VZCZCXYZ0006
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHC #1167 3042105
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 312047Z OCT 07
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO RUEHAB/AMEMBASSY ABIDJAN PRIORITY 9909
RUEHLI/AMEMBASSY LISBON PRIORITY 4752
INFO RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY

UNCLAS STATE 151167 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EAIR SENV ETRD
SUBJECT: PORTUGAL - RESPONDING TO GOP'S FAX ON OPORTO NIGHT FLIGHT 
RESTRICTIONS 
 
REF: (A) SEPT 12 GOP FAX (B) STATE 118288 (C) GOP MAY 8 LETTER TO AMB 
 
HOFFMAN (D)MORENSKI-BYERLY EMAIL OF MAY 23 
 
¶1.  Summary and action request.  Department was disappointed by the 
response received from the Government of Portugal (GoP) to our August 
demarche (ref B).  The passing reference to the balanced approach to 
noise management, as if a mere verbal reference takes care of the 
obligations of the GoP to take certain steps, raises serious 
questions about the government's international commitment to address 
noise problems in a transparent and consultative manner, as does the 
lack of any reference to the EC Directive on noise management at 
European airports.  The limited exemptions offered (to allow for 
extenuating circumstances) offer little real flexibility to our 
carriers that rely on night-time operations in Lisbon.  Moreover, if 
our understanding is correct, restrictions on the use of reverse 
thrust after landing (para 3 of the fax) raise serious safety 
concerns.  Although EEB/TRA DAS John Byerly raised the issue of night 
flight restrictions with Luis Fonseca de Almeida on the margins of 
the International Civil Aviation Organization Assembly, he did not 
have an opportunity to discuss the GOP's reply in detail.  Department 
requests that post convey the points in paragraph two to the 
Government of Portugal, and advise them of our intent to raise this 
during the next preliminary meeting of the US-EU Joint Committee the 
week of November 5.   End Summary and Action Request. 
 
¶2.  Begin Points 
 
-- We have reviewed the response to our request for more information 
regarding the Decree-Law 9/2007 of January 2007 on noise regulation 
at Oporto Airport. 
 
-- We are concerned that the decision to forbid landings or take-offs 
between the hours of midnight and 6:00 a.m. appears to have been 
taken without a structured and transparent opportunity for 
consultation with all stakeholders, or any meaningful consideration 
of the costs and benefits of alternative measures available to 
address noise at Oporto. 
 
-- The response to our request offered no insight into any 
cost/benefit analysis that Portugal may have conducted.  It provided 
no clear explanation for the data underpinning the nature of the 
noise problem identified or any alternative measures that were 
evaluated before the decision was taken to implement operational 
restrictions and, it would appear to dismiss alternative measures. 
There is only an uninformative and unsatisfactory reference to 
"governmental deliberation." 
 
-- As noted in our August communications, an approach that lacks 
cost/benefit analysis and transparency would be inconsistent with the 
internationally agreed commitment to apply the "balanced approach" to 
noise management at the airport level, a commitment underscored in 
conjunction with the signing of the US-EU Air Transport Agreement. 
It also would be inconsistent with the requirements outlined in the 
EC Directive 2002/30/EC. 
 
-- Operating restrictions at Oporto that limit U.S. carriers' market 
access raise fundamental issues under the existing bilateral Open 
Skies Agreement, and under the U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement that 
will be provisionally applied as of March 30, 2008. 
 
-- Moreover, in our reading of the implementation measures, it 
appears that there is a complete ban on the use of reverse thrust 
after landing.  Such an outright ban raises significant safety 
concerns. 
 
-- While we appreciate that your government has offered exceptions, 
those exceptions only apply in extenuating circumstances and offer no 
real flexibility for carriers that rely on the ability to take off 
and land at night. 
 
-- While we affirm that the ultimate decision clearly rests with your 
government, reaching it in a manner which appears to us to ignore 
international agreement and EC requirements is counterproductive to 
the orderly operation of international aviation. 
 
-- We have also raised our concerns with the European Commission, and 
have placed this issue on the agenda of the next preliminary meeting 
of the Joint Committee scheduled for November 5-6. 
RICE