recent amendment, the Kigali Amendment, called for the phase-down of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in 2016. These HFCs were used as replacements for a batch of ozone-depleting substances eliminated by the original Montreal Protocol. Although they do not deplete the ozone layer, they are known to be powerful greenhouse gases and, thus, contributors to climate change.

The Montreal Protocol provided a set of practical, actionable tasks that were universally agreed on. The Protocol has successfully met its objectives thus far and continues to safeguard the ozone layer today. Thanks to the collaborative effort of nations around the world, the ozone layer is well on its way to recovery.

Decision XVI/3: Duration of critical-use nominations of methyl bromide

The Sixteenth Meeting of the Parties decided in Dec. XVI/3:

Mindful that decision Ex.I/4, under paragraph 9 (e), requested the Technology and Economic Assessment Panel to review critical-use nominations on an annual basis and to apply the criteria set forth in decision IX/6 and of other relevant criteria agreed by the Parties,

Recognizing that decision Ex.I/3, under paragraph 6, asked the Parties to take note of the proposal by the United States of America on multi-year exemptions, and to consider the elaboration of criteria and a methodology for authorizing multi-year exemptions,

  1. To agree that the basis for extending the duration of critical-use nominations and exemptions of methyl bromide to periods greater than one year requires further attention;
  2. To elaborate, as far as possible, at the Seventeenth Meeting of Parties a framework for spreading a critical-use exemption over more than one year and to agree that the following elements, among others, should be taken into account:
    1. Annual reporting on:
      1. Status of re-registration and review of methyl bromide;
      2. Status of registration of alternatives and substitutes for methyl bromide;
      3. Efforts to evaluate, commercialize and secure national regulatory approval of alternatives and substitutes;
    2. Assessment of requests to reconsider approved critical-use exemptions in the case of exceptional circumstances;
    3. Review of downward trends for different instances;
    4. Assessments of nominations in the light of the alternatives database referred to in paragraph 1 of decision Ex.I/4, and comparisons with management strategies;
    5. Applicability of existing decisions to methyl bromide critical-use exemptions longer than one year;
    6. Additional conditions applicable to critical-use exemptions longer than one year;
  3. To consider the technical justifications for spreading a critical-use exemption over more than one year, taking into account, among others, the following instances:
    1. Where the use patterns of methyl bromide are not regular on an annual or seasonal basis;
    2. Where, for a specific use, no alternatives or emerging solutions are anticipated for several years;
    3. Where a plan of implementation of an alternative stretches over several years;
    4. Where management strategies include a complete time-bound phase-out for a nomination or sector or use.