Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices 43137 

1See Public Law 108–176, title VII, § 709, Dec. 

12, 2003, 117 Stat. 2582. 

2Sustainability means developing aviation in a 

manner that enhances and promotes the Nation’s 

economic, environmental, and social initiatives. 

3See the NextGen Integrated Plan (December 

2004) Sections 5.1.6 and 7.6. 

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; 

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: http://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 

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

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

43138 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices 

4http://www.jpdo.gov/library/ 

20101123_JPDOPaper_EMS_Strategy_v3.0.pdf. 

5See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on 

Aviation and Environment at www.faa.gov/library/ 

reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf. 

6See the 2004 FAA Report to Congress on 

Aviation and Environment at www.faa.gov/library/ 

reports/media/congrept_aviation_envirn.pdf. 

7See 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 http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/partner/ 

reports/proj15/proj15finalreport.pdf. 

8There 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. 

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 

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 

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices 43139 

10Carbon 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. 

12See Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change Fourth Assessment Report, ‘‘Working Group 

1: The Physical Science Basis,’’ 2007. 

13See ICAO Assembly Resolution A37–19: 

Consolidated statement of Continuing ICAO 

policies and practices related to environmental 

protection—Climate change, Section 23.g). 

14This 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. 

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 

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 

(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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

43140 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices 

15See 2011 The Future of Aviation Advisory 

Committee (FAAC) Final Report; http:// 

www.dot.gov/faac/environment.html. 

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. 

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2012 / Notices 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 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Air Carrier Hazardous Materials 

Passenger Notification Requirements: 

Acceptable Means of Compliance 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of public meeting and 

related information. 

SUMMARY: This notice is to advise 

interested persons that the Federal 

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 

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: http://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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES