Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
16972780
label
Aircraft Noise (14)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
16972780
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Aircraft Noise (14)
citationUrl
collections
James M. Cannon Files (Ford Administration)
James Cannon's Issues Files
subjects
Aeronautics, Commercial
Aircraft
Noise
Regulatory reform
Speeches, addresses, etc.
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
16972780
coverageEndDate
day
18
logicalDate
1976-11-18
month
11
year
1976
coverageStartDate
day
9
logicalDate
1976-09-09
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
5626be3c5ff5d7f7
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 2, folder "Aircraft Noise (14)" of the James M.
Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 2 of the James M. Cannon Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
CLEARANCE SHEET
DATE: 10-7-76
Your Request
JMC ACTION
Required by:
SUBJECT:
Draft--Aviation Noise
STAFF Policy RESPONSIBILIEY HOPE
RECEIVED FROM:
DATE RECEIVED:
STAFF COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
QUERN/MOORE RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE
REVIEW & COMMENT
Jim, I that this decisions here.
DISCUSS
is a but serious are
Let's Arl
CANNON ACTION:
DATE:
Material Has Been:
Signed and forwarded
Changed and signed
Returned per conversation
LISRANT GERALD P. FORD
Noted
JIM CANNON
Comment:
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 7, 1976
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE
SUBJECT:
Draft--Aviation Noise Policy
I have revised several pages in the draft speech on "Quiet
Skies." I have kept your original page numbers; my changes
are indicated with underlining. I have also changed the
speech in a material respect: I have made the Coleman
proposal an amendment to Aviation Regulatory Reform, not an
alternative to it.
July
is not Prendant,
That The for.
what or I, osked June
FORD is LIBRARY 938870
-7-
JRH changes are underlined
in this draft.
Consequently, we have this situation:
Too Much Noise:
The Federal Government FAA, by not moving on noise standards,
has shown a lack of decisiveness that must be changed.
Outdated Regulations:
The CAB, by following policies and procedures that are
impractical and out of date, is clearly unable to assist
the airlines in providing the best and cheapest service to
the public.
Congressional Inaction:
The Congress, by its failure to act on aviation regulatory
reform, is continuing a critical economic problem for the
airlines and all the people who work for airlines and depend
on them.
As President, I cannot tolerate inaction any longer. It is
high time the Federal Government laid down a clear and
effective plan to We-must end the noise pollution around
American airports and bring quiet skies back to America
again.
I am proposing a number of actions
-8-
Te-de-this,-f-am-taking-the-fetlewing-aetiens
First, I am today directing the Secretary of Transportation
to instruct the Administrator of FAA to extend its noise
regulations standards to all domestic U.S. commercial aircraft,
so that within the next eight years, all such aircraft will
be at least 25% quieter. te-be-phased-in-ever-an-8-year-peried.
I am also directing the Secretary of Transportation, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, and the
Secretary of State to begin negotiations immediately with
representatives of international aviation to solve the
international noise problem.
Second, we must free aviation from arbitrary and unnecessary
restrictions and regulations SO that the airlines themselves
can solve the noise problem. pay-the-eest-of-noise-abatement.
I am putting the Congress on notice that I will not accept
its inaction. Congress must adopt the airline regulatory
reform measure I proposed in 1975. Congress must act on this
reform in the interest of the American public: passage will
mean lower air fares and a stronger aviation industry which
is more able to pay for new, quieter aircraft.
I want the members to know now that aviation regulatory reform
will be on their doorstep when they come back in January.
-8A-
f-the-Cengress-dees-net-act-on Third, I will immediately
propose to the next Congress an amendment to my aviation
regulatory reform fer-the-airlines-within-60-days-after-the
opens, must make certain legislation
which will guarantee that the airlines can meet the new noise
standards and at the same time continue to be a healthy and
competitive industry serving 200 million Americans. I will
use every effort to see that this Act, as amended is passed
and signed by Therefore;-if-Cengress-fails-to-act-on-Aviatien
Regulatory-Reform-by March 15, 5 1976. I shall send Congress
amended legislation that would will reduce the present Federal
tax on domestic passenger fares from 8 percent to 6 percent,
and reduce the present Federal tax on domestic freight from
5 percent to 3 percent+-and.
Third;-f-propose-that-the-present-Pederal-tar-on-domestie-
passenger-fares-be-redueed-frem-8-pereent-to-6-pereent-and
en-demestic-freight-be-redueed-from-5-pereent-te-3-pereent-
This tax on the consumer is now going to the Airport and
Airway Trust Fund to provide Federal assistance to airport
construction and improvement. There is now a surplus of
$1.4 billion in this fund. Passengers-have-a-right-to-this
tax-reduetion:
YORD
LIBRARY
-9-
However,-if-the-Cengress-dees-mot-aet-on-regufatory-reform-
fer-the-airtines-within-60-days-after-the-new-sessien-opens;
I shall have-ne-ehoiee-but-te propose the-reimposition-ef
that a temporary 2 percent as-an environmental surcharge on
passenger fares and freight bills. The funds from the this
surcharge would-be-directed-inte-a-speeial will form a
special environmental trust fund, administered by the
Secretary of Transportation, to assist help the airlines
in-finaneing-the-new-and make a downpayment on new quieter
planes that-are-necessary-for-the-abatement which will help
solve the problem of aircraft noise around our major airports.
I-de-net-want-te-eall-for-this-envirenmenta1-sureharge-on
passengers---Regulatory-reform-is-a-far-better-sotution-
But-if-Cengress-dees-net-aet-on-the-aviation-regulatery-reform
I-prepesed-tast-Octeber;-there-has-to-be-another-atternative-
This proposal will mean that the aviation user, not the
general taxpayer, will pay the cost of solving the air noise
problem. It will mean jobs in our aircraft industry. It
will encourage and strengthen our aircraft industry, vital to
our export markets and to our national defense.
Even-then;-an-envirenmental-sureharge-would-be-a-temporary
expedient----net-a-permanent-solutien-te-the-real-problem
facing-the-airlines-and-other-ever-regutated-indastries-in-
this-country.
Sueh-a-sureharge-weuld This environmental fund will help
-9A-
end the noise problem. But it will not change the CAB's
outdated methods of setting fares and controlling markets.
It will not improve an airline's ability to compete and
provide better service.
FORD CIBRARY
-10-
The lasting long-term solution is to give the free enterprise
system its best chance to operate. That is why I am coupling
lasting regulatory reform measures with limited funding for
environmental purposes.
The genius of the American economic system throughout our
history has been a partnership between government and free
enterprise. The right role of the government in the American
economic system is to help private enterprise accomplish
needed objectives for the American people--and not to hinder
private enterprise.
Our national growth in 200 years has been phenomenal, and in
no area of our lives has the partnership between government
and private enterprise worked better than in transportation.
In the National Transportation Policy Statement of my
Administration of September 17, 1976, we said:
"Transportation has substantially shaped the growth
and development of the United States. Waterways led
our ancestors to new frontiers. Today, our energy-
efficient inland waterways and merchant marine seek
out new markets. Railroads
-11-
fed the hearths of an industrial revolution and
now have renewed significance in the era of environ-
mental and energy consciousness. Highways made
us the most mobile population on earth, profoundly
altered our land use patterns, and established the
automobile, truck and bus as an important part of
the Nation's mobility and economic activity. Mass
transit provided the lifeline to city centers and
now offers hope for their revival. Civil aviation
extended its reach around the globe and helped
design the interdependent world in which we now
live. General aviation has greatly increased
business and pleasure mobility and opened up formerly
unreachable territories. Pipelines are vital to
energy independence.
"To sustain and enhance our economic vitality
and growth, the productivity of our commerce and
the quality of our leisure, we need a healthy and
responsive transportation system. National trans-
portation policy must serve these broad goals of
our society by helping to guide the development,
financing and maintenance of a safe, efficient,
accessible and diverse transportation system. Such
FORD
LIBRAR
-12-
a system should meet the needs of all Americans --
as passengers, consumers, employees, shippers and
investors -- in a way that is consistent with other
national objectives. The values and priorities of
our society are changing as the land on which we
live is changing, and transportation must blend
with other national goals in seeking heightened
quality in the American way of life."
We have set our national goals for what is and what must
continue to be the best airline system in the world. By
working together we can reach those goals: a strong,
responsive aviation system and quiet skies for America.
Thank you.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 10, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JIM CANNON June
SUBJECT:
Aviation Noise Proposal by Secretary Coleman
In response to your memorandum of October 4, here is a
revision of the speech on Aviation Noise (Tab A). The new
section spelling out Secretary Coleman's plan begins on
page 8.
In brief, this new speech draft makes two major points:
1. Presidential action to enforce aviation noise
standards, and
2. Congress must enact Aviation Regulatory Reform,
or the President will be forced to propose a 2%
environmental surcharge to fund a DOT-administered
aircraft replacement program.
Secretary Coleman, with whom I have again discussed his
proposal, believes this approach would intensify the
airlines' opposition to regulatory reform. In Coleman's
judgment, the hope of a $3 billion aircraft replacement
fund would provide the airlines with an additional incen-
tive to make certain Regulatory Reform is defeated.
Secretary Coleman would join the Aviation Regulatory Reform
Act and noise abatement, and thereby create an omnibus air
bill which would provide the airlines with an incentive to
help pass the legislation.
Secretary Coleman has drafted for your consideration a
Presidential statement which would integrate regulatory
reform and the 2% reduction in Federal taxes on passengers
FORD
2
and freight (Tab B). He proposes a series of Presidential
steps (pages 4-9 of Tab B), which could be incorporated into
your speech or a supporting fact sheet. One change Coleman
suggests: He would not propose the DOT-administered fund
now, but would hold hearings to consider what financing
assistance airlines need to meet noise standards.
Second Draft
10/10/76
QUIET SKIES
(Appropriate Salutation)
We have assembled here at
Airport
today so that I could speak with you about two important
and related national problems.
And in the process I am going to discuss a real-
life case study of what is wrong with Washington - and
what must be done about it.
The first of these two national problems is aircraft
and airport noise - and I will today announce a plan to
reduce the noise pollution around this and other major
airports in the Nation.
The second problem is the need to ensure that the
200 million Americans who fly every year have the finest
possible airline service. I will today describe the
measures necessary to make certain that the American
consumer will be served by a healthy and competitive
system of commercial airlines.
FORD LIBRARY
-2-
Both of these problems and their resolution affect
your lives, your jobs, your environment, your property,
your future and your children's future, and the well-being
and progress of the Nation.
For some 6 million Americans who live and work
around 100 major airports in the U.S., the noise of jet
planes is a very real and personal environmental problem.
I know, because I used to live near Washington National,
and sometimes the noise was so bad you could not read a
newspaper, hear the T.V., or finish a conversation with
the children.
For these 6 million Americans the problem of noise
is getting worse as air travel increases -- and we want
air travel to increase.
But we must also end the noise problem.
Since the 1960's, when the airlines introduced new
jet airplanes into the fleet, noise has been recognized
as a major constraint to commercial aviation. Through
research and development, by the government and by private
industry, we have learned how to make jet engines quieter,
and more efficient in fuel use. The technology is ready.
-3-
We have taken the first steps to reduce
the noise around airports. In 1969 the Federal Aviation
Administration, one of the two Federal agencies that
regulate the commercial airlines - I know you are
aware that Congress feels the airlines are so important
that you need two Federal regulatory agencies to tell
you what to do -- in 1969 the FAA issued standards that
would cut in half the perceived noise of new jet aircrafts,
effective at the start of 1975.
For the last two years, all commercial planes
coming off the assembly lines in the United States have
met these standards.
But the FAA did not act to correct the biggest
part of the airport noise problem - some 1600 older jet
airplanes, or about 77 percent of the U.S. commercial
airlines fleet.
These planes are still flying; and if you live near
this or any other major airport in the United States,
you are still listening to them.
-4-
Why, seven years after the FAA set aircraft noise
standards, are these noisy planes still flying?
The answer, very simply, is that FAA knew that
some of the airlines could not afford to pay for modifying
or replacing their older planes to meet the new noise
standards.
Why not? One reason, frankly, is that some of the
airlines have not been well-managed.
But another important reason airlines could not
afford to pay for noise reduction is that the Civil
Aeronautics Board, the other Federal agency that regulates
the airlines, could not look ahead and provide the
revenues the airlines would need to pay for noise reduction.
The CAB is like that mythical bird which flew back-
ward and knew where it had been, but not where it was going.
Under their own regulations for setting airline fares,
CAB looks backward at "historic costs," but not ahead to
realistic future costs.
-5-
The CAB was created almost 40 years ago to promote
and assist a young and hopeful airline industry. There
were reasons then to allocate routes, set fares, and limit
competition; at the beginning, the public need for good
service required extensive government involvement to assure
orderly growth of the airlines.
It is different now.
When the CAB began in 1938, domestic airlines carried
a total of 1.3 million passengers, for 476 million passenger
miles.
This year, U.S. airlines will carry more than 200
million passengers, for 128 billion passengers miles --- a
growth of 26,800 percent. Airlines now carry more people
between cities than any other form of public transportation.
The airline industry is no longer an infant; it is
mature, big and fully capable of prospering in a free,
open and competitive market.
It was for this reason that on October 8, 1975, I
proposed to the Congress the Aviation Act of 1975, which
-6-
would have reduced economic controls, opened markets,
reduced fares and made it possible for all airlines
to better serve the American consumer.
My objective was to work with the Congress to
ensure that the U.S. will have the most efficient airline
system in the world, providing the American public with
the best possible service at the lowest possible cost.
That was 11 months ago; but neither the House nor
the Senate has acted on this important legislation, which
is the first comprehensive updating of airline regulation
in almost forty years. Nor has Congress proposed any
alternative.
However, the blame does not all rest on Congress.
Some airline executives, and their Washington lobbyists,
have short-sightedly opposed this change. While they say
publicly they are for free enterprise and open competition,
they have privately lobbied against open competition, against
the American consumer, and in fact against greater opportunity
for the growth and prosperity of their airlines.
-7-
Consequently, we have this situation:
Too Much Noise:
The FAA has permitted noisy aircraft because many
airlines could not afford to replace or refit these
older planes.
Outdated Regulations:
The CAB, by following policies and procedures that
are impractical and out of date, is clearly unable to
assist the airlines in providing the best and cheapest
service to the public.
Congressional Inaction:
The Congress, by its failure to act on aviation regu-
latory reform, is continuing a critical economic
problem for the airlines and all the people who work
for airlines and depend on them.
As President, I cannot tolerate inaction any longer.
We must end the noise pollution around American airports
and bring quiet skies back to America again.
We must free aviation from arbitrary and unnecessary
restrictions and regulations so that the airlines themselves
can pay the cost of noise abatement.
8
To do this, I am taking the following actions:
First, I am today directing the Secretary of Transportation
to instruct the Administrator of FAA to extend its noise
standards to all domestic U.S. commercial aircraft, to be
phased in over an 8-year period. I am also directing the
Secretary of State to initiate negotiations with the Inter-
national Civil Aviation Organization and the European Aviation
Conference to reach agreement on noise standards for all
international aircraft flying into the United States.
Second, I am putting the Congress on notice that I will not
accept its inaction. Congress must adopt the airline regu-
latory reform measure I proposed in 1975. Congress must act
on this reform in the interest of the American public:
passage will mean lower air fares and a stronger aviation
industry which is more able to pay for new, quieter aircraft.
I want the members to know now that aviation regulatory reform
will be on their doorstep when they come back in January.
-9-
If the Congress does not act on regulatory reform
for the airlines within 60 days after the new session
opens, then I must act. We will make certain that U.S.
airlines can meet noise standards and at the same time
continue to be a healthy and competitive industry serving
200 million Americans.
Therefore, if Congress fails to act on aviation
regulatory reform by March 5, 1976, I shall send Congress
legislation to:
--- Reduce the present Federal tax on domestic
passenger fares from 8 percent to 6 percent;
-- Reduce the present Federal tax on Domestic
freight from 5 percent to 3 percent; and
- Impose a 2 percent environmental surcharge on all
passenger fares and freight waybills.
The funds from this surcharge would be directed into
a Quiet Skies Trust Fund, administered by the Secretary of
Transportation, to assist the airlines in financing the
new and quieter planes which will help solve the problem
of aircraft noise around our major airports.
9a
I do not want to call for this environmental surcharge
on passengers. Regulatory reform is a far better solution.
But if Congress does not act on the aviation regulatory
reform I proposed last October, there has to be another
alternative. But one way or the other, we must make it
possible for the commercial airlines to replace their oldest
and noisiest airplanes.
One way or the other, we must have the aviation user,
not the general taxpayer, pay the cost of solving the air
noise problem.
Solving the airport noise problem is an environmental
imperative. And in solving this problem, we will bring into
service a fleet of quiet, new airplanes that will conserve
fuel and lower operating costs and fares. Replacing the
older planes will also strengthen our aircraft industry which
is vital to our world leadership in economic trade and to
our national defense. And building these new planes will
create 240,000 ueseful, productive jobs for Americans.
10
The best way we can make sure that Americans will con-
tinue to have the finest airline service in the world is to
give the free enterprise system its best chance to operate.
The genius of the American economic system throughout
our history has been a partnership between government and
free enterprise. The right role of the government in the
American economic system is to help private enterprise
accomplish needed objectives for the American people --
and not to hinder private enterprise.
Our national growth in 200 years has been phenomenal,
and in no area of our lives has the partnership between
government and private enterprise worked better than in
transportation.
In the National Transportation Policy Statement of
my Administration of September 17, 1975, we said:
"Transportation has substantially shaped the
growth and development of the United States.
Waterways led our ancestors to new frontiers.
Today, our energy-efficient inland waterways and
merchant marine seek out new markets. Railroads
-11-
fed the hearths of an industrial revolution and
now have renewed significance in the era of environ-
mental and energy consciousness. Highways made
us the most mobile population on earth, profoundly
altered our land use patterns, and established the
automobile, truck and bus as an important part of
the Nation's mobility and economic activity. Mass
transit provided the lifeline to city centers and
now offers hope for their revival. Civil aviation
extended its reach around the globe and helped
design the interdependent world in which we now
live. General aviation has greatly increased
business and pleasure mobility and opened up formerly
unreachable territories. Pipelines are vital to
energy independence.
"To sustain and enhance our economic vitality
and growth, the productivity of our commerce and
the quality of our leisure, we need a healthy and
responsive transportation system. National trans-
portation policy must serve these broad goals of
our society by helping to guide the development,
financing and maintenance of a safe, efficient,
accessible and diverse transportation system. Such
-12-
a system should meet the needs of all Americans --
as passengers, consumers, employees, shippers and
investors -- in a way that is consistent with
other national objectives. The values and priorities
of our society are changing as the land on which
we live is changing, and transportation must blend
with other national goals in seeking heightened
quality in the American way of life."
We have set our national goals for what is and what
must continue to be the best airline system in the world.
By working together we can reach those goals.
Thank you.
B
of
THE SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20590
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
1976 OCT 10 AM 8 02
MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES A. CANNON
The White House
Subject: Aircraft Noise
Enclosed is a draft statement for the President on aircraft
noise. I have written this statement in a form that would be
appropriate for release by the White House, although I recognize
that any statement the President might make personally would
probably be shorter. Although I would be delighted to draft some
personal remarks, I suspect this is a task better left to the
White House staff. I recommend, however, that the enclosed
statement be released by the President simultaneously with any
speech or remarks which he might make on the subject in the
near future.
There are some very sensitive nuances in the enclosed statement that
are designed to protect the Administration's position in pending
litigation, in response to certain commitments made to the Congress,
and in attempting to achieve the broadest range of support for a
Presidential noise policy statement--support by environmentalists
and the aviation industry.
Bu
William T. Coleman, Jr.
Enclosure
LIBRARY
STATEMENT OF THE PRESIDENT
ON AIRCRAFT NOISE
Aircraft noise around airports is a substantial annoyance for
six to seven million Americans. The problem is particularly serious
at some of the major airports, such as those in New York, Los
Angeles, Boston, Atlanta and Chicago. In fact, it represents a
significant or potential problem for residents living near many other
airports across the nation, and as air travel increases, noise will
become a serious problem at some of these other airports as well.
Cities like San Jose, San Francisco, Miami, Denver, San Diego, Seattle
and Phoenix are under increasing public pressure to take steps to
reduce aircraft noise. In fact, the Federal Aviation Administration
has identified 100 airports where noise is a problem.
Citizen complaints, law suits for noise damages and proposed
restrictions on airport use have begun to threaten the efficiency and
viability of the interstate air transportation system.
During the past six weeks I have reviewed extensively the aircraft
noise problem. I have considered the recommendations of Secretary
of Transportation William T. Coleman, Jr., Federal Aviation
Administrator John L. McLucas, EPA Administrator Russell E. Train
and many other federal, state and local officials concerned with the
effect of aircraft noise on people in areas surrounding our major airports.
2
I have become acutely aware of the seriousness of this problem
and have reached the following conclusions:
1. The aggravation and annoyance of aircraft noise are a
nationwide problem that can be addressed only by the joint efforts
of government, airport operators and industry, working together
cooperatively. If each of us performs the responsibilities
for which we are uniquely suited under a comprehensive policy to
reduce aircraft noise, we can and will achieve measured progress
in improving the quality of life for airport neighbors.
2. We have the technological capability to bring about
significant reductions in aircraft noise emissions. Our major
constraint has been the economic condition of the carriers which
has prevented the rapid introduction of quieter technology and
the development of new airplanes that will provide even greater
noise reduction benefits. Because of this economic problem,
77 percent of the civil aviation fleet operating today does not
meet the present federal noise standard for new subsonic
aircraft. This is intolerable. We must take action not only to
quiet or retire the noisy aircraft but also to accelerate their
replacement with new quieter technologies that will bring
3
additional benefits in noise reduction, fuel efficiency and new
technology. To be effective, this action requires that we also
address the issue of how the results which are now possible
technologically may be financed.
3. In considering the serious and complex problem of aircraft
noise, I am aware of many interrelated problems that must be
addressed simultaneously. These problems include:
- - the financial and regulatory constraints on the ability of our
air carriers to purchase new, quieter airplanes;
- - the inadequate utilization of technological and employment
capability in the aeronautical manufacturing industry;
- - the lost potential for substantial energy conservation improve-
ments by the delayed introduction of new more fuel efficient
aircraft;
- - the importance to the national interest of maintaining U.S.
leadership in providing aeronautical products for the rest
of the world in light of increasing European competition;
and
- - the need to reduce aircraft noise levels so as to minimize
the necessity for airport operators to impose curfews and
4
other restrictions on the use of airports that interfere
with the efficiency of interstate travel.
In reviewing these problems, I have considered the recommendations
of members of my Cabinet and staff, and I have directed that the
following action be taken:
1. Within ten days the Secretary of Transportation will publish
a comprehensive aviation noise policy. That policy will set
forth why the solution to the noise problem in this country must
be a joint effort by federal, state and local governments, airport
operators, air carriers and aircraft manufacturers. It will
include a statement of the responsibilities of each and a specific
plan and timetable for federal action that will ensure that the
federal government meets its statutory obligations to reduce noise
by promulgating regulations that have been delayed too long.
2. I am directing the Federal Aviation Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to promulgate
within two weeks a regulation that will require domestic commercial
aircraft to meet present federal noise standards in accordance
with a phased-in time schedule, not to exceed eight years. I am
5
further directing the Federal Aviation Administrator, in
consultation with the Secretary of Transportation, to promulgate
by the end of this year a new federal noise regulation that will
establish new, tougher standards for new subsonic technology
aircraft.
3. I have directed the Secretary of State to initiate negotiations
with the International Civil Aviation Organization and the European
Civil Aviation Conference to bring about international agreement
on noise standards for all international aircraft operations into
the U.S. If agreement is not reached within four years, we will
begin to apply U.S. standards to foreign aircraft unilaterally.
4. I have directed the Secretary of Transportation to provide
special financial and technical assistance to airport operators
to help them develop comprehensive noise abatement plans, to
assist them in the acquisition of buffer land and purchase of
noise suppressant equipment, and to assure that the land around
airports is zoned and developed in ways that are compatible
with airport operations.
5. I will ask the Congress to reduce by 2 percentage points
the domestic ticket and freight waybill taxes, thereby releasing
6
the excess tax revenues that are presently unused by the Airport
Development Aid Program and enabling the air carriers to pay
the costs of meeting these new environmental standards without
increasing the cost of air travel to the consumer. My tax
reduction proposal will be included in a revised Aviation Reform
Act that I will submit to Congress before the start of the next
session. Thus, the Administration's continued support for this
tax reduction will be conditioned on Congressional acceptance
of aviation regulatory reform.
6. I have directed the Secretary of Transportation to consider
in an open public hearing what financing provisions are necessary
to ensure that the air carriers can meet the noise requirements.
The Secretary will consider what sort of special financing provisions
should be established in addition to the reduction of the ticket tax
I have proposed (whether, for example, a special surcharge of 2%
should be imposed to provide revenues that could be used to help
secure necessary financing for the replacement of the noisy
aircraft and, if so, how such revenues should be dispersed).
In formulating a financing proposal, the Secretary shall consult
with consumers, representatives of industry and other concerned
7
parties, and shape his proposal to meet the following criteria:
- - financing measures should be available to assure that noise
regulations meet the statutory test of "economic reasonable-
ness;"
- - financing should be consistent with and help advance the
cause of aviation regulatory reform;
- - the cost of environmental improvements should be met by
the user, not the general public;
- - any special financing provisions should involve minimum
government interference with investment decisions in the
private sector and should be equitable among the carriers;
- - the cost of air travel to the consumer should not be increased
as a result of the program.
7. This proposal will make possible the replacement of most of
the 500 oldest, noisiest four-engine jets still in commercial
operation. It will enable further the quieting, and in some cases
replacement, of most of the approximately 1,000 newer, less
noisy jets that do meet federal standards.
8. Before the next session of Congress begins, I will submit
to the Congress a revised Aviation Reform Act that will provide--
8
in addition to the removal of unnecessary regulatory constraints
on pricing, entry and routes- - a provision that will make possible
the generation of sufficient private sector financing to meet the
federal noise requirements and achieve other important national
benefits, including:
- - reduction of the number of Americans exposed to serious
aircraft noise impacts by about 1 million;
- - reduction of the annoyance, inconvenience, discomfort, and
mental distress caused by aircraft noise for all who live or
work near airports;
- - the creation of 240 thousand new jobs in the aerospace industry;
- - the production of new generation of U.S. manufactured
airplanes--presently stalled at the design stage--offering
the advantages of new design and safety technology, and
enabling U.S. manufacturers to respond to the projected
worldwide demand for a new generation of airplanes in
1978-84;
- - substantial energy savings by improvements up to 30% in
fuel efficiency, the more rapid introduction of the quietest
engines now technologically possible--engines less than
half as loud as the noisy jets they would replace;
9
- - better air service to the American traveler with lower
operating costs and prices in airplanes designed to service
many markets more economically.
A nationwide effort to reduce aircraft noise represents a commit-
ment to a better quality of life for millions of Americans. We will
replace the chaos, confusion and conflict that has all too often
characterized the noise reduction effort thus far with firm federal
leadership and close cooperation with the airport operators, the carriers
and the people adversely affected by aircraft noise. Through our
continuing efforts to develop quieter aircraft, by our requirement that
noisier aircraft be quieted or replaced, and with our financial and
technical assistance to airport operators, we will bring about a sub-
stantial reduction in the impact of aircraft noise on our fellow citizens,
and at the same time create new jobs and improve the efficiency and
competitive position of our air carriers and aerospace manufacturers.
THE WHITE HOUSE
REQUEST
WASHINGTON
October 10, 1976
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE Ru
SUBJECT:
Revisions to Quiet Skies Speech
Pursuant to Your Request
I attach for your consideration, revisions to pages 8 and 9
of the draft Presidential speech on Aviation Noise policy. I
have revised these pages in accordance with your instructions.
I personally remain convinced that: (1) the Federal Aviation
Administration should not be chastized for failing to act in
this area (page 7), particularly since it is well known that
this matter has been at the White House since June; (2)
Presenting the Aviation industry with a $3.5 billion dollar
bonus if they can prevent enactment of Aviation regulatory
reform for 60 days after the new Congress begins virtually
guarantees postponement or death for the President's Aviation
Act of 1975. (3) From the technical legal point of view,
Secretary Coleman's draft protects the Federal government
against suits for damages for aviation noise, the so-called
"pre-emption" issue.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 10, 1976
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
JIM CANNON
SUBJECT:
Aviation Noise Proposal by Secretary Coleman
In response to your memorandum of October 4, here is a
revision of the speech on Aviation Noise (Tab A). The new
section spelling out Secretary Coleman's plan begins on
page 8.
In brief, this new speech draft makes two major points:
1. Presidential action to enforce aviation noise
standards, and
2. Congress must enact Aviation Regulatory Reform,
or the President will be forced to propose a 2%
environmental surcharge to fund a DOT-administered
aircraft replacement program.
Secretary Coleman, with whom I have again discussed his
proposal, believes this approach would intensify the
airlines' opposition to regulatory reform. In Coleman's
judgment, the hope of a $3 billion aircraft replacement
fund would provide the airlines with an additional incen-
tive to make certain Regulatory Reform is defeated.
Secretary Coleman would join the Aviation Regulatory Reform
Act and noise abatement, and thereby create an omnibus air
bill which would provide the airlines with an incentive to
help pass the legislation.
Secretary Coleman has drafted for your consideration a
Presidential statement which would integrate regulatory
reform and the 2% reduction in Federal taxes on passengers
2
and freight (Tab B). He proposes a series of Presidential
steps (pages 4-9 of Tab B), which could be incorporated into
your speech or a supporting fact sheet. One change Coleman
suggests: He would not propose the DOT-administered fund
now, but would hold hearings to consider what financing
assistance airlines need to meet noise standards.
10/19/76
Possible Presidential Actions
1. Direct Secretary Coleman to instruct FAA to extend
noise standards to all domestic commercial aircraft
2. Put Congress on notice that it must adopt airline
regulatory reform early in the next session.
3. If Congress does not act on regulatory reform, then
the President will send legislation to:
--- reduce federal tax by 2%
-- impose a 2% environmental surcharge, with the money
going into a trust fund to assist the airlines in
financing the new planes that meet noise standards.
1. The President wants to extend noise standards as of
January 1, 1977, phased in over 8 years.
2. The President wants to give Congress a 90-day deadline.
3. The President wants to direct Secretary Coleman to hold
hearings on how the airlines may finance the retrofitting
or replacement of these 1550 planes.
There is to be no mention of federal fare tax reduction
at this time.
Whether it can be accomplished when Congress passes
regulatory reform or whether they would need additional
assistance, Congress is to report to the President within
60 days after its returns so that he can be in a position
to make recommendations on financing the retrofit or
replacement of aircraft.
The President also wants a strong mention of jobs in the
speech.
mtq wl President
Aircraft Noise
10/19/76
Possible Presidential Actions
I.
Direct Secretary Coleman to instruct FAA to extend
noise standards to all domestic commercial aircraft.
II. Put Congress on notice that it must adopt airline
regulatory reform early in the next session.
III. If Congress does not act on regulatory reform, then
the President will send legislation to:
- reduce federal tax by 2%
-- impose a 2% environmental surcharge, with the
money going into a trust fund to assist the
airlines in financing the new planes that meet
noise standards.
10/19/76
Possible Presidential Actions
1. Direct Secretary Coleman to instruct FAA to extend
noise standards to all domestic commercial aircraft
2. Put Congress on notice that it must adopt airline
regulatory reform early in the next session.
3. If Congress does not act on regulatory reform, then
the President will send legislation to:
-- reduce federal tax by 2%
-- impose a 2% environmental surcharge, with the money
going into a trust fund to assist the airlines in
financing the new planes that meet noise standards.
1. The President wants to extend noise standards as of
January 1, 1977, phased in over 8 years.
2. The President wants to give Congress a 90-day deadline.
3. The President wants to direct Secretary Coleman to hold
hearings on how the airlines may finance the retrofitting
or replacement of these 1550 planes.
There is to be no mention of federal fare tax reduction
at this time.
Whether it can be accomplished when Congress passes
regulatory reform or whether they would need additional
Colemn
assistance, Congress is to report to the President within
60 days after its returns so that he can be in a position
to make recommendations on financing the retrofit or
replacement of aircraft.
The President also wants a strong mention of jobs in the
speech.
Congrus .
FORD LIBRARY
Dec
1
Hearn on A/L Byn
Jan I
-
Desdatem 8 ut that
gran 5 Cansum
ZPF waye TOOUS Column ou rpe of - LOCLOITE Jopa to P THE or
80 qu'u VEFOR TTD LOCALVO BO yo CVU pe TM S hourcrob
protection' LOIOLE on TO FO 7m ATEPTO
specific If cwn pe apeu coudress beneen
WE FPT#
spore TO co po DO wourron of [egetry [VIC CVX sequestou
$/5 3" ave postinde STORTON - ou Coupon cyese 1220 Condrews byswes* our Becrep ETUBUGO dewore . 30-qui gye
T' TOJA' bpw20q TO DAGE 9 Lover
1"
1316 asses FO expens NOTES www.wqui.go se of
ETUDUCTED cpo UGA byeuse FORE weep DOTES
дотий ruco or FLITED Ling to WARTHS are STETTUGS TO
-- rubone 5 30 stry cue movel
-- Legace [09019] FWX pk 3#
eye ACTI usarg FOT
3" It CONDLESS qoes not gop ou reform' cysu
LOCOLE worrd TO cye boxe
3" DUE Coudress ou FRIE TF sqobp WILLING
HOTSE to VII gomensto COMMISSION
T' Dyrect to PURCKNOF EVV eg expend
yorrown
file
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 19, 1976
1976 OCT 19 PM 7 43
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JIM CANNON
FROM:
JUDITH RICHARDS HOPE
SUBJECT:
Aviation Noise
Aviation Daily of October 18, 1976, reprints in their
entirety, the President's remarks on noise, made in Los
Angeles County two weeks ago.
CC:
Art Quern
Paul Leach
FORD i LIBRARY 07V839
101919