Currently released so far... 12478 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01 2010/12/02 2010/12/03 2010/12/04 2010/12/05 2010/12/06 2010/12/07 2010/12/08 2010/12/09 2010/12/10 2010/12/11 2010/12/12 2010/12/13 2010/12/14 2010/12/15 2010/12/16 2010/12/17 2010/12/18 2010/12/19 2010/12/20 2010/12/21 2010/12/22 2010/12/23 2010/12/24 2010/12/25 2010/12/26 2010/12/27 2010/12/28 2010/12/29 2010/12/30
2011/01/01 2011/01/02 2011/01/04 2011/01/05 2011/01/07 2011/01/09 2011/01/10 2011/01/11 2011/01/12 2011/01/13 2011/01/14 2011/01/15 2011/01/16 2011/01/17 2011/01/18 2011/01/19 2011/01/20 2011/01/21 2011/01/22 2011/01/23 2011/01/24 2011/01/25 2011/01/26 2011/01/27 2011/01/28 2011/01/29 2011/01/30 2011/01/31
2011/02/01 2011/02/02 2011/02/03 2011/02/04 2011/02/05 2011/02/06 2011/02/07 2011/02/08 2011/02/09 2011/02/10 2011/02/11 2011/02/12 2011/02/13 2011/02/14 2011/02/15 2011/02/16 2011/02/17 2011/02/18 2011/02/19 2011/02/20 2011/02/21 2011/02/22 2011/02/23 2011/02/24 2011/02/25 2011/02/26 2011/02/27 2011/02/28
2011/03/01 2011/03/02 2011/03/03 2011/03/04 2011/03/05 2011/03/06 2011/03/07 2011/03/08 2011/03/09 2011/03/10 2011/03/11 2011/03/13 2011/03/14 2011/03/15 2011/03/16 2011/03/17 2011/03/18 2011/03/19 2011/03/20 2011/03/21 2011/03/22 2011/03/23 2011/03/24 2011/03/25 2011/03/26 2011/03/27 2011/03/28 2011/03/29 2011/03/30 2011/03/31
2011/04/01 2011/04/02 2011/04/03 2011/04/04 2011/04/05 2011/04/06 2011/04/07 2011/04/08 2011/04/09 2011/04/10 2011/04/11 2011/04/12 2011/04/13 2011/04/14 2011/04/15 2011/04/16 2011/04/17 2011/04/18 2011/04/19 2011/04/20 2011/04/21 2011/04/22 2011/04/23 2011/04/24 2011/04/25 2011/04/26 2011/04/27 2011/04/28 2011/04/29 2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens Embassy Asuncion Embassy Astana Embassy Asmara Embassy Ashgabat Embassy Apia Embassy Ankara Embassy Amman Embassy Algiers Embassy Addis Ababa Embassy Accra Embassy Abuja Embassy Abu Dhabi Embassy Abidjan Consulate Auckland Consulate Amsterdam Consulate Adana American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura Embassy Buenos Aires Embassy Budapest Embassy Bucharest Embassy Brussels Embassy Bridgetown Embassy Bratislava Embassy Brasilia Embassy Bogota Embassy Bishkek Embassy Bern Embassy Berlin Embassy Belmopan Embassy Belgrade Embassy Beirut Embassy Beijing Embassy Banjul Embassy Bangkok Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan Embassy Bamako Embassy Baku Embassy Baghdad Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen Embassy Conakry Embassy Colombo Embassy Chisinau Embassy Caracas Embassy Canberra Embassy Cairo Consulate Curacao Consulate Ciudad Juarez Consulate Chennai Consulate Casablanca Consulate Cape Town Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe Embassy Dublin Embassy Doha Embassy Djibouti Embassy Dili Embassy Dhaka Embassy Dar Es Salaam Embassy Damascus Embassy Dakar Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki Embassy Harare Embassy Hanoi Consulate Ho Chi Minh City Consulate Hermosillo Consulate Hamilton Consulate Hamburg Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv Embassy Kuwait Embassy Kuala Lumpur Embassy Kinshasa Embassy Kingston Embassy Kigali Embassy Khartoum Embassy Kathmandu Embassy Kampala Embassy Kabul Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg Embassy Luanda Embassy London Embassy Ljubljana Embassy Lisbon Embassy Lima Embassy Lilongwe Embassy La Paz Consulate Lahore Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE Mission USNATO Mission UNESCO Embassy Muscat Embassy Moscow Embassy Montevideo Embassy Monrovia Embassy Minsk Embassy Mexico Embassy Mbabane Embassy Maputo Embassy Manila Embassy Manama Embassy Managua Embassy Malabo Embassy Madrid Consulate Munich Consulate Mumbai Consulate Montreal Consulate Monterrey Consulate Milan Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia Embassy Niamey Embassy New Delhi Embassy Ndjamena Embassy Nassau Embassy Nairobi Consulate Naples Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina Embassy Pretoria Embassy Prague Embassy Port Of Spain Embassy Port Louis Embassy Port Au Prince Embassy Phnom Penh Embassy Paris Embassy Paramaribo Embassy Panama Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah Embassy Rome Embassy Riyadh Embassy Riga Embassy Reykjavik Embassy Rangoon Embassy Rabat Consulate Rio De Janeiro Consulate Recife
Secretary of State Embassy Suva Embassy Stockholm Embassy Sofia Embassy Skopje Embassy Singapore Embassy Seoul Embassy Sarajevo Embassy Santo Domingo Embassy Santiago Embassy Sanaa Embassy San Salvador Embassy San Jose Consulate Strasbourg Consulate St Petersburg Consulate Shenyang Consulate Shanghai Consulate Sapporo Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis Embassy Tripoli Embassy Tokyo Embassy The Hague Embassy Tel Aviv Embassy Tehran Embassy Tegucigalpa Embassy Tbilisi Embassy Tashkent Embassy Tallinn Consulate Toronto Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York USEU Brussels US Office Almaty US Mission Geneva US Interests Section Havana US Delegation, Secretary UNVIE Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius Embassy Vienna Embassy Vatican Embassy Valletta Consulate Vladivostok Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AU ASEC AE AF AORC AEMR AMGT ABUD AFFAIRS APER AS AMED AY AG AR AJ AL AID AM AODE ABLD AMG AFIN ATRN AGAO AFU AN AA ALOW APECO ADM ARF ASEAN APEC AMBASSADOR AO ASUP AZ AADP ACOA ANET AMCHAMS ACABQ ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG APCS AGMT AINF AIT AORL ACS AFSI AFSN ACBAQ AFGHANISTAN ADANA ADPM AX ADCO AECL AMEX ACAO ASCH AORG AGR AROC ASIG AND ARM AQ ATFN AC AUC ASEX AER AVERY AGRICULTURE
BL BR BO BA BD BM BK BG BU BB BH BTIO BY BEXP BP BE BRUSSELS BF BIDEN BT BX BC BILAT BN BBSR BTIU BWC BMGT
CA CASC CVIS CM CH CO CU CD CWC CI CS CY CMGT CF CG CR CB CV CW CE CBW CT CPAS COUNTERTERRORISM CJAN CODEL CIDA CDG CDC CIA CTR CNARC CSW CN CONS CLINTON COE CROS CARICOM CONDOLEEZZA COUNTER CL COM CICTE CIS CFED COUNTRY CJUS CBSA CEUDA CLMT CAC COPUOS CIC CBE CHR CTM CVR CITEL CLEARANCE CACS CAN CITT CARSON CACM CDB CAPC CKGR CBC
EC EG EPET ECON ETRD EFIN EIND EMIN ENRG EAID EAGR EUN ETTC EAIR ENIV ES EU EINV ELAB ECIN EFIS ELTN EWWT ECPS ECONOMIC ENGR EN EINT EPA ELN ESA EZ ER ET EFTA EINVECONSENVCSJA EUMEM ETRA EXTERNAL EI EUR EK ERNG ENGY ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS ENERG EINVEFIN ENVR ECA ELECTIONS ETC EUREM ENNP EFINECONCS EURN ECINECONCS EEPET EXIM ERD ENVI ETRC ETRDEINVTINTCS ETRO EDU ETRN EAIG ECONCS ECONOMICS EAP ECONOMY EINN EIAR EXBS ECUN EINDETRD EREL EUC ESENV ECONEFIN ECIP EFIM EAIDS ETRDECONWTOCS EUNCH EINVETC
IZ IT IR IS IN IC IAEA IO ICAO IWC ID IV ISRAEL IAHRC IQ ICTR IMF IRS IDP IGAD ICRC ICTY IMO IL INRA INRO ICJ ITU IBRD INMARSAT IIP ITALY IEFIN IACI ILO INTELSAT ILC ITRA IDA INRB IRC INTERPOL IA IPR IRAQI ISRAELI INTERNAL ISLAMISTS INDO ITPHUM ITPGOV ITALIAN IBET INR IEA IZPREL IRAJ ITF IF
KDEM KU KPAL KNNP KCRM KZ KN KS KJUS KTFN KSCA KV KISL KPAO KPKO KIRF KTIA KIPR KFLO KFRD KTIP KAWC KSUM KCOM KAID KE KTDB KMDR KOMC KWBG KDRG KVPR KTEX KGIC KWMN KSCI KCOR KACT KDDG KHLS KSAF KFLU KSEO KMRS KSPR KOLY KSEP KVIR KGHG KIRC KUNR KIFR KCIP KMCA KMPI KBCT KHSA KICC KIDE KCRS KMFO KRVC KRGY KR KAWK KG KFIN KHIV KBIO KOCI KBTR KNEI KPOA KCFE KPLS KSTC KHDP KPRP KCRCM KLIG KCFC KTER KREC KTBT KPRV KSTH KRIM KRAD KWAC KWMM KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KOMS KX KMIG KRCM KVRP KBTS KPAONZ KNUC KNAR KPWR KNPP KDEMAF KNUP KNNPMNUC KERG KGIT KPAI KTLA KFSC KCSY KSAC KTRD KID KOM KMOC KJUST KGCC KREL KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KFTFN KO KNSD KHUM KSEC KCMR KCHG KICA KPIN KESS KDEV KCGC KWWMN KPAK KWNM KWMNCS KRFD
MOPS MCAP MPOS MARR MO MNUC MX MASS MG MY MU ML MR MILITARY MTCRE MT MEPP MA MDC MP MAR MASSMNUC MARAD MAPP MZ MD MI MEETINGS MK MCC MEPN MRCRE MAS MIL MASC MC MV MTCR MIK MUCN MEDIA MERCOSUR MW MOPPS MTS MLS MILI MTRE MEPI MQADHAFI MAPS
NO NATO NL NP NZ NSF NI NH NG NAFTA NU NASA NR NATOPREL NSSP NSG NA NT NW NK NPT NPA NATIONAL NPG NSFO NS NSC NE NGO NDP NIPP NRR NEW NZUS NC NAR NV NORAD
OTRA OPCW OVIP OAS OREP OPIC OIIP OPRC ODIP OEXC OPDC OSCE OIC OSCI OECD OFDP OFDA OMIG OPAD OFFICIALS OVP OIE OHUM OCS OBSP OTR OSAC ON OCII OES
PGOV PREL PHUM PTER PINS PINR PREF PK PROP PA PARM PBTS PMAR PM PGIV PE PRAM PHUH PHSA PL PNAT PO PLN PAO PSA PHUMPGOV PF PEL PBIO POLITICS PHUMBA PAS POL PREO PAHO PMIL POGOV POV PAK PNR PRL PG PREFA PSI PINL PU PARMS PRGOV PALESTINIAN PAIGH POLITICAL PARTIES POSTS PROG PORG PTBS PUNE POLICY PDOV PCI PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PBT PP PS PY PTERE PGOF PKFK PSOE PEPR PPA PINT PRELP PSEPC PGOVE PINF PNG PGOC PFOR PCUL POLINT PGGV PHALANAGE PARTY PGOVLO PHUS PDEM PECON PROV PHUMPREL
RS RU RELATIONS RW RO RM RP ROOD RICE RUPREL RSO RCMP REACTION REPORT REGION RIGHTS RF RFE RSP RIGHTSPOLMIL ROBERT
SU SCUL SNAR SOCI SF SA SHUM SENV SP SR SY SANC SC SMIG SZ SARS SW SEVN SO SEN SL SNARCS SNARN SI SG SN SH SYR SAARC SPCE SHI SCRS SENVKGHG SYRIA SWE STEINBERG SIPRS ST SNARIZ SSA SK SPCVIS SOFA SIPDIS SAN
TC TI TBIO TH TSPL TRGY TSPA TPHY TU TW TS TAGS TK TX TNGD TZ TF TL TV TN TD TIP TR TP TO TT TFIN THPY TERRORISM TINT TRSY TURKEY TBID
US UK UNGA UP UZ UNMIK USTR UNO UNSC UN UNESCO UNAUS UNHRC UY UG UNHCR UNCND USOAS USEU UNICEF UNEP UV UNPUOS UNCSD USUN UNCHR UNDC USNC UE UNDP UNC USPS USAID UNVIE UAE UNFICYP UNODC UNCHS UNIDROIT UNDESCO UNCHC
Browse by classification
Community resources
Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page Contact us on IRC
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 04MONTREAL308, SIXTH MEETING OF THE ICAO COMMITTEE ON AVIATION
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #04MONTREAL308.
| Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04MONTREAL308 | 2004-02-25 19:48 | 2011-04-28 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED | Consulate Montreal |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 11 MONTREAL 000308
SIPDIS
FROM USMISSION ICAO
DEPARTMENT FOR EB/TRA/AVP, IO/T, OES/EGC
FAA FOR AIA 100, APO-1, AEE-1
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAIR SENV ETRD ICAO
SUBJECT: SIXTH MEETING OF THE ICAO COMMITTEE ON AVIATION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION:OUTCOME
¶1. SUMMARY: THE U.S. WAS SUCCESSFUL IN ACHIEVING MOST OF
ITS GOALS AT THE SIXTH MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL
AVIATION ORGANIZATION'S (ICAO) COMMITTEE ON AVIATION
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (CAEP), HELD IN MONTREAL, FEBRUARY
2-12, 2004. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT RESULT RELATED TO AIRCRAFT
NOISE WAS ADOPTION OF ICAO GUIDANCE MATERIAL ON THE BALANCED
APPROACH TO AIRCRAFT NOISE MANAGEMENT. ON THE EMISSIONS
ISSUES, THE COMMITTEE ADOPTED A SIGNIFICANT NEW NOX
STRINGENCY STANDARD THAT IS A 12% REDUCTION OVER THE CURRENT
STANDARD. THE NEW STANDARD WILL BE EFFECTIVE FOR NEW
PRODUCTION ENGINES IN 2008. THE COMMITTEE ALSO AGREED TO
PURSUE THE USE OF VOLUNTARY MEASURES TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS
AND TO FURTHER STUDY CO2 EMISSIONS TRADING OPTIONS.
HOWEVER, AS EXPECTED, THE MEETING FAILED TO REACH AGREEMENT
ON WHETHER OR NOT EXISTING ICAO GUIDANCE ON CHARGES SUPPORTS
THE APPLICATION OF CO2 EMISSIONS CHARGES. END SUMMARY.
¶2. THE SIXTH MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION
ORGANIZATION'S (ICAO) COMMITTEE ON AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION (CAEP) CONVENED IN MONTREAL ON MONDAY, FEBRUARY
2, 2004. APPROXIMATELY 185 PARTICIPANTS REPRESENTING ALL 19
CAEP MEMBER STATES AND 11 OBSERVER ORGANIZATIONS WERE IN
ATTENDANCE. THE MEETING CONCLUDED ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 12.
--------------------
U.S. DELEGATION
--------------------
¶3. MR. CARL BURLESON, THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF
ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY AT THE FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION (FAA) HEADED THE UNITED STATES DELEGATION AS
THE U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO CAEP. ALSO ON THE DELEGATION,
SUPPORTING MR. BURLESON FROM THE FAA WERE MR. GARY O'TOOLE,
MR. ARCHIE MUCKLE, DR. LOURDES MAURICE, MR. TOM CONNOR, AND
MR. CURTIS HOLSCLAW. MR. STEVE SEIDEL AND MR. BRYAN
MANNING FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, MR.
CHRISTO ARTUSIO FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE, AND MR. JON
MONTGOMERY FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ALSO SUPPORTED
MR. BURLESON ON THE DELEGATION.
¶4. ALTHOUGH NOT ON THE OFFICIAL U.S. DELEGATION, CERTAIN
U.S. STAKEHOLDERS WERE IN ATTENDANCE AS MEMBERS ON VARIOUS
INTERNATIONAL OBSERVER ORGANIZATIONS AND WERE CONSULTED
THROUGHOUT THE TWO WEEKS IN MONTREAL. THESE ADVISORS
REPRESENTED THE AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (ATA), ASSOCIATION
OF AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES (AIA), GENERAL AVIATION
MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION (GAMA), AND THE CENTER FOR CLEAN
AIR POLICY (CCAP). ALSO DURING THE COURSE OF THE MEETING,
THE HEAD OF THE U.S. DELEGATION CONDUCTED FOUR TELECONS WITH
GOVERNMENT AND INDUSTRY TO APPRISE INTERESTED PARTIES ON THE
PROGRESS OF THE MEETING.
-----------------------------
KOTAITE OPENS MEETING
-----------------------------
¶5. DR. ASSAD KOTAITE, PRESIDENT OF THE ICAO COUNCIL, OPENED
THE MEETING BY REMINDING THE MEMBERS THAT GLOBAL COOPERATION
HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE IN REDUCING THE IMPACT OF AVIATION ON THE
ENVIRONMENT. AIRCRAFT TODAY ARE MUCH QUIETER AND LESS
POLLUTING THEN THEIR COUNTERPARTS OF A FEW DECADES AGO DUE
TO THE CLOSE COOPERATION AMONG MANUFACTURERS, OPERATORS, AND
REGULATORS. HE NOTED THAT CAEP/5 HAD SUCCESSFULLY ADDRESSED
VERY DIFFICULT ISSUES SUCH AS A NEW NOISE STANDARD, THE
BALANCED APPROACH TO NOISE MANAGEMENT, AND A WAY FORWARD TO
LIMIT OR REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
¶6. DR. KOTAITE CONTINUED BY NOTING THAT CAEP/6 TAKES PLACE
AT A TIME WHEN THE AVIATION COMMUNITY IS JUST BEGINNING TO
RECOVER FROM THE DEVASTATING EFFECTS OF 11 SEPTEMBER 2001.
HE THEN DISCUSSED ICAO'S ELEVATION OF AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL
MATTERS WITHIN THE ORGANIZATION BY THE CREATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT WITHIN THE SECRETARIAT. HE CONCLUDED BY
REMINDING THE MEETING OF ITS RESPONSIBILITY TO ICAO'S 188
MEMBER STATES REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENT - ONE OF THE THREE
MOST IMPORTANT AREAS DEALT WITH BY ICAO TOGETHER WITH SAFETY
AND SECURITY.
¶7. MR. GRAHAM PENDLEBURY, THE CAEP MEMBER FROM THE UNITED
KINGDOM, WAS CHOSEN BY CONSENSUS AS CHAIR FOR THE MEETING.
MR. S. TAKANO, THE CAEP MEMBER FROM JAPAN, WAS SELECTED AS
THE DEPUTY CHAIR, ALSO BY CONSENSUS. THE U.S. MEMBER
SUPPORTED BOTH SELECTIONS.
--------------------------------
AIRCRAFT ENGINE EMISSIONS
--------------------------------
¶8. NEW NOX STRINGENCY STANDARD.
¶A. THE NOX STANDARD DISCUSSION FOCUSED ON THE CAEP ANALYSIS
THAT WAS DONE ON SEVERAL SCENARIOS - A 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%,
25% AND 30% REDUCTIONS (FROM THE CAEP/4 STANDARD)
IMPLEMENTED IN EITHER 2008 OR 2012. THE PRESENTATIONS
FOCUSED ON THE WORKING ASSUMPTIONS, AND THE RESULTS THAT
SHOWED THAT 10% WAS THE MOST COST-EFFECTIVE SOLUTION WHEREAS
HIGHER LEVELS DROVE COSTS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER WITH SMALL
VERY SMALL GAINS IN NOX REDUCTIONS. . AT 15% THERE APPEARED
TO BE A BREAK POINT WHERE GREATER TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES SEEM
TO GREATLY ESCALATE COSTS. THE STUDY ALSO SHOWED THAT A
LOWER STRINGENCY LEVEL (10%) IMPLEMENTED IN 2008 WOULD HAVE
ALMOST THE SAME EFFECT AS A HIGHER LEVEL (15%) IN 2012.
¶B. A NUMBER OF PAPERS WERE SUBMITTED ON THE NOX STRINGENCY
ISSUE. FIVE EUROPEAN STATES - THE UK, GERMANY, SWEDEN,
SWITZERLAND, AND NORWAY - SUBMITTED A PAPER CALLING FOR A
20% INCREASE. ACI PRESENTED A PAPER THAT CALLED FOR A 20%
REDUCTION IN 2008 AND A 30% REDUCTION IN 2012, AND ICSA
REPRESENTING ENVIRONMENTAL NGOS CALLED FOR 30% IN 2012. THE
DEVELOPING WORLD SEEMED TO BE IN THE 5% TO 10% RANGE. THE
UK ALSO PRESENTED A PAPER THAT QUESTIONED THE CAEP ANALYSIS
SUGGESTING THAT THE COSTS OF SOME OF THE HIGHER OPTIONS WERE
OVERESTIMATED AND BENEFITS UNDERESTIMATED.
¶C. AFTER LONG NEGOTIATIONS IN A MEMBERS-ONLY MEETING, IT
WAS AGREED THAT THE NEW NOX STANDARD WOULD BE A 12%
REDUCTION EFFECTIVE IN 2008. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT
REDUCTION - AT LEAST TWICE AS STRINGENT AS PAST CAEP NOX
STRINGENCY INCREASES. ALSO, THE MEETING AGREED TO REVISIT
THE NOX STANDARD AT CAEP/8 (2010) WITH A COMMITMENT TO
REVIEW LONG TERM GOALS, DEVELOP BETTER MODELING, GATHER
BETTER TECHNICAL AND SCIENTIFIC DATA, AND LOOK AT
INTERDEPENDENCIES DURING THE INTERVENING 6 YEARS.
¶9. PRODUCTION CUT-OFF OF THE CAEP/4 NOX STANDARD. AN ISSUE
RELATED TO AGREEMENT ON A NEW NOX STANDARD WAS WHETHER OR
NOT THERE WOULD BE A PRODUCTION CUT-OFF OF THE CURRENT
(CAEP/4) STANDARD. THIS ISSUE BECAME AN INTEGRAL PART OF
THE NEGOTIATION ON THE NEW NOX STANDARD. ALTHOUGH THE U.S.
POSITION SUPPORTED A PRODUCTION CUT-OFF, NEW INFORMATION WAS
BROUGHT TO THE MEMBERS-ONLY MEETING THAT AT CAEP/4, THERE
WAS AGREEMENT THAT THERE WOULD BE NO PRODUCTION CUT-OFF.
THE CAEP SECRETARY CONFIRMED THIS INFORMATION AND THERE WAS
A MAJORITY VIEW THAT THE CAEP/4 DECISION SHOULD STAND.
REALIZING THAT THIS VIEW WAS CRITICAL TO ACHIEVING THE U.S.
POSITION FOR NOX AT THIS MEETING (AS WELL AS THE UPCOMING
DISCUSSION ON CHARGES), THE U.S. MEMBER RESPONDED BY
INSISTING THAT PRODUCTION CUT-OFF WOULD BE REVIEWED IN THE
TIME LEADING UP TO CAEP/8, AND THE NEED FOR, AND DETAILS OF
A PRODUCTION CUT-OFF WOULD BE REVISITED AT CAEP/8. THE
FINAL DECISION WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE NO PRODUCTION CUT-OFF
FOR THE CAEP/4 STANDARD. HOWEVER, THIS ISSUE WOULD BE PUT
ON THE FUTURE WORK PROGRAM.
--------------------------------------------- ---------------
MARKET-BASED OPTIONS (TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS)
--------------------------------------------- ---------------
¶10. VOLUNTARY MEASURES. THE MEMBERS WERE ASKED TO ADOPT A
VOLUNTARY MEASURES TEMPLATE. THE TEMPLATE GIVES BASIC
GUIDANCE AND STRUCTURE TO A POSSIBLE VOLUNTARY ARRANGEMENT
TO REDUCE CO2 EMISSIONS. THE MEETING ACCEPTED THE TEMPLATE,
AND AGREED THAT CAEP SHOULD EXPLORE HOW THIS TEMPLATE MIGHT
BE USED AS THE BASIS FOR A REAL VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT,
POSSIBLY BASED ON OPERATIONAL MEASURES, IN THE FUTURE WORK
PROGRAM.
¶11. EMISSIONS (CO2) CHARGES.
¶A. THIS WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT ISSUE FOR THE MEETING, AND
THE MEMBERS WERE UNABLE TO COME TO AGREEMENT OVER THE USE OF
EMISSIONS CHARGES TO REDUCE CO2 - A GLOBAL GREENHOUSE GAS.
THE DEBATE FOCUSED ON THE APPLICABILITY OF EXISTING ICAO
GUIDANCE TO THESE CHARGES AND WHETHER THE GUIDANCE PROVIDED
TO DATE WAS SUFFICIENT TO ANSWER A NUMBER OF LEGAL, POLICY,
AND ECONOMIC QUESTIONS RAISED GIVEN THE NOVEL NATURE OF CO2
CHARGES. EXISTING ICAO GUIDANCE FOCUSES ON THE MITIGATION
OF THE LOCAL IMPACT OF EMISSIONS AND NOISE, OR THE PROVISION
OF SPECIFIC AVIATION SERVICES WHEREAS CO2 IS A GLOBAL
EMISSION WITH NO LOCAL IMPACT OR HEALTH EFFECTS. THE
EUROPEANS BELIEVE THAT EXISTING GUIDANCE IS SUFFICIENT TO GO
AHEAD WITH CO2 CHARGES. THE U.S., AS WELL AS THE REST OF
THE WORLD, OPPOSED CO2 CHARGES SUGGESTING THAT POSSIBLY
SPECIFIC GUIDANCE COULD BE DEVELOPED IN THE FUTURE, BUT ONLY
AFTER THE OPEN LEGAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES WERE ADDRESSED.
THERE WAS ALSO SENTIMENT BY SOME OF THE DEVELOPING WORLD
THAT ANY CHARGING SCHEME EVENTUALLY DEVELOPED- WHETHER ON
CO2 OR LOCAL AIR QUALITY ISSUES- SHOULD EXEMPT THEM..
¶B. THE ICAO LEGAL BUREAU CONCLUDED IN A PAPER TO THE
MEETING THAT EMISSIONS CHARGES ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE
CHICAGO CONVENTION BUT THEY MUST BE BASED ON THE COST OF
MITIGATING ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, THE COST MUST BE
IDENTIFIABLE AND DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO AVIATION, AND THAT
THERE WERE OTHER REMAINING LEGAL ISSUES TO BE EXPLORED.
THESE INCLUDED WHAT IS MEANT BY, AND HOW TO DETERMINE THE
"FULL COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE," HOW TO IDENTIFY AND
ESTABLISH CATEGORIES OF COSTS, THE GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE OF
APPLICATION, ETC. THE U.S. SUGGESTED THAT IT IS PREMATURE
FOR ANY STATE TO IMPLEMENT CO2 CHARGES UNTIL THESE ISSUES
CAN BE FURTHER STUDIED, AND THAT THESE ISSUES COULD BE TAKEN
UP BY THE ICAO LEGAL COMMITTEE - A BODY OF MEMBER STATES.
¶C. THE MEETING COULD NOT AGREE ON RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
COUNCIL. INSTEAD, DIFFERING VIEWS WERE DOCUMENTED AND WILL
BE FORWARDED AS A POLICY ISSUE TO THE ICAO COUNCIL, AND
POSSIBLY THE 35TH ICAO ASSEMBLY AT THE END OF 2004.
¶12. EMISSIONS TRADING.
¶A. THE MEETING CONSIDERED THREE OPTIONS (OR "AVENUES") FOR
CONSIDERATION IN FURTHER STUDY OF EMISSIONS TRADING. THE
AVENUES WERE A TRADING SCHEME BASED ON 1) INTEGRATED TRADING
UNDER THE KYOTO PROTOCOL, 2) A NEW LEGAL INSTRUMENT WITHIN
ICAO, AND 3) A VOLUNTARY TRADING APPROACH. THERE APPEARED
TO BE GENERAL SUPPORT FROM DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES FOR
CONTINUING AVENUES 1 AND 3. MANY SAW AVENUE 3 AS A
PRECURSOR TO AVENUE 1 WHILE THE U.S. ARGUED THAT A VOLUNTARY
ARRANGEMENT COULD BE PURSUED ON ITS OWN MERIT - NOT
NECESSARILY AS A LEAD IN TO A FUTURE MANDATORY ARRANGEMENT.
THERE WAS NEARLY UNIVERSAL AGREEMENT ON THE ELIMINATION OF
AVENUE 2 BASED ON THE DIFFICULTIES IN DEVELOPING A NEW ICAO
LEGAL INSTRUMENT UNDER THE CHICAGO CONVENTION.
¶B. DURING THE DEBATE, THE ISSUE OF ALLOCATION OF
INTERNATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS CAME UP. SEVERAL
STATES FROM EUROPE, AND CANADA AND BRAZIL SUGGESTED THAT THE
ISSUE OF THE ALLOCATION OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS NEEDED
TO BE RESOLVED FOR ICAO TO PURSUE THESE EMISSIONS TRADING
AVENUES - ESPECIALLY AVENUE 1.
¶C. FINALLY, LANGUAGE WAS AGREED THAT RULED OUT AVENUE 2 FOR
FURTHER CONSIDERATION, SUPPORTED FURTHER PURSUIT OF AVENUE
3, AND AGREED THAT WORK SHOULD CONTINUE ON AVENUE 1 TO
PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR STATES FOR TRADING SCHEMES CONSISTENT
WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE UNFCCC PROCESS (THE U.S.
MANAGED TO GET ANY REFERENCE TO KYOTO DROPPED).
------------------
AIRCRAFT NOISE
------------------
¶13. BALANCED APPROACH FOR AIRCRAFT NOISE MANAGEMENT. IN A
MAJOR VICTORY FOR THE U.S., THE MEETING ADOPTED THE DRAFT
GUIDANCE MATERIAL ON THE BALANCED APPROACH TO AIRCRAFT NOISE
MANAGEMENT AS DRAFTED AND AS SUPPORTED BY THE U.S. THE
DISCUSSIONS PREDICTABLY ADDRESSED WHETHER THE DOCUMENT WAS
SUFFICIENT TO SEND FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION - WAS
IT COMPLETE, DID IT ADDRESS THE NEEDS OF ALL MEMBER STATES,
ETC.? IN CONCLUSION, THE MEETING ACCEPTED THE MAIN DOCUMENT
AND MOST OF ITS ANNEXES WITH NO CHANGES. TWO ANNEXES WILL
BE REFERRED FOR FUTURE WORK - CASE STUDIES THAT DEMONSTRATE
HOW AIRPORTS HAVE APPLIED ELEMENTS OF THE BALANCED APPROACH
AND INFORMATION ON ENCROACHMENT STUDIES. THIS WAS A CLEAR
VICTORY FOR THE U.S.
¶14. NOISE CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTATION.
¶A. SEVERAL CAEP MEMBER STATES HAVE BEEN PUSHING TO HAVE ONE
STANDARDIZED NOISE CERTIFICATE ON BOARD THE AIRCRAFT.
EUROPEAN STATES REQUIRE A STAND-ALONE NOISE CERTIFICATE
CARRIED ON BOARD THE AIRCRAFT WHEREAS THE U.S. DOCUMENTS
NOISE CERTIFICATION IN THE AIRCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL. THERE
ARE CURRENTLY SEVERAL DIFFERENT METHODS IN USE
INTERNATIONALLY. IN VIEW OF THE WIDE VARIETY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE SYSTEMS ALREADY IN USE FOR NOISE
CERTIFICATION DOCUMENTATION, IT WAS DEEMED NECESSARY TO
ADOPT THREE ALTERNATIVE STANDARDIZED OPTIONS. THE THREE
OPTIONS ARE:
1) ALL INFORMATION ITEMS CONTAINED IN A SINGLE DOCUMENT, A
STAND ALONE NOISE CERTIFICATE;
2) TWO COMPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS OF WHICH THE SECOND WOULD
BE THE AFM OR THE AIRCRAFT OPERATING MANUAL (AOM); AND
3) THREE COMPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS.
¶B. ALTHOUGH SEVERAL MEMBERS FAVORED ONE STAND-ALONE NOISE
CERTIFICATE, IT WAS RECOGNIZED THAT THIS PROPOSAL WAS A
LARGE LEAP FORWARD, AND DUE TO EXISTING STATE PRACTICES,
GOING ANY FARTHER AT THIS TIME WOULD NOT BE PRACTICABLE.
THE MEETING AGREED TO ACCEPT THE THREE OPTIONS, BUT TO
REVISIT THE ISSUE IN THE FUTURE.
¶15. ENGINE THRUST DERATE.
¶A. THIS DISCUSSION FOCUSED ON THE METHOD USED TO ENSURE
COMPLIANCE WITH REDUCED THRUST REQUIREMENTS FOR NOISE
REDUCTIONS. THE MEETING CONSIDERED THREE WAYS THAT A THRUST
DERATE COULD BE IMPLEMENTED. THESE INCLUDED A REVISION TO
THE AIRCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL (AFM), A PHYSICAL ENGINE THRUST
LIMITATION OR A RE-DESIGNATION OF THE ENGINE.
¶B. THE EUROPEAN VIEW, ONE ENSHRINED IN EUROPEAN CIVIL
AVIATION CONFERENCE (ECAC) PROCEDURES, REQUIRES A PHYSICAL
LIMITATION TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE. THE U.S. VIEW, SUPPORTED
IN A WORKING PAPER PRESENTED BY THE U.S. MEMBER, IS THAT AN
AFM ENTRY IS SUFFICIENT. THE U.S. ARGUMENT IS THAT THE AFM
IS SUFFICIENT TO ENSURE SAFETY COMPLIANCE, AND HAS BEEN THE
ACCEPTED METHODOLOGY INTERNATIONALLY TO ENSURE SAFETY.
¶C. SINCE ALL THREE OPTIONS WILL NEED TO BE EXPLORED IN
FUTURE WORK, INTERIM GUIDANCE WAS PRESENTED FOR USE WHILE
THIS ISSUE IS CONSIDERED FURTHER. THE U.S. AND OTHERS WERE
CONCERNED THAT THE INTERIM GUIDANCE SEEMED TO BE A STEP-BY-
STEP PROCESS THAT WOULD LEAD TO PHYSICAL LIMITS. THE
INTERIM GUIDANCE WAS FINALLY REDRAFTED TO ONLY SUGGEST THAT
THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE, AND THAT IT
IS UP TO THE CERTIFICATING AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE.
¶16. REVISION OF NOISE LEVELS WITHIN THE SAME CHAPTER.
THERE WAS ALSO SOME DISCUSSION OF THE METHODOLOGY TO BE USED
IN THE REVISION OF NOISE LEVELS WITHIN THE SAME
CERTIFICATION STANDARD, OR CHAPTER. THE MEETING AGREED THAT
THERE IS A NEED TO REVISE THE NOISE LEVELS OF SOME AIRCRAFT
WITHIN THE SAME CHAPTER, AND ENDORSED THE NEED TO DEVELOP
GUIDANCE ON THIS ISSUE WITHIN THE FUTURE WORK PROGRAM.
¶17. ALIGNMENT OF HELICOPTER NOISE CERTIFICATION STANDARDS.
THE MEETING ACCEPTED NEW LANGUAGE FOR ICAO ANNEX 6 -
OPERATION OF AIRCRAFT, PART III - INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS -
HELICOPTERS, TO ALIGN ANNEX 6 PROVISIONS WITH THE RELEVANT
HELICOPTER NOISE PROVISIONS OF ANNEX 16 - ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION, VOLUME I - AIRCRAFT NOISE. THE TEXT CURRENTLY
SUGGESTS THAT ALL HELICOPTERS ARE REQUIRED TO CARRY A NOISE
CERTIFICATION DOCUMENT WHEN IN FACT SOME HELICOPTERS, AS
SPECIFIED IN ANNEX 16 ARE EXEMPT FROM NOISE CERTIFICATION
REQUIREMENTS.
----------------------
FUTURE WORK
----------------------
¶18. CAEP WORKING METHODS. THE U.S. HAD LED AN INTERNAL
CAEP TASK FORCE TO EXAMINE THE STRUCTURE AND PROCESSES OF
CAEP OVER THE LAST TWO-AND-A HALF YEARS. THIS WAS INITIATED
AT THE REQUEST OF THE ICAO PRESIDENT, DR. KOTAITE. THE TASK
FORCE RECOMMENDED TO THE MEETING THAT THREE AREAS NEEDED TO
BE DEVELOPED - ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS, CAEP
STRUCTURE, AND ICAO RESOURCES.
¶A. GOALS - THESE WOULD NEED TO BE SET NECESSARILY BROAD
BECAUSE OF THEIR GLOBAL NATURE, AND THE VARYING NEEDS OF
ICAO'S 188 MEMBER STATES. THEY WERE CONSIDERED IMPORTANT IN
HELPING SET ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PRIORITIES, AND IN
MEASURING THE SUCCESS OF THE CAEP WORK PROGRAM. THE MEETING
AGREED ON THE FOLLOWING: ICAO IS CONSCIOUS OF ITS
RESPONSIBILITY AND THAT OF ITS CONTRACTING STATES TO ACHIEVE
MAXIMUM COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN THE SAFE AND ORDERLY
DEVELOPMENT OF CIVIL AVIATION AND THE QUALITY OF THE
ENVIRONMENT. IN CARRYING ON ITS RESPONSIBILITY, ICAO WILL
STRIVE TO:
1) LIMIT OR REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE AFFECTED BY
SIGNIFICANT AIRCRAFT NOISE;
2) LIMIT OR REDUCE THE IMPACT OF AVIATION EMISSIONS ON
LOCAL AIR QUALITY; AND
3) LIMIT OR REDUCE AVIATION GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ON
THE GLOBAL CLIMATE.
¶B. CAEP STRUCTURE - WITH A VIEW TO STREAMLINING THE
PROCESS, TO BETTER COORDINATING THE WORK OF VARIOUS TASK
GROUPS, AND TO START TO DEAL WITH THE INTERDEPENDENCIES OF
BOTH NOISE AND EMISSIONS, THE MEETING AGREED TO A SLIGHTLY
STREAMLINED WORKING GROUP STRUCTURE. THE TECHNICAL WORKING
GROUPS ON NOISE AND EMISSIONS WOULD REMAIN THE SAME. THE
WORK OF WORKING GROUP 2, NOISE - AIRPORTS AND OPERATIONS,
AND THAT OF WORKING GROUP 4, EMISSIONS - OPERATIONAL ISSUES,
WOULD BE COMBINED INTO A NEW WORKING GROUP 2, OPERATIONS.
THIS GROUP WILL DEVELOP GUIDANCE MATERIAL (FOR EXAMPLE, THE
BALANCED APPROACH), AND EXPLORE OPERATIONAL ISSUES RELATED
TO AIRCRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE. CAEP'S ECONOMICS
SUPPORT GROUP (FESG) WILL ALSO REMAIN INTACT.
¶C. ICAO RESOURCES - THE MEETING AGREED THAT SINCE ICAO HAS
LISTED ENVIRONMENT AS ONE OF ITS TOP THREE PRIORITIES,
SECOND ONLY TO SAFETY AND SECURITY, IT WAS TIME TO EXPAND
CAEP SUPPORT BEYOND SIMPLY HAVING ONE STAFF PERSON ACTING AS
THE CAEP SECRETARY. THE MEETING ENDORSED THE CREATION OF AN
ENVIRONMENTAL UNIT WITH DEDICATED STAFFING AND FUNDING.
THIS HAS BECOME A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE WITHIN CAEP AND ICAO AS
THE SECRETARY GENERAL ANNOUNCED, A MONTH BEFORE CAEP/6
STARTED, THAT A UNIT HAD BEEN FORMED. UNFORTUNATELY, THE
UNIT CREATED BY ICAO WAS UNRESPONSIVE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS
IN THE CAEP RESTRUCTURING REPORT. NOT ONLY DOES IT HAVE NO
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES, IT PRODUCES MORE COMPLEXITY IN
COMMUNICATION AND COORDINATION- AS ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSIBILITIES ARE MOVED TO THE AIR TRANSPORT BUREAU WHILE
THE ANNEXES THAT CAEP HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR REMAIN IN THE
MORE TECHNICAL AIR NAVIGATION BUREAU. THE REPORT OF THE
MEETING EXPRESSES THE DISPLEASURE OF SEVERAL MEMBERS OVER
THIS MOVE AND APPARENT CONTINUING LACK OF ADEQUATE SUPPORT
TO CAEP. THE U.S. SHARES THESE VIEWS.
¶19. U.S. INITIATIVE ON ADDRESSING INTERDEPENDENCIES OF
VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS
¶A. THE U.S. DELEGATION ALSO PRESENTED A PAPER ON A VISION
FOR THE FUTURE - DEVELOPING A MORE EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO
ADDRESSING INTERDEPENDENCIES AMONG ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
THIS PAPER CALLED ON CAEP TO CONSIDER THE INTERDEPENDENCIES
BETWEEN NOISE AND EMISSIONS, AND BETWEEN THE VARIOUS
EMISSIONS, IN ITS FUTURE WORK AND PROPOSED BOTH NEAR-TERM
AND LONGER-TERM ACTIONS THAT SEEK TO ENHANCE ICAO'S ABILITY
TO ADDRESS THIS CRITICAL ASPECT OF ITS MANDATE. THE U.S.
VIEWS THIS AS A USEFUL ANALYTICAL APPROACH FOR MOVING
FORWARD IN DEALING WITH AVIATION ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES IN AN
INTEGRATED FASHION.
¶B. TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION ON THIS APPROACH, THE FAA
HOSTED A RECEPTION AT ICAO HEADQUARTERS FOR THE HEADS OF THE
MEMBER AND OBSERVER ORGANIZATIONS. THE GOAL WAS TO
INTRODUCE A METHODOLOGY, AND THE CAPABILITY, TO RECOGNIZE
AND ADDRESS THE INTERDEPENDENCIES OF ALL ENVIRONMENTAL
FACTORS - VARIOUS ENGINE EMISSIONS AND NOISE - IN FUTURE
CAEP WORK AND DECISIONS. THE FAA PRESENTED ITS WORK ON
TOOLS TO FOSTER A SYSTEMS APPROACH TO ADDRESSING ALL ASPECTS
OF NOISE AND EMISSIONS ISSUES IN THE FUTURE.
¶C. THERE SEEMED TO BE GENERAL ACCEPTANCE FOR THE U.S. VIEWS
AND INITIATIVE BY THE MEMBERS, AND AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE
WORK THAT WOULD SUPPORT SUCH AN APPROACH IN THE FUTURE.
¶20. TECHNICAL WORK PROGRAMS. THE MEETING ACCEPTED A LONG
LIST OF TASKS FOR THE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUPS WITHOUT
ATTEMPTING TO PARE THE LIST DOWN OR TO PRIORITIZE THE
SPECIFIC ITEMS. IT WAS DECIDED THAT THE WORKING GROUPS
WOULD PROVIDE INPUT ON THESE ISSUES TO THE NEXT CAEP
STEERING GROUP SCHEDULED FOR BONN GERMANY ON NOVEMBER 2004.
¶21. THE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. DELEGATION WERE PROFESSIONAL
AND WORKED EFFECTIVELY AS A TEAM TO ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES OF
THE U.S. POSITION. DELEGATION MEMBERS REPRESENTED THE
UNITED STATES WELL AND ARE TO BE COMMENDED
STIMPSON ALLEN