Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

1 Public Announcement

The U.S

. Department of Transportation (DOT) , Office of the Secretary of Transportation, told the public of this Future of Aviation Advisory Committee (FAAC) Environment Subcommittee meeting in a Federal Register notice published Septemb er 13, 2010 (75 FR 5562 6 ).

Subc ommittee Members in Attendance

Name Affiliation(s)
Bryan K. Bedford ( Subc ommittee Chair) President and C hief Executive

Officer Republic Airways Holdings, Inc. (Republic Airways)

Juan J. Alonso Associate P rofessor, Departme nt

of Aeronautics and Astronautics Stanford University

Kinney Baxter Attended for Raul Regalado Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority
Brian Brandewie Attended for Cynthia Egnotovich Goodrich Corporation (Goodrich) Billy Glover Attended for Nicole Pi asecki Boeing Commercial Airplanes (Boeing)

Committee Members Not in Attendance

Name Affiliation(s)
Cynthia M. Egnotovich Segment P resident, N acelles and

I nterior S ystems Goodrich

Nicole W. Piasecki Vice President,

Business Development Boeing

Raul Re galado President and

Chief Executive Officer Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority

Other Officials Present

Name Affiliation(s)
Lynne Pickard (Designated Federal Officer (DFO)) Deputy Director, Office of

Environment and Energy DOT

Camille Mittelhol tz ( Alternate DFO) Environmental Policies Team

Leader, Office of Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy DOTFuture of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

2 Name Affiliation(s)

Carl Burleson Deputy Assistant Administrator,

Office of Aviation Policy, Planning, and Environment Federal Aviation Administration ( FAA )

Ot her Persons Present

Name Affiliation(s)

Bill Edmunds Senior Human Performance

Specialist Air Line Pilots Association, International

Scott Harper FAAC Support PAI Consulting
Jonathan Hoffman S enio r Principle Scientist The MITRE Corporation
Anne Kohut P ublisher Airport Noise Report
Richard Marchi S enio r Advisor, Policy and

Regulatory Affairs Airports Council International

– North America ( ACI

– NA )
Glenn Morse Continental Airlines (Continental) Doug Obey Reporter Inside EPA
Sue Presti Senior Director of

Government Affairs The International Air Cargo Association (TIACA) Nancy N. Young Vice President,

Environmental Affairs Air Transport Association of America , Inc. (ATA)

B ACKGROUND AND W ELCOMING R EMARKS

This is the record of the third meeting of the FAAC Environment Subcommittee, a Federal advisory committee formed pursuant to and subject to the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA). The subcommittee and its meetings are likewise subject to the requirements of FACA.

Mr. Bryan K. Bedfo rd, Subcommittee Chair, Republic Airways, cal led the meeting to order at 1: 03 p .m. He welcomed the subcommittee members and thanked them for their participation. He then thanked Dr

. Juan J. Alonso, Stanford University, for filling in as the subcommittee chair for the last meeting.

A DMINISTRATIVE M ATTERS

Mr. Bedford asked Ms. Lynne Pickard, DFO, DOT, to review the FACA requirements.

Ms. Pickard briefed the subcommittee on the history and purpose of FACA, and noted some of its key requirements, including ba lanced representation and publicly accessible meetings. She outlined her responsibilities as DFO, including maint aining information on cost s and membership, ensuring efficient operations, and keeping publicly available records of FAAC activities.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

3 Ms

. Pick ard noted meetings of the subcommittee are accessible to the public . She stated interested persons will have the opportunity to submit comments before each meeting, and the minutes of each meeting will be made available both in the regulatory docket at ht tp:// www.regulations.gov (Docket number DOT

- OST

- 2010

- 0074) and on the FAAC Web site at http:// www.dot.gov/ faac

.

Ms. Pickard read the formal statement required under FACA. She noted although the meeting was open to the public

, participation in the meeting was limited to subcommittee members , their alternates

, and Federal officials , subject to the discretion of the subcommittee c hair . Ms. Pickard added that only subcommittee members and their alternates are entitled to vote on subcommittee business.

D ISCUSS ION

Ms

. Pickard turned the meeting over to Mr

. Bedford

, who noted the Obama Administration recently embrac ed infrastructure spending on the Next Generation Air Transportation System ( NextGen ) and
propos ed to permanently extend research and development tax credits.

Mr

. Bedford asked Dr

. Alonso to summarize the FAAC meeting that took place August 25

, 2010

. Dr

. Alonso mentioned that the E nvironment S ubcommittee gave two presentations

. He noted Ms. Jeanne Yu
, Boeing

, gave a presentation titled, T he Environmen tal Benefits of Aircraft/Engine Technology

. She stated aircraft and engine technologies have accounted for 80 to 90 percent of the environmental improvements in the air transportation system

.

Mr. John Heimlich, ATA, gave t he second presentation

, on sust ainable alternative a viation f uels . He highlight ed some of the barriers to ensur ing the presence of sustainable fuel in the market.

Dr

. Alonso stated the presentations were well received . He noted the only comments were about ensuring cost was being cons idered. He added the subcommittee should focus on o perational i mprovements, t echnology i mprovements , and s ustainable alternative a viation f uel s

. Dr. Alonso then stated the day’s discussions should be about the degree to which the subcommittee focuses on NextGen, given the previously mentioned initiative s from the Obama Administration. He expressed his belief that these three areas

, possibly along with harmonized domestic and global efforts for reducing emissions

, would be the areas the subcommittee shoul d use as the basis for its proposals.

Mr

. Bedford noted that other subcommittees have also focused on NextGen . Dr

. Alonso agreed , noting that there were five presentations on NextGen at the full committee meeting

, and it was clear NextGen impacts every su bcommittee. He stated although NextGen seems to be gaining momentum , he was n o t sure what initiatives or finances could help meet its environmental goals.

Ms

. Pickard agreed with Dr

. Alonso and added that much of th e attention for NextGen seems to be give n to the air traffic side

, and the environmental component seems to be treated as a side benefit that is achieved through more efficient air traffic. She stated she was n o t sure if the Presidential i nitiatives had any language about environmental equipage

, and ask ed Mr. Bedford if a discussion with the Chair of the Financing S ubcommittee would be desirable because they are probably holding the same discussi ons

.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

4 Mr. Billy Glover , Boeing, asked what is meant by the phrase ― environmental equipage .‖ H e stat ed he thought the environmental benefit from NextGen stemmed from a more efficient system. Ms

. Pickard stated environmental equipage c ould also include new environmental technologies that come out of the research and development pipeline that c ould be add ed or retrofitt ed to the fleet.

Dr

. Alonso suggested environmental equipage would come out of technological improvements

. He questioned whether the subcommittee should consider it as a separate proposal with its own funding

, timeline, and prioriti es

.

Mr

. Bedford requested more clarity about the Presidential i nitiative and exactly what is in the proposal beyond a general commitment to infrastructure

. Ms

. Camille Mittelholtz

, DOT, stated the re is not a very high level of detail in terms of where the money would go . S he added she w ill try to get more information about the proposal and send it to the subcommittee members.

Ms

. Nancy N. Young
, ATA, agreed and added that although there were probably ongoing negotiations, it might be appropriate for the FAAC to suggest goals for the proposal

.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed if any proposals can be made based on the presentations given during the last
two meetings . Mr

. Glover suggested they could pull some material together about equipage and procedures from the presentations

. He endorsed moving forward, noting there c ould be associated environmental benefits

. Mr

. Brian Brand e wie , Goodrich, agreed and stated the largest impact would be on carbon emissions . He noted implementing area navigation (RNAV), r equired n avigation
p er formance (RNP), and other procedures would reduce carbon emissions by 25 to 30 percent

.

Dr

. Alonso stated there were some misconception s about with the figures presented and explained that most studies show

, at most, a 10 percent reduction in fuel consumpt i on from all NextGen operational improvements

. He noted w hen people talk about a 30 percent reduction in fuel consumption, they are talking about the fuel burned in the terminal area.

The subcommittee members then discuss ed what proposals could come out o f further consideration of NextGen

. They observed there are environmental benefits, especially in terms of carbon reduction

, that come from NextGen and its components

. Ms

. Pickard stated this issue may not be the primary subcommittee proposal, but the su bcommittee is setting the stage for more conversation at the October 5 , 2010

, meeting to discuss more topics in terms of NextGen support.

Mr

. Glover suggested the Environment Subcommittee take its past presentations and determine which

areas , such as RNAV and RNP, appear to have the most benefits and are ready to deploy

. He stated they should discuss this list and how to pare it down at the next meeting.

Mr

. Bedford asked, after hearing all the presentations o n NextGen

, an d given that it i s such a simple
t erm for a subject that is so broad in scope , how the sub committee should choose two or three topics on which to focus ? He questioned whether they would come from en route navigation opportunities and terminal area navigation opportunities, or from a focus on high

- density airports and a concentrat ion on runway metering

.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

5 Mr

. Glover suggested the subcommittee should focus on carbon dioxide and stated they c ould look at the procedures that provide carbon dioxide benefits over those that have noise reduction be nefits. He expressed his belief that i f the subcommittee prioritized its list

, the procedures that provide carbon dioxide reduction benefits would rise to the top.

Dr

. Alonso suggested NextGen is a topic they should coordinate with the Subcommittee on Fin ancing

. He stated because this is being discussed among all the subcommittees, its proposal should come from the FAAC

. He added it should include environmental issues ; if it does not

, the Environment S ub committee should develop its own proposals.

Mr

. Bed ford stated that NextGen touches on the subject matter of every subcommittee. He noted t hey all benefit from it because aircraft will spend less time in the air or waiting in lines , saving millions of dollars in fuel, mak ing the air carriers more competit ive, and reducing carbon emissions . He expressed concern about which parts of NextGen could be decoupled from the 15

- y ea r plan and could be implemented over the next 3 years.

Dr

. Alonso stated there are a numb er of procedures, such as RNAV/RNP and surface operations

, that could have a favorabl e impact on the environment . He expressed concern about the possible acceleration of NextGen and added that in the rush to equip aircraft and the entire system so it can operate properly , environmental concerns might not be considered first and foremost in the decisions that would be made

.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed for an example

, and Dr

. Alonso discussed RNP and RNAV. Dr. Alonso noted w ith these in place

, aircraft approach and landing patterns would be tighter, the noise fo otprint would not be spread out, and there would be an increase in the frequency of airplanes. He noted noise c ould increase

over a 24

- hour period. Dr. Alonso added when the designers start planning

, they will have to make compromises with different inte rests, and Dr. Alonso is concern ed the environmental issues may be removed during these decisions.

Mr

. Bedford agreed and noted the subcommittee ’ s focus i s to reduce carbon emissions ; noise and water

are still important second ary environmental consideratio ns for this purpose

. He stated the subcommittee need s to investigate the b y

- product s of lower emissions and whether reducing carbon dioxide will increase the noise over a community, which might derail the process.

Mr

. Bedford suggested the subcommittee ad d a placeholder for operational improvements and further investigate the cost, speed to market, and potential effects on emission reduction of RNAV and RNP

. Mr

. Glover agreed and stated the subcommittee also should highlight emission s metrics as part of t he implementation plan for NextGen. Mr

. Richard Marchi

, ACI

- NA

, suggested the subcommittee also include some of the surface surveillance opportunities to reduce emissions and the time aircraft spend idling on the ground, much like they did at John F. Kenn edy International Airport.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed Mr

. Marchi to provide suggestions about how th e metering program used at John F. Kennedy International Airport might be implemented at other airports, and which airports could benefit from the program . Mr

. Mar chi stated there is language in the House version of an FAA

re authorization bill that directs the FAA to conduct a five

- airport pilot program to develop tools forFuture of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

6 effective taxi flow management. He stated the subcommittee could endorse that program. Mr

. Bedford ask ed Mr

. Marchi if he could help identify 5 to 10 airports with a similar opera ting profile to John F. Kennedy International Airport that could benefit from this program. Mr

. Marchi asked Ms

. Young and Mr

. Glover to help him with this project.

Mr

. Bedford then raised the subject of technology and ask ed Mr

. Brandewie if there was anything he wanted to add now that Administration support for extension of the research and development tax credits was clearer . Mr

. Brandewie stated the research and dev elopment tax credits were covered

, and no further discussion was needed.

Mr

. Bedford stated it seemed that ground service equipment issues were not going to make it in the final proposals and ask ed the subcommittee if anyone disagreed. The consensus was t he subcommittee could remove the se issues from the list. He then ask ed if there would be any benefit to examining aircraft and engine technology

, because the subcommittee has a 3

- year window to call for action.

Dr

. Alonso stated that NextGen and operation al improvements can provide about a 10 percent overall increase in environmental benefits, but this will take about 5 years. On the technology side

, t he industry has committed to a 1.5 percent improvement in fuel efficiency per year . He noted in 5 years there should be a 9.5 percent improvement

, and the fuel burn benefits can grow over time with improved technologies

. Dr. Alonso stated the subcommittee’s argument should be that although it may not achieve its target with in the 3 years , technologies have the potential to provide up to a 30 percent improvement in fuel burn reductions over the next 15 to 20 years

.

Dr

. Alonso further noted that sustainable alternative aviation fuels could significant ly reduce carbon emissions. He explained that some alternat ive fuels have a carbon life cycle impact that is half of the
current petroleum life cycle . He stated that in 10 to 15 years, if 20 to 25 percent of the total fuel used came from alternative fuels

, it could reduce carbon emissions impacts by 10 to 15 perc ent

. Dr. Alonso then stated the air carrier industry could achieve a 10 percent reduction in carbon emissions in 5 years from operational improvements, another 30 percent reduction in 15 to 20 years from technological improvements, and up to 10 to 20 perc ent from alternative fuels in the same timeframe. He noted these numbers show what kind of relative im pacts alternative fuels can have on carbon dioxide emissions, which is the focus of th e subcommittee. He added he was a little less concerned about what they achieve in the next 3 years, and more concerned that these things happen in the future. Dr. Alonso stated he would like to see more discussion about technology improvements and aviation fuels, even though these are long

- term issues

.

Mr

. Glover state d that what is done in the next 3 years will a ffect the next 10 to 15 years

, and the decisions in research and development and implementation work are important even though there will not be immediate benefits

, because the air carrier industry is in the lo ng

- cycle business.

Mr

. Bedford stated he did not disagree

, but the charter is looking for more immediate items because that is what the Administration requested . He added that although he did not want to stifle conversation about long

- term improvements, h e thought the subcommittee should focus on pro posals that, if fund ed now, could have quick implementation and benefits by industry standards

.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

7 Mr. Bedford observed that proposals like runway metering would have more immediate tangible benefits. He then ask ed Dr

. Alonso and Mr

. Glover if t he y thought Ms. Yu ’s report to the FAAC

, The Environmental Benefits of Aircraft/Engine Technology

, had any elements that this subcommittee could adopt as proposals.

Mr

. Glover stated that Ms. Yu discuss ed the Continuous Low er Energy, Emissions

, and Noise ( CLEEN ) technology program and the new technology in the ecoDemonstrator aircraft

, which is within the 3

- year window. He added there may be additional technologies and proposals that could be ad ded to the ecoDemonstrator.

D r

. Alonso stated although Ms. Yu’s presentation did not have a lot of specific recommendations, she stressed that programs like the CLEEN program could help accelerate equipage of some technologies in the fleet. He added he would like to see more discussi on about technology programs the Secretary of Transportation could support that would pay dividends beyond the 3

- year window. He suggested if these programs are not implemented now, they w ill produce possible benefits in the 10 to 15

- year timeframe.

Ms

. M ittelholtz clarified to the sub committee that her understanding of the charter was that its proposals are for actions the Secretary could take in the near future

, and should not be limited to actions that have effect s in the near future. Dr

. Alonso agreed with her.

Mr

. Bedford stated although he thought some focus should be placed on actions that could have some immediate effect

, he would support proposals on technolog ies the sub committee could place its weight behind. Dr

. Alonso, Mr

. Glover, and Mr

. Bran dewie agreed to work together on proposals about technology the subcommittee could make

.

Mr

. Bedford then raised the subject of sustainable alternative fuels

, which could have some good options for the subcommittee to pursue. Ms

. Young noted A TA has a lot of interest i n this subject

, and it would be a good opportunity for the FAAC to suggest the Secretary should provide more support for the development of alternative aviation fuel s

. Mr

. Glover agreed and stated there are some specific proposals the subcom mittee could develop

. Mr

. Brandewie added that these could include collaboration with the U.S

. Air Force

.

Ms

. Young stated air carriers have been engaged with the military

, but the re are more opportunities within the g overnment to support such collaborati on. She observed the biggest hurdle the industry faces is the commercialization of alternative aviation fuel facilities

, and financial support within the Federal Government for these programs is needed. Mr

. Bedford ask ed what the return on investment

wou ld be if one of the subcommittee’s proposal was for the g overnment to inve st more in alternative fuel programs.

Dr

. Alonso stated most people believe alternative fuel is a technology with great potential

, but it is in the early stages. He added the commer cialization issue, in terms of plant construction , is one area that might be worth investing in , if only on a small scale. He noted he fully supports any proposals to investigate this technology ’s potential.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

8 Mr

. Glover described current programs in the U. S. Department of Agriculture

, U.S. Department of Energy , and other Federal agencies. He stated the Secretary could work with other agencies to generate financing specifically focused on aviation fuel

.

Mr

. Marchi suggested individual components of the prop osal should emphasize the unique requirements of aviation, specifically that aviation is heavily dependent on fuels with energy density

— in terms of both weight and volume. He also observed the range of carbon efficiency among the various alternative fue ls is quite large and can range from fuels that actually produce more carbon per pound of fuel to fuels that produce half as much

. Mr. Marchi suggested the support should be for the fuels with the large st carbon reduction and greatest environmental benefi t.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed Ms

. Young if she would create a proposal that suggest s how to support alternative fuels with the existing infrastructure. Ms

. Young agreed and asked Mr

. Glover to assist her

. H e agreed

.

Mr

. Bedford stated he would be stepping away fr om the meeting for a moment. B efore he left he stated the last bullet point for discussion was the idea of targets and goals within the framework of domestic and global emissions reduc tion efforts. He suggested these target s should be reasonably achievab le and economically viable. Mr

. Bedford then passed the meeting chair to Dr

. Alonso until he return ed

.

Dr

. Alonso continued the meeting with discussion on goals set by different portions of the air carrier industry

, the Federal Government, and int ernation ally . Mr

. Glover offered some background on this topic and described the International Civil Aviation Organization ( ICAO ) C ouncil meeting that took place the week before . The ICAO Council di scussed recommendation s for a framework on g reenhouse gas emissi ons reductions that it could present to the ICAO General Assembly

. In addition

, there was a letter from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to ICAO stating (to paraphrase) that the UNFCCC expected ICAO to take care of intern ational emissions from aviation

, and that domestic emissions, including aircraft, w ould be handled by the U NFCCC. The letter explained how the two organizations would be compatible : the principles laid out by the UNFCC C would apply domestically and the I CAO principles would apply international ly

. Dr. Alonso added that, in addition to the commercial aviation interests, the National Business Aviation Association agreed to the proposition . He noted while there are still some gaps between the various positi ons, they are all working toward a n equitable framework that provides real benefits.

Dr

. Alonso stated it would be difficult to develop a proposal that would bring all groups together with a unified set of goals. He asked if some of the Environment Subcom mittee’s goals about technology, fuels, and operations could be measured against the goals of ICAO and UNFCCC to determine if the y

are realistic

, but he was not sure if that should be a role of this subcommittee.

Mr

. Glover stated all the figures on the po tential benefits on technology, operational improvements, and fuels that have been presented to the subcommittee are consistent with what industry paper s have reported at the international level.

Dr

. Alonso stated that in setting long

- term fuel burn goals, he worked with a committee from ICAO that examined technology and various other things that could make a difference. He read the following excerpt from an untitled report:Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

9 A number of system goals have been conveyed by various different communities in t he aerospace community. ICAO has adopted an aspirational goal of 2 percent global fleet fuel efficiency improvements per year from 2021 to 2050. The U.S

. government is advocating a goal of achieving carbon neutral growth on the basis of 2005 by 2020

, wit h net reductions by 2050. The International Air Transport Association is calling for carbon neutral growth from 2020 and a 5 0 percent reduction by 2050 from the baseline of 2005.

Dr

. Alonso stated these are all ambitious goals

. He expressed concern that technology, operational improvements

, and the onset of sustainable fuels wil l not be enough to achieve the goal s

.

Mr

. Glover agreed these are certainly stretch goals, especially th ose set by the United States

, which will be very difficult to achieve. Ms

. Young stated that she agreed with everyone

. She added that Ms

. Pickard had made a good suggestion at the August 10, 2010

, Denver , Colorado

, meeting , when she said even though th e subcommittee may not develop a specific proposal

, these are very aggressive goals that will be difficult to achieve

. Ms. Pickard suggested there needs to be a concerted effort for investment in technology, operational improvements

, alternative fuels, and infrastructure to achiev e these goals

.

Mr

. Glover highlighted the need for h armonization between domestic and international goals

, which he stated needs to be part of the proposal.

Mr

. Kinney Baxter , Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority, stated the subcommittee has been focusing on carbon emissions , and asked if there were oth er environmental issues the subcommittee should discuss . Dr

. Alonso reminded the subcommittee members that although they had discussed other issues, they decided to focus on carbon dioxide reductions for the ir main proposals at the first meeting

. The sub committee agreed to focus on ways to achieve carbon dioxide reductions without negatively impacting other environmental issues

, such as noise, water quality, and local emission s.

Ms

. Pickard stated that Dr. Jake Plante , FAA, gave a presentation at the Augu st 10, 2010

, meeting on low

- emissio n ground support equipment

. She reminded the Environment Subcommittee that at the end of the meeting the subcommittee concluded th at low

- emission ground support equipment did not rate a proposal

. She added that Dr

. Plan te offered to present a broader airport sustainability initiative to the subcommittee . She ask ed if the subcommittee would consider hearing more on such an approach at its Oct ober 5 , 2010

, meeting. Dr

. Alonso polled the subcommittee and ask ed Ms

. Pickard to have D r

. Plante send a read

- ahead statement to the subcommittee about his proposal so the subcommittee could then discuss it at the Oct ober 5 , 2010

, meeting.

Dr

. Alonso ask ed the subcommittee for comments about harmonization of goals and global efforts on reducing carbon dioxide

. Ms

. Pickard again stated that the goals are aggressive and the outcome is difficult to predict because there are so many uncertainties about technological improvements and alternative fuels

. She added that instead of looking at these numbers, it would be more productive to look at ways to reach them

. Ms. Pickard recommended that the subcommittee think about what the Secretary can do that would help achiev e these goals

. S he expressed concern that some proposals toFuture of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

10 control car bon emissions would just siphon money from the aviation sector without producing improvements.

Dr

. Alonso stated he was also struggling to develop a reasonable proposal on this topic. He agreed the
current goals are aggressive and a concerted effort towar d technological and operational improvements and alternative fuels will be required. He added that as an industry, having harmonized goals is very important. He ask ed if anyone on the subcommittee could elaborate on what the U

. S

. G overnment was doing to achieve harmonization at the ICAO level

.

Ms

. Pickard stated the FAA was taking the lead in ICAO concerning NextGen goals . She added that Mr. Carl Burleson , FAA, represent s the U nited S tates on this issue

. She noted that international aviation should addr ess climate change through mutual agreements at ICAO

. H aving said that, she asked what the Secretary could contribute

. Ms. Pickard observed that there is concern that other domestic legislati on or international regulations could impede , rather than suppo rt, progress

.

Ms

. Young reiterated that the FAA and the U.S. Department of State represent the United States at ICAO and the UNFCCC in international agreements. She stated that at the Air Transport Action Group Environmental Summit

, September 16 and 17, 2 010

, in Geneva , Switzerland, the FAA confirmed that the U

. S

. Government remains dedicated to ensuring ICAO remains the leader

. She added although the subcommittee is developing some concrete proposals on technology, infrastructure, and operational improve ment s , ICAO will be undermined without consistent international and com ple mentary national agreement s

. She added there need s to be an international regulatory regime that supports meeting the se targets. As an example of a target being undermined by the l ack of an international framework, she described the air passenger duty the German government approved and justified on environmental grounds. She explained that in absen c e of an international framework , this will continue to happen

.

Mr

. Burleson joined t he meeting

, and Dr

. Alonso gave him a brief overview of the global harmonization discussions. Mr. Burleson stated the U.S

. Government probably has the most coherent position on a viation emissions at ICAO. He explained that the Government developed an int egrated position based on input from the FAA, Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Department of State

. He noted t he U

. S

. position is based on how ICAO policies and ICAO standards are used to achieve harmonization. Mr. Burleson added that when d eveloping items on which the Secretary can act , timing will be an issue because the ICAO General Assembly will already have met by the time anything comes out of the Environment Sub committee. He stated that in discussions at the Air Transport Action Group Environmental Summit , one of the differences in some countries ’ positions is whether they use the international standard of ICAO to address situations where there i s a distinction between international and domestic or if they use it as an international st andard to address global issues. Mr. Burleson stated t he United States is taking a more holistic approach by treating it as a global industry. He noted there needs to be more consideration about how to address things globally

. C arbon dioxide emissions h ave a global impact reg ardless of where they originate . He observed this attitude is not shared by other countries

, and an artificial distinction between international and domestic issues could lead to strange policies that are not optimal for either airc raft stand ard s or air traffic management

.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

11 Dr

. Alonso ask ed Mr

. Burleson if he thought some ICAO States would start acting on their own because it is so difficult to get the international communities that fac e different challenges together in a single rulin g . He further asked

, if they do start acting on their own

, could it a ffect the U.S

. industry adversely. Mr

. Burleson stated he saw more potential in countries moving at different speeds. He noted the standard

- setting was well

- harmonized, because technic al exp erts are doing their work on carbon dioxide and noise standards consideration

. He explained h e does n o t predict a wide divergence because there are a limited number of aircraft engine manufacturers

. Mr. Burleson further stated the air traffic side is a little harder to coordinate

, because getting best practice s out is more of a challenge. He added the area with the greatest challenge is market

- based measures , because countries differ so much on this issue.

Ms

. Young st ated she was referring to mark et

- based measures . W ithout a global framework in place, countries are acting alone and using the environment as an excuse to raise revenue s , such as the German air passenger duty mentioned earlier. She suggested the subcommittee raise the point that it i s importan t to push back against the proliferation of types measures that would siphon money out of aviation and away from the ability to invest in research and development , new aircraft that can fly in the NextGen s ystem , and alternative fuels

.

Mr

. Burles on noted Ms

. Young was correct about the lack of harmonization in the market

- based measures, and that i s why the United States is working hard to establish ing principles about how these measures will be used. He stated while these measures are important a nd cost

- effective

, there is concern about the potential proliferation of different measures without consistent principles

, and depending on how these measures are applied by States

, there could be perverse dis incentives for technology adoption.

Mr

. Bedford stated after all of the subcommittee’s discussion, there may be nothing that could be developed into a proposal for the Secretary, but he explained that making no recommendations could be a worse alternative. Mr. Bedford reiterated the commission the FAA C was given, which states that competitiveness , viability, labor, the environment

, and growth of the industry need to fit together . He expressed concern that there is a potential for these needs to be undermined by over ly

- ambitious, unreasonable, or unach ievab le international actions

. .

Mr

. Burleson noted one of the upsides of working through ICAO in the standard setting area is that

over time a philosophy of adopting things that are technologica l l y feasible, economically reasonable, and environmentally b eneficial has been developed . He added this philosophy also take s into account the tradeoffs of interdependency

. Mr. Burleson stated t his framework is driven by data

, and it serves the U.S

. industry very well.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed the subcommittee members i f they thought the se targets were reasonable , and if not , should the subcommittee speak up

. He reiterated from a n earlier briefing that the ICAO targets are not as aggressive as those in the European Union

, b ut he questioned whether the ICAO target s fit w ithin the U

. S

. framework of ambitious but achievable goals, and whether these targets are something the industry can pay for.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

12 Ms

. Pickard agreed the goals are ambitious and stated the subcommittee would get more mileage by focusing on recommend ations that would help meet those goals . Ms

. Young suggested in the absence of acknowledging specific targets, the subcommittee sh ould acknowledge there are many aggressive targets and the re is a need for investment to help achieve those targets. She noted that tech nology, operational, and infrastructure improvements would be needed to advance toward these targets.

Mr

. Bedford ask ed Ms

. Young to articulate this in a presentation to the subcommittee at its next meeting to determine where the industry stands in relatio n to ICAO. Ms. Young agreed to give this presentation

.

Mr

. Bedford then ask ed if there was any other business

, and Ms

. Pickard suggested the subcommittee should address the public comments.

P UBLIC C OMMENTS Ms Mittelholtz summarized the public comments tha t had been received.

Mr

. Bob Knauer recommended the DOT and FAA regulations be changed to allow air carriers to deny service to any passenger with excessive perfume.

Air Services Australia entered a report i n the docket regarding the Brisbane Green Aviat ion Program and its navigation modernization program

. Air Services Australia noted the program had some environmental benefits.

C LOSING R EMARKS

/N EXT M EETING

Mr

. Bedford reminded the subcommittee members of the next meeting at the Intercontinental Hotel in Chicago, Illinois

, on Tuesday, October 5

, 2010, from 10: 3 0 a.m. to 3 p.m. Central Daylight Time

. He stated his expectation for the next meeting would be to narrow down and prioritize the proposals . He summarize d the issues as follows :

 Acceleration of co mponents of NextGen

, specifically RNAV / RNP
, and related equipage issues ;

 Expan ding the a irport metering program ;

 Research and development of new technology ;

 Spurring development of a lternative fuels and look ing for financial support from existing
sources;

 Harmonization of domestic and international frameworks; and

 Consider ation of a potential broad airport sustainability proposal.Future of Aviation Advisory Committee Environment Subcommittee Record of Meeting September 20, 2010

Teleconference

13 

## A C Assigned to Action Item

Camille Mittelholtz Provide more information to the subcommittee on the Presidential i nitiative

.
Br ian Brandewie Provide more specifics on the acceleration of NextGen components , such as

RNAV/ RNP, and equipage

. Richard Marchi

, Billy Glover, and Nancy Young Look into proposals for expanding the a irport m etering p rogram

.

Nancy Young Provide bullets arti culating her understanding of the greenhouse gas target

proposals before ICAO

, and provide the subcommittee with current indications of what industry and ICAO targets mean and how to get there

. Billy Glover , Nancy Young Look into an alternative fuel propo sal, possibly including supporting the

necessary infrastructure and proposing fina ncial support

. Juan Alonso, Billy Glover

, and Brain Brandewie Research technology improvements with regard t o engine and aircraft

technologies

, and suggest proposals includ i ng the CLEEN technology program and R&D tax credits for industry

.

A DJOURNMENT

Mr. Bedford solicited a motion for adjournment. On motion, duly seconded and approved by the majority of the FAAC members present, the meeting was adjourned.

The meeting adjour ned at 3:05 p.m

. I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the foregoing minutes are accurate and complete.

Approved by: _______________________

________________ _____

Lynne Pickard

, Designated Federal Official

Dated: _______________________

________________ ___________