null
John J Goodfriend  08/15/2007 01:59:27 PM  From  DB/Inbox:  John J 
Goodfriend

Cable 
Text:                                                                      
                                                                           
      
UNCLAS    SIPDIS     LONDON 03141

SIPDIS
CXLONDON:
    ACTION: FAA
    INFO:   EST AMB RSO ECON DCM
Laser2:
    ACTION: FAAUNCL COPYUN1

DISSEMINATION: FAA /1
CHARGE: STA

APPROVED: ECON:JMCNAMARA
DRAFTED: EST:WJPATON
CLEARED: FAA:CBARKS (INFO)

VZCZCLOI573
PP RUEHC RUEHMT RHMFIUU
DE RUEHLO #3141/01 2261614
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 141614Z AUG 07
FM AMEMBASSY LONDON
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 4947
INFO RUEHMT/AMCONSUL MONTREAL PRIORITY 0046
RHMFIUU/FAA NATIONAL HQ WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LONDON 003141 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR IO/T AND EB/TRA 
AMCONSUL MONTREAL PASS TO U.S. MISSION TO ICAO 
FAA FOR JIM FILIPATTOS, DI REIMOLD AND CARL BURLESON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAIR ETRD SENV KGHG ECON UK
SUBJECT: HMG DOES NOT SEE EYE-TO-EYE WITH USG ENVIRONMENTAL 
POSITIONS AT ICAO 
 
REF: A. STATE 83246 
 
     ¶B. LONDON 02589 
 
¶1.  (U) Action Request: Post received the comments 
at para 2 in response to ref A, from Danny Powers, 
Head of the International Branch, Aviation 
Environment Division, UK Department for Transport. 
HMG requests USG support and endorsement of its 
position as set out in para 2. 
 
¶2.  (SBU) Begin HMG Comments: 
 
United Kingdom Response to the United States 
Environmental Positions for the ICAO Assembly 
 
The UK welcomes this action by the U.S. in its 
intention to help find a constructive way forward at 
the ICAO Assembly.  We are also seeking to be 
constructive.  Our comments below are given against 
the background that it is essential to have an 
approach which recognizes the scale of the challenge 
facing aviation and responds accordingly.  The U.S. 
proposals are constructive, however where, in our, 
they view represent an incomplete solution, we are 
looking to work with the grain and build on those 
proposals to present an effective way forward. 
 
(USG Talking Point 1) The United States believes it is 
critical for ICAO to continue its important role and 
efforts in addressing aviation's environmental 
impacts in order to ensure the sustainable growth of 
aviation with all the benefits it brings to the 
world. 
 
(USG Talking Point 5) The United States believes it 
critical that ICAO should continue its leadership in 
fostering cost-effective solutions for use by 
Contracting States to address the environmental 
objectives they have agreed to. 
 
The United Kingdom believes it is critical for ICAO 
to take a strong leadership role in addressing 
aviation's environmental impacts.  The United 
Kingdom considers that ICAO must provide a 
comprehensive vision for a sustainable aviation 
industry that reflects the seriousness of the 
environmental challenge and must promote the 
measures necessary to realize that vision.  In order 
to remain at the forefront of the global debate, 
ICAO must ensure that international arrangements 
keep pace with the changing context. 
 
(USG Talking Point 2) The United States endorses a 
systematic and comprehensive approach to mitigating 
the impacts of aircraft engine emissions on the 
environment.  Such an approach should include better 
scientific understanding, modernization of air 
traffic management procedures, development of new 
lower emissions and energy-efficient technologies 
for aircraft and engines, and exploration of the 
potential of alternative fuels. 
 
(USG Talking Point 3) The United States also believes 
cost-beneficial market-based measures have a role to 
play.  The United States supports endorsement of the 
ICAO guidance on emissions trading, provided that 
incorporation of airlines of other States is done on 
the basis of mutual consent.  That is the only 
acceptable manner for implementation of emissions 
trading for international aviation consistent with 
international aviation law. 
 
(USG Talking Point 6) With respect to greenhouse gas 
emissions, ICAO should exercise leadership through 
the Global Air Navigation Plan to encourage 
improvements in fuel efficiency around the world. 
 
The United Kingdom strongly supports a systematic 
and comprehensive approach to mitigating the impacts 
of aircraft engine emissions on the environment. 
However, the United Kingdom believes that such an 
approach should include, and recognize the benefits 
of, market-based measures. 
 
The United Kingdom is disappointed, therefore, that 
market-based measures do not form part of the United 
States' vision of a systematic and comprehensive 
approach.  We are also disappointed that the United 
States does not appear to have accepted the 
conclusion reached by CAEP/7 in relation to the 
guidance on market based measures. 
 
The United Kingdom notes further that there have 
been discussions through CAEP including a meeting of 
legal experts.  That meeting did not reach a 
conclusion that "mutual consent" was the only 
acceptable manner for implementation of emissions 
trading for international aviation consistent with 
international aviation law.  Point 3 must therefore 
be seen as an opinion - with other states having a 
different opinion - rather than a statement of fact 
 
(USG Talking point 4) The United States believes the 
guidance developed on local air quality emissions 
charges is a step forward.  However, we still have 
doubts about whether these charges are cost- 
effective in many cases.  ICAO should further assess 
the cost-effectiveness of such charges.  For States 
using such charges we encourage transparency, 
openness, and accountability in how such charges are 
set and revenues employed. 
 
The United Kingdom believes that the ICAO guidance 
provides an effective framework for the 
consideration of local air quality emissions 
charges.  In relation to further work, the United 
Kingdom considers that the FESG analysis on the 
cost-effectiveness of local air quality charges 
prepared for CAEP/7 represented the result of well- 
considered work.  CAEP accepted the conclusions 
drawn from the analysis.  We do not therefore see a 
role for further assessment at this stage.  But, of 
course, we share the desire for openness and 
accountability which is set out in the guidance. 
 
(USG Talking point 7) Further, development of an ICAO 
Emissions Plan must include a systematic 
understanding of trends in growth, impacts of 
various emissions, changes in aircraft technology, 
air traffic operational improvements and trade-offs 
between various environmental objectives - 
especially mitigation strategies.  ICAO's Emission 
Plan should also reflect a philosophy that a "one 
size fits all" approach will not be effective in 
tackling the important issue of aviation greenhouse 
gas emissions. 
 
The United Kingdom agrees that an Emissions Plan 
needs to incorporate these elements, but believes 
that it must also set out a clear vision of how ICAO 
will achieve its environmental goal of limiting or 
reducing the impact of aviation greenhouse gas 
emissions on the global climate.  Such a Plan also 
needs to provide States with sufficient flexibility 
to adopt appropriate measures to tackle aviation 
greenhouse gas emissions. 
 
The United Kingdom solicits your support and 
endorsement of its position as set out in this 
response. 
 
End HMG Comments. 
 
Visit London's Classified Website: 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eur/london/index. cfm 
TUTTLE