Aviation Environmental and Energy Policy Statement, 43137-43141 [2012-15908]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices
environmental review of the proposed
action may be required. Approval does
not constitute a commitment by the
FAA to financially assist in the
implementation of the program nor a
determination that all measures covered
by the program are eligible for grant-inaid funding from the FAA under
applicable law contained in Title 49
U.S.C. Where federal funding is sought,
requests for project grants must be
submitted to the FAA Airports District
Office in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania.
The Philadelphia International
Airport study contains a proposed noise
compatibility program comprised of
actions designed for phased
implementation by airport management
and adjacent jurisdictions from January
20, 2012 to the year 2017. It was
requested that the FAA evaluate and
approve this material as a Noise
Compatibility Program as described in
section 47504 of the Act. The FAA
began its review of the program on
January 24, 2012 and was required by a
provision of the Act to approve or
disapprove the program within 180 days
(other than the use of new or modified
flight procedures for noise control).
Failure to approve or disapprove such
program within the 180-day period shall
be deemed to be an approval of such
program.
The submitted program contained
twenty-two proposed actions for noise
abatement, noise mitigation, land use
planning and program management on
and off the airport. The FAA completed
its review and determined that the
procedural and substantive
requirements of the Act and Part 150
have been satisfied. The overall program
was approved by the FAA, effective July
13, 2012.
Outright approval was granted for five
specific program measures. These
measures were; engine run-up
restrictions; support of local
municipalities in comprehensive
planning strategies to reduce noncompatible land use; establish a noise
abatement advisory committee; continue
to develop the responsibilities of the
Philadelphia International Airport Noise
Office; and update the Noise Exposure
Maps (NEMs) and Noise Compatibility
Program (NCP). Fifteen program
measures were approved subject to
certain conditions. Conditions generally
involved adherence to safety, design,
regulatory standards or other conditions
as determined necessary by FAA or
airport operators. These measures were;
use of Runways 09l/09R/17/35/08 noise
abatement departure flight tracks;
Runway 27L noise abatement departure
flight track; Runway 27R noise
abatement departure flight track;
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:21 Jul 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
continue and expand the nighttime
runway use program; encourage noise
attenuating standards in airport
development; continue the residential
sound insulation program; develop and
implement a purchase assurance
program; develop and implement a Fort
Mifflin sound insulation program;
develop and implement a voluntary
acquisition program; sound insulate
educational facilities and places of
worship; enhance the airport’s existing
noise monitoring and flight tracking
system by acquiring a multilateration
system; install additional permanent
noise monitors, continue to develop an
informal community awareness
program; improve and upgrade webbased noise information; and develop
and implement a Fly Quiet Program.
Two program measures were
disapproved for the purposes of Part
150. These measures were; support the
creation and use of Area Navigation
(RNAV) and Required Navigation
Performance (RNP); and support the
development of Continuous Descent
Approaches (CDA). The two measures
that were disapproved for the purposes
of Part 150 because they do not have a
measureable noise benefit to sensitive
land uses within the Day-Night Level
(DNL) 65 decibel noise contour. The
airport can pursue or implement the
measures outside of the Part 150
program.
These determinations are set forth in
detail in a Record of Approval signed by
the Acting Division Manager for the
Eastern Region Airports Division on July
13, 2012. The Record of Approval, as
well as other evaluation materials and
the documents comprising the
submittal, are available for review at the
FAA office listed above and at the
Philadelphia International Airport
Office of the Noise Abatement Program
Manager, at 2801 Island Avenue, Suite
13, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The
Record of Approval also will be
available on-line at: https://www.faa.gov/
airports_airtraffic/airports/
environmental/airport_noise/part_150/
states/.
Issued in Jamaica, New York on July 16,
2012.
Debbie Roth,
Acting Manager, Eastern Region Airports
Division.
[FR Doc. 2012–17858 Filed 7–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43137
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Aviation Environmental and Energy
Policy Statement
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Policy Statement.
AGENCY:
This is a statement affirming
the FAA’s environmental and energy
policy for U.S. civil aviation. This
policy statement outlines guiding
principles, establishes initial high level
performance goals, and describes
strategies to achieve the goals.
DATES: July 23, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie
Marks, Office of Environment and
Energy (AEE), Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone:
(202) 267–3494.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Policy Statement
Introduction
This policy statement affirms
environmental and energy policy for
U.S. civil aviation. The Next Generation
Air Transportation System, commonly
called NextGen, is the transformation of
the U.S. aviation system by employing
technological, operational, and
infrastructure advances to provide
improved safety, security, mobility,
environmental performance, and quality
of service.1 The overarching
environmental performance goal for
NextGen is environmental protection
that allows sustained 2 aviation growth.3
The primary environmental and
energy issues that significantly
influence the capacity and flexibility of
the national aviation system are aircraft
noise, air quality, climate, energy, and
water quality. These issues are being
addressed under a range of
environmental laws and regulations,
and by governmental and industry
initiatives. Major strides in lessening the
environmental effects of aviation have
been made over the past several
decades. However, aircraft noise
continues to be the public’s primary
objection to near term aviation growth.
Aircraft emissions contribute to air
quality-related health effects, as do
emissions from all combustion
processes, and are causing heightened
1 See Public Law 108–176, title VII, § 709, Dec.
12, 2003, 117 Stat. 2582.
2 Sustainability means developing aviation in a
manner that enhances and promotes the Nation’s
economic, environmental, and social initiatives.
3 See the NextGen Integrated Plan (December
2004) Sections 5.1.6 and 7.6.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
43138
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
concerns locally and globally. The
potential effects of aircraft emissions on
the climate of our planet may pose the
most serious long term environmental
consequences facing aviation. Noise and
emissions will be the principal
environmental constraints on the
capacity and flexibility of the national
aviation system unless they are
effectively managed and mitigated. It is
important to build on current efforts and
develop new strategies as the system is
transformed with NextGen. In addition,
energy supply, its cost, and the
relationship between the burning of
fossil fuels and climate change are
driving increased emphasis on the need
for energy conservation and sustainable
alternative fuels. Finally, the nation’s
water quality requires continued
protection from potential contamination
from airport-related discharges.
These combined environmental and
energy challenges must be successfully
managed and mitigated for NextGen to
realize its full potential and for the U.S.
to meet the aviation transportation
needs of the 21st century.
Environmental and Energy Policy
Framework and Principles
This policy statement outlines
guiding principles, establishes initial
high level performance goals, and
describes strategies to achieve the goals.
The main guiding principles are (1) to
limit and reduce future aviation
environmental impacts to levels that
protect public health and welfare and
(2) to ensure energy availability and
sustainability.
Two supporting principles are:
(1) Appropriate environmental
protection measures combined with
effective and efficient environmental
reviews must be an integral part of
strategies for future growth in air
transportation. The implementation of a
strategic Environmental Management
System (EMS) approach should provide
a foundation for improving the
integration of environmental and energy
assessment and performance into the
planning, decision-making, and
operation of the national aviation
system.4 The NextGen EMS approach,
featuring collaboration across
stakeholders, is a strategic concept that
requires development, maturation and a
robust implementation plan.
(2) Aviation must have reliable and
sustainable sources of energy and must
use that energy efficiently and in a
manner that is consistent with
environmental protection. Continuing
progress in energy efficiency and
4 https://www.jpdo.gov/library/
20101123_JPDOPaper_EMS_Strategy_v3.0.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:21 Jul 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
pioneering advances in sustainable
alternative aviation fuels will be key
components of NextGen.
Based on these guiding principles,
this policy statement is intended to be
a living document. The initial high level
goals presented below will serve as the
guide for setting of specific quantitative
performance targets. We will
periodically review the goals, targets,
and strategies to achieve them and
refine them over time based on better
scientific knowledge, changing
environmental protection and energy
needs, and improved technological and
operational capabilities. They are
additionally subject to review and
revision based on Administration policy
guidance, particularly with respect to
energy, climate, and sustainability. New
goals, targets, and strategies may be
defined based on these same factors.
Key Aviation Environmental and
Energy Goals
Each of the following initial goals is
presented by impact area—noise, air
quality, climate, energy, and water
quality. These goals are established at
levels intended to reduce future aviation
environmental and energy impacts
sufficiently to protect public health and
welfare while allowing sustained air
transportation growth. They are high
level goals at the aviation system-wide
level, and are intended to be common to
all individual organizational EMSs.
Each goal will have quantitative
targets that are actionable and can be
used to measure progress. Initial targets,
some of which have been established,
will be based upon currently available
scientific knowledge of aviation’s
impacts and will take into account near
term operational and technological
improvements.
Noise Goal: Reduce the number of
people exposed to significant noise
around U.S. airports in absolute terms,
notwithstanding aviation growth, and
provide additional measures to protect
public health and welfare and our
national resources.5
The number of people in the U.S.
exposed to significant aircraft noise
since 1975 has dropped by 90 percent,
an impressive reduction primarily due
to reductions in aircraft source noise
and phase outs of Stage 1 and 2 aircraft
over 75,000 pounds. Yet noise remains
a predominant aviation environmental
concern of the public, one of the
principal environmental obstacles to
expanding airport and airspace capacity,
and the one that has used the most
5 See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on
Aviation and Environment at www.faa.gov/library/
reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mitigation resources—including funding
from the Airport Improvement Program
(AIP) and Passenger Facility Charges
(PFC). The persistence of significant
levels of aircraft noise in communities
around airports is the major impact, but
not the only one. There are increasing
concerns in areas of moderate noise
exposure and public complaints from
suburban and rural areas where ambient
noise is lower. At noise exposure levels
below those involving health and
welfare concerns, there are also
sensitivities with respect to national
resources such as national parks. While
techniques and tools for measuring and
modeling noise exposure provide a
reliable means of assessing the levels of
aircraft noise to which people are
exposed, focused research could
improve our scientific knowledge base
of the extent of impacts and appropriate
mitigation below historically-defined
significant noise levels.
Air Quality Goal: Achieve an absolute
reduction of significant air quality
health and welfare impacts attributable
to aviation, notwithstanding aviation
growth.6
Aviation’s impact on air quality,
through emissions of specific pollutants,
is a growing concern.7 Emissions of
criteria pollutants 8 contribute to surface
air quality deterioration, resulting in
human health and welfare impacts.9
The focus for commercial aviation and
airport infrastructure is on reducing
emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX),
Particulate Matter (PM), Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), and Hydrocarbons (HC). Lead
(Pb) is an issue for general aviation
since more than 200,000 piston-engine
aircraft rely on leaded AvGas for safe
operation and produce about half of all
lead emissions in the U.S. At the airport
level, about 30 percent of U.S.
commercial service airports are in nonattainment areas that do not meet
national air quality standards or in
maintenance areas. For these airports,
emissions issues add to the complexity
and uncertainty of expansion proposals.
An increasing number of airports have
invested in low emission vehicular
6 See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on
Aviation and Environment at www.faa.gov/library/
reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf.
7 See 2009 Partnership for AiR Transportation
Noise and Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) Center
of Excellence (COE) Report titled Aircraft Impacts
on Local and Regional Air Quality in the United
States at https://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/partner/
reports/proj15/proj15finalreport.pdf.
8 There are six criteria pollutants identified in the
Clean Air Act: Ozone; Lead; Nitrogen Oxides;
Carbon Monoxide; Sulfur Dioxide; and Particulate
Matter.
9 Includes health impacts such as increased risks
of mortality or morbidity as well as impacts that
influence psychological well-being and happiness.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
fleets and ground support equipment to
reduce emissions. The national air
quality standards are expected to
become more stringent in the future,
placing more pressure on aviation to
reduce emissions despite growth.
Climate Goal: Limit the impact of
aircraft CO2 emissions on the global
climate by achieving carbon neutral
growth 10 by 2020 compared to 2005,
and net reductions of the climate impact
from all aviation emissions over the
longer term (by 2050).11
The potential effects of aircraft
emissions on the global climate may be
the most serious long-term
environmental and energy issues facing
aviation. Aircraft account for about
3 percent of both national and
worldwide carbon dioxide (CO2)
emissions. Aircraft have been projected
to contribute a larger portion of
greenhouse gas emissions in the
future—perhaps 5 percent by 2050—
based on projected aviation growth
assumptions and the prospect of easier
transition to alternative technologies
and fuels for land transport modes.12
There are additional concerns specific
to aircraft as the majority of emissions
from a given flight are directly released
into the chemically complex and
sensitive region of the upper
troposphere and lower stratosphere.
While CO2—accounting for the bulk of
aviation greenhouse gas emissions—has
the same effects regardless of where it
is emitted, certain emissions may have
greater effects when released at altitude.
In addition, aircraft emissions of water
vapor and aerosols lead to the formation
of contrails and modification of cirrus
cloud distribution, both of which can
impact earth’s climate. There is not yet
sufficient scientific knowledge about
aircraft contrails to determine their
impact on climate or to adopt measures
to deal with them. There are multiple,
interrelated impacts due to aircraft
emissions with varying degrees of
understanding, with CO2 being the best
understood and quantified.
Energy Goal: Improve National
Airspace System (NAS) energy
efficiency by at least two percent per
year, and develop and deploy
10 Carbon neutral growth is no higher carbon
dioxide emissions in 2020 than is reported in 2005.
11 Goal unveiled by U.S. at COP/15 and
documented in Canada, Mexico, U.S. Position
presented at ICAO’s 37th Assembly. See Working
Paper titled A More Ambitious, Collective
Approach to International Aviation Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, Section 2.3.
12 See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change Fourth Assessment Report, ‘‘Working Group
1: The Physical Science Basis,’’ 2007.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:21 Jul 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
alternative jet fuels for commercial
aviation.13
Aircraft engine and airframe
advances, together with improved air
traffic management and operating
procedures, have dramatically improved
aircraft fuel efficiency. The aircraft
energy efficiency improvement over the
last 20 years has outpaced other forms
of transportation in the U.S.
Notwithstanding this success, there is
renewed emphasis on improving the
fuel efficiency of the aviation system.
Fuel currently represents the largest
operating cost for U.S. airlines, and this
cost category has grown dramatically in
recent years. The air traffic
modernization planned under NextGen
should further improve efficiency by
reducing delays and enabling more
direct routings. Sustainable practices by
airport operators can conserve energy,
make use of renewable resources (solar,
wind, geothermal), and deploy low
emission vehicles and ground support
equipment.
Moreover, advances in the
development of sustainable alternative
fuels offer great promise for emissions
reduction. Nearly 100 percent of the fuel
used in aviation operations is petroleum
based—raising issues of energy supply,
energy security, and fossil fuel
emissions affecting air quality and
climate. In response to these multiple
concerns, government and the aviation
industry have a strong interest in ‘‘drop
in’’ alternative aviation fuels that can be
blended with or replace petroleum jet
fuel with no changes to existing engines,
aircraft, ground infrastructure, and
supply equipment.
Alternative fuel options that use plant
oils, sugars, or cellulose from plants
have the potential to dramatically
reduce CO2 emissions, if produced in a
sustainable manner. Generally, all
alternative aviation fuel options appear
to reduce particulate matter emissions
in engine exhausts—a cause of
respiratory ailments, although not
unique to aviation as a source.
Water Quality Goal: Limit the adverse
aviation discharges to U.S. waters and
reduce aviation’s contribution to
significant water quality impacts.14
Many U.S. airports are located near
waterways and wetlands because, when
airports were originally built, the best
available land suitable for an airport
13 See ICAO Assembly Resolution A37–19:
Consolidated statement of Continuing ICAO
policies and practices related to environmental
protection—Climate change, Section 23.g).
14 This goal is consistent with Sections 401, 402,
and 404 of the Federal Pollution Control Act of
1972, as amended (now the Clean Water Act) and
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969.
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43139
(flat and inexpensive) was often found
near water. As a result, aviation has the
potential to adversely affect surface
water and groundwater biologically,
chemically, and physically. Runoff
containing sediments, fluids, fuel,
construction materials, and other waste
products can cause adverse water
quality and biotic community impacts
during airport construction. Apart from
construction, an airport’s storm water
discharges, aircraft and pavement
deicing activities, and aircraft fueling
and maintenance procedures can
contribute further to water quality
impacts. As an example, biological and
chemical breakdown of deicing
chemicals in airport runoff can cause
severe dissolved oxygen demands on
receiving waters. Additives in deicing
chemicals may be toxic to aquatic life.
The Nation’s water quality is controlled
by legislation and regulations, permit
programs, spill control prevention
planning, and best management
practices. It is important for aviation to
continue efforts to minimize discharges
that adversely affect water quality.
Aviation Environmental and Energy
Strategies
The environmental and energy
challenges confronting aviation are not
amenable to a single solution; rather,
they will require multiple solutions
involving innovations in technology,
operations, planning, and sustainability.
A five-pillar comprehensive and
integrated approach to achieving
aviation environmental and energy
goals, based on aviation’s traditional
strengths of technological and
operational innovation, is outlined
below with examples provided under
each strategy.
Improved Scientific Knowledge and
Integrated Modeling. Aviation
environmental analyses, impact
determinations, and mitigation
decisions for NextGen activities must
continue to be based on a solid
scientific foundation. This will require
continued investments in research to
improve our scientific understanding of
the impacts of aviation. This is
particularly important with respect to
aviation’s effects on climate. It is also
germane to gaining a more nuanced and
multi-faceted understanding of noise
impacts, given community concerns
with aircraft noise and public pressures
to mitigate noise at levels lower than
current Federal guidelines. In addition,
the development and use of advanced
decision-support tools that account for
interdependencies of impacts and costbenefit analyses of potential solutions
will facilitate more informed decisionmaking. Prospective solutions and
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
43140
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices
combinations of solutions have different
impacts, benefits, and costs. Some
solutions have the ability to optimize for
one area of environmental protection at
the expense of another, and trade-offs
should be as transparent as possible.
Air Traffic Management
Modernization. The development and
integration of advanced operational
procedures and infrastructure
improvements will foster National
Airspace System (NAS) operational
capabilities that will function more
efficiently and contribute to mitigating
environmental impacts and improving
energy efficiency. NextGen will increase
the efficiency of aircraft operations, both
in the air and on the airport surface.
Improving efficiency saves time and
fuel. Reducing fuel consumption
reduces CO2 emissions that affect
climate and other emissions that
adversely affect air quality. Fuel burn,
emissions, and flight times can be cut by
Performance Based Navigation (RNAV/
RNP) routes. Optimized Profile Descents
can reduce noise, emissions, and fuel
consumption. NextGen technology and
procedures that optimize gate-to-gate
operations are being demonstrated with
international partners in Europe and
Asia-Pacific to reduce fuel burn,
emissions, and noise.
New Aircraft Technologies.
Historically, new technologies have
offered the greatest success in reducing
aviation’s impacts. New engine/airframe
technologies will need to play key roles
in achieving aviation environment and
energy goals. The U.S. will support
advances in engine technology and
airframe configurations to lay the
foundation for the next generation of
aircraft. Our technological strategy
envisions a fleet of quieter, cleaner
aircraft that operate more efficiently
with less energy. The FAA and NASA,
along with the Department of Defense,
closely coordinate efforts on aeronautics
technology research through the
President’s National Science and
Technology Council’s multi-agency
National Aeronautics Research and
Development Plan. Each agency focuses
on different elements but they share the
same national goals. The FAA’s focus is
on maturing technologies for near term
application, while NASA focuses on a
broader range of time frames of
technology development. This includes
future concepts such as electric aircraft.
Sustainable Alternative Aviation
Fuels. Sustainable alternative aviation
fuels development and deployment offer
prospects for enabling environmental
improvements, energy security and
economic stability for aviation. The
aviation industry has made a
commitment to convert its fuel supply
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:21 Jul 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
to alternative fuels.15 Government and
industry are working cooperatively with
coordinating mechanisms such as the
Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels
Initiative (CAAFI) and are supporting
alternative fuels research. Near term
efforts include adding new classes of
fuels to the approved alternative jet fuel
standard by ASTM International,
conducting aircraft flight tests using
alternative fuels and ascertaining their
emissions characteristics, lifecycle
greenhouse gases, and sustainability. A
number of challenges remain to
sustainable alternative fuel deployment,
including financing for commercial
production.
Policies, Environmental Standards,
and Market-based Measures.
Development and implementation of
appropriate policies, programs,
regulations, and mechanisms are critical
to support advantageous technology and
operational innovations and accelerate
their integration into the commercial
fleet, the airport environment, and
entire national aviation system. The
NextGen EMS approach will integrate
environmental protection objectives into
NextGen and facilitate National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
reviews. Cooperative partnerships
between government and industry can
focus and leverage funding in ways that
are beneficial for aviation and good for
the environment. There is a need for
continued and enhanced exploration of
the most effective means to address
residual aircraft noise impacts that
cannot be reduced through technologies
to guide capital investments in noise
mitigation such as sound insulation, to
encourage adequate land use planning,
and to support other methods.
Internationally, the U.S. is leading
efforts at the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO) to limit
and reduce international aviation
emissions, including development of a
CO2 standard for aircraft, and a new
particulate matter (PM) certification
requirement for engines. ICAO has
additionally agreed to explore more
ambitious goals for the aviation sector,
including carbon neutral growth in the
mid-term and reductions in the long
term. The U.S. is exploring the
effectiveness of various policies,
including economic incentives to limit
and reduce CO2 emissions. The U.S. is
also supporting studies to investigate
the need, cost and trade-offs, and the
technological feasibility of more
stringent noise standards. Additionally,
if we are to achieve environmental and
15 See 2011 The Future of Aviation Advisory
Committee (FAAC) Final Report; https://
www.dot.gov/faac/environment.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
energy goals beyond the near term,
policies may be needed to accelerate the
integration of new technologies into the
civil fleet compared to the normal rate
of introduction and replacement.
Roles, Responsibilities, and
Harmonization
Developing the future air
transportation system is a shared
responsibility among U.S. government
agencies and the aviation industry that
involves effective planning, research
and development, resource deployment,
performance, and collaboration. The
Federal government is responsible for
national policy and regulations
including aircraft noise and emissions,
aviation safety, airspace management
and air traffic control, research and
development, and managing Federal
investments in the NAS. Airport
proprietors are responsible for managing
their airports, including planning and
implementing actions to mitigate the
adverse effects of airport operations and
development on community noise, air
quality, and water quality consistent
with Federal regulations. Manufacturers
of airframes and engines engage in
research and development and produce
the new technologies that are so critical
to reducing the environmental footprint
of aviation. Air carriers, air freight
operators, and other aircraft operators
make product purchase decisions that
affect fleetwide environmental
performance and fly and service aircraft
in ways that affect fuel use and
environmental impacts. The use of
EMSs by aviation stakeholders
contributing to NextGen will play an
important role in achieving the
environmentally sustainable growth of
air transportation.
It is also important to recognize that
civil aviation is an inherently global
endeavor. We are committed to a
sustainable national aviation system
that is seamlessly integrated with the
larger international system. This will
require harmonization with
international standards, recommended
practices, and guidance through ICAO.
This aviation environmental and energy
policy statement is intended to be
implemented constructively within the
larger international system.
Conclusion
Aviation has features that distinguish
it from other transportation modes and
industries that must be factored into the
application of environmental and
energy strategies. A high premium on
safety demands the incorporation of
only proven and technically sound
technologies to reduce environmental
impacts. Aircraft are high cost and have
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices
a long life span, requiring long lead
times for new technologies to be widely
incorporated in the fleet and close
attention to financial feasibility.
Airborne systems must be lightweight
and fuel-efficient. Airlines and other
aircraft operators will need to invest the
capital to purchase aircraft with new
technologies for aviation to realize the
environmental and operational benefits.
Airport infrastructure requires
substantial planning and construction
effort, as well as public and financial
support. Noise, air quality, and climate
effects of aviation result from an
interdependent set of technologies and
operations, so that action to reduce
impacts in one area (e.g., aircraft engine
noise) can increase impacts in another
area (e.g., nitrogen oxides emissions).
Efforts to protect water quality by
reducing deicing fluid discharge could
affect safety and efficiency of
operations. Such considerations
increase the challenge of achieving
ambitious environmental and energy
goals. Nevertheless, aviation’s
impressive record of creativity and
innovation can rise to these challenges.
This policy statement is intended to
outline strategies and approaches
necessary to meet the environmental
and energy challenges that confront the
U.S. civil aviation system. There is a
shared commitment to moving the
aviation sector to environmental
performance that will reduce aviation’s
noise, air quality, climate, energy, and
water quality impacts notwithstanding
the anticipated growth in aviation.
Through broad inclusion and sustained
commitment among all stakeholders, the
U.S. will be a global leader in
researching, developing, and
implementing technological, operational
and policy initiatives that address
mobility and environmental needs.
Lourdes Q. Maurice,
Executive Director, Office of Environment and
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2012–15908 Filed 7–20–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Aviation Administration
Air Carrier Hazardous Materials
Passenger Notification Requirements:
Acceptable Means of Compliance
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting and
related information.
AGENCY:
This notice is to advise
interested persons that the Federal
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:21 Jul 20, 2012
Jkt 226001
Aviation Administration (FAA), in
coordination with the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), will conduct
a public meeting to discuss Air Carrier
Hazardous Materials Passenger
Notification Requirements and
Acceptable Means of Compliance with
49 CFR 175.25. The public meeting, to
be held on August 16th, 2012 in
Washington, DC, is intended to provide
interested persons with an opportunity
to submit comments and participate in
discussions concerning the acceptability
of various means of compliance with
federal hazardous materials regulations.
DATES: August 16th, 2012; from 1 p.m.
to 4 p.m.
Meeting Location
Airlines for America, 1301
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 11th Floor,
Washington, DC 20004.
Any person wishing to attend the
public meeting (in person or via
telephone) should send an email to
9-AWA-ASH-ADG-HAZMAT@faa.gov
with the subject line ‘‘Attendee
Information for Passenger Notification
Meeting’’ no later than the close of
business on August 9th, 2012. Please
include the names and contact
information (Organization/Email/
Address/Telephone Number) for any
individuals planning to attend, and
indicate whether attendance will be in
person or via telephone. Providing this
information will allow us to send you
meeting documents prior to the meeting,
assist us in recordkeeping for the
meeting, facilitate the security screening
process for entry into the building on
the day of the meeting, and ensure
adequate seating space and telephone
conference lines for all attendees.
We are committed to providing equal
access to this meeting for all
participants. If you need alternative
formats or other reasonable
accommodations, please call (202) 385–
4916 or email: 9-AWA-ASH-ADGHazMat@faa.gov with your request by
the close of business on August 9, 2012.
Attendees will be required to check in
with the security desk in the building
lobby, 1st floor. When they get to the
11th floor, a receptionist will guide
them to the meeting room.
Conference Call Information:
Telephone conference capability will be
provided to allow participation from
interested individuals who are unable to
attend the meeting in person. To join
the telephone conference, call (605)
475–3200 and enter passcode 981243#.
Prior to the meeting, copies of
documents for the Air Carrier
Hazardous Materials Passenger
Notification Requirements Public
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43141
Meeting and the meeting agenda will be
distributed by email to all individuals
who register as participants at the
meeting.
Comment Submission: Stakeholders
are encouraged to submit comments
prior to the August 16th, 2012 public
meeting by emailing to 9-AWA-ASHADG-HAZMAT@faa.gov. Please mark
submissions with the subject line
‘‘Comments for Passenger Notification
Public Meeting.’’ After the meeting, all
comments received will be posted
without change to the following Web
site, including any personal
information: https://www.faa.gov/about/
office_org/headquarters_offices/ash/
ash_programs/hazmat/aircarrier_info/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kenneth Miller, Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Hazard
Materials Safety (ADG–1), 800
Independence Ave. SW., Washington,
DC 20591. Email:
kenneth.miller@faa.gov. Phone:
202–385–4916
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
49 CFR 175.25 defines requirements
for notification at air passenger facilities
of hazardous materials restrictions. One
primary purpose for this rule is to
enhance public safety awareness
regarding the carriage of hazardous
materials onboard aircraft, either as
carry-on items or in checked baggage.
Improved public safety awareness in
this area increases passenger
compliance with applicable 49 CFR
requirements, thus enhancing overall
aviation safety by reducing the
likelihood of inappropriate items being
transported onboard aircraft.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration (PHMSA)
amended 49 CFR 175.25 on January 19,
2011 (76 FR 3382). The amendments
included requirements for passenger
notification during ticket purchase and
check-in. The amended rule has an
effective date of January 1, 2013. While
PHMSA has the primary responsibility
for issuing 49 CFR regulations, the FAA
has primary responsibility for
overseeing compliance with these
regulations as they pertain to air
transportation. PHMSA and the FAA
have received numerous inquiries
regarding specific interpretations of the
amended requirements and the
acceptability of certain means of
compliance with the revised rules.
II. Purpose of Public Meeting
The FAA seeks to collaborate with the
air passenger transportation community
in defining and implementing a
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43137-43141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15908]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Aviation Environmental and Energy Policy Statement
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Policy Statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This is a statement affirming the FAA's environmental and
energy policy for U.S. civil aviation. This policy statement outlines
guiding principles, establishes initial high level performance goals,
and describes strategies to achieve the goals.
DATES: July 23, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Marks, Office of Environment and
Energy (AEE), Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave.
SW., Washington, DC 20591; Telephone: (202) 267-3494.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Policy Statement
Introduction
This policy statement affirms environmental and energy policy for
U.S. civil aviation. The Next Generation Air Transportation System,
commonly called NextGen, is the transformation of the U.S. aviation
system by employing technological, operational, and infrastructure
advances to provide improved safety, security, mobility, environmental
performance, and quality of service.\1\ The overarching environmental
performance goal for NextGen is environmental protection that allows
sustained \2\ aviation growth.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Public Law 108-176, title VII, Sec. 709, Dec. 12, 2003,
117 Stat. 2582.
\2\ Sustainability means developing aviation in a manner that
enhances and promotes the Nation's economic, environmental, and
social initiatives.
\3\ See the NextGen Integrated Plan (December 2004) Sections
5.1.6 and 7.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary environmental and energy issues that significantly
influence the capacity and flexibility of the national aviation system
are aircraft noise, air quality, climate, energy, and water quality.
These issues are being addressed under a range of environmental laws
and regulations, and by governmental and industry initiatives. Major
strides in lessening the environmental effects of aviation have been
made over the past several decades. However, aircraft noise continues
to be the public's primary objection to near term aviation growth.
Aircraft emissions contribute to air quality-related health effects, as
do emissions from all combustion processes, and are causing heightened
[[Page 43138]]
concerns locally and globally. The potential effects of aircraft
emissions on the climate of our planet may pose the most serious long
term environmental consequences facing aviation. Noise and emissions
will be the principal environmental constraints on the capacity and
flexibility of the national aviation system unless they are effectively
managed and mitigated. It is important to build on current efforts and
develop new strategies as the system is transformed with NextGen. In
addition, energy supply, its cost, and the relationship between the
burning of fossil fuels and climate change are driving increased
emphasis on the need for energy conservation and sustainable
alternative fuels. Finally, the nation's water quality requires
continued protection from potential contamination from airport-related
discharges.
These combined environmental and energy challenges must be
successfully managed and mitigated for NextGen to realize its full
potential and for the U.S. to meet the aviation transportation needs of
the 21st century.
Environmental and Energy Policy Framework and Principles
This policy statement outlines guiding principles, establishes
initial high level performance goals, and describes strategies to
achieve the goals. The main guiding principles are (1) to limit and
reduce future aviation environmental impacts to levels that protect
public health and welfare and (2) to ensure energy availability and
sustainability.
Two supporting principles are:
(1) Appropriate environmental protection measures combined with
effective and efficient environmental reviews must be an integral part
of strategies for future growth in air transportation. The
implementation of a strategic Environmental Management System (EMS)
approach should provide a foundation for improving the integration of
environmental and energy assessment and performance into the planning,
decision-making, and operation of the national aviation system.\4\ The
NextGen EMS approach, featuring collaboration across stakeholders, is a
strategic concept that requires development, maturation and a robust
implementation plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.jpdo.gov/library/20101123_JPDOPaper_EMS_Strategy_v3.0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Aviation must have reliable and sustainable sources of energy
and must use that energy efficiently and in a manner that is consistent
with environmental protection. Continuing progress in energy efficiency
and pioneering advances in sustainable alternative aviation fuels will
be key components of NextGen.
Based on these guiding principles, this policy statement is
intended to be a living document. The initial high level goals
presented below will serve as the guide for setting of specific
quantitative performance targets. We will periodically review the
goals, targets, and strategies to achieve them and refine them over
time based on better scientific knowledge, changing environmental
protection and energy needs, and improved technological and operational
capabilities. They are additionally subject to review and revision
based on Administration policy guidance, particularly with respect to
energy, climate, and sustainability. New goals, targets, and strategies
may be defined based on these same factors.
Key Aviation Environmental and Energy Goals
Each of the following initial goals is presented by impact area--
noise, air quality, climate, energy, and water quality. These goals are
established at levels intended to reduce future aviation environmental
and energy impacts sufficiently to protect public health and welfare
while allowing sustained air transportation growth. They are high level
goals at the aviation system-wide level, and are intended to be common
to all individual organizational EMSs.
Each goal will have quantitative targets that are actionable and
can be used to measure progress. Initial targets, some of which have
been established, will be based upon currently available scientific
knowledge of aviation's impacts and will take into account near term
operational and technological improvements.
Noise Goal: Reduce the number of people exposed to significant
noise around U.S. airports in absolute terms, notwithstanding aviation
growth, and provide additional measures to protect public health and
welfare and our national resources.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on Aviation and
Environment at www.faa.gov/library/reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of people in the U.S. exposed to significant aircraft
noise since 1975 has dropped by 90 percent, an impressive reduction
primarily due to reductions in aircraft source noise and phase outs of
Stage 1 and 2 aircraft over 75,000 pounds. Yet noise remains a
predominant aviation environmental concern of the public, one of the
principal environmental obstacles to expanding airport and airspace
capacity, and the one that has used the most mitigation resources--
including funding from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) and
Passenger Facility Charges (PFC). The persistence of significant levels
of aircraft noise in communities around airports is the major impact,
but not the only one. There are increasing concerns in areas of
moderate noise exposure and public complaints from suburban and rural
areas where ambient noise is lower. At noise exposure levels below
those involving health and welfare concerns, there are also
sensitivities with respect to national resources such as national
parks. While techniques and tools for measuring and modeling noise
exposure provide a reliable means of assessing the levels of aircraft
noise to which people are exposed, focused research could improve our
scientific knowledge base of the extent of impacts and appropriate
mitigation below historically-defined significant noise levels.
Air Quality Goal: Achieve an absolute reduction of significant air
quality health and welfare impacts attributable to aviation,
notwithstanding aviation growth.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on Aviation and
Environment at www.faa.gov/library/reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aviation's impact on air quality, through emissions of specific
pollutants, is a growing concern.\7\ Emissions of criteria pollutants
\8\ contribute to surface air quality deterioration, resulting in human
health and welfare impacts.\9\ The focus for commercial aviation and
airport infrastructure is on reducing emissions of Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX), Particulate Matter (PM), Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), and Hydrocarbons (HC). Lead (Pb) is an issue for
general aviation since more than 200,000 piston-engine aircraft rely on
leaded AvGas for safe operation and produce about half of all lead
emissions in the U.S. At the airport level, about 30 percent of U.S.
commercial service airports are in non-attainment areas that do not
meet national air quality standards or in maintenance areas. For these
airports, emissions issues add to the complexity and uncertainty of
expansion proposals. An increasing number of airports have invested in
low emission vehicular
[[Page 43139]]
fleets and ground support equipment to reduce emissions. The national
air quality standards are expected to become more stringent in the
future, placing more pressure on aviation to reduce emissions despite
growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 2009 Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and
Emissions Reduction (PARTNER) Center of Excellence (COE) Report
titled Aircraft Impacts on Local and Regional Air Quality in the
United States at https://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/partner/reports/proj15/proj15finalreport.pdf.
\8\ There are six criteria pollutants identified in the Clean
Air Act: Ozone; Lead; Nitrogen Oxides; Carbon Monoxide; Sulfur
Dioxide; and Particulate Matter.
\9\ Includes health impacts such as increased risks of mortality
or morbidity as well as impacts that influence psychological well-
being and happiness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Climate Goal: Limit the impact of aircraft CO2 emissions
on the global climate by achieving carbon neutral growth \10\ by 2020
compared to 2005, and net reductions of the climate impact from all
aviation emissions over the longer term (by 2050).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Carbon neutral growth is no higher carbon dioxide emissions
in 2020 than is reported in 2005.
\11\ Goal unveiled by U.S. at COP/15 and documented in Canada,
Mexico, U.S. Position presented at ICAO's 37th Assembly. See Working
Paper titled A More Ambitious, Collective Approach to International
Aviation Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Section 2.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The potential effects of aircraft emissions on the global climate
may be the most serious long-term environmental and energy issues
facing aviation. Aircraft account for about 3 percent of both national
and worldwide carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Aircraft have
been projected to contribute a larger portion of greenhouse gas
emissions in the future--perhaps 5 percent by 2050--based on projected
aviation growth assumptions and the prospect of easier transition to
alternative technologies and fuels for land transport modes.\12\ There
are additional concerns specific to aircraft as the majority of
emissions from a given flight are directly released into the chemically
complex and sensitive region of the upper troposphere and lower
stratosphere. While CO2--accounting for the bulk of aviation
greenhouse gas emissions--has the same effects regardless of where it
is emitted, certain emissions may have greater effects when released at
altitude. In addition, aircraft emissions of water vapor and aerosols
lead to the formation of contrails and modification of cirrus cloud
distribution, both of which can impact earth's climate. There is not
yet sufficient scientific knowledge about aircraft contrails to
determine their impact on climate or to adopt measures to deal with
them. There are multiple, interrelated impacts due to aircraft
emissions with varying degrees of understanding, with CO2
being the best understood and quantified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth
Assessment Report, ``Working Group 1: The Physical Science Basis,''
2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Goal: Improve National Airspace System (NAS) energy
efficiency by at least two percent per year, and develop and deploy
alternative jet fuels for commercial aviation.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See ICAO Assembly Resolution A37-19: Consolidated statement
of Continuing ICAO policies and practices related to environmental
protection--Climate change, Section 23.g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft engine and airframe advances, together with improved air
traffic management and operating procedures, have dramatically improved
aircraft fuel efficiency. The aircraft energy efficiency improvement
over the last 20 years has outpaced other forms of transportation in
the U.S. Notwithstanding this success, there is renewed emphasis on
improving the fuel efficiency of the aviation system. Fuel currently
represents the largest operating cost for U.S. airlines, and this cost
category has grown dramatically in recent years. The air traffic
modernization planned under NextGen should further improve efficiency
by reducing delays and enabling more direct routings. Sustainable
practices by airport operators can conserve energy, make use of
renewable resources (solar, wind, geothermal), and deploy low emission
vehicles and ground support equipment.
Moreover, advances in the development of sustainable alternative
fuels offer great promise for emissions reduction. Nearly 100 percent
of the fuel used in aviation operations is petroleum based--raising
issues of energy supply, energy security, and fossil fuel emissions
affecting air quality and climate. In response to these multiple
concerns, government and the aviation industry have a strong interest
in ``drop in'' alternative aviation fuels that can be blended with or
replace petroleum jet fuel with no changes to existing engines,
aircraft, ground infrastructure, and supply equipment.
Alternative fuel options that use plant oils, sugars, or cellulose
from plants have the potential to dramatically reduce CO2
emissions, if produced in a sustainable manner. Generally, all
alternative aviation fuel options appear to reduce particulate matter
emissions in engine exhausts--a cause of respiratory ailments, although
not unique to aviation as a source.
Water Quality Goal: Limit the adverse aviation discharges to U.S.
waters and reduce aviation's contribution to significant water quality
impacts.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ This goal is consistent with Sections 401, 402, and 404 of
the Federal Pollution Control Act of 1972, as amended (now the Clean
Water Act) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many U.S. airports are located near waterways and wetlands because,
when airports were originally built, the best available land suitable
for an airport (flat and inexpensive) was often found near water. As a
result, aviation has the potential to adversely affect surface water
and groundwater biologically, chemically, and physically. Runoff
containing sediments, fluids, fuel, construction materials, and other
waste products can cause adverse water quality and biotic community
impacts during airport construction. Apart from construction, an
airport's storm water discharges, aircraft and pavement deicing
activities, and aircraft fueling and maintenance procedures can
contribute further to water quality impacts. As an example, biological
and chemical breakdown of deicing chemicals in airport runoff can cause
severe dissolved oxygen demands on receiving waters. Additives in
deicing chemicals may be toxic to aquatic life. The Nation's water
quality is controlled by legislation and regulations, permit programs,
spill control prevention planning, and best management practices. It is
important for aviation to continue efforts to minimize discharges that
adversely affect water quality.
Aviation Environmental and Energy Strategies
The environmental and energy challenges confronting aviation are
not amenable to a single solution; rather, they will require multiple
solutions involving innovations in technology, operations, planning,
and sustainability. A five-pillar comprehensive and integrated approach
to achieving aviation environmental and energy goals, based on
aviation's traditional strengths of technological and operational
innovation, is outlined below with examples provided under each
strategy.
Improved Scientific Knowledge and Integrated Modeling. Aviation
environmental analyses, impact determinations, and mitigation decisions
for NextGen activities must continue to be based on a solid scientific
foundation. This will require continued investments in research to
improve our scientific understanding of the impacts of aviation. This
is particularly important with respect to aviation's effects on
climate. It is also germane to gaining a more nuanced and multi-faceted
understanding of noise impacts, given community concerns with aircraft
noise and public pressures to mitigate noise at levels lower than
current Federal guidelines. In addition, the development and use of
advanced decision-support tools that account for interdependencies of
impacts and cost-benefit analyses of potential solutions will
facilitate more informed decision-making. Prospective solutions and
[[Page 43140]]
combinations of solutions have different impacts, benefits, and costs.
Some solutions have the ability to optimize for one area of
environmental protection at the expense of another, and trade-offs
should be as transparent as possible.
Air Traffic Management Modernization. The development and
integration of advanced operational procedures and infrastructure
improvements will foster National Airspace System (NAS) operational
capabilities that will function more efficiently and contribute to
mitigating environmental impacts and improving energy efficiency.
NextGen will increase the efficiency of aircraft operations, both in
the air and on the airport surface. Improving efficiency saves time and
fuel. Reducing fuel consumption reduces CO2 emissions that
affect climate and other emissions that adversely affect air quality.
Fuel burn, emissions, and flight times can be cut by Performance Based
Navigation (RNAV/RNP) routes. Optimized Profile Descents can reduce
noise, emissions, and fuel consumption. NextGen technology and
procedures that optimize gate-to-gate operations are being demonstrated
with international partners in Europe and Asia-Pacific to reduce fuel
burn, emissions, and noise.
New Aircraft Technologies. Historically, new technologies have
offered the greatest success in reducing aviation's impacts. New
engine/airframe technologies will need to play key roles in achieving
aviation environment and energy goals. The U.S. will support advances
in engine technology and airframe configurations to lay the foundation
for the next generation of aircraft. Our technological strategy
envisions a fleet of quieter, cleaner aircraft that operate more
efficiently with less energy. The FAA and NASA, along with the
Department of Defense, closely coordinate efforts on aeronautics
technology research through the President's National Science and
Technology Council's multi-agency National Aeronautics Research and
Development Plan. Each agency focuses on different elements but they
share the same national goals. The FAA's focus is on maturing
technologies for near term application, while NASA focuses on a broader
range of time frames of technology development. This includes future
concepts such as electric aircraft.
Sustainable Alternative Aviation Fuels. Sustainable alternative
aviation fuels development and deployment offer prospects for enabling
environmental improvements, energy security and economic stability for
aviation. The aviation industry has made a commitment to convert its
fuel supply to alternative fuels.\15\ Government and industry are
working cooperatively with coordinating mechanisms such as the
Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) and are
supporting alternative fuels research. Near term efforts include adding
new classes of fuels to the approved alternative jet fuel standard by
ASTM International, conducting aircraft flight tests using alternative
fuels and ascertaining their emissions characteristics, lifecycle
greenhouse gases, and sustainability. A number of challenges remain to
sustainable alternative fuel deployment, including financing for
commercial production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See 2011 The Future of Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC)
Final Report; https://www.dot.gov/faac/environment.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policies, Environmental Standards, and Market-based Measures.
Development and implementation of appropriate policies, programs,
regulations, and mechanisms are critical to support advantageous
technology and operational innovations and accelerate their integration
into the commercial fleet, the airport environment, and entire national
aviation system. The NextGen EMS approach will integrate environmental
protection objectives into NextGen and facilitate National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews. Cooperative partnerships
between government and industry can focus and leverage funding in ways
that are beneficial for aviation and good for the environment. There is
a need for continued and enhanced exploration of the most effective
means to address residual aircraft noise impacts that cannot be reduced
through technologies to guide capital investments in noise mitigation
such as sound insulation, to encourage adequate land use planning, and
to support other methods. Internationally, the U.S. is leading efforts
at the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) to limit and
reduce international aviation emissions, including development of a
CO2 standard for aircraft, and a new particulate matter (PM)
certification requirement for engines. ICAO has additionally agreed to
explore more ambitious goals for the aviation sector, including carbon
neutral growth in the mid-term and reductions in the long term. The
U.S. is exploring the effectiveness of various policies, including
economic incentives to limit and reduce CO2 emissions. The
U.S. is also supporting studies to investigate the need, cost and
trade-offs, and the technological feasibility of more stringent noise
standards. Additionally, if we are to achieve environmental and energy
goals beyond the near term, policies may be needed to accelerate the
integration of new technologies into the civil fleet compared to the
normal rate of introduction and replacement.
Roles, Responsibilities, and Harmonization
Developing the future air transportation system is a shared
responsibility among U.S. government agencies and the aviation industry
that involves effective planning, research and development, resource
deployment, performance, and collaboration. The Federal government is
responsible for national policy and regulations including aircraft
noise and emissions, aviation safety, airspace management and air
traffic control, research and development, and managing Federal
investments in the NAS. Airport proprietors are responsible for
managing their airports, including planning and implementing actions to
mitigate the adverse effects of airport operations and development on
community noise, air quality, and water quality consistent with Federal
regulations. Manufacturers of airframes and engines engage in research
and development and produce the new technologies that are so critical
to reducing the environmental footprint of aviation. Air carriers, air
freight operators, and other aircraft operators make product purchase
decisions that affect fleetwide environmental performance and fly and
service aircraft in ways that affect fuel use and environmental
impacts. The use of EMSs by aviation stakeholders contributing to
NextGen will play an important role in achieving the environmentally
sustainable growth of air transportation.
It is also important to recognize that civil aviation is an
inherently global endeavor. We are committed to a sustainable national
aviation system that is seamlessly integrated with the larger
international system. This will require harmonization with
international standards, recommended practices, and guidance through
ICAO. This aviation environmental and energy policy statement is
intended to be implemented constructively within the larger
international system.
Conclusion
Aviation has features that distinguish it from other transportation
modes and industries that must be factored into the application of
environmental and energy strategies. A high premium on safety demands
the incorporation of only proven and technically sound technologies to
reduce environmental impacts. Aircraft are high cost and have
[[Page 43141]]
a long life span, requiring long lead times for new technologies to be
widely incorporated in the fleet and close attention to financial
feasibility. Airborne systems must be lightweight and fuel-efficient.
Airlines and other aircraft operators will need to invest the capital
to purchase aircraft with new technologies for aviation to realize the
environmental and operational benefits. Airport infrastructure requires
substantial planning and construction effort, as well as public and
financial support. Noise, air quality, and climate effects of aviation
result from an interdependent set of technologies and operations, so
that action to reduce impacts in one area (e.g., aircraft engine noise)
can increase impacts in another area (e.g., nitrogen oxides emissions).
Efforts to protect water quality by reducing deicing fluid discharge
could affect safety and efficiency of operations. Such considerations
increase the challenge of achieving ambitious environmental and energy
goals. Nevertheless, aviation's impressive record of creativity and
innovation can rise to these challenges.
This policy statement is intended to outline strategies and
approaches necessary to meet the environmental and energy challenges
that confront the U.S. civil aviation system. There is a shared
commitment to moving the aviation sector to environmental performance
that will reduce aviation's noise, air quality, climate, energy, and
water quality impacts notwithstanding the anticipated growth in
aviation. Through broad inclusion and sustained commitment among all
stakeholders, the U.S. will be a global leader in researching,
developing, and implementing technological, operational and policy
initiatives that address mobility and environmental needs.
Lourdes Q. Maurice,
Executive Director, Office of Environment and Energy.
[FR Doc. 2012-15908 Filed 7-20-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P