Objective ENV02

1. Objective ENV02 ESSIP Plan 2013 Bernd HILL DSS/EIPR 13.09.2013

2. Explanation • It concerns Collaborative Environment Management (CEM) at airports • The minimization of noise and gaseous emissions resulting from aircraft operations at the terminal airspace and ground will be enabled through the establishment at individual airports of formal partnership arrangements between ANSP, Airport and Aircraft Operators, to facilitate joint environmental improvements. • The objective provides a framework for the establishment of formal partnership arrangements amongst operational stakeholders (ANSP, Airport and Aircraft Operators) to collaborate and decide on implementing airport related environment mitigation techniques such as minimizing aircraft noise and gaseous emissions in and around airports. • It is a process (Regular Meetings, Agreed actions plans)…and not an “operational” implementation • Operational implementation (e.g. CDO) can be decided through CEM but its implementation is monitored separately through ESSIP Objective ENV 01 ESSIP Plan 2013 / Objective ENV02

3. What has changed since LSSIP 2012 ? • The Objective was aligned with SESAR OI Step AO-0703 • The overall FOC date is extended to 12/2016 • All SloA dates were extended to either 12/2015 or 12/2016 • Additional Supporting material has been added • Measurable finalisation criteria have been added

4. Link to European ATM Master Plan • OI step - [AO-0703]-Aircraft Noise Management and Mitigation at and around Airports • Description:To ensure that local decisions on achieving the optimum environmental performance from aircraft operations at and around airports, by the most appropriate balance between social, economic and environmental imperatives. A key aim will be to balance sometimes conflicting needs for noise and atmospheric emission reduction. A correctly balanced environmental regime at an airport can help to ensure that the Legal compliance is maintained, the rules are harmonised to the extent possible, the global and local impacts are minimised to the extent possible, non optimal environmental procedures and constraints are not applied and where such constraints are being considered, the least damaging options are selected. The optimum environmental efficiency and capacity can be achieved at and around airports through the collaborative local selection of the most appropriate ATM capabilities and OIs available, within an overarching and harmonising framework. • IOC: 12/2008 • FOC: 12/2016

5. Link to European ATM Master Plan • OI step - [AO-0705]-Reduced Water Pollution • Description:De-icing stations are created where the fluids, spoiled on the apron, can be collected and treated. Furthermore, technical solutions for the bio-degradation of de-icing fluids are implemented. Application techniques are developed in collaboration with airlines to improve the anti-icing treatment on aircraft at the stands so that the amount of glycol released in the storm water can be reduced. • IOC: 12/2007 • FOC: 12/2015

6. Link to European ATM Master Plan • OI step - [AO-0706]-(Local) Monitoring of Environmental Performance • Description:The environmental performance (compliance to operational procedures, key performance indicators) of ATM stakeholders at the airport is recorded and monitored in support of continuous improvement process. In particular, it is possible to determine the amount of airport related versus external pollution. This improvement involves use of noise monitoring systems, flight tracking and air quality monitoring systems. • IOC: 12/2007 • FOC: 12/2015

7. Most important SLoA(s) ENV02-ASP01 & APO01: • A regular (minimum twice per annum) CEM group meeting takes place that has the full backing of top management; • The CEM group is always attended by representatives of the Airport Operator, the Aircraft Operators (a minimum of the lead carrier or sufficient carriers to cover 50%+ of movements) and the ANSP; • A shared environmental vision for the airport has been agreed by all core Stakeholders and plans for its delivery have been agreed; • Regular joint progress reports against SMART objectives/targets are made through appropriate channels. • See also CEM Guidance Document (Airport Environmental Partnership, p17): “How do I know that I am compliant with this guidance?”)

8. Most important SLoA(s) ENV02-APO02 • In accordance with locally agreed CEM priorities, ensure the availability of timely, accurate and relevant environmental information at Airports • This may entail investment in appropriate environmental monitoring or modelling systems at Airports to record and monitor noise, emissions, air quality, etc. • Data availability is essential in support of the continuous performance improvement process.

9. Finalisation Criteria and Closed Questions ENV02-ASP01 & APO01: • If a shared environmental vision for the airport has been agreed by all core Stakeholders and plans for its delivery available, what are the main priority mitigation[1] measure(s) to be covered? • Please provide at least one – only titles are required:[1] For example: Noise track adherence, CDO, Auxiliary Power Unit controls, joint community relations, noise abatement procedures, airfield fuel and emissions reduction, joint support for airport growth plans and so on. More examples can be found in the EUROCONTROL CEM checklist document at www.environment.int/environment/CEM ENV02-AOP02: • Environmental monitoring or information systems are implemented and functioning

10. Objective’s completion criteria • Partially completed: The CEM working arrangement has been established and is formulating a shared environmental vision; but no further actions have been taken yet. • Completed: CDO is established as an operational procedure and procedures were formally published. A working arrangement to track performance and seek improvement has been established and environmental monitoring or information systems are implemented and functioning.

11. ESSIP Report 2012 • At the level of Air Navigation Service Providers (ANSPs), the Objective has been declared completed by more than half of the ANSPs in the ECAC area. • At the level of Military Operators (MIL) the Objective has been declared completed by a small portion of Military Stakeholders in the ECAC area. No Military Operators declared that deployment of this Objective is ongoing. One Military Operator declared still being in the planning process and another one declared that he has No Plan to implement this Objective. However, the big majority of Military Operators declared that this Objective is not applicable, mostly because Military does not operate at Civil Airports. • At the level of Air Airport Operators (APOs) the Objective has been declared completed by one-third of the APOs in the ECAC area. Almost half of the APOs declared that deployment of this Objective is ongoing. A small portion of APOs declared still being in the planning process and No APO declared that the Objective ins not achieved in time. However, another small portion of APOs declared that they have No Plan to implement this Objective without providing thorough information. Some APOs declared that this Objective is not applicable, although they are included in the List of Applicable Airports.

12. Objective Coordinator’s Analysis • States need to indicate and describe effective progress in the SLoAs for all and each airport before declaring it as “Completed” or even “Partially Completed”. • The Objective is closely linked to CDO procedures prescribed in Objective ENV01. State Focal Points should ensure that there is no deviation on the implementation status between Objectives ENV01 and ENV02 for each stakeholder. In case there is deviation, a thorough justification should be made explaining the reasons. • Airports should enhance the implementation to be better synchronised with the ANSP (see also list of Airports in ESSIP Plan 2013). • Military Aircraft Operators who do not make use of a Civil Airport (see also list of Airports in ESSIP Plan 2013) should declare “Not Applicable” and justify it.

13. Links and contacts • Objective Coordinator: Hill, B. +32 2 729 5058 bernd.hill@eurocontrol.int • DSS Objective Expert(s): Watt A., +32 2 729 5049 andrew.watt@eurocontrol.int Mahony, S., +32 2 729 4745 sharon.mahony@eurocontrol.int