ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 209 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0 104 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the openin g to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Communit y and the European Atom ic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this fi le is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 1983  über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 27. 9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(84) 209 final
Brussels, 13 April 1984
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
Response of the United States  
Community action objecting to
noiseDepartment of State to the third  
their rule on aircraft operating  
limits
COM(84) 209 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
Re su crise of the United States Department of State to the third  
Community action objecting to their rule on aircraft operating noise
limits
Consideration of a Community response  
Previous Community Actions
1. On 28 June 1980, an Aide-Mémoire1 was delivered to the US  
Department of State, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)  
and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which contained a  
Community objection to the implementation of the FAA Notice of  
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) 80-7 on aircraft operating noise  
limits.
This NPRM provided that, from 1 January 1985, all the foreign  
registfred jet aircraft landing in the United States, would be  
subject to US noise standards (FAR 36). These standards are, in  
some respects, more stringent than the International standards  
(j^glneci in the Annex 16 to the convention of the In cernationax  
Civil Aviation. The United Stales is a signatory to the  
Convention.
Furthermore, the International Civil Aviation Organisation  
(TCAO).  had recommended,  in May 1579, that States should not  
fox-bid the movements of non noise certificated foreign  
i  egist'.rod aircraft before 1 January 1983. ihis recommendation  
was reinforced by trie resolution A'3-10 of the Assembly of ICAO  
(October 1980).
see Doc. 8822/80 AER 26 ENV 140

The FAA published its rule in November 1980 without making any  
substantial concessions to Community, Member States or  
European Civil Aviation Conference objections.
2. On 1 July 1981, the Permanent Representatives Committee agreed
that the Community should lodge a further protest against the
2unilateral action of the United States .  A second Aide-Memoire 
was presented to the US authorities on lb July 1981.
The US authorities replied on 12 August 1981 that they would  
give full and proper consideration to individual requests for
3
exemptions by Community Airlines .  However, they did not modify  
their position on the main Community objections :  i.e. their non  
application of the ICAO standards to foreign registered aircraft  
and non respect of the ICAO A23-10 resolution.
The Third Community Action
3. On 29 June 1983, the Permanent Representatives Committee agreed
for a third demarche in protest to be presented to the US  
Aauthorities .
An Aide-Memoire and a petition, the drafts of which were
5
prepared and submitted to the Council by the Commission ,  were  
handed over to the US Department of State, jointly, as for the  
previous actions, by the representatives of the Council  
Presidency and of the Commission's delegation in Washington, on  
8 August 1983.
2 see Do· .  7192/81 AER :  0 ENV 99 + COR 1
O
' ■  Doc AMD 'A> KIJV 1  ]  r >
A D o c. ’/'iP b /b O  AKR IP ENV 91 i  ADD!
5 Doc. 6555/33 AER 8 ENV 59 - COM(33) 194 final

The Aide-Mémoire repeated the main objections already formulated  
and also drew the attention of the US authorities to the noise  
regulations adopted by the Port Authority of New York and New  
Jersey. These regulations were more stringent than the Federal  
rule and also did not comply with the ICAO recommendations.
The petition followed the FAA procedures for amending a rule and  
proposed amendments to FAR 91, to bring it in line with the  
international practice.
The response of the US authorities
4. In their response, handed over to the Commission's Delegation in  
Washington on 8 December 1983 (see Annex 1), the US authorities  
maintain their position that the US is not in violation of  
international agreements to which it is party and reject the  
Community's main objections relating to the application of  
national rules to foreign aircraft instead of the ICAO Annex 16  
standards and to resolution A23-10 of the ICAO Assembly. They  
mentioned again that exemptions might be granted for duly  
justified individual cases.
Furthermore,  they informed the Community that a federal district  
court has, in most respects, suspended the regulation adopted by  
the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
Consideration of a Community reply
9. The Commission lias considered the legal issues raised in the US  
rer.oonse, and concludes that further legal protest is unlikely  
to he fruitful or useful.

Nevertheless, the tone of the Department of State's response to  
the Coriimunity demarche is not acceptable. It is suggested,  
therefore, that our disagreement with the US position should be  
notified.
A draft response to the US Department of State is annexed to  
this communication (Annex 2). It is proposed that this  
Community response is transmitted to. the US Department of State.

ANNEX 1
AIDE-MEMOIRE
The Department of State refers to the Commission of 
the European Communities' aide-memoire of August S,
1983. forwarded jointly by the Delegation of the 
Commission of the European Communities and the Embassy 
of Greece, concerning the relationship between aircraft 
noise regulations issued by the United States Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA') .  That aide-memoire 
transmitted a petition for amendment of Federal 
Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 91, Subpart E, and 
stated the Communities' view that the ameifl3ment would 
bring FAR Part 91 "in line" with international 
agreements, including in particular the aircraft noise 
standards and recommended practices published by the 
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) in
f i
Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil 
Aviation.
The United States Government, including in 
particular the FAA, has carefully considered the
'V«
Communities1  views on noise standards for aircraft 
engaged in 'international air transportation as 
expressed in the Communities’  aide-memoire. The United 
States notes that, like the Communities, it^regards the 
orderly establishment of noise standards as an 
important and serious matter. In this regard, it is 
the view of the United States Government that the 
provisions of FAR 91 and the FAA's timetable for its 
implementation are in full accord with international 
agreements to which the United States Is a party.

£
The United States cannot agree with the Communities
I
that the FAA should amend its noise regulations on 
account of Resolution A23-10 of the ICAO Assembly.
That Resolution constitutes a request by the ICAO 
Assembly that member states not require aircraft to 
meet the requirements of Annex 16 before 1988.
However, as the chairman of the United States 
delegation to the 23rd Assembly of the ICAO, the FAA 
Administrator, explained when the Resolution was 
adopted, the provisions of FAR 91, Subpart E, were 
mandated by the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act 
of 1979. In particular, the provision most affected by 
the petition, Section 91.303, was required by Section 
302 of the statute to be appl.ied to both United States 
and foreign air carriers. The FAA cannot by rule 
countermand a statute enacted by Congress and is 
therefore precluded from exempting all foreign 
registered aircraft from the noise requirements of 
Parts 91 and 36. Thus, because consideration of the 
Communities' petition would be futile, the FAA does not 
plan to publish the petition in the Federal Register 
and solicit public comment.
However, as the FAA Administrator pointed out to
the ICAO Assembly, he may allow specific exemptions to
individual operators which have a legitimate need for 
«
temporary^relief from the timetable imposed by the 
regulations. The FAA will continue to consider such 
petitions, on a case-by-case basis in light of unusual 
or unique circumstances, to determine whether the 
granting of the temporary extension requested would be 
in the public or national interest.

- 3 -
Additionally, the United States Government notes 
that enforcement of noise rules imposed by the Port 
Authority of New York and New Jersey has in most
t
respects been enjoined by the United States courts. 
Therefore, those rules are not being generally applied 
to aircraft operating into the Port Authority airports, 
and the FAA rules would apply instead.
Department of S tat»,

ANNEX II
DRAFT OF THE RESPONSE TO BE HANDED TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT QF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
The r ·.: ope·· in Community refers to the Department of State's Aide-  
Mémoire of 8 December; 19S3 concerning the European Community's  
objections to noise rules imposed on foreign registered civil  
subsonic jet aircraft by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
It regrets that the United States Government cannot take into  
account the amendment proposed oy the Community petition, that the  
US Government considers the petition as futile on the ground that  
the FAA cannot act contrary to a statute enacted by Congress and  
that it has net seer, fit to publish it in the F'ederal Register. It  
is felt that such publient.on might have elicited useful public  
commonts.
Without being convinced that the FAA is so bound as regards foreign  
registered aircraft, the European Community holds the view that  
these internal considerations do not a!ter the principle of comity  
in the field of aviation. The United States Government should have  
ensured that the FAA rule complied with international practice, as  
other nations did.
Given the shared interest of the European Community and the United  
Stair·;·, Government in the ord'-i I  y dove I  opinent of in !  ornati onal air  
trcinsport. and establ i  shiivi. 1 .  of iiihTiml ional noise standards, the  
Community registers i us disappointment with the Department of  
State's communication of 8 December 1983 and maintains its  
previously expressed objections to United States unilateral action,  
which is not in conformity with the resolution A23-10 of the  
International Civil Aviation Organization or with international  
practice in this field.