70 likes | 203 Views
Fines/Community Fund Airport Noise. Presentation to Dublin Airport Stakeholders Forum 9 th December, 2010. UK Airports. Some UK airports have a noise penalty system in place. Robust legislation is in place underpinning the aircraft fines system at UK airport.
E N D
Fines/Community Fund Airport Noise Presentation to Dublin Airport Stakeholders Forum 9th December, 2010
UK Airports • Some UK airports have a noise penalty system in place. Robust legislation is in place underpinning the aircraft fines system at UK airport. • These include Manchester, East Midlands, London Heathrow, London Gatwick, Birmingham and London Stansted. • In some airports these occur when an aircraft over-flies a noise monitoring terminal (NMT) and exceeds a preset level. However revenues from these fines have been decreasing with the introduction of newer quieter aircraft. In the case of Birmingham the income generated in 1996/97 was £33,895, this has reduced to only £446.66 in the year 2008/09. • Other airports have extra surcharge on noisier aircraft included in their landing fees.
UK Airports • London Stansted is the only airport to impose fines for track keeping as well as noisy aircraft overflying the NMTs. • There is a standard fine of £500 for each deviation from the preferential noise route (environmental corridor). This charge is levied after an in depth investigation by the airport and ATC. • Stansted Airport aim to achieve 95% on track, and in 2009 they achieved 98%. • Dublin Airport’s on track statistics are almost 99% for 2010 year to date.
European Airports • France: An independent authority, Authorité De Controle Des Nuisances Aéroportuaires, is mandated by the Government to monitor France’s ten largest airports and impose sanctions where appropriate. • Sanctions vary from: • Non compliance with a slot time • Noisy chapter 3 aircraft • Night time engine testing • Surpassing defined noise threshold at particular airport. • Different sanctions apply at different airports. • Revenue generated does not go to community fund, it seems to go back into funding the existence of this particular authority.
European Airports Zurich Airport: • Adopts a surcharge method of loading noisier aircraft with higher landing charges. • There is an ‘Airport of Zurich Noise Funds Committee, which meets twice a year, but it is not clear if local communities benefit from money generated from noisier aircraft . Schiphol Airport: • Has a Noise and Disturbance Reduction Programme. • Meets local community groups, but gives no details of fines or community fund at the airport.
European Airports • AENAS Group – Spanish Airport • Have corrective measures (although it does not say what they are )in place for noisier aircraft. • Restrictions on power units and engine testing. • Curfews at some of the holiday islands e.g. Canaries, Balearic • No fines for noisy aircraft and no community fund.
European Airports Vienna: • Environment & Aviation Platform that include noise reducing approach and take off routes • Aircraft noise zones • No reference to fines or community fund • Quite an extensive mediation process involving 50 stakeholders Other: • Many airports do not have a community fund related to aircraft noise however they link their noise protection programme to mitigation i.e. Insulation home/schools, vortex compensation etc.