19 Amendments of Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH related to 2011/0398(COD)
Amendment 58 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) While a cost-benefit analysis provides an indication of the total economic welfare effectsnoise abatement objective should be chosen by comparing all costs and all benefits, a cost-effectiveness assessment focuses on achieving a given objective in the mostthe tool to reach this objective should be cost-effective way, requiring a comparison of only the costs.
Amendment 63 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Suspension of noise mitigating measures is important to avoid unwanted consequences on aviation safety, airport capacity and competition. Whilst an appeal procedure against noise-related operating restrictions may relate to noise abatement objectives, assessment methods and selection of cost-effective measures, the appeal may not suspend their implementation. Therefore, the Commission should well before implementation of the measures be able to use the right of scrutiny and to suspend measures deemed to produce unwanted or irreversible consequences. It is recognised that the suspension should be for a limited periodThe Commission should be able to evaluate proposed operating restrictions before their implementation.
Amendment 74 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) In order to ensure legal certainty and planning reliability, operating restrictions and decisions on the operation of airports, including court decisions and the outcome of mediation processes which were already introduced or under examination before the entry into force of this Regulation should not be subject to this Regulation but should be treated under existing rules.
Amendment 75 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 76 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 84 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation lays down rules on the introduction of noise-related operating restrictions in a consistent manner on an airport-by-airport basis and where a noise problem has been identified so as to help improve the noise climate and to limit or reduce the number of people significantly affected by the harmful effects ofaffected by aircraft noise, in accordance with the Balanced Approach.
Amendment 102 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(2) ‘'Balanced Approach’' means the methodprocess established by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) under which the range of available measures, namely reduction of aircraft noise at source, land-use planning and management, noise abatement operational procedures and operating restrictions, is considered in a consistent way with the view to addresminimising the noise problem in the most cost-effective way on an airport by airport basis.
Amendment 106 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) ‘'Marginally compliant aircraft’' means civil aircraft that meet is certified in accordance withe Chapter 3 certification limits laid down in Volume 1, Part II, Chapter 3 of Annex 16 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) by a cumulative margin of less than 108 EPNdB (Effective Perceived Noise in dDecibels), whereby t during a transitional period of four years after the entry into force of this Regulation, and by a cumulative margin of less than 10 EPNdB following the end of that transitional period. The cumulative margin is the figure expressed in EPNdB obtained by adding the individual margins (i.e. the differences between the certificated noise level and the maximum permitted noise level) at each of the three reference noise measurement points as defined in Volume 1, Part II, Chapter 43 of Annex 16 to the Chicago Convention;
Amendment 111 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) ‘Operating restrictions’ means a noise- related action that limits the access to or reduces the optimal capacity use of an airport, including operating restrictions aimed at the withdrawal from operations of marginally compliant aircraft at specific airports as well as operating restrictions of a partial nature, affecting thwhich for example apply for an identified time operationd of civil aircraft according to time periodnly for certain runways at the airport.
Amendment 126 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
3. The Member States shall notify the Commission of the names and addresses of the designated competent authorities and appeal body referred to in paragraph 1. The Commission shall publish this information.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States may, within the Balanced Approach, differentiate noise mitigating measures according to aircraft type, runway use, flight path and/or timeframe covered.
Amendment 218 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
At the request of the Commission and if the European Aviation Safety Agency does not already dispose of the information requested, aircraft operators shall communicate the following noise information in respect of their aircraft that use Union airports:
Amendment 236 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 243 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. The Agency shall verify the aircraft noise and performance data for modelling purposes in accordance with Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and the CouncilModelling of airport community noise shall be based on manufacturer provided aircraft noise and performance data recommended for use by the international community and made available through ICAO. The Agency shall verify the aircraft noise and performance data for modelling purposes in accordance with Article 6 (1) of Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and the Council. The Agency shall refer to the established ICAO Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection Modelling and Databases Group's process to determine data validity and best practices and ensure continued harmonization across international airworthiness agencies.
Amendment 248 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Following the assessment carried out in accordance with Article 5, the notification of the decision shall be accompanied by a written report explaining the reasons for introducing the operating restriction, the environnoise abatemental objective established for the airport, the measures that were considered to meet that objective, and the evaluation of the likely cost-effectiveness of the various measures considered, including, where relevant, their cross- border impact.
Amendment 250 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3
Article 7 – paragraph 3
3. Where the operating restriction concerns the withdrawal of marginally compliant aircraft from an airport, no new services shall be allowed with marginally compliant aircraft at that airport six months after the notification. The competent authorities shall decide on the annual rate for removing marginally compliant aircraft from the fleet of affected operators at that airport, taking due account of the age of the aircraft and the composition of the total fleet. Without prejudice to paragraph 3 of Article 4, this rate shall not be more than 20% of that operator's fleet of, ending at least two months prior to the determination of the slot coordination parameters as per paragraph 1. The competent authorities shall decide on the annual rate for removing marginally compliant aircraft. This annual rate shall not be more than 25% of the movements and shall be applied uniformly to each affected operator in reference to its number of movements with marginally compliant aircraft servingat that airport.
Amendment 268 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
1. At the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, and without prejudice to a pending appeal procedure, the Commission may scrutinise the decision on an operating restriction, prior to its implementation. Where the Commission finds that the decision does not respect the requirements set out in this Regulation, or is otherwise contrary to Union law, it may suspendwithin a period of two months after the day on which it receives notice, as referred to in Article 7(1), evaluate the process for the introduction of a noise-related operating restriction. Where the Commission finds that the introduction of a noise-related operating restriction does not follow the process set out in this Regulation, the Commission may notify the relevant competent authorities accordingly. The relevant competent authorities may take the decCommission's opinion into account.
Amendment 270 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 4
Article 10 – paragraph 4
4. Where the Commission has not adopted a decisnotified its opinion within a period of sixtwo months after it has received the informationnotice, as referred to in paragraph 2Article 7(1), the competent authority may apply the envisaged decision on an operating restriction.
Amendment 275 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. The delegation of power referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred for an indeterminateon the Commission for a period of timefive years from the date of entry into force of this Regulation.