IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
75th Forum Standing Committee Meeting
18-20 June 2007
Jongny, Switzerland
Meeting Report
1.0
Opening
The President welcomed participants1 and thanked the Government of Switzerland for hosting
the meeting. He emphasized the importance of a productive meeting stating the Forum
Standing Committee (FSC) must be successful in its work to prepare the agenda and
programme for Forum VI. G. Karlaganis, Switzerland, welcomed participants on behalf of the
Government of Switzerland. He emphasized Switzerland’s commitment to advancing
chemical safety stressing the importance of working together to ensure the sound management
of chemicals.
2.0
Adoption of Agenda
The President presented the proposed agenda for adoption (IFCS/FSC/07.08). The Secretariat
proposed that under agenda item 5.3.1.e Other topics for Forum VI plenary agenda, the paper
submitted by the Islamic Republic of Iran on “Ecologically Sound and Integrated Pest &
Vector Management” be considered and the information paper prepared by Dr Joel Tickner,
Lowell Center for Sustainable Production, USA, on “IFCS Forum V Recommendation on
Tools and Approaches for Applying Precaution in the Context of Chemicals Safety - Draft
Proposal for follow-up” be presented, and under agenda item 5.8 Other business, the FSC
consider changing its password protected website to a public website.
The proposed agenda was adopted.
3.0
Acceptance of the Record of the 74th FSC Meeting
The revised Draft Record of the 74th FSC Teleconference (IFCS/FSC/07.06 rev 1) was
accepted.
4.0
FSC - designation of representatives status report
Formal designations of FSC members have been received from all governments and
organizations. With the exception of G. Entenza, Argentina, who serves as an alternate for the
Latin American & Caribbean Region, alternates remain to be confirmed or designated by
government representatives in all regions. K. Kunzer, NGO industry representative, has
retired. It is anticipated that her replacement will be named in the last quarter of 2007; in the
meantime R. Koch will serve as the interim NGO industry representative to the FSC.
5.0
5.1
Forum VI
Host/venue - update
C.N. Sylla informed the FSC on the status of the work to prepare a proposal by the
Government of Senegal to host Forum VI. The Government of Senegal has received all the
necessary information from the Secretariat. It has formed a small committee to address the
budget requirements and a communication has been sent to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
1
List of Participants - Annex 1
1
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
concerning the financing requirement. Some funds have been secured from the national
budget, but additional funding support is needed from external sources.
FSC members expressed appreciation for the efforts of Senegal to prepare a proposal to host
Forum VI, but noted that the necessary comprehensive formal proposal including the
guarantee of full funding resources had not been received by the agreed deadline of 31 May
2007. Several members stressed the importance of convening Forum VI in September 2008
for the future of IFCS and its ability to substantively contribute to the implementation of the
Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). Members expressed
the importance of convening Forum VI in the African Region, the only region yet to host a
session of the Forum. Noting the time constraints and the resources needed by a country
assuming responsibility for hosting a session of the Forum, several members expressed
concern that necessary financial resources of approximately 1 million USD could not be
raised in a timely manner by the Government of Senegal.
J. Katima proposed that the FSC agree to a two plan approach: plan A – the deadline for the
Government of Senegal to submit the necessary comprehensive proposal would be extended
for a short period and plan B – if the required proposal had not been received by the extended
deadline, the FSC go forward with the alternate arrangements to organize Forum VI at the UN
conference facility in Nairobi 13-19 September 2008. The FSC agreed to the proposal.
At the request of Mr Sylla, the FSC agreed to extend the deadline for receiving the necessary
proposal and funding guarantees from the Government of Senegal until 31 July 2007. The
FSC requested the Secretariat to review any submitted proposal and determine if it met all the
necessary criteria as specified in the guidelines established by the Forum. If an acceptable
proposal is received from the Government of Senegal by 31 July 2007, then the Government
of Senegal will be entrusted with hosting Forum VI in September 2008. If an acceptable
proposal is not received by the extended deadline, the FSC will proceed with alternate
arrangements to organize Forum VI at the UN conference facility in Nairobi.
5.2
Forum VI Theme
Themes for sessions of the Forum provide the focus for the Opening plenary session (keynote
speakers) and are an integral part of plenary topics and special events. A range of concepts
and ideas were proposed and considered by members including a focus on prevention,
challenges, opportunities, partnerships, recognition & consolidation of gains to move forward,
contributing to the 2020 Goal, and future contribution of the Forum to the international
chemicals regime.
The President proposed and the FSC agreed that the phrase “Global Partnerships for Chemical
Safety” be incorporated as a permanent part of the IFCS logo and that the theme of Forum VI
include the updated IFCS logo with the subtitle “Contributing to the 2020 Goal”, i.e.
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety
Global Partnerships for Chemical Safety
Contributing to the 2020 Goal
Sixth session – Forum VI
5.3
Agenda and programme
The President introduced the agenda item stating that the FSC is requested to review and
provide guidance on proposals for plenary agenda topics for Forum VI and consider other
topics that may be suggested by FSC members and IFCS participants. The FSC Terms of
2
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Reference includes as a role and responsibility to guide the process of development of
meeting materials and documents following the practice of lead country/sponsor/organization
approach to preparing materials for agenda item. The responses to the FSC questionnaire
soliciting views on the list of topics for the future Forum session compiled by Forum V
provide the basis for the FSC work. Lead sponsors and drafting groups have submitted
proposals for the consideration of the FSC on nanotechnology and nanomaterials:
opportunities and challenges, substitution and alternatives, lead and cadmium: need for
international action?, and ecologically sound and integrated pest and vector management.
The Secretariat provided information on the types and organization of official meeting
documents for sessions of the Forum (IFCS/FSC/01.63 rev 2) and reviewed lead sponsor and
rapporteur responsibilities for the preparation of plenary sessions, facilitation of work during
Forum sessions and drafting of the meeting report (IFCS/FSC/07.18). For each proposed
plenary topic, the FSC is requested to consider the content, structure and length of a plenary
session and the type of meeting documents to be prepared.
G. Karlaganis urged FSC members to select a few topics for in-depth discussion at Forum VI
so that the output would be productive and contribute substantively to international efforts.
5.3.1 Plenary agenda topics
5.3.1.a Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials: opportunities and challenges
G. Karlaganis introduced the proposal for a plenary session on Nanotechnology and
Nanomaterials: opportunities and challenges at Forum VI (IFCS/FSC/07.10) providing
information on the process to prepare the paper with the drafting group. He invited R. Visser
to inform the FSC on the work OECD is undertaking. R. Visser provided an overview of the
focus and activities of two working parties established by OECD which were briefly
described in the background section of the proposal. He noted that both working parties are
multi sector and that non-member States may be invited to participate in the work but
financial support for their participation was not available. He referred members to the OECD
website for further information
http://www.oecd.org/department/0,3355,en_2649_37015404_1_1_1_1_1,00.html .
G. Karlaganis then presented the proposed objective of a plenary session which is to share
information, the topics that would be addressed and the proposal for the structure and
presentations of a full day session on the topic. He said that P. Chemin, France, proposed that
ethical issues also be addressed. He noted that an evening break out group may be needed to
formulate and bring back to plenary any conclusion from the discussions.
H. Finman expressed two concerns: duplication of efforts with existing work and whether or
not the topic was a priority across regions.
Concerning the question of duplication, M. Luxem stated the intention was not to reinvent
OECD’s work but provide a platform for sharing information on ongoing work in the OECD
and elsewhere and learning from others experiences. It will be important that information on
OECD’s work is circulated in advance. R. Visser said he will be happy to provide all
information on OECD’s activities and make a presentation. J. Katima said that IFCS has
never duplicated the work of others. OECD conducts a different type of work and brings
together different types of participants/stakeholders. I. Zastenskaya expressed the view that no
duplication of effort exist. The IFCS mandate specified in its Terms of Reference covers the
inclusion of the topic in the Forum agenda. She said that OECD work involves a panel of high
level professional whose work product will be followed in countries. In order for this to be
done it is important to inform decision makers through wide discussions such as provided at
Forum sessions. For developing countries information sharing and awareness raising are vital
and value added. L. Corra said that IFCS is a means to make information available to decision
3
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
makers in developing countries and that participation in ongoing work such as OECD is
hindered by lack of financial support.
Concerning the question of whether or not it is a priority topic, S. Oliveira said that the
plenary programme for Forum VI should be provided a balanced allocation of time to the
issues and topics. J. de Kom said that the topic of nanotechnology and nanomaterials is a
priority in the LAC region although not the 1st priority and agreed that the time allocated
should be balanced with other topics. It is useful to have information and a Forum discussion
would have added value to other fora. Smaller countries are already using nanotechnology
and nanomaterials and information was needed in order not to repeat what others have
done/are doing. K-H Choi said there is a need to broaden current discussions in the AsiaPacific region and the Forum provides a good mechanism for this and sharing information on
this emerging issue. G. Dehghani said it was an important issue to include on the agenda. For
many nanotechnology and nanomaterials are only vague concepts at this stage, thus
information sharing was important for many countries. A session at Forum VI was not a
duplication of ongoing efforts – many topics are under consideration by multiple fora and the
discussions are complementary. J. Katima observed that if something is developed in
industrialized countries it will find its way to Africa. African countries should not wait until it
becomes a high priority issue to acquire information and discuss. It is important to understand
key issues now. The Forum will be an opportunity for developing countries to provide input
on what should be considered in research efforts. A. Bary observed that many may think that
nano issues are too high tech for developing countries, but developing countries will be the
users and consumers. The topic, especially safety issues, is an important one for Africa. A.
Olanipekun said that presentations and discussions will add opportunity for capacity building
and technology cooperation which are very key outputs. I. Zastenskaya stated that nano issues
may not be a high priority in the CEE region but this does not mean there are no problems.
Information on the situations in CEE countries is not available. Nanotechnology and
nanomaterials are surely used and to begin work countries must get basic information. Thus,
the topic can be considered a priority in the CEE region.
The following comments and suggestions were offered by FSC members for the planning
process:
 a greater focus on research and safety and health issues; information indicates that
relatively very little health and safety research is being undertaken, most of the research is
focused on technology development;
 more time for presentations and discussions on potential hazards should be organized; T.
Jakl suggested adding “hazards” to the 1st sentence on the objective as the field of
toxicology faces new challenges in the area.;
 a balanced approach was important;
 Prof V. Howard, UK, was proposed as a speaker by L. Corra. Prof Howard has publish a
book on nano and is leading a major research project in the UK;
 the topic has become a substantive one for trade unions over the last several years as
developing countries were under pressure to look for uses of nano technology and
materials, the gap in knowledge was an important issue to address;
 the medical industrial areas are of a different nature than other areas;
 information on how to carry out risk assessments is needed;
 OSH and disposal are issues of concern and if material entered into the environment then
public health is also an issue to be addressed;
 Forum VI will be held in Africa and the interest of African countries should be
incorporated;
 there is a widening gap in knowledge in the area and the session should focus on what
information developing countries, particularly LDC, need;
 Forum should provide a means to identify gaps and identify strengths and weaknesses;
4
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1




legislation: D. Hongsamoot proposed a discussion on legislation covering nano
technology be included; several FSC members expressed the view that it was too early for
this discussion; one members observed that the proposal covers the topic of legislation
although not specifically stated;
list of topics: a number FSC members said that the list was too long and should be
prioritized; one member observed that the topics were related and could be collapsed into
groups;
information to be provided by FSC members include:
o D. Hongsamoot will share information on several presentations on the subject at the
recent INCHES Conference on Children and Environmental Health. She referred to a
European Union project on nano pathology that could be considered as a contribution
to the session;
o a structured dialogue involving different ministries, industry and NGOs was ongoing
in Germany; M. Luxem will provide information;
o Slovenia has developed a platform for discussion with scientists and in 2007 a
preventive medicine session on nano issues was scheduled. M. Ciraj will contribute
information to the preparation of the Forum session;
o European Union has just launched its 7th framework programme on research and the
topic is included;
concerning the proposed presentations on relevant activities in international organizations,
clarification of the proposed “discussion of controversies generated by actions of these
groups to clarify where there is consensus and where there is not” is needed.
R. Visser questioned the need for a breakout group if it was too soon for recommendations to
be formulated. H. Finman expressed the view that the value added for the session was the goal
of information exchange and that breakout groups traditionally focus on negotiating text of
draft decisions. The Secretariat explained that at previous session of the Forum break out
groups have afforded additional time for information sharing, dialogue and discussion
particularly to engage developing countries. At previous sessions of the Forum, not all break
out groups were charged to negotiate recommendations. G. Karlaganis acknowledged that the
term breakout group was misleading. The intention was to allow ample time for information
sharing and discussion and summarizing the latter. G. Wiser said that the need for breakout
groups can be decide during the Forum; breakout groups provide an opportunity for
developing countries to express their information needs. In general evenings should be
reserved for outcome of dynamics of plenary and the programme should be flexible.
G. Karlaganis summarized the input provided by the FSC. Based on the results of the
questionnaire and the FSC discussions the topic is understood to be a priority topic for Forum
VI with the objective of information sharing. A Though Starter (TS) paper will be prepared
based on the proposal and FSC input. He will prepare a time table for the WG to prepare the
TS and organize the session. He invited the IOMC organizations to prepare an information
paper on work ongoing in their organizations. R. Visser agreed to prepare a paper on OECD
activities and to discuss the request other IOMC organizations. J. Stratford said a first step is
to identify speakers for the topics and ask each for a short description of a possible
presentation. She noted that it is proposed to make public an OECD information paper on the
activities of countries.
M. Luxem offered to contribute to the extent possible and M. Ciraj volunteered for the WG.
FSC members were requested to inform the IFCS secretariat within several weeks of their or
their constituencies’ interest in participating in the WG.
5
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
5.3.1.b Lead & Cadmium
M. Luxem introduced the proposal (IFCS/FSC/07.11) stating the objective was to consider the
need for international action on lead and cadmium. There was a need to consider criteria for
what constitutes global concern. This had been done for POPs, but not other groups of
substances. The proposal was based on work done to date and would not repeat work done
elsewhere. It was proposed to go a step further than the recent UNEP GC decision that
requested additional scientific and technology information to fill gaps. The question to be
considered is: is there a global concern? If yes, is there need for international action? IFCS
does not implement activities, but the Forum may discuss what to implement. Forum VI
would provide a neutral forum that could identify common ground. A WG will prepare an
information paper to support the discussion at Forum VI. The WG could schedule its 1st
teleconference in October 2007 after the UNEP September deadline for submission of
information.
G. Karlaganis supported the proposal to include the topic in the plenary agenda for Forum VI
and the preparation of either an information or thought starter paper. R. Quijano requested
that lifecycle issues be included in the planned discussion. B. Erikson noted that mining waste
and recycling of batteries are major problems mostly solved in developed countries, but not in
developing countries.
H. Finman volunteered to work with others to appropriately scope out the topic. For example
Forum VI can focus on concrete activities and identify gaps in what countries are doing and
potential partnerships, it should not consider and agree on definitions or undertake more
normative discussions. UNEP GC will decide the way forward for work on lead and cadmium.
G. Wiser said that a discussion on whether or not there is a global concern and consideration
of what constitutes a global concern are valuable questions to be addressed and appropriate
for IFCS. The Forum has a different role than the UNEP GC. IFCS is multi sector multi
stakeholder process which is productive in finding common ground and conclusions which
provide useful input to the UNEP GC and others. A discussion at Forum VI on the question
of global concern on lead and cadmium will be added value to other efforts and service the
upcoming UNEP GC meeting in 2009.
M. Luxem said the Forum would not discuss policy, but the basis for policy. It would
examine the commonality of needs, concerns and potential actions, if so identified.
Concerning the criteria for what constitutes global concern, analytical work has not yet been
undertaken. The issue was raised in 1996 at a UNEP meeting and interest expressed by a
number of participants at Forum II on working together on the topic, but it had never been
taken up in any fora. This is basic work which no other fora deal with. It complements the
work done by others including UNEP.
M. Luxem said the WG will prepare an information paper not a TS as so much is known.
A. Olanipekun offered to share information and experience from efforts and work in Nigeria.
G. Karlaganis volunteered for the WG. FSC members were requested to inform the IFCS
secretariat within several weeks of their or their constituencies’ interest in participating in the
WG.
5.3.1.c Substitution/alternatives
T. Jakl introduced the proposal (IFCS/FSC/07.12) prepared by the drafting group.
Substitution is viewed as a broad area not limited to a focus of one substance replacing
another, but including replacing one solution by another with for example different
technology. It is an ongoing process in business and development, an inherent part of product
6
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
development not just an instrument in environmental policy. An objective of the session at
Forum VI is to raise awareness on the multiple facets and nature of substitution. The proposal
is the initial starting point for preparing a session. A next step is to receive proposals for
speakers. He referred the FSC to the information paper provided by P. Chemin, France, which
provides his views and examples of non-chemical alternatives.
The following comments and suggestions were offered by FSC members for the planning
process:
- Germany will share the work undertaken on the subject when Germany held the EU
Presidency;
- need to consider benefits and challenges;
- several members questioned the goal/objective of “establishing consensus on definitions
of substitution and alternatives” expressing views such as: doubt if a discussion on
terminology would be fruitful in light of the differences between agriculture and industry;
discussion of terminology and principle would not be useful for developing countries, but
need at least to describe what substitution is; reference to principles and terminology
would be distracting;
- does the scope included Green Chemistry and leasing;
- would the lifecycle approach imply looking at other areas;
- reference other MEAS e.g. Montreal Protocol important to mention in background; OSH
aspect should be included e.g. action under the Montreal Protocol led to OSH problems;
reference to the Montreal Protocol as a good example chemical & non chemical
alternatives;
- too many goals are proposed – should choose several and focus on these e.g. discuss
process mechanisms for substitution, particularly for resource poor countries;
- presentation of legal background not most relevant for IFCS; information on legal aspects
in a few countries and how national legislation has been designed & works would be
instructive; legal background last step for some problems;
- recommendations are more appropriate for a peer review meeting – focus on information
sharing;
- regional level issues and actions should be included where international and national
levels are mentioned;
- financial aspects should be covered as some believe substitution/alternatives are more
expensive; must take into account health costs;
- information sharing and case studies good approach.
T. Jakl summarized the input provided by the FSC and responded to a number of the points
raise. The input from the FSC would be taken into consideration in preparing a meeting paper
and the presentations. He said terminology was needed to establish common ground as a basis
for discussion and to be able to address issues. This could be addressed by including more
explicit descriptions in the background section of a paper. A database or reference list of case
examples could be compiled. Concerning legal aspects, only experience where legal language
triggered substitution could be included. He said a life cycle approach is necessary to compare
solutions. The Montreal Protocol has place in paper, but noted it need appropriate balance in
presenting the end results.
M. Luxem/Germany offered to contribute to the extent possible. B. Erikson, M. Gribble/NGO
industry, and IPEN network volunteered for the WG. FSC members were requested to inform
the IFCS secretariat within several weeks of their or their constituencies’ interest in
participating in the WG.
5.3.1.d Table C referred to in the SAICM Global Plan of Action
7
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
The list of topics for future Forum sessions compiled by Forum V includes the preparation of
an objective information report to support ICCM consideration of topics and items in Table C
referred to in the SAICM Global Plan of Action (GPA). At the request of the FSC, the
Secretariat sent letters requesting brief information on ongoing and planned work relevant to
the areas and activities listed in Table C to the IOMC/IOCC Chair and SAICM Regional
Focal Points. Information was collected using a standard reporting form and is summarized in
meeting document IFCS/FSC/07.13. A draft of the report was sent to those volunteering to
work with the Secretariat on collection of information for comment and further input. In
addition to the detailed information received from several IOMC organizations, the IFCS
President had received a letter from the Chair IOMC/IOCC expressing some concerns about
the possible duplication of work already underway in other fora.
R. Visser stated the IOMC view was that Table C was non-existent and as ICCM1 did not
request any further information on it the IOMC organizations questioned why governments
would have agreed to put an objective information report to support ICCM consideration of
topics and items in Table C on the list of potential topics for a future Forum session. In
principle the IOMC organizations have a problem with the collection of objective information
on the items in Table C and no more information will be provided by the IOMC organizations.
M. Luxem responded that Germany had proposed the information collection exercise
recognizing that work under SAICM did not include Table C and expressed the view that
IFCS was the proper forum to discuss the issues. Germany found the compilation of
information to be very useful.
M. Gubb stated that the GPA was a working tool and as such it is possible that the issues and
items in Table C may be taken up in the future. To date the regional groups have not
considered Table C as a priority item to be addressed. J. Stratford said that there was not a
large interest in the informal EU-JUSCANNZ group in further discussing the GPA at this
time but in using the current version to gain experience. A. Olanipekun informed the FSC
through the African Core Group positions on how to address the issues in Table C will be
prepared prior to ICCM2. She said that the group had noted the overlap between items in the
GPA and Table C. I. Zastenskaya said the CEE regional group consideration of Table C was
blocked by one country’s position on the activity on asbestos listed in the Table. G. Entenza
stated that Table C contained global issues to be considered and was important to the LAC
region. The open process provided by the IFCS for discussing and exploring was a proper
place to continue the debate.
H. Finman said the matter of how to approach Table C is an inherent ICCM function. The
question was rather are there items or issues in Table C that the IFCS should discuss. If so, an
IFCS participant should prepare a proposal on an individual topic, not Table C in general.
J. Katima said Table C was not copyrighted by SAICM and he believed that lack of
information and common understanding was probably a core reason for lack of agreement at
ICCM. IFCS contribution to the development of SAICM led to SAICM being agreed in a
timely manner. Information sharing and exploring the topics will support ICCM discussions
when it takes up the issues and items.
B. Erikson observed that some of the most important issues in Table C were not ripe for
discussion at ICCM1 and collection of information on ongoing activities was a way to keep
the issues on the agenda. Many of the items were relevant for future discussion in the Forum.
G. Wiser stated that the focus should be on the individual activities and why they are
important to countries and how progress on them can be made in the realm of chemical safety.
Table C comprises activities and issues that are within the mandate of IFCS to discuss. M.
Luxem expressed agreement saying this is what she had in mind when originally proposed the
8
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
information collection exercise. A side event discussion on one or more of the topics would
provide an opportunity to listen and learn and could be considered. G. Dehghani supported the
view that IFCS had the right and responsibility to discuss the items in Table C and noted that
it was already working on some topics.
The FSC agreed to keep the items and issues in Table C under review for possible future
topics noting that any IFCS participant may submit a proposal for a Forum session on an item
or issue listed in Table C. SAICM regional groups were invited to keep the FSC informed on
their efforts to considered the activities and items and issues contained in Table C.
5.3.1.e Other topics
G. Dehghani, Iran, informed the FSC that following the 74th FSC teleconference in March
2007 he had received further information from the Secretariat on the outcome of previous
Forum sessions on the topics on OHS and precaution (case studies) and the work under way
by an informal group to follow up on the Forum V recommendations on the latter. Based on
this information the Government of Iran decided not to prepare proposals on these topics for
Forum VI.
The Secretariat referred to the information paper prepared by Dr Joel Tickner, Lowell Center
for Sustainable Production, USA, on “IFCS Forum V Recommendation on Tools and
Approaches for Applying Precaution in the Context of Chemicals Safety - Draft Proposal for
follow-up”. The proposal includes an option for an IFCS Forum VI side event to provide
information on the follow up work to implement the Forum agreed actions and
recommendations. This work has synergies with two topics for the Forum VI plenary agenda:
Nanotechnology and Nanomaterials: opportunities and challenges and
Substitution/alternatives. It is anticipated that the preparation of these topics for Forum VI
will feed important information into the planned portal to tools, approaches, and practical case
examples for applying precaution in chemicals safety that is being developed as an important
first priority in this effort.
Ecologically sound and integrated pest and vector management
G. Dehghani introduced the paper prepared by Iran (IFCS/FSC/07.21) stating that the topic of
IVM could be considered an emerging issue because of new developments and situations
concerning communicable diseases and related issues. He described the goals and objectives
of the session and possible issues that could be considered by the Forum.
T. Jakl expressed the view that the topic of IVM was an extremely important topic. The POPS
Convention was dealing with the issue in its work on DDT with great ambition. What would
the added value be of an IFCS discussion? M. Luxem noted that POPs COP3 has already
proposed a way forward on the issue of DDT.
R. Quijano expressed full support for a session on the topic at Forum VI noting that the topic
has been an IFCS Priority for Action since Forum III. A discussion at Forum VI would be a
follow up to the recommendation. He noted that IFCS is a different broader audience than the
participants in POPs COP sessions. He interpreted the proposal as a broader discussion than
the special case issue of DDT. Forum VI should address IVM and IPM in the broader context
of the Forum III recommendation as an integral part of risk reduction. He proposed to amend
the scope and include IPM and the agriculture sector with a focus on case studies including
examples from Cambodia, India and Thailand. He said the FAO IPM programme is not well
known in many countries and he proposed Peter Kenmore, FAO, to given a presentation. He
volunteered to work with Iran to further develop the proposal. D. Hongsamoot supported the
proposal to broaden the scope.
9
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
I. Zastenskaya proposed that IVM could be a good example to discuss in the session on
substitution and alternatives. J. de Kom supported the proposal. M. Musenga supported the
proposal and volunteered to work with Iran to further develop the proposal stating that
Zambia is one of the developing countries in Africa using DDT for malaria control for public
health. T. Jakl said that if included in the session on substitution, the focus would be narrowed
to DDT and performance criteria for its alternatives. DDT could be part of the lessons learned
in the substitution and alternatives discussion, but it is a very special case. The core issues
mentioned by G. Dehghani and Romy on IPM and IVM would not be taken up.
The FSC requested G. Dehghani working with R. Quijano to prepare a revised proposal for a
Forum VI session on IVM and IPM that could be discussed at its next teleconference. The
revised proposal should include proposed presentations in each area. The FSC agreed that
time should be reserved on the Forum VI plenary agenda for the topic.
The following comments and suggestions were offered by FSC members for revising the
proposal:
- include information on how the plenary session build on the IPM work of FAO and the
IVM work of WHO;
- WHO, FAO, GEF , Stockholm Convention Secretariat invited to contribute;
- added value would be regional aspects/approach;
- goals as stated are huge undertaking, consider reducing;
- IVM is a public health problem requiring a multi stakeholder strategy.
FSC members were requested to submit in writing any additional comments on the paper and
nominations for presentations and speakers.
Linkages
J. Katima informed the FSC that following the discussions at a GEF technical advisory
committee meeting he was considering how a discussion on the linkages between chemical
safety work and other environmental areas might be organized. He said that it was an issue
that should not be avoided, but he did not know when it should be discussed and if it should
be organized as a plenary or side event.
L. Corra stated this was an important topic and that for some time a number of stakeholders
had been looking for ways to work with on going efforts addressing biodiversity issues. M.
Luxem said there was an ongoing dialogue in Germany on the topic of linkages and a project
to examine linkages. She will send J. Katima information. The President suggested that it
might be a topic to consider for a keynote address.
T. Jakl said the idea was excellent food for thought and that the discussion on substitution and
alternatives concerning gains in efficiencies bring the areas out of isolated frameworks. Links
between chemicals management and climate change exist and it would be beneficial to collect
these and other examples. A task would be to translate “chemicals management” into climate
change language for a dialogue. Chemicals management issues are already included in
climate change work, and it was a matter of branding to make them apparent. It was a
worthwhile exercise with valuable potential to contribute. He volunteered to work with J.
Katima to find an appropriate format for discussion of the topic. One approach may be for
IFCS to organize a side event at a climate change meeting focusing on the message “have you
considered that chemicals management is relevant to climate change
H. Finman expressed the view that the topic of linkages was not an appropriate topic for the
IFCS. She viewed the discussion of linkages as IFCS discussing how GEF and the WB should
10
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
organize its work. She requested the record show she “strenuously” objected to the topic as a
side event at a session of the Forum.
J. Katima said the consideration of linkages was a separate discussion from the work of GEF.
The proposal was to examine linkages from the scientific standpoint – not the policy aspects.
G. Wiser agreed that IFCS should not discuss GEF policy, but he understood that J. Katima
was proposing to examine how chemicals management policy effects, for example, climate
change. This is not an issue for GEF but an appropriate issue for IFCS to discuss. Several
FSC members supported this.
The Secretariat noted that linkages between chemicals management and other areas of
Agenda 21 were examined at Forum II. The IFCS President had prepared and presented a
paper on the subject. It was further noted that the IFCS TOR state one of its functions is to
foster an understanding of the issues.
M. Luxem and T. Jakl volunteered to work with J. Katima to explore possible ways of
scheduling time at Form VI to examine the linkages of chemicals management work with
other areas. FSC members were requested to inform the IFCS secretariat within several weeks
of their or their constituencies’ interest in working with the group.
5.3.2
Opening Session
For sessions of the Forum, the FSC has assumed the lead responsibilities for preparing the
programme for the Opening session. The FSC is requested to consider the content and
organization of the Opening Session, e.g. keynote speaker(s) for Forum VI and the process to
prepare the session. The programme for Opening sessions of previous Forums has ranged
from government officials to keynote speakers and panel discussions.
5.3.3.a Keynote speaker(s)
The FSC was requested to provide initial suggestions for keynote speakers. The following
names were put forward as possible key note speakers (FSC member proposing name in
parentheses):2
 Hon. Prof Wangari Maathai, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, Kenyan environmental
activist (G. Karlaganis)
 Prof Klaus Toefer, former Executive Director, UNEP (T. Jakl)
 President of Liberia (A. Olanipekun)
 Group of African First Ladies working on children’s environment health (A.
Olanipekun)
 Kofi Annan (M. Ciraj)
 Minister of Environment, South Africa (A. Olanipekun)
2
Following the FSC meeting a further communication was received from M. Musenga adding the
following to the list of proposed keynote speakers:
Minister of Environment , Cameroon.( M.Musenga)
Minister of Environment, Madagasca.( M. Musenga)
Minister of Environment , Burundi.(M.Musenga)
Minister of health , Zimbabwe.( M.Musenga)
Minister of Environment , Angola.(M.Musenga)
Minister of Environment, Malawi.( M.Musenga)
M. Musenga stated that “Since the meeting will be held in Africa we need a full participation from
Africa.”
11
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1



Mrs Moureen Mwanawasa the First Lady for the Zambian Government
working on children’s environmental health (M. Musenga, will check to see if scope
of work includes chemical safety)
Dr. Anna Kajumulo Tibaijuka, UN Under-Secretary-General and Executive Director,
UN-HABITAT (J. Katima)
Representative/senior executive of downstream user industry e.g. industry profiled in
“Healthy Business Strategies for Transforming the Toxic Chemical Economy”
(Interface Fabric, Dell, Avalon Natural Products etc.) (Secretariat).
Those who put forward names for possible key note speakers were requested to informally
contact the proposed individual to ascertain interest and availability. M. Gribble agreed to
check with industry colleagues on the possibility of a representative/senior executive of
downstream user industry.
5.3.3.b Awards
The Secretariat reviewed the types of IFCS awards and the process and time frame for
nomination and selection of recipients as detailed in meeting documents IFCS/FSC/07.19 and
IFCS/FSC /07.20. The deadline for nominations will be approximately 6 months prior to
Forum VI and a list of proposed recipients will be forwarded by the selection panel (IFSC
officers) to the FSC for its consideration 3 to 4 months prior to Forum VI.
5.3.3.c Monitoring Progress
The President introduced the agenda item providing background information and context for
the discussion. The IFCS Terms of Reference state that the Forum is “to provide analysis and
report on progress of governments, international organizations and intergovernmental bodies
in achieving the sound management of chemicals, …”. To assist in carrying out this mandate,
Forum IV adopted revised Guidelines for IFCS National Focal Points (NFP) that include an
annual reporting requirement. The NFP report for each year is requested in the first quarter of
the following year. Prior to previous sessions of the Forum a summary report has been
prepared compiling the information received. The summary report provided information for
the President’s Progress Report that has been prepared for previous Forums. The IFCS
Priorities for Action beyond 2000 and the Bahia Declaration were the basis for SAICM and
together with other Forum recommendations have been incorporated into the SAICM OPS
and GPA. During the SAICM negotiations some of the IFCS priorities, recommendations
and/or targets may have been revised or updated. ICCM has been mandated to monitor
progress on the implementation of SAICM and efforts are under way led by the Canadian
government to prepare a proposal on a process for monitoring progress and a baseline report
for ICCM2. The President requested the FSC to consider and provide advice on what type of
progress report, if any, should be prepared for Forum VI so as not to duplicate efforts.
FSC members supported not preparing a detailed President’s Progress Report noting that a
report would duplicate efforts under way for the ICCM and it would be difficult to obtain
information. The Secretariat was requested to prepare the standard summary report on the
Simple Indicators of Progress reports submitted by NFPs and include in the report links to
additional information available on the web to supplement the information provided in the
national reports. J. Katima proposed that the President report on the activities and work of the
FSC since Forum V in the Opening Session Forum VI. The FSC agreed.
5.3.4
Side Events
Side events (of a non-commercial nature) may be organized by any IFCS participant or
groups of participants on topics that are relevant to the mandate and scope of IFCS. Side
12
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
event sponsors are responsible fully for the organization and any associated costs. Information
on optional costs, for example of providing lunch and interpretation, will be available after the
venue and host are selected. The Secretariat facilitates the organizational work and
communications between the side event organizers and the Forum host. The deadline for
requesting a date/time and meeting room for a side event is normally 2 months prior to the
session of a Forum. The FSC is kept informed on the requests and schedule of side events.
The FSC was requested to provide information on possible side events that were under
consideration for Forum VI. The following information on side events currently being
considered was provided (FSC member or IFCS participant considering event in parentheses):
 applying precaution in the context of chemical safety - information event on the
follow up work to implement the Forum agreed actions and recommendations e.g.
demonstration of web based portal of tools and approaches (J. Tickner);
 linkages of chemicals management issues and work with other environmental areas (J.
Katima);
 chemical leasing (T. Jakl together with UNIDO);
 trade unions – topics to be decided (B. Erikson);
 IPEN – topic to be decided (G. Wiser);
 IPM by PAN (R. Quijano).
5.3.5
Time schedule for Forum VI
The Secretariat presented a revised draft general time schedule based on the agreed plenary
agenda items (IFCS/FSC/07.15 rev 1). The FSC considered the scheduling of plenary sessions
and allocation of time. G. Dehghani noting the broad scope and complexity of the topics of
IVM and IPM each with distinctive aspects requested the FSC consider allocating a full day
(two (2) plenary sessions) to the topic of “ecologically sound and integrated pest and vector
management”. The FSC agreed to consider the request at its next meeting when it would
consider a revised full proposal for the topic including information on presentations and
speakers. The FSC agreed that the draft general time schedule for Forum VI should be
considered a flexible working document that could be adjusted as needed as the organization
of plenary topics developed. The revised draft general time schedule is presented in Annex 2.
5.3.6
Time schedule for FVI preparations
The Secretariat proposed a revised time schedule taking into account the decisions of the FSC
during the meeting. The FSC considered and agreed on its teleconference/meeting schedule
and other target dates. The schedule will be kept under review and amended as necessary by
the FSC as preparations for Forum VI progress. The revised time schedule for Forum VI
preparations (IFCS/FSC/07.16 rev2) is presented in Annex 3.
6.0
Financial Report - Status report
The Secretariat presented the financial report (IFCS/FSC/07.17) covering the IFCS Trust
Fund, IFCS Fund for Advocacy and Promotion, designated contributions and IFCS Twinning
Funds. For 2007 there is a shortfall in contributions to the Trust Fund of approximately 66
000 USD and for 2008 pledged contributions totalling about 50% of the approved budget
have been received. Twinning costs to support the participation of developing and CIET
countries and NGOs in Forum VI is estimated at over 400 000 USD. In total 750 000 USD is
needed to support the work of IFCS through Forum VI in 2008 including designated
contributions to the Twinning Funds. In addition 400 000 to 450 000 USD will be needed to
cover conference support services if Forum VI is held at the UN conference facility in Nairobi.
13
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
G. Karlaganis expressed the view that 4 things are needed to successfully organize Forum VI:
a date for Forum VI, a venue for the meeting, substantive agenda topics that add value to other
efforts, and funds. If the FSC did the first 3 items, then raising the necessary funds could be
accomplished. Based on the decisions taken by the FSC at this meeting, good progress was
being made. A number of FSC members expressed agreement with this approach. M. Luxem
stated the 2008 contribution from Germany to the IFCS Trust Fund had been secured.
7.0
SAICM - Implementation update
M. Gubb provided an update on work undertaken, ongoing and planned for the
implementation of SAICM. Information was provided on the development of a focal point
network, national government, IGO and NGO implementation reports, the Quick Start
Programme, secretariat staffing, regional meetings and initial preparations for ICCM2. A.
Olanipekun, G. Entenza, J. Stratford, I. Zastenskaya informed the FSC on regional meetings
and efforts. M. Gubb provided information on the outcome of the recent Asia-Pacific
Regional Meeting. Detailed information is available on the SAICM website
(http://www.chem.unep.ch/saicm/ ).
8.0
Other business
FSC website
J-L. Wallace, Canada, wrote to the Secretariat asking “why do we go to the trouble of settingup password protected sites when the IFCS is supposed to be about inclusion, openness and
transparency? It seems that our actions are contrary to what the IFCS is all about.” The
Secretariat promised to bring the question forward to the FSC at its meeting for its
consideration. The Secretariat explained that the FSC on the proposal of WEOG governments
in the late 1990's took the decision that its meeting documents would be made available only
on a password protected site as many of the documents would be "works" in progress and
might lead to confusion for those not directly involved. The Secretariat proposed that the FSC
website be transformed to a publicly available website. The FSC agreed and requested that the
site clearly note that the meeting documents may be draft versions representing work in
progress.
Announcement of Forum VI agenda topics, date & venue
T. Jakl requested the Secretariat to prepare and distribute in an appropriate format an
announcement of the outcome of the FSC meeting on the Forum VI date, venue, plenary
agenda topics and FSC WGs established to prepare the topics. The Secretariat suggested that
the information could be distributed via an IFCS Information Circular and/or a letter from the
IFCS President to IFCS participants. The information will also be posted on the IFCS website.
9.0
Closure of the meeting
The President stated that the FSC had achieved the goals of the meeting and thanked all
participants for their valuable contributions ensuring the successful outcome. Substantive
work remains to be done to prepare the each of the topics for Forum VI and with the
continuing spirit of cooperation and collaboration the FSC will be successful in its work to
prepare the agenda and programme for Forum VI. He thanked G. Karlaganis and the
Government of Switzerland for the excellent arrangement in hosting the meeting.
14
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Annex 1
Participants List
GOVERNMENT
Argentina
Mr Gonzalo Entenza
Dirección General de Asuntos Ambientales
Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores y Culto
Esmeralda 1212
Buenos Aires 1007
Argentina
Tel: +54 11 5166 8469
Fax: +54 11 4819 7413
Email: gex@mrecic.gov.ar etg@mrecic.gov.ar
Austria
Dr Thomas Jakl
Chemicals Policy Directorate (1/U)
Federal Ministry for Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management
Stubenbastei 5
Vienna A-1010
Austria
Tel: +43 1 51 52 22 330
Fax: +43 1 51 52 27 334
Email: thomas.jakl@bmlfuw.gv.at
Belarus
Dr Irina Zastenskaya
Deputy Director
Republican Scientific Practical Center of Hygiene
8 Academicheskaya Str
Minsk - 12 220012
Belarus
Tel: +375 17 292 5015
Fax: +375 17 284 0345
Email: rspch@rspch.by zastenskaya@hotmail.com
Brazil
Ms Sergia Oliveira
Secretariat for Environment Quality in
Human Settlement6s
Ministry of Environment
Esplanada dos Ministerios,
Bloco B, Sala 820
Brasilia, DF 70068-900
Brazil
Tel: +55 61 4009 1373 / 1016
Fax: +55 61 4009 1944
Email: sergia.oliveira@mma.gov.br
Burkina Faso
Prof Abdouraman Bary
Coordonnateur
Autorité nationale pour la Convention sur les Armes chimiques
09 BP 526 Ouagadougou 09
Ouagadougou
Burkina Faso
Tel: +226 76 59 53 47
Fax: +226 50 30 72 42
Email: abary@univ-ouaga.bf abdouramanb@yahoo.com
15
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
China
Ms Hong Zhou
Associate Researcher
Chemical Registration Center of State Environment Protection Administration
8 Dayangfang, Anwai
Beijing 100012
China
Tel: +86 10 84915287
Fax: +86 10 84913897
Email: zhouh@crc-sepa.org.cn
Germany
Ms Monika Luxem
Assistant Head of Division
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety
P.O. Box 120629
Bonn D-53048
Germany
Tel: +49 1888 305 2722
Email: monika.luxem@bmu.bund.de
Hungary
Dr Zoltan Szabo
Acting Director General
Fodor Jozsef National Center for Public Health
Nagyvarad ter 2
Budapest 1096
Hungary
Tel: +36 1 476 11 36
Fax: +36 1 215 68 91
Email: szabozoltan@fjokk.hu
Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Mr Gholamhossein Dehghani
Secretary
National Authority for Chemical Conventions
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
United Nations Avenue
Building number 812
Imam Square
Tehran
Iran (Islamic Republic of)
Tel: +98 21 611 45336
Fax: +98 21 6670094
Email: gdehghani@yahoo.com or gdehghani@yahoo.com
Korea (Republic of)
Dr Kyung-Hee Choi
Director
National Institute of Environmental Research
Ministry of the Environment
Environmental Research Complex
Kyungseo-dong, Seo-gu,
Inchon
Seoul 404-170
Korea (Republic of)
Tel: +82 32 56 07206
Fax: +82 32 568 2041
Email: nierchoi@me.go.kr nierchoi@unitel.co.kr
16
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Nigeria
Mrs Abiola I. Olanipekun
Chief Environmental Scientist
Pollution Control Department
Federal Ministry of Environment
Plot 444,
Aguiyi Ironsi Street
Maitama District
Abuja
Nigeria
Tel: +234 9 5234119/2731067
Fax: +234 9 5234014/4136317
Email: abiolanipekun@yahoo.co.uk
Senegal
Mr Cheikh Ndiaye Sylla
Deputy Director of Environment
Ministry of Environment
123, rue Calmette
BP 6557
Dakar Etoile
Dakar
Senegal
Tel: +221 822 6211
Fax: +221 822 6212
Email: denv@sentoo.sn
Slovenia
Dr Marta Ciraj
Director
National Chemicals Bureau
Ministry of Health, National Chemicals Bureau
Mali trg 6
Ljubljana SI-1000
Slovenia
Tel: +386 1 47 86 039
Fax: +386 1 47 86 266
Email: marta.ciraj@gov.si
Suriname
Dr Jules F. M. De Kom
Toxicology Focal Point
Secretariat Director
Ministry of Health
H. Arronstraat 64 B
Paramaribo
Suriname
Tel: +597 477601
Fax: +597473 923
Email: dekomj@sr.net apotheek@azp.sr
Switzerland
Mrs Gabi Eigenmann
Global Affairs Section
Federal Office for the Environment
International Affairs Division
Bern 3003
Switzerland
Tel: +41 31 3229303
Fax: +41 31 3230349
Email: gabi.eigenmann@bagu.admin.ch
17
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Dr Georg Karlaganis
Head of the Substances, Soil & Biotech. Div.
Federal Department of Environment, Transport, Energy & Communications
Federal Office for the Environment
Worblentalstr. 68
3063 Ittigen
Bern CH-3003
Switzerland
Tel: +41 31 32 26 955
Fax: +41 31 32 47 978
Email: georg.karlaganis@buwal.admin.ch
Tanzania (United Republic of)
Prof Jamidu Katima
University of Dar es Salaam
University of Dar es Salaam
PO Box 35131
Dar es Salaam
Tanzania (United Republic of)
Tel: +255 22 2410 754
Fax: +255 22 2410 114
Email: jkatima@cpe.udsm.ac.tz jamidu_katima@yahoo.co.uk
Thailand
Dr Duangtip Hongsamoot
Food and Drug Administration
Chemical Safety Group
Ministry of Public Health
Tiwanon Road,
Muang District
Nonthaburi 11000
Thailand
Tel: +662 590 7021
Fax: +662 590 7287
Email: duangtip@health.moph.go.th
Ms Pornpit Silkavute
Research Manager,
Health Systems Research Institute (HSRI)
Ministry of Public Health
Tiwanon Road, Muang District
Nonthaburi 11000
Thailand
Tel: +66 2 951 1286 93 Extn.127
Fax: +66 2 951 1295
Email: pornpit@health.moph.go.th
United Kingdom
Dr Jane Stratford
Chemical and Nanotechnologies Division
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
2A Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London SW11P 3JR
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 207 2381594
Email: jane.stratford@defra.gsi.gov.uk
18
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
United States of America
Ms Hodayah Finman
Foreign Affairs Officer
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington D.C. 20460
United States of America
Tel: +1 202 647 1123
Fax: +1 202 647 5947
Email: finmanhh@state.gov
Zambia
Mr Michael Musenga
Environmental Health Officer and Public Prosecutor for Environmental Health
Environmental Health
Monze District Council
PO Box 660149
Monze Southern Province
Zambia
Tel: Mobile: +26097436314
Fax: +260 32 50265
Email: mmusenga@yahoo.com
IGO
IOMC
Dr Robert Visser
Head, Environment Health & Safety Division
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
2 rue André Pascal
Paris Cédex 16 F-75775
France
Tel: +33 1 45 24 93 10
Fax: +33 1 45 24 16 75
Email: robert.visser@oecd.org
SAICM
Dr Matthew Gubb
SAICM Secretariat
United Nations Environment Programme
15, Chemin des Anémones
Châtelaine
Geneva CH-1219
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 9178200
Fax: +41 22 7973460
Email: mgubb@chemicals.unep.ch
19
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
NGO
CIEL
Mr Glenn Wiser
Senior Attorney
Center for International Environmental law (CIEL)
1350 Connecticut Avenue NW
Suite 1100
Washington DC 20036
United States of America
Tel: +1 202 785 8700
Fax: +1 202 785 8701
Email: gwiser@ciel.org
ICCA
Mr Michael Gribble
International Chemicals Management
SGCI Chemie Pharma Schweiz
Nordstrasse 15
Zurich 8035
Switzerland
Tel: +41 44 3681740
Fax: +41 44 3681741
Email: michael.gribble@sgci.ch
ITUC
Mr Bjorn Erikson
Industrial Hygenist
Landsorganisasjonen i Norge
Youngsgaten 11
Oslo N-0181
Norway
Tel: +47 2306 1714
Fax: +47 2306 1753
Email: bjorn.erikson@lo.no
ISDE
Dr Lilian Corra
ISDE President and resposible for Latin America
International Society of Doctors for the Environment
Bulnes 2009, 2°A
Buenos Aires 1425
Argentina
Tel: +54 11 4823 2298 Home: +54 11 4821 7782
Fax: +54 11 4823 2298
Email: lcisde@arnet.com.ar
PAN - Asia and Pacific
Dr Romeo F. Quijano
President
Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Philippines
Lot 2
Block 30, Salome Tan St
BF Executive Village
Las Pinas City Metro-Manila 1740
Philippines
Tel: +63 2 8050585
Fax: +63 2 5218251
Email: romyquij@yahoo.com sampyq@excite.com
20
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
SECRETARIAT
Mrs Pauline Lynch-Keep
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety
c/o World Health Organization
20 Avenue Appia
Geneva 27 CH-1211
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 79 13 873
Fax: +41 22 79 14 875
Email: lynchkeepp@who.int
Dr Judy Stober
Executive Secretary
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety
c/o World Health Organization
20 Avenue Appia
Geneva 27 CH-1211
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 791 36 50/38 73
Fax: +41 22 791 48 75
Email: stoberj@who.int
21
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Annex 2
Overview of Programme & Proposed General Time Schedule
Intergovernmental Forum on Chemical Safety
Sixth Session - Forum VI
Saturday
(Pre-meetings Saturday & Sunday) Monday - Friday
Sunday
Monday
08000900
09001000
Regional Groups
(t.b.d.)
R
10001100
Side Event(s) ?
E
13001400
14001500
R
S
E
T
G
R
I
A
FSC1 MTG
(or post RG Meetings)
T
15001600
Friday
FSC
FSC
FSC
FSC
Regional Groups
(t.b.d.)
Regional Groups
(t.b.d.)
Regional Groups
(t.b.d.)
Regional Groups
(t.b.d.)
S
Opening
Keynote speakers
Awards
Plenary:
Organizational Matters
PPR2
Administrative items
R
E
Plenary:
Nanotechnology
and nanomaterials:
opportunities and challenges
(part 1)
Other business
Plenary:
Substitution and alternatives
Plenary:
Ecologically sound and integrated
pest & vector management
Adoption of Report
G
I
Side Event (s)
S
Side Event (s)
Side Event (s)
Side Event (s)
Side Event (s)
Plenary:
Nanotechnology
and nanomaterials:
opportunities and challenges
(part 2)
Plenary:
Lead and Cadmium:
need for international action?
Plenary:
Plenary:
continued
Side Event(s)
&/or
ad hoc WG(s)
Side Event(s)
&/or
ad hoc WG(s)
T
R
A
A
G
R
P
S
N
?
T
Plenary:
T
Future of IFCS
I
I
O
O
Plenary items brought back for
follow up consideration
N
N
1800
Reception
Sunday or Monday evening
Reception
Sunday or Monday evening
Side Event(s)
&/or
ad hoc WG(s)
Side Event(s)
&/or
ad hoc WG(s)
1
Review of conclusions and
recommendations
R
R
E
G
O
17001800
Thursday
T
I
16001700
Wednesday
Plenary:
I
12001300
Tuesday
Side Event(s)?
G
11001200
IFCS/FSC/07.15 rev 1
Working DRAFT Version 1/19.06.07
FSC – Forum Standing Committee
2
PPR – President’s Progress Report on work of FSC since Forum V
22
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
Annex 3
IFCS/FSC/07.16 rev 2
20 June 2007
Time Schedule for Forum VI Preparations
Working Version
Key Dates 2007/2008
Activity
18-20 June 2007
Forum Standing Committee meeting,
Jongny, Switzerland
1 August 2007
Forum VI venue confirmed
25 September 2007 (Tuesday),
12h00 GMT
FSC teleconference
October 2007
Distribution of announcement - Nominations for Award of Merit and
Special Recognition Award
11 December 2007 (Tuesday)
12h00 GMT
FSC teleconference
t.b.d.
FSC teleconference schedule for 2008
26-28 Feb 2008 Bangkok
or
25-27 Feb 2008 Switzerland
Forum Standing Committee face-to-face meeting
- final decisions on agenda & programme for Forum VI
- review of final draft of plenary/decision item papers
15 March 2008
Award of Merit nominations - deadline for submission
Special Recognition Award nominations - deadline for submission
31 March 2008
Indicators of Progress Survey - National Focal Point 2007 reports
due
April 2008 – 1 August 2008
Forum VI Meeting documents posted on website – English language
versions in April 2008; other language versions posted as soon as
they become available
April 2008
Invitation letters to Forum V distributed
April 2008
Officers review nominations for Award of Merit and Special
Recognition Award, and make recommendations to FSC.
Note: additional FSC teleconference schedule t.b.d.
23
IFCS/FSC/07. 22 rev 1
1 April 2008
Final version of all Forum VI Plenary Item Papers due (incl.
information and thought starter papers for agenda items prepared by
WGs on agenda topics)
15 June 2008
Final version of all Forum V Information Papers (not related to
agenda topics) due
15 June 2008
Deadline for Twinning assistance request
15 July 2008
Twinning recipients selected and notified
15 July 2008
Side events/lunch time presentations/evening workshops - deadline
for requests
31 July 2008
Forum VI Pre-registration deadline
t.b.d.
(probably sometime in July 2008)
Exhibit request deadline
1 August 2008
Forum V Papers posted on internet
(distribution via website only, except on special request)
Sunday preceding Forum VI
(14h00 to 15h00) or (18h00-19h00)
FSC meeting at Forum VI venue
Sunday preceding Forum VI
(15h00 to 18h00)
IFCS Regional Group meetings, in preparation for Forum VI
Mid to late September 2008
(dates to be confirmed if in Senegal;
13-19 September 2008 if in Nairobi
at UN Conference Centre)
Forum VI
3-5 Nov 2008
(t.b.c.)
SAICM/ICCM open-ended legal and technical working group
meeting , Geneva
11-15 May 2009
(t.b.c.)
ICCM2, Geneva
24