Aerodrome Safety Functional Directive

ASD 2002-008
2002.11.26

Attachment 1

NOISE ABATEMENT PROCEDURES AND RESTRICTIONS IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS

Aircraft noise concerns at airports are local in nature. Certain airports have an obligation to manage local noise issues associated with activity at airports. Measures to address these concerns inevitably have impacts that reach beyond the local area. In order to deal fairly with the concerns of all affected parties and yet achieve effective and enforceable measures that address noise issues, Transport Canada has made revisions to the process for implementing or modifying noise abatement procedures and restrictions which will require the exercise of Transport Canada’s regulatory authority. The information to be considered as part of the process has been defined by an industry/government working group reporting to Transport Canada’s Aircraft Noise and Emissions Committee.

The process is one that originates at the airport level and proceeds from the site to the Transport Canada regional office and eventually makes its way to the national regulatory process centered in Ottawa. The various stages are designed to ensure that equity and fairness are observed and that consultation with the affected parties is completed. Integral to the implementation/modification of noise abatement procedures and restrictions is the assurance that the process has been followed.

The individual steps in the process are:

1. The noise issue is clearly identified by the proponent. Supporting documentation shall consider (where applicable) but not be limited to the following, where applicable:

  • Description of the problem;
  • Proposed solution (including possible exceptions);
  • Alternatives (such as alternative procedures or land uses in the community);
  • Costs (such as revenue impact, direct and indirect costs to the community, airport operator and airport users);
  • Noise impacts of the proposed solution;
  • Effects on aircraft emissions;
  • Effect on current and future airport capacity;
  • Implications of not proceeding with the proposal;
  • Implementation issues (e.g. aircraft technology; availability of replacement aircraft; ground facilities);
  • Impact on the Aviation System;
  • Safety implications;
  • Air traffic management;
  • Fleet impact.

2. The proponent conducts consultation on the proposal with all affected parties to include the following:

  • Airport management/operator;
  • Noise management committee (where applicable);
  • Community representatives;
  • NAVCANADA;
  • Air Transport Association of Canada (secretarially or by delegate);
  • Canadian Business Aircraft Association (secretarially or by delegate);
  • Canadian Owners and Pilots Association (secretarially or by delegate);
  • All scheduled Operators who operate at the airport;
  • Transport Canada;
  • All Fixed Base Operators on the airport.

3. The proponent:

  1. Fully and clearly explains the impacts to all parties, documenting this consultation and the information produced by this process such that it is clear what has been transmitted to whom and any reactions received.
  2. Where all parties agree with the proposal, the airport operator shall submit a description of the proposal and of the consultation process. Included in the package will be a signoff indicating agreement of the participants.
    1. The consultation process will include descriptions of what information was considered and an explicit indication of agreement to not consider particular items.
  3. Where there is no consensus, the proponent shall document the consultation in the same manner as b) above, include any dissenting views, and will forward this information to the airport operator for onward transmission to Transport Canada. Dissents should contain all reasons for the position taken.

4. Regional Aerodrome Safety reviews the documentation and the proposal to ensure that the consultation process has been followed and that the report is complete and accurate, and then refers it to the Director Aerodrome Safety with its recommendation. This report shall include the Regional concurrence or disagreement with the proposal along with supporting rationale.

5. The Director Aerodrome Safety reviews the submission and obtains headquarters Office of Technical Interest signoff to ensure that the proposal meets the national policy and verifies the national airport system effects, if applicable.

6. Where there is consensus the proposal will be sent for publication.

7. If there is no agreement, the Director Aerodrome Safety prepares briefing explanatory notes for forwarding to the Aircraft Noise and Emissions Committee (ANEC) members.

8. The Director Aerodrome Safety will call a meeting of the ANEC to schedule a proposal review.

9. Where dissents have been forwarded, the Director Aerodrome Safety prepares notes and forwards an issue paper to the Secretariat of the Civil Aviation Regulatory Committee (CARC) meeting agenda.

10. If no dissents or CARC has rendered a decision, the Director Aerodrome Safety arranges with region to publish procedure or restriction.

SUMMARY OF HEADQUARTERS PROCESS

Submission Receipt

No Dissent  Publish
                  c.c. CARC

Dissent   CARC Approves  Publish
                        NO
                 Return to NMC

Date modified: