madrid - barajas airport - aena madrid ing interactivo.pdfmadrid-barajas airport published its ﬁ...

Madrid - BarajasAirport2009 Environmental Management Report

Madrid - Barajas Airport

3 Introduction 4 The environmental management system 4 Environmental policy 5 Environmental commitment 6 Environmental principles 7 Management review 8 Goals and objectives 10 Audits 11 Environmental aspects 11 Noise 21 Air 32 Water 52 Waste 62 Consumption 67 Flora 70 Fauna 73 Evaluation of aspects 80 Potential aspects 82 SERCOM (Environmental Monitoring Service for Companies) 87 Company evaluation: Improvements 89 Environmental communications 96 Environmental awareness activities 97 World Environment Day 99 Future outlook 101 Glossary

Madrid - Barajas Airport

2009 Environmental Management Report

Introduction

3

The Madrid-Barajas Airport, under the principles of Aena’s environmental policy and in keeping with its strategic goals for the coming years, is focusing its efforts on improving its environmental management, making its airport facilities sustainable and compatible with preserving the environment. These actions are taking place thanks to cooperation from Aena’s personnel, airlines, companies, institutions, local communities and everyone else involved in the air transportation activities.

Minimizing the noise effects of operations and reducing or improving the processing of waste and discharges were some of the areas that were emphasized in 2009. As for those measures aimed at minimizing environmental noise concerns, of note is the completion of the incorporation of P-RNAV precision routes for all confi gurations as well as continued application and exhaustive monitoring to ensure regulatory compliance.

As for reducing other impacts of our activities, new water extraction networks were built at the airport to avoid discharges into public water streams. A new hydrocarbon separation plant was also constructed to replace an existing plant and which is better able to treat the water collected on the apron. The last year also saw plans for optimizing waste management with a new facility, a triage plant, that will allow for signifi cant improvement in the segregation of reusable waste.

A key goal at the airport continues to be improved communications and dissemination of information to public agencies, neighbouring communities and other interested groups so as to reach a consensus on the best ways to preserve the environment. To that end, a technical working group on noise was created in 2009, reporting to CSAM (Commission to Monitor Expansion Activities of the Madrid Airport System), to offer proposals for modifying current routes and initiatives of a technical nature aimed at reducing noise disturbances in neighbouring towns. We should note as well that in an effort to provide accurate information to all interested parties regarding the impact of noise, a new system was being prepared over the last year called Web Track, that provides a real-time snapshot of the paths taken by airplanes arriving at and departing from Madrid-Barajas, as well as the resulting noise levels. The system will be available on Aena’s website.

Lastly, we should note that over the course of 2009, the Madrid-Barajas Airport published its fi rst Sustainability Report, in keeping with the principles of the international GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) Standard. The goal of this initiative is to make the airport’s environmental management actions known to those outside its community. This report will be published annually and will complement the environmental management reports.

4

The environmental management system

The Madrid-Barajas Airport has been ISO 14001:2004 certifi ed since May 2000 by the certifi cation agency AE-NOR. In 2007, its Environmental Management System, and with it the principles of its policy, were expanded to all activities taking place outside the main airport com-plex, as part of the compensatory measures of the 2001 Environmental Impact Statement.

Environmental policy

The Madrid-Barajas Airport is part of the Aena net-work and its environmental efforts are fully supported by Aena’s policy on the environment, as approved by its management in 2003. This policy is the foundation on which civilian airports under Aena’s purview develop their improvement plans as they strive to make air travel a sustainable means of transportation and compatible with preserving the environment.

AENA’s STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS

Increase environmental sustainability and energy effi ciency

Improve society’s image of us

5

Environmental commitment

Aena, Spain’s airport and air navigation authority, as a leader in providing safe, quality and effi cient air trans-portation services through its airports and air navigation system, is cognizant of its commitment to society to protect the environment and of its role in contributing to the sustainability of air travel.

Consistent with this responsibility, one of Aena’s goals is excellence in the provision of the services assigned to it. This requires, as part of the Spanish Strategy on Sustainable Development, the application of measures that allow for the sustainable development of air travel by striking a balance between its costs and its social, environmental and economic benefi ts in order to yield a positive result for our society.

Along these lines, Aena’s commitment to the environ-ment has been a constant and ongoing process, one that has involved defi ning a set of programs and ac-tions, as well as a gradual increase in the resources allotted for achieving its environmental commitments, all hinged around a constantly updated Environmental Policy that has taken root in our organization’s collective consciousness.

The environmental variable is likewise present in every aspect of our daily activities: planning, project cons-truction and provision of services. By using suitable indicators, we can defi ne preventive, protective, com-

pensatory and corrective measures to minimize any po-tential impact from airport activities, air navigation and infrastructure development, thus ensuring higher levels of environmental quality, economic progress and the preservation of our natural values.

In keeping with this environmental commitment, the implementation of new environmental management systems is being promoted at airport and air navigation centres. These systems are based on internationally re-cognized norms that allow for the awarding of environ-mental certifi cations.

In particular, as part of our commitments under the Kyo-to Protocol, we are striving to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by making the most of our energy resources and by turning toward the progressive use of renewable energies as permitted by operational requirements.

This has all led Aena to establish a commitment for environmental excellence to meet the social and en-vironmental demands that will ensure the sustainable development or air transportation in keeping with the following principles:

6

Environmental principles

To respect and protect the environment as a central tenet in the management of those activities entrusted to Aena in the area of airports and air navigation, as well as in the development of aviation infrastructure and of retail spaces and services.

To make air travel compatible with preserving the environment such that today’s actions do not com-promise the quality of life of future generations, thus promoting sustainable development.

To establish procedures for learning of and updating the legal requirements applicable to Aena’s activities and for complying with them.

To implement an Environmental Management Sys-tem at each centre that is compatible with this Envi-ronmental Policy, and which allows for the periodic defi nition of environmental goals and objectives, as well as for the systematic monitoring and evalua-tion of its level of compliance so as to assure cons-tant improvement and the prevention of contami-nation.

To promote actions intended to minimize sound le-vels and that allow for preserving the quality of life in neighbourhoods surrounding airport settings.

To use the technical and economic means available to prevent air pollution that may be associated with Aena’s activities, while minimizing chemical emissions and establishing suitable testing, monitoring and co-rrective mechanisms.

To promote the reuse, recycling and management of waste in a way that is environmentally friendly.

To streamline the consumption of energy and na-tural resources through energy effi ciency and the gradual utilization of renewable energies.

To behave transparently with the public agencies, institutions and communities involved in Aena’s ac-tivity and to cooperate closely with them so as to prevent any potential environmental impact that may result from those activities associated with air transportation.

To inform all of Aena’s employees, contractors and concessionaires of its Environmental Policy and to make it available to our clients and to the rest of society.

To promote awareness in our staff through training programs on the importance of the correct conduct of their activities, encouraging their participation in achieving our goals.

To periodically revise the Environmental Policy to meet the organization’s new objectives, adapting it to new needs as they arise.


7

The Madrid-Barajas Airport has an Environment Sub-committee whose goal is to coordinate all environmental actions and initiatives. This body, made up of represen-tatives from various departments, deals with issues such as monitoring of goals, audit results, non-conformities detected, the method for applying new environmental regulations, etc.

There are also other committees and working groups that deal with environmental questions of great im-portance to society and which include corporate envi-ronmental managers, as well as other affected interest groups. Some of these are the Commission to Monitor the Expansion of Madrid-Barajas Airport (CSAM) and the Trajectory Analysis Working Group, which include representatives from the leading airlines.

Management review

Every year the Steering Committee conducts a tho-rough review of the effectiveness of the airport’s En-vironmental Management system and of its constant improvement in a process called “management system review”. This Committee is responsible for integrating Aena’s environmental policy into all areas of airport management, as well as for objectively evaluating the airport’s environmental impact.

This review identifi es opportunities for improvement and assesses the need for changes in the system, con-sidering:

The results of internal audits and evaluates compli-ance with the legal and other requirements the airport is committed to.

Communications from interested external parties, including complaints.

The organization’s environmental performance. The degree of compliance with goals and objectives.

The status of corrective and preventive actions.

Situational changes, including changes to legal and to other requirements associated with the environment and its objectives.

Recommendations for improvement.

Goals and objectives

The Madrid-Barajas Airport establishes an environmen-tal management program every year that considers the most signifi cant aspects of its activity in concert with Aena’s strategic objectives in the area of the environ-ment.

The degree to which the goals set out in 2009 have been achieved is shown below:

8

2009 OBJECTIVES GOALS PLANNED STATUSDEGREE OF

COMPLIANCE

Determine the impact of the emissions generated through the airport’s

activities so as to defi ne actions to minimize them

Broaden airport scenarios of pollutant dispersion model to encompass all

airport operations

Action cancelled due to budget cutbacks

Assess the viability of proposals for the program used to model

the dispersion of pollutants in the atmosphere

Ruled out unviable airport proposals (Taxiing, etc.).

Proposal to replace GSE equipment delayed until after construction of

natural gas fi lling stations

Improve knowledge of the quality of surface and waste waters

Study and construction of a control network of surface water (streams) so as to have up-to-date knowledge of the water quality with at least 90%

valid data

The necessary studies are being carried out in cooperation with CHT for the construction of the control network, which will be executed in

2010.

Optimize the handling of non-hazardous waste so as to achieve 18%

segregation (annual total)

(Achieve 14%, new actions planned for 2010, foremost among which is the construction of a triage plant)

Establish new routes at T1-2-3 to improve the selective pick-up of

waste generated by Aena and other companies by the airport waste

handler

Action delayed until 2010 since it requires the construction of new

infrastructure

Implement selective pick-up of paper and cardboard in retail spaces and

offi cesCompleted

Implement pick-up of recyclable plastics at restaurant retail spaces in

airport complexCompleted

Packaging pick-up in prefi ltersUnviable measure to be corrected

with construction of triage plant in 2010

Completed

In progress

Cancelled


9

2009 OBJECTIVES GOALS PLANNED STATUSDEGREE OF

COMPLIANCE

Minimize non-compliance of airlines/no. of Operations by 10% and the NC of companies by10%

with respect to 2008

Hold contest to reward those companies with the best

environmental performanceCompleted

Hold periodic meeting of the trajectory analysis technical group

every four monthsCompleted

Ensure all trajectories have an associated PRNAV route

Completed

Improve dissemination of the EMS and of the airport’s environmental

parameters through three new initiatives

Write a sustainability report and establish a programme to improve

any weak points detectedCompleted

Create new environmental intranet with better features and services

(access to environmental legislation, EMP requirements, WMP models, etc.)

Completed

Raise environmental awareness by expanding and improving the contents of the Expoenvironment

Area

Includes displaying archaeological remains in one of the halls and starting visits to the exposition,

combining the contents of the exhibit airplane and the Expoenvironment

Hall.

Integrating the visit with the auditorium is postponed, as is the expansion planned for some halls

Completed

In progress

Cancelled

10

Audits

The Madrid-Barajas Airport schedules internal and ex-ternal audits annually to determine whether the Envi-ronmental Management System (EMS):

Conforms to the requirements set forth in the EMS itself, in the ISO 14001 Standard and in applicable legislation.

Is effi cient, constantly improving and adequately maintained.

Below is a brief summary of the audits of the Environ-mental Management System conducted since its incep-tion, as well as the number of non-conformities found for each. Of note is the fact that the last two external audits performed by the certifi cation agency AENOR found no non-conformities. In 2009, the system’s ISO 14001 certifi cation was once again renewed for three years.

YEAR AUDIT NON CONFORMITIES FOUND

2000 (February) Certifi cation 12

2001 (December) Internal 8

2001 (June) Tracking 6

2002 (April) Internal 12

2002 (May) Tracking 3

2002 (November) Internal 12

2003 (April) Renewal 4


2004 (March) Internal 12

2004 (May) Tracking 3


2005 (March) Internal 10

2005 (April) Tracking 3


2006 (May) Internal 6

2006 (June) Renewal 4





2009 (January) Internal 4

2009 (March) Renewal 0


11

Environmental aspects

Every year, the Madrid-Barajas Airport identifi es and eva-luates those environmental aspects of its activities that may have an impact on the environment (air, water, soil, fl ora and fauna) so as to minimize said impact through prevention and monitoring.

In order to identify these environmental aspects, the airport’s normal operating conditions are taken into consideration, along with planned developments and those situations arising from emergency or accident conditions.

One environmental aspect is that of the activities, pro-ducts or services of an organization that can interact with the environment. This aspect may be direct (resul-ting from activities performed by the airport itself) or indirect (resulting from the companies that operate wi-thin it).

What follows is a brief exposé of the main environmen-tal aspects present at the airport, as well as the results of the monitoring being carried out on each.

Noise 2009

Introduction

The Madrid-Barajas Airport continues to forge ahead with its efforts to reduce noise pollution. To this end, work continued in 2009 on efforts to minimize noise, thanks to the introduction of PRNAV routes and ope-rational controls, and to communicate and reach a consensus with everyone involved in aviation activities through participation in working groups, like the Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR), created in 2009.

12


A. Monitoring systems

The airport has two systems for monitoring and track-ing aviation operations, as well as for controlling noise emissions.

1. SIRMA – Noise Monitoring System

This system receives information from the NMTs (Noise Monitoring Terminals), which are located within the air-port grounds and in neighbouring communities. It also receives radar data and information from the SACTA fl ight plan system. SIRMA associates the noise recorded at each NMT with the offending aircraft, whose fl ight information is readily available to the system.

Map showing locations of microphones in the SIRMA network and of aerial routes in use in 2009

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 16 18 20 21 23 24 25 26 27

13

DATA MEASURED BY THE NMTs IN 2009

LOCATION AND NUMBER OF NMTs

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Leq_airplane dB (A) day 36 55 52 54 53 53 46 59 61 64 66 40 48 43 49 53 54 50 49 55 51 58

Leq_airplane dB (A) night 25 34 31 45 42 45 36 45 51 48 50 29 32 25 39 44 43 42 25 54 43 39

NMT Location NMT Location NMT Location

1 La Moraleja 9 Belvis 21 Sto. Domingo Norte

2 Algete 10 S. Fernando 23 Los Berrocales

3 S.S. de los Reyes 11 Coslada Estación 24 Ciudalcampo

4 Fuente el Fresno 12 Alameda de Osuna 25 Prado Norte

5 Sto. Domingo Sur 13 Barajas 26 Club de Campo

6 Fte. Del Saz 16 Tres Cantos 27 La Granjilla

7 Paracuellos 18 El Molar

8 Mejorada 20 Torrejón

*Data from NMTs 14, 15 and 17 not shown since these are within the airport grounds

14


The above table shows an analysis of the degree of com-pliance with the acoustic quality goals set out in Royal Decree 1367/2007 for noise emissions and applicable to existing urban areas, whose limits are: Ld=65, Ln=55.

One non-compliance with this goal was detected for the Coslada Station, a location scheduled for inclusion in the acoustic insulation plan currently under way.

Leq_airplane dB (A) Leq_airplane dB (A)

day night

Location NMT 2009 008 2009 2008

La Moraleja 1 36 38 25 31

Algete 2 55 56 34 33

SS de los Reyes 3 52 57 31 35

Fuente el Fresno 4 54 56 45 46

S Domingo (S) 5 53 53 42 44

Fuente el Saz 6 53 55 45 46

Paracuellos 7 46 51 36 39

Mejorada 8 59 60 45 45

Belvis 9 61 63 51 52

San Fernando 10 64 65 48 47

Coslada Estación 11 66 67 50 49

Alameda de Osuna 12 40 44 29 30

Barajas 13 48 50 32 34

Tres Cantos 16 43 45 25 24

El Molar 18 49 47 39 37

Torrejón 20 53 53 44 45

S. Domingo (N) 21 54 53 43 45

Los Berrocales 23 50 51 42 43

Ciudalcampo 24 49 51 25 25

Prado Norte 25 55 56 54 55

Club de Campo 26 51 51 43 45

La Granjilla 27 58 60 39 41

15Views from ATMS cameras

2. AMTS - Acoustic Monitoring and Tracking System

This system comprises two noise monitors and three ca-meras, which are used to monitor compliance with the

nighttime operating restrictions imposed by DIA 2001 in the area of the so-called ramps 5 and 6 on the apron, and in the Dique Sur (South Dock), which are closest to populated areas.

B. Actions taken in 2009 to minimize the effect of noise

B.1. From a legislative standpoint:

Over the course of 2009, the DGAC Resolution of 30 August 2006 continued to be applied in relation to reducing the operations of marginally compliant aircraft, its aim being to have these fl eets cease ope-rations at the airport by 2012. To that end, this Re-solution requires a progressive reduction of between 15 and 20% each season. The reduction between the 2008 and 2009 summer seasons was 50%.

Monitoring operations to ensure compliance with the operating restrictions stipulated in the DGAC Aero-nautical Circular 2/2006 of 26 July continued in 2009 as these relate to noise abatement procedures, specifi cally in terms of adhering to nominal routes up to fl ight level 100 (10,000 ft).

(*): B747-200-300; DC8-5060; DC10; A300B2; An124; B727; B737-200; IL76; Tu154; An72; YAK42; IL86; DC9; IL62; Tu134(**): MD88-87-83-82; DC9-10; B747-737-733; A321-320-310-300Note: The aircraft types listed here are for information purposes only, since the acoustic classifi cation depends on each aircraft’s noise certifi cate.

Also monitored are nighttime operations between 23:00 and 07:00 local time for aircraft whose noise quota is equal to or greater than 4, the entry, exit or any type of maintenance performed at night in the R5, R6 and Dique Sur parking areas. Also restricted is the use of reverse engines at night and of auxiliary power units, or of conducting engine testing, in faci-lities not intended for that purpose.

As specifi ed in the second fi nal provision of Law 34/2007 on Air Quality and Protection of the Atmos-phere, a noise tax has been imposed since 2007. This consists of an additional charge levied when billing the landing fee. Its amount depends on the aircraft category and time of operation. The goal of this mea-sure is to discourage the use of noisy aircraft. This fee also allows for a higher penalty for nighttime opera-tions that is twice that imposed during the day.

16


Acoustic classifi cation (category)Justifi cation Penalty

Description 07.00 a 22.59 (LT) 23.00 a 06.59 (LT)

1 Marginally compliant (*) 70% 140%

2 Airplanes lacking the latest

technology (**)20% 40%

3 Airplanes with latest technology 0% 0%

4 Airplanes currently in design stage 0% 0%

17

B.2. From an operational standpoint:

Manoeuvres using P-RNAV (precision navigation-based takeoff routes) have been in place at Madrid-Barajas Airport since 2007. In May 2009, new P-RNAV routes were introduced for all northbound destinations. At the end of 2009, 70% of all northbound takeoffs and 75% of southbound takeoffs used these routes.

The use of these precision navigation systems based on geographic coordinates allows for more focused fl ight paths with fewer repercussions on nearby urban centres.

B.3. From a tracking and monitoring standpo-int:

Detailed measurements were taken in the municipa-lities of Loeches, Campo Real, El Casar de Talamanca and Hoyo de Manzanares.

Aircraft trajectories continued to be monitored on a daily basis for the purpose of detecting possible non-compliances with established procedures.

The Trajectory Analysis Technical Group, created in 2007, held two meetings in 2009. This Group includes representatives from various pilots’ and airline asso-ciations, from the DGAC, the Air Navigation Directo-rate and the airport, who meet to review and analyze proposals to improve the defi nition of the arrival and departure routes for Madrid-Barajas Airport so as to improve operations, reduce dispersion and diminish environmental impacts within the airport setting.

A new Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR) was created in 2009, reporting to the CSAM, featuring the participation of all those town halls that wish to propose modifi cations to current routes and whose goal is to examine technical proposals and initiatives aimed at minimizing the noise effects stemming from the activity at Madrid-Barajas Airport. Since its crea-tion, this group has held two meetings.

Work also continued on another initiative begun in 2007 whose goal is to reduce the number of non-compliances during aircraft landings and takeoffs. These efforts are yielding very good results, since they involve individual meetings with airlines at which ways to improve adherence to nominal routes are proposed, specifi c sources of confl ict are discussed and monitoring actions are coordinated so as to im-prove fl ight procedures.

The Environmental Department conducts daily tracking of trajectories, analyzing any potential procedural vio-lations and reporting these, if appropriate, to the State

Aviation Safety Agency. In 2009, 255 potential non-compliances were detected*.

18


SID-PRNAV ALTITUDE CR4 R5/R6 REVERSERS

600

500

400

300

200

100

2009 231 15 0 1 8

2008 546 64 0 0 1

NON COMPLIANCES 2008 - 2009

19

B.4. From the standpoint of community rela-tions and dissemination of information:

The 26th meeting of the CSAM was held on 15 January 2008, at which a revision of the 2004 acoustic footprint was presented based on actual operational data from October 06 to October 07 and which resul-ted in a new acoustic insulation plan.

The 28th meeting of the CSAM was held on 19 June 2009 to address the modifi cations to the P-RNAV routes that went into effect on 7 May. These changes affected some nominal routes and the new P-RNAV routes with northbound destinations. A report was also presented on the work of the Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR).

Meetings with municipal representatives were held in 2009 to discuss Aena’s current and future projects aimed at reducing sound pollution, with actions being discussed on a case-by-case basis. Six such meetings were held in 2009.

A new system called Web Track was in the prepara-tion stage in 2009. This system will allow users see the fl ight paths of departing and arriving airplanes at Madrid-Barajas Airport, as well as the resulting noise levels. This system is available on Aena’s website.

C. Milestones

The following table shows the milestones achieved in recent years:

20


2006On 1 April the SIRMA system was replaced by 29 NMTs, of which three are designated for AMTS, 4 portable NMTs are used for conducting measurements at those locations

lacking fi xed NMTs and 22 NMTs are fi xed.

2006 Opening of the T4 Terminal and fl ight fi elds. Start of four-runway operations.

2006Noise measurement campaigns were conducted from May until the end of the year by surrounding

municipalities, in keeping with the commitments agreed to at the CSAM.

2006In response to a request received at the CSAM, three new fi xed NMTs are added to the monitoring network

in Prado Norte (Algete), La Granjilla and Club de Campo (San Sebastián de los Reyes).

26/07/2006Publication of the DGAC aeronautical circular of 26 July to prevent departure

from nominal route prior to FL100.

30/08/2006Publication of the DGAC resolution of 30 August on operational restrictions

at Madrid-Barajas Airport.

28/09/2006Entry into force of new TMA with the entry into operation of new air routes whose

sound footprints were approved by the CSAM on 28/01/2004.

2006 Incorporation of noise tax in the wording of law on air quality and protection of the atmosphere.

2007 Introduction of P-RNAV manoeuvres on takeoff.

2007 Introduction of noise tax for aircraft operating at the airport.

Nov 2007 Creation of trajectory analysis committee and of its technical group.

6/06/2007 Modifi cation of nighttime route from 36L threshold.

15/01/2008 Revision to the 2004 sound footprint presented at 26th CSAM meeting based

on actual operational data from one year (Oct/06 to Oct/07).

10/07/2008Creation of a Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR) approved at the 27th CSAM meeting. Reporting

to the CSAM, its purpose is to consider possible technical initiatives to minimize noise pollution.

7/05/2009 Entry into force of new P-RNAV routes for all northbound destinations.

16/06/2009 First meeting of the Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR).

21

Air

The Madrid-Barajas Airport has an Automatic Air Qua-lity Monitoring Network (REDAIR) to keep track of the atmospheric pollutants that are generated as a result of airport activities.

Redair station 1Fixed station located near the 15R and 15L thresholds, near the T4 satellite terminal.

Redair station 2Fixed station located at the western edge of the airport complex near the airport’s service road.

The network’s design is based on atmospheric pollution modelling studies and consists of three fi xed stations and a mobile laboratory for taking samples in specifi c areas not covered by the fi xed network.

The network’s stations are situated in the following lo-cations:

Redair station 3Fixed station located in the vicinity of Dique Sur opposite the R5-R6 platforms, at the western edge of the airport complex.

Mobile LaboratoryLocated until May 2009 next to the Pabellón de Estado (North Area). Since then it has been next to the Central FFS (Firefi ghting Service).

22


MAP SHOWING LOCATIONS OF MONITORING POINTS

Stat

ion R

EDAIR

3

Stat

ion R

EDAIR

2

Stat

ion R

EDAIR

1

23

The inhalation values in the areas affected by airport operations such as takeoffs, landings and taxiing are recorded, as are atmospheric pollution readings from other areas, like the cogeneration plant.

The measuring stations house the various pieces of analytical equipment and a weather substation.

Once validated, the data are published daily on Aena’s website, in the section on airport environment, and added to a fi le containing air quality information that is subsequently sent to the Madrid City Hall, to the Com-munity of Madrid and to the Ministry of the Environ-ment and Rural and Marine Affairs.

Par

3

Analytical and weather equipment

Values for lead and benzene are also recorded

Data acquisition system Data processing centre Environmental monitoring centre

REDAIR operating equipment

The REDAIR network gathers data on key atmospheric pollution parameters and performs real-time analysis of airborne concentrations of:

PM10 and PM2.5 Suspended Particulate Matter Sulphur dioxide - SO2

Nitrogen oxides - NO2/NOx Carbon monoxide - CO

Ozone - O3 Total hydrocarbons - TPH

NO2/ NOX Limit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit

Hourly limit for the protection of human

health

220Limit value may not be exceeded more

than 18 times a year

No violations of hourly

limit recorded

23 violations of hourly limit recorded

31 violations of hourly limit recorded

No violations of hourly limit recorded




3 violations of the hourly limit value

recorded

72 violations of the hourly limit value

recorded


Annual limit for the protection of human

health

44Annual limit not

exceededAnnual limit not

exceeded

Yearly limit for the protection of human

health violated 48 ig/ m3

Annual limit not exceeded

42Annual limit not

exceededAnnual limit not

exceeded

Yearly limit for the protection of human

health violated 51 ig/ m3

Annual limit not exceeded

Annual limit for the protection of vegetation (NOX)

30Average annual

value of 51 |g/ m3 in excess of limit

Average annual value of 75 |g/ m3 in

excess of limit

Average annual value of 100 |g/ m3

in excess of limit


excess of limit

30Average annual

value of 61 |g/ m3 in excess of limit


excess of limit

Average annual value of 83 |g/ m3 in excess of limit


excess of limit

Alert threshold

400Limit value may not be exceeded more than three

consecutive hours

No alert threshold violations recorded





consecutive hours





As per RD 1073/2002 (transposition of EC Directive 1999/30/EC)24


Below is a comparison of the results for 2008 and 2009, along with the legal limits:

2008

2009

SO2 Límit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit

Hourly limit for the protection of

human health



No violations of limit recorded





than 24 times a yearNo violations of limit recorded




Annual limit for the protection of

human health

125Limit value may not be exceeded more than 3 times a year

Limit value not exceeded




125Limit value may not be exceeded more than 3 times a year






vegetation

20

Annual limit for the protection of vegetation not

exceeded


exceeded


exceeded


exceeded

20


exceeded


exceeded


exceeded


exceeded

Alert threshold


consecutive hours






consecutive hours





As per RD 1073/2002 (transposition of EC Directive 1999/30/EC) 25

2008

2009

CO Limit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit

Hourly limit for the protection of human

health

10No violations of established limit

recorded

No violations of established limit

recorded


recorded


recorded

10No violations of established limit

recorded


recorded


recorded


recorded

As per RD 1073/2002 (transposition of EC Directive 1999/30/EC)

LEAD Limit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit


human health

0.5No violations

of annual limit recorded

No violations of annual limit

recorded


recorded


recorded

0.5No violations



recorded


recorded


recorded


BENZENE Limit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit


human health

7No violations



recorded


recorded


recorded

6No violations



recorded


recorded


recorded


26


2008

2008

2008

2009

2009

2009

PARTICULATE (PM10) Límit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit

Daily limit for the protection of

human health



12 violations recorded. Maximum limit not exceeded.











human health

28

Annual limit for the protection of human health not

exceeded.


exceeded.


exceeded.


exceeded.

24


exceeded.


exceeded.


exceeded.


exceeded.


OZONE Límit µg/ m³ REDAIR 1 REDAIR 2 REDAIR 3 Mobile unit

Threshold for informing public

180 µg/ m³ for more than one hour

No threshold violations recorded









Threshold for alerting public












27

2008

2008

2009

2009

The annual limits for the protection of vegetation were exceeded in both 2008 and 2009 at Redair 1, 2 and 3.

Based on the atmospheric pollutant dispersion model, which was fi nalized in October 2008, it was concluded that a large part of the pollutants measured by Redair 3 was from traffi c in the vicinity of the airport. As a result, and in agreement with the Community of Madrid, its location was changed. The mobile unit is currently next to the FFS, where it has been since May 2009, taking samples to assess this new location.

As shown in the following graphs, the limits established for NO2 are exceeded practically all year round at most of the stations set up by the Madrid City Hall and the Community of Madrid.

28


Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

120

100

80

60

40

20

COMPARISON SHOWING TREND IN AVERAGE MONTHLY NO2 CONCENTRATIONS AT REDAIR 3 WITH THE STATIONS OF THE CITY OF MADRID IN 2009

REDAIR 3 E07: M. Salamanca E09: P. Luca TenaE12: Pza M. Becerra E23: Alcalá (fi nal) E25: Sta. EugeniaE26: Urb. Embajada E27: Barajas Avg. City Hall Net.

Conc

entr

atio

n m

icro

gram

s/m

3

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Conc

entr

atio

n m

icro

gram

s/m

3

29

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

COMPARISON SHOWING TREND IN AVERAGE MONTHLY NO2 CONCENTRATIONS AT REDAIR 3 WITH THE STATIONS OF THE CITY OF MADRID IN 2009

REDAIR 3 GETAFE LEGANÉSALCALÁ DE HENARES ALCOBENDAS FUENLABRADAMÓSTOLESCOSLADA

TORREJÓN DE ARDOZ ALCORCÓN

30


DIRECT EMISSIONS OF GREENHOUSE GASES AT THE AIRPORT 2008-2009

CONSUMPTIONTONNES CO2 EQUIVALENT (t CO2-eq)

2008 2009

Heating fuel (diesel) 4,126.13 3,868.28

Fuel used at power plant (diesel) 25.19 48.07

Natural gas used at cogeneration plant 112,112.52 108,791.50

Diesel used at cogeneration plant 1,357.93 1,886.59

Fuel used during live FFS drills (diesel) 5.34 2.67

Fuel used by diesel vehicles 298.01 326.16

Fuel used by gasoline vehicles 157.28 157.62

Fuel used by natural gas vehicles 5,576.97 2,012.29

31

Par

3

In 2007, a project was started at Madrid-Barajas Air-port called Aergas, which continued through 2008, and whose goal was to reduce the level of both noise and gaseous emissions from the vehicles and machinery in use at the airport through the design of new models powered by natural gas to gradually replace the diesel engines of ground vehicles with electrical and natural gas engines.

In 2009, the fl eet of natural gas powered vehicles con-tinued to be refuelled at the pilot CNG station located on the air side at the Dique Sur. The installation of new compressed natural gas (CNG) facilities is planned for 2012, the same year that the handling contracts will be renewed. These facilities will allow for the replacement of all GSE equipment.

Likewise, another objective for 2010 is the monitoring of atmospheric emissions generated by all of the ground equipment and a determination of the carbon footprint resulting from the use of all this equipment.

One airport facility that is on the road to minimizing its greenhouse gas emissions is the cogeneration plant, which was placed in operation with the expansion of the airport and which generated 62.8% of the energy used in the T4, T4 Satellite and other auxiliary facilities at the airport in 2009.

This plant relies on natural gas as its primary fuel source and works by taking advantage of the hot exhaust gases from the electrical motor-generators and of the cold air from its low temperature cooling to power the heating and air conditioning systems. In addition, the motors have electrical generators coupled to them that produce electricity for the terminal area.

32


Water

Surface water: streams and the lagoon

Physical and chemical analyses of the surface water are carried out at the airport twice a year so as to monitor the quality of the water in the lagoon and in the streams that cross the expanded airport complex.

The airport expansion followed a series of modifi cations to the Jarama River and to the Tía Mar¬tina-La Plata, Valdebebas, Zorreras and La Vega streams. Part of the two new runways constructed (15L-33R y 18L-36R) are in the Jarama River public waterway, meaning that the construction of runway 15L - 33R required part of that river to be diverted.

The new riverbed is the same length as the original and its construction was authorized by the Tajo Water Au-thority (CHT).

As for the streams, the construction of the satellite ter-minal platform forced the diversion of the Tía Martina-La Plata and Valdebebas streams with the construction of a new riverbed to combine the waters from both streams. The construction of the 18L - 36R runway required that a portion of the Tía Martina-La Plata-Valdebebas, Zorre-ras and La Vega streams be channelled underneath.

The De la Vega stream runs

along the northern edge of

runway 18R - 36L before being

channelled underneath runway

18L - 36R, after which it emp-

ties into the Jarama River.

The Zorreras stream crosses

two successive underground

channels beneath runways

18R-36L and 18L-36R before

emptying into the Jarama Ri-

ver.

The Valdebebas stream runs

west-east and is diverted un-

derneath runway 18R-36L,

after which it joins the La Tía

Martina-La Plata and Valdebe-

bas streams.

The lagoon is in an enclave

within the Jarama River valley at

the eastern end of the airport

and east of the runways 36R-

18L and 33R- 15L. It comprises

a single permanent lagoon with

an approximate surface area of

two hectares.

33

MAP OF SURFACE WATER SAMPLE POINTS (STREAMS AND LAGOON)

3

Laguna

Arroyo de Valdebebas

Arroyo de las Zorreras

Arroyo de la Vega

A

AAAAA

Upstream sample point

Sample point downstream of the Tía Martina - La Plata stream junction

Downstream sample point

To ensure that the activities that take place within the airport complex do not affect the quality of the surface water, samples are taken twice a year of the lagoon and at points upstream and downstream of the streams.

The samples are analyzed by a water analysis and control laboratory that is accredited by the water authority for the purposes of checking and monitoring water quality. The parameters measured are defi ned in the water con-trol program and the reference values are set by the Tajo Water Plan for this section of the Jarama River basin.

The results of the analyses performed on the airport’s streams and lagoon in 2008 and 2009 are shown be-low.

34


AVERAGE BIANNUAL ANALYSIS AT STREAM SAMPLE POINTS FOR 2008 AND 2009

Reference value

(mgr/l)

Valdebebas(upstream)

Valdebebas(junction)

Valdebebas(downstream)

Zorreras(upstream)

Zorreras(downstream)

De la Vega(upstream)

De la Vega(downstream)

Annual avg. Annual avg. Annual avg. Annual avg. Annual avg. Annual avg. Annual avg.

2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009

pH - 7.9 7.9 8.2 8.4 8.1 7.9 7.9 8 8 8.2 7.6 7.7 7.9 7.8

E.C. - 621 703.5 521 706.5 522 690 830.5 758 733.5 712.5 811.5 889.5 806 946

Oil and grease

- 14.6 0.1 0.2 6 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.4 8.2 0.3 4.6

COD - 19 10.5 14.5 267.5 13 34.5 43 30 16.5 14 75.5 195 72.5 235

BOD5 15 10 10 5 8 5 6 8 7.5 5 7 70 65 44 50

SS 25 22 4.6 18 17.8 16.5 9.5 9 14 7 12.5 17.5 91 25.5 90

Dissolved HC - 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.9 0.1 0.5

NH4 10 0.6 4.4 1.4 2 1 4.2 7.7 8.6 1.3 0.1 30.5 51.5 27 46.5

Total Phosphorus

3 0.3 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 1.4 1.6 1.8 1.4 1.2 0.5 1.4 0.6 2.1

mg/

L

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

35

In both 2008 and 2009, the analyses of the samples taken at the Arroyo de la Vega sample point revealed that the BOD5, suspended solids (SS) and ammonia (NH4) parameters had been exceeded, though the vio-

lations ocurred at the sample points both upstream and downstream of the airport expansion area, meaning the pollution did not originate at the airport.

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

2008

2009

Valdebebas(upstream)

Valdebebas(junction)

Valdebebas(downstream)

Zorreras(upstream)

Zorreras(downstream)

De la Vega(upstream)

De la Vega(downstream)

RESULTS OF SEMIANNUAL ANALYSES FOR 2008-2009. SAMPLE POINTS: STREAMS

BOD5SSNH4Total Phosphorus

All of the results are correct, for both 2008 and 2009, except for the fi rst half of 2009, in which the objective

limit for BOD5 was exceeded due to the low water level in the lagoon.

36


BIANNUAL ANALYSES FOR 2008 AND 2009 SAMPLE POINT: AIRPORT LAGOON

ParametersReference value

(mgr/l)1st half 2008 1st half 2009 2nd half 2008 2nd half 2009

pH - 8.7 8.1 7.7 7.9

Conductivity - 119 165 94 195

Oil and grease - 0.3 0.39 0.52 0.7

COD - 37 158 33 79

BOD5 15 <5 50 12 13

SS 25 5 25 7.5 12

Dissolved HC - 0.21 0.07 0.14 0.53

NH4 10 <1 0.74 <1 0.07

Total P. 3 0.1 0.78 0.37 0.33

37

Rain water

The Madrid-Barajas Airport currently has 12 hydro-carbon separators and six desanders for treating the effl uent from the platform. There are 16 points in all where liquid is routed into public water streams.

Rain water is monitored twice a year. Samples are taken at every effl uent point that is authorized by the CHT, and at those that are likely to have an environmental effect on public water streams. These checks are made by a water analysis and quality control service that is authorized by the water authority to carry out water quality monitoring and testing.

The quality of rain water is compared to the limit values set by the Tajo Water Authority in the corresponding effl uent discharge permits or in the applicable regula-tions when not subject to a permit.

HSP Remotos

38


HSP LOCATIONS WITHIN AIRPORT COMPLEX

39

The results of the checks made at the 16 authorized effl uent points are shown below

All of the results are correct for both 2008 and 2009, except at a sample point in the fi rst half of 2008 and which resulted from an accident.

The HSP Remotos was replaced in 2009.

Parameter Dissolved HC Suspended solids (SS)

Legal Limits < 5 mg/L < 35 mg/L

2008 1st half 2nd half 1st half 2nd half

Sample points 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009 2008 2009

Zorreras norte (North trench) 0.059 (*) 0.055 <0.05 6 (*) 13 6.3

Zorreras sur (South trench) 0.059 (*) 0.055 <0.05 6 (*) 13 6.3

Valdebebas south/south2 east <0.05 (*) 0.051 0.53 4 (*) <3 4.0

Valdebebas north 0.061 (*) 0.059 <0.05 4 (*) <3 9

CELA Area <0.2 (*) 1.7 <0.05 15 (*) 8.5 3.2

PIC Area 0.42 (*) <0.050 0.13 4 (*) 6.9 5.0

36R threshold 0.54 (*) <0.050 0.26 10 (*) 13 10

HSP Platform 0.19 5 0.30 0.7 10 10 12 11

HSP Remotos 0.18 (*) 0.42 0.27 15 (*) 8.2 4.0

Runway 18L/36R Desander 1 0.15 (*) <0.05 0.35 <3.0 (*) 4 <3.0

Runway 18L/36R Desander 2 0.05 (*) 0.10 <0.05 4.0 (*) 4.0 5.4

Runway 18L/36R Desander 3 0.051 <0.20 0.06 <0.05 <3.0 <5.0 14 7.7

Runway 18L/36R HSP Platform 0.4 2.3 0.48 0.31 6 24 5.1 3.0

Runway 15L/33R Desander 1 5.1 (*) <0.050 <0.05 <5 (*) <5.0 4.1

Runway 15L/33R Desander 2 <0.2 (*) <0.050 <0.05 11 (*) 3.8 3.2

Runway 15L/33R Desander -Pump tank <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.23 16 6.9 4 8.8

Runway 15L/33R HSP Platform <0.05 <0.20 <0.05 <0.20 <3 <5.0 <3 <5.0

Runway 18L/36R HSP 1 <0.05 (*) <0.05 <0.05 4 (*) 13 3.6

(*) No measurements were taken at these effl uent points in the fi rst half of 2009 due to lack of fl ow.

Conc

entr

atio

n (m

g/l)

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

Zorreras Norte

36R Threshold HSPZorreras Sur

PlatformValdebebas North

PSH RemotosCELA Area

Rwy 18L/36R HSP Nº1Valdebebas South

Rwy 18L/36R HSP PlatformPIC Area

Rwy 15L/33R HSP PlatformRwy 15L/33R HSP Pump tank

40


TPH SS

AVERAGE OF TPH AND SS PARAMETERS FOR ANALYSES ON ALL HYDROCARBON SEPARATORS IN 2009

41

Conc

entr

ació

n (m

g/l)

8

6

4

2

Rwy 18L/36R Desander 1Rwy 18L/36R Desander 2Rwy 18L/36R Desander 3

Rwy 15L/33R Desander 2Rwy 15L/33R Desander 1

HCT SS

AVERAGE OF TPH AND SS PARAMETERS FOR ANALYSES OF ALL DESANDERS IN 2009

42


Waste water

Waste water at the airport is generated by sanitary services, cafeterias, restaurants and activities involving the platform and the terminals. Moreover, the airport’s collection network gathers waste water from part of the town of Barajas, from Iberia’s industrial area and from other companies and concessionaires housed at the air-port.

The quality of the waste water at the discharge points into the municipal treatment network is checked quar-terly at accredited laboratories.

The quality of the waste water is checked against the limits set by the Community of Madrid and municipal ordinances, or in the corresponding discharge permits.

The graph below shows the trend in oil and grease con-tent for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 at the T1, T2 and T3 discharge points.

43

Par

3

Conc

entr

ació

n (m

g/l)

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

OIL AND GREASE CONTENT FROM 2006-2009 AT THE T1-T2-T3 DISCHARGE SAMPLE POINT

1er quarter 2nd quarter 3rd quarter 4th quarter

2006 1,000 1,000 83 35

2007 34 49 82 42

2008 89 229 2,414.33 1,207.33

2009 889 4,044 3,016 2,440.00

Note the considerable increase to above the legal limit in the oil and grease content at this discharge point over the four quarters in 2009. Today, actions are being taken to reduce this concentration as much as possible,

and include the installation of sample basins to monitor discharges from those facilities and companies whose effl uent is channelled to this point.

44


The periodicity of the analyses at the T1, T2 and T3 sam-ple points was changed to monthly starting in March 2008.

In 2006, with the expansion of the airport, the num-ber of points at which water is discharged into munici-pal networks increased. As a result, the residual urban water that is discharged from Terminal 4 North, Terminal 4 South, the satellite terminal and the Control Tower - CELA (Airside Electrical Plant) is monitored quarterly.

As the table shows, the allowable total nitrogen content was exceeded in 2009 at the T4 North, T4 Satellite and CELA-Control Tower discharge points. This is believed to

have resulted from the nature of the discharge, and was reported to the Madrid City Hall.

There is another discharge point in the expansion area that is checked annually, that associated with the Feca-les Plot, which includes the effl uent from the no. 1 elec-trical plant, the liquid effl uent plant, the cogeneration plant and the waste transfer station.

The results of the checks conducted in 2009 at the waste water discharge points for the expansion area are shown below:

Annual average of the quarterly analyses for the expansion area discharge points for 2009

Sample point T4 Norte T4 Sur T4 Satélite TWR-CELAParcela de Sistemas

Límites (mgr/l)

Oil and grease (mg/l) 34.75 46.25 37.25 47.25 - 100

COD (mgO2/l) 866.75 764.75 1222 706.25 764 1750

BOD5 (mgO2/l) 467.50 315 627.50 338.75 160 1000

SS (mg/l) 340 334 597.75 230.25 317 1000

Total nitrogen (mg/l) 137.25 70.75 129.75 126.75 12 125

45

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

(mg/

L)

QUARTERLY AVERAGE IN 2009 FOR SAMPLE POINTS T4 North, T4 South, T4 Satellite and CELA-TWR

Oil and grease COD BOD5 SS Total nitrogen

In 2009, the FFS point at which effl uent water was dis-charged into the public water stream was removed thanks

to the work done to connect it to the airport’s sewage network, which was completed in late October 2009.

T4 NorthT4 SouthT4 SatelliteControl Tower

46


Underground water

The quality of the water in the aquifers beneath the airport is monitored through a Strategic Environmental Monitoring Network (RECA), which consists of a total of

61 piezometers, which are distributed along the ground occupied by the T1, T2 and T3 terminals and surroun-ding areas, as well as in the airport expansion area.

47

A new plan was established in 2009 for the sampling and control parameters based on the proposal made by the Community of Madrid to re-reference the bore

holes by dividing the airport complex into a grid. Said plan was approved by Madrid’s Environmental Council in 2009.

In keeping with this new plan, bi-annual quality con-trol checks were made of the underground water. These checks were scheduled and agreed to by the CHT and the Community of Madrid..

These checks were conducted in the months of June and December, with the exception of the three points situated at Ramp 6, whose water was sampled in May 2009 as a result of work to lay asphalt in that part of the airport and which would have made sampling at those points in June impossible.

As for the piezometers in the T123 area, the monitoring parameters selected are directly related to the type of ac-tivity that takes place in the area (only airport activities):

Total hydrocarbons (TPH)Total BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylenes)PAH (naphthalene, acenaphthylene, pyrenes, anthra-cene, etc.)pH and electrical conductivity (E.C.)

As for the piezometers in the T4 area, the parameters monitored are related to the type of activity carried out in the areas occupied by the airport expansion:

Oil and grease or lipophilic substances AmmoniumpH and electrical conductivity (E.C.)

Photos of piezometers

48


The analysis results for the piezometers in the T123 area are shown below:

(*) Piezometers destroyed by construction(**) Parameters during annual readings

Sounding (old

reference)

Sounding (new

reference)

Sample date

May / June 2009 December 2009

E.C. at 25ºC pHTPH

(C10-C40)E.C. at 25ºC pH

TPH (C10-C40)

BETX** PAH’s **

µS/cm mg/l µS/cm mg/l µg/l µg/l

Action levelDutch Regulation

2.500 6.5-9.5 0.6 2.500 6.5-9.5 0.6 30 0.05

184/08-24 10D-56* 950 7.0 <0.2 - - - - -

184/08-30 10D-23 760 7.9 <0.2 1.170 7.0 <0.2 <3 <0.5

184/08-33 10D-28 630 7.7 <0.2 - - - - -

184/08-35 10D-41 880 7.3 <0.2 940 7.1 <0.2 <3 <0.5

184/08-39 10D-57 860 7.5 <0.2 - - - - -

ID8-2 8C-1 580 7.1 <0.2 570 6.9 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID14 9D-1 760 7.4 <0.2 700 7.2 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID19 9D-5 730 7.0 <0.2 750 6.5 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID-20 9D-3 - - - - - - - -

ID29 9D-25 780 7.3 <0.2 730 7.3 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID-43 10D-55* 890 6.9 <0.2 - - - - -

ID49 10C12 1.010 7.1 <0.2 1.260 6.9 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID65 8D-3 750 7.4 <0.2 730 6.3 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID69 10D-42 910 7.4 <0.2 900 7.1 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID102 9D-2 680 7.1 <0.2 690 7.0 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID146 10D-10 870 7.5 <0.2 900 6.8 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID152 9D-18 920 7.1 <0.2 890 6.6 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID156 9D-6 700 7.4 <0.2 720 7.3 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID159 9D-4 700 7.5 <0.2 650 7.2 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID162 10D-20 1.140 7.1 <0.2 1.140 6.8 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID163 9D-28 990 7.1 <0.2 970 7.0 <0.2 <3 <0.5

ID170 10D-54* 1.090 6.8 <0.2 - - - - -

49

In six of the 22 underground water soundings that comprise the RECA in T123, no water samples could be taken because in some cases the piezometers (10D-56, 10D-55 and 10D-54) had been buried by work to lay asphalt at ramps 6 and 7, or were dry (10D-57) or there was insuffi cient volume (10D-28 and 9D-3) to conduct the required analyses.

No dissolved organic compounds (BETX, PAH or C10-C40 hydrocarbons) were detected in any of the sam-ples. A project to replace and install new piezometers to replace those destroyed during construction work on ramps 6 and 7 was executed in December 2009.

50


The results of the analyses conducted on the piezometers in the T4 area are shown below:

Sounding (old

reference)

Sounding (new

reference)

Sample date

May / June 2009 December 2009

E.C. at 25ºC pHOil and grease

Ammonia E.C. at 25ºC pHOil and grease

Ammonia

µS/cm mg/l mg/l µS/cm mg/l mg/l

Maximum allowable concentrations RD 140/2003

(Appx. I)2.500 6.5-9.5 1 0.5 2.500 6.5-9.5 1 0.5

NAT-01 8B-1 630 7.2 <1 0.10 550 7.0 1.1 <0.05NAT-02 8A-1 1,040 7.6 <1 <0.05 910 7.4 <1 <0.05NAT-03 7A-1 640 7.6 <1 <0.05 520 7.3 1.1 <0.05NAT-04 6A-1 970 8.0 <1 <0.05 670 7.0 1.2 <0.05NAT-05 6B-1 960 7.0 <1 <0.05 790 6.9 <1 <0.05NAT-06 5B-2 890 7.4 <1 <0.05 770 7.0 <1 <0.05NAT-07 6B-2 320 8.2 <1 <0.05 290 8.1 <1 <0.05NAT-08 7B-1 750 7.5 <1 <0.05 630 7.2 <1 <0.05NAT-09 7B-2 530 7.7 <1 <0.05 490 6.9 <1 <0.0518R-01 5B-1 590 7.6 <1 <0.05 530 7.5 <1 <0.0518R-02 4B-1 1,000 7.5 <1 <0.05 900 7.3 <1 <0.0518R-03 2B-1 1,240 7.7 <1 <0.05 1,040 7.4 <1 <0.0518R-04 2C-1 900 7.0 <1 1.10 840 6.9 <1 1.4018R-05 3C-1 740 7.5 <1 <0.05 620 7.3 <1 <0.0518R-06 3C-3 5,800 7.3 <1 <0.05 6,700 7.0 <1 0.3518R-07 3C-4 820 7.3 <1 <0.05 1,000 7.1 <1 <0.0518R-08 3C-5 890 7.8 <1 0.06 770 7.3 <1 <0.0518L-01 2D-2 670 7.7 <1 <0.05 480 7.3 <1 <0.0518L-02 2D-1 1,070 7.9 <1 <0.05 1,090 7.3 <1 <0.0518L-03 3D-2 820 7.2 <1 1.90 810 7.4 <1 3.7018L-05 5D-1 1,150 7.2 <1 <0.05 980 6.9 1.2 <0.0518L-06 6D-1 1,020 7.1 <1 <0.05 870 6.7 <1 <0.0518L-07 6D-2 1,030 7.2 <1 <0.05 870 6.9 <1 <0.0518L-08 5C-1 460 7.7 <1 <0.05 340 7.5 <1 <0.0518L-09 4C-2 480 8.0 <1 <0.05 440 7.8 <1 <0.0518L-10 4C-1 690 7.4 <1 <0.05 620 7.2 <1 <0.05SAT-01 6D-3 710 7.5 <1 0.05 660 7.3 <1 <0.05SAT-02 7D-1 860 6.7 <1 <0.05 730 6.9 <1 <0.05SAT-03 7C-1 890 7.0 <1 0.08 720 7.0 <1 <0.0515L-01 7E-1 1,310 7.4 <1 <0.05 950 6.9 <1 <0.0515L-02 7E-2 840 7.8 2.6 <0.05 710 7.8 <1 <0.0515L-03 7E-3 2,400 7.3 <1 <0.05 1,740 7.1 <1 <0.0515L-04 8F-1 1,730 7.7 <1 <0.05 1,500 7.2 <1 <0.0515L-05 9G-1 1,610 7.5 <1 <0.05 1,000 7.3 <1 <0.0515L-06 10F-1 3,400 7.7 <1 <0.05 3,200 7.1 <1 <0.0515L-07 8E-1 1,170 7.8 <1 0.05 1,080 7.4 <1 <0.0515L-08 7E-4 770 7.4 <1 <0.05 800 7.1 <1 <0.0515L-09 8D-2 480 7.4 <1 <0.05 440 7.9 <1 <0.0515L-10 8D-1 1,000 6.9 <1 <0.05 810 7.0 <1 <0.05

51

The results of the samples taken in the piezometers in the airport expansion area revealed a small amount of oil and grease in four piezometers (8B-1, 7A-1, 6A-1 and 5D- 1), which could have originated from the pre-sence of cars moving in and parking in this area. No oil or grease was detected in the second round of samples, however, which confi rms the fact that this was an iso-lated incident.

The water samples taken from piezometers 2C-1 and 3D-2, near the De La Vega stream and Jarama River, res-pectively, revealed ammonia in both sampling periods, the one taken in December 2009 showing a higher con-centration than that recorded in June 2009. It should be noted that the samples taken from the De La Vega stream had NH4 levels in excess of the quality goals spe-cifi ed in the Tajo Water Plan.

The trend observed in 2009 with respect to the apparent thickness of free-phase hydrocarbons was similar to that of 2008, with variations associated with periods of pre-cipitation and with little (practically none) movement in the direction of underground water fl ow.

52


Waste

The numerous activities at the Madrid-Barajas Airport generate large amounts of hazardous and non-hazar-dous waste, all of which is handled by authorized waste management and transportation companies, as requi-red by existing laws.

Waste transfer station

53

The following table shows the different types of waste generated at the airport and their source.

TYPE OF WASTE SOURCE

NO

N H

AZA

RD

OU

S W

AST

E

• Paper and cardboard

• Scrap metal

• Wood

• Wood chippings

• Glass

• Plastic

• Tyres

• Packaging

• Liquids and liquid-like substances

• Perishables

• Cleaning of terminals and access roads

• Restaurants and

• Offi ces

• Facility and lawn maintenance

• Taken from passengers in accordance with fl ight

safety rules

HA

ZAR

DO

US

WA

STE

• Lead batteries

• Aerosols

• Antifreeze

• Fluorescent bulbs

• Medical waste

• Water with hydrocarbons

• Sludge with hydrocarbons

• Degraded fuel

• Halon

• Leachate

• Ammonium sulphate

• Lead Battereies

• Oil Filters

• Used Oil

• Contaminated empty packaging

• Contaminated absorbent material

• Electrical and electronic equipment

• Maintenance of terminals, vehicles, facilities,

power stations, etc.

• Cleaning of effl uent treatment facilities (HSPs,

grease separators, etc.)

• Training of fi refi ghting personnel

• Medical service

• Confi nement of waste from old dump site

• Liquid effl uent treatment plant

54


In 2009, there were eight selective pickup areas (ZR) at the airport, distributed as follows:

Three in terminals T1, T2 and T3, two on the platform (air side) and the third on the ground side.

Five in the T4 and T4S terminal areas: four on the basement fl oor of the T4 terminal building and the fi fth on the basement fl oor of the satellite building.

The airport also has a facility called a transfer plant, where normal solid waste, reusable waste and hazard-ous waste generated by airport activities can be centrally and internally handled before being hauled away by au-thorized waste management companies.

In these areas the waste that is picked up from various points around the airport is received, identifi ed, sorted and temporarily stored. These points feature containers

for each type of waste, whether hazardous or recyclable. The number of containers is determined by the amount of waste received in each area. The containers are all suitably identifi ed and labelled as required by existing regulations.

The ZRs do not accept materials that are radioactive, explosive, infectious or waste that is unsegregated or unidentifi ed.

The frequency with which the waste is removed by out-side companies is determined by the storage capacities of the ZRs and the time limit specifi ed by existing regu-lations.

Waste collection areas Waste collection areas

Solid waste transfer station Solid waste transfer station

55

NON-HAZARDOUS SEGREGATED RECOVERED WASTE 2006 2007 2008 2009

Paper and cardboard 814.08 422.94 856.51 859.06

Scrap metal 28.23 53.86 59.72 133.19

Wood 17.78 24.40 96.23 84.29

Wood chippings 60.10 98.20 75.83 71.19

Glass 30.62 38.88 36.16 70.39

Packaging 34.44 132.88 218.91 71.62

Tyres 4.64 4.90 6.16 8.80

Inert Material 20.18 12.36 9.38 (*)

Rubble (*) (*) (*) 92.54

Toner 230 Units 41 Units 205 Units 90 Units

OTHER NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE 2006 2007 2008 2009

Other (USW) 11,490.68 10,933.23 10,595.07 9,525.24

Liquids and liquid-like substances (*) 608.26 551.96 549.94

Perishables (*) 68.92 89.70 41.16

Inert Material (*) 335.88 330.07 174.82

Wastwater treatment sludge (*) (*) (*) 128.78

The table below shows the amount of non-hazardous waste generated in 2009

(*)This type of waste was not generated or handled in this year.

56


PERCENTAGE OF NHW SEGREGATED IN 2009 (MT)

origin. This is due to the implementation of a new system for segregating reading material from airplanes, as well as paper and cardboard from offi ces and retail spaces.

As is evident from the above graph, the fraction of paper and cardboard handled in 2009 represents over half of all the non-hazardous waste segregated at the point of

Paper and cardboard

Wood Scrap metal

Packaging Tyres

Wood chippings Glass

0.7%5.5%

66.4%5.4%

5.4%

6.4%

10.2%

57

Tonn

es

1,000

800

600

400

200

GENERATION OF NHW RECOVERED IN 2008-2009 (MT)

Paper & cardboard

Scrap metal Wood Wood chippings Glass Tyres Packaging

2008 856.51 59.72 93.23 75.83 36.16 6.16 218.91

2009 868,420 133,190 84,290 71,190 70,390 8,800 71,620

Note also that the segregation of non-hazardous waste in 2009 did not experience any signifi cant changes with regard to 2008, with only a considerable increase in the separation of scrap metal (123.02%), due mainly to

some air conditioning units being changed out, and an increase in the segregation of glass (94.66%), due to an improved system in use by the company RAESA at its restaurants.

Tonn

es

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

58


NON-RECOVERABLE WASTE GENERATED IN 2008-2009 (MT)

Other Liquids and liquid-like substances Perishables

2008 10,595.070 551,960 89,980

2009 9,525.240 549,940 41,160

In terms of the remaining materials, liquids and liquid-like substances and perishables, there was a reduction of 10.1%, 0.4% and 54.2%, respectively, due to height-

ened public awareness of compliance with safety regu-lations involving luggage and to the fact that 5.07% fewer passengers travelled in 2009 than in 2008.

(*)Liquids and liquid-like substances: this waste started to be generated in 2007 following the enactment of new secu-rity regulations for the transportation of liquids in carry-on baggage (EC Regulation 1546/2006).No data on perishable waste are available from previous years.

59

HAZARDOUS WASTE 2006 2007 2008 2009

Alkaline or Ni-Cd batteries (*) 0.46 1.582 (*)

Medical 1.09 1.18 1,10084 1.4353

RAEE 13.80 18.62 28.16 9.94

Absorbents 16.36 15.42 13,125 13.27

USed oil 5.55 3.88 1.63 7.14

Contaminated empty packaging 3.41 2.29 1.68 1.26

Fluorescent bulbs 0.94 8.30 7.041 7.23

Oil fi lters 0.36 1.11 0.53 0.52

Antifreeze 3.04 4.36 (*) (*)

Pb batteries 1.60 9.10 12.28 49.51

Non-halogenated solvents 0.20 0.38 (*) (*)

Water with hydrocarbons 1,268.50 345.04 159.38 (*)

Aerosols (*) 25.26 25.89 17.14

Degraded fuel (*) (*) 2.272 0.428

Sludge with hydrocarbons (*) (*) 203.48 (*)

Halons (*) (*) (*) 0.21

Leachate (*) (*) (*) 7.36

Ammonium sulphate (*) (*) (*) 6.5

The following table shows the hazardous waste generated in 2009

(*)This type of waste was not generated or handled in this year.

60


PERCENTAGES OF HAZARDOUS WASTE HANDLED IN 2009

Pb batteries Medical waste Degraged fuel. Cont. empty packaging Electrical equipment Oil fi lters Fluorescent bulbsHalonsLeachateAmmonium sulphate AbsorbentsUsed oilAerosols

40.6%

1.2%

0.4%1.0%

0.4%0.2%

8.2%5.9%

6.0%

5.3%

10.9%

5.9%

14.1%

61

60

50

40

30

20

10

Tonn

es

HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATED 2008-2009 (MT)

Absorbents Used oil Aerosols Pb batteries MedicalDegraded

fuel.Cont. empty

pack.Elect. equip.

Oil fi ltersFluorescent

bulbs

2008 13.125 1.630 25.891 12.280 1.10084 2.272 1.678 28.160 0.535 7.041

2009 13.270 7.140 17.142 49.510 1.435 0.428 1.265 9.945 0.520 7.228

In terms of hazardous waste generation, there was a considerable increase in 2009 in the amount of used oil (338.94%) and of lead batteries (303.17%). This was because of the maintenance performed on the power station transformers and the replacement of the SAIS in the T4 Terminal.

On the other hand, there was a notable decrease in the generation of RAEE (64.88%), mainly as a result of fewer computers being changed out, and of ae-

rosols (33.79%), thanks to a notable improvement in passenger compliance with luggage restrictions in 2009.

Three new types of waste were generated in 2009: leachate (from a waste holding area at the old garbage dump), halons (cooling gases from refrigeration equip-ment) and ammonium sulphate (waste generated by the liquid effl uent treatment plant).

1,450,000

1,400,000

1,350,000

1,300,000

1,250,000

1,200,000

1,150,000

1,100,000

1,050,000

62


POTABLE WATER CONSUMPTION

Usage 2007 Usage 2008 Usage 2009

The consumption of potable water dropped in 2008 and 2009 due to a decrease in the number of passengers

and an increase in the price of water, which resulted in reduced usage by the companies.

Consumption

The consumption of natural resources must be regarded as an important environmental issue at the airport, since the proper and responsible management of both natural

resources and of raw materials is essential to meeting the demand from existing services.

The following graph shows the consumption of potable water over the last three years:

200720082009

Litr

os

63

The consumption of potable water dropped in 2008 and 2009 due to a decrease in the number of passengers and an increase in the price of water, which resulted in reduced usage by the companies.

The process to connect the airport to the Madrid City Hall’s reclaimed water network started in 2008, so that this water could be used for lawn irrigation and hosing down of platforms. Over the course of 2009, further infrastructure needs were identifi ed for the materializa-tion of this project.

TOTAL WATER CONSUMPTION RATE (litres/ No.

passengers)

2007 2008 2009

27.24 26.62 24.54

64


Well water usage for irrigation (non-potable)

In 2009, the consumption of well water for lawn irri-gation increased due to lower rainfall and to incidents involving cracks and breaks in the distribution and irriga-tion network, resulting in water loss.

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

WELL WATER USED FOR IRRIGATION IN 2007-2008-2009

200720082009


Litr

es

65

Electricity usage in 2007-2008-2009

Electricity usage at the airport stems mainly from the operation of the building HVAC units and of lighting systems, both in public use buildings and on the plat-forms. Energy-saving measures include the use of a co-generation plant, which relies on residual heat.

Electricity consumption in 2009 totalled 329,826,830 kWh, of which 207,230,480 kWh were generated by the coge-neration plant. Electricity usage dropped in comparison to previous years thanks to the adoption of energy effi ciency measures in 2009 (improved resource use at the SATE, switching off circuits at night in accessory areas of terminals, use of low-energy lighting in the south platform, etc.).

Total electricity use in 2007 333.40 Gw h



1,240.00

1,220.00

1,200.00

1,180.00

1,160.00

Fuel consumption by vehicles (both gasoline and diesel) increased by 6.75% in 2009 with respect to 2008. This increase was due to the increased number of vehicles in the fl eet.

This increase is evident in the graph showing the ratio of fuel usage by vehicles in terms of litres consumed per vehicle. As in previous years, the gasoline-powered fl eet is being replaced by diesel vehicles and more natural gas vehicles are added every year.

66


VEHICLE FUEL CONSUMPTION

2007 2007 2008 2009

No. of vehicles 167 148 159

Fuel (L) 2007 2008 2009

Gasoline 75,338 68,756 70,893

Diesel 127,029 111,592 122,133

FUEL CONSUMPTION (LITRES/VEHICLE) IN 2007-2008-2009

200720082009


Litr

es p

er v

ehic

le

67

Flora

Actions within the airport complex

There are currently various ecosystems within the air-port (riparian, pine forest, gardens, etc.). In the forested area, situated between the fl ight fi eld and the lagoon, there is a section measuring about 90 ha with various pine varieties, such as stone pines (Pinus pinea), Aleppo pines (Pinus halepensis) and Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica). The trees in this area are pruned annual-ly, dead stumps and dry trees are pulled out and the underbrush is cleared out. Also, so as to maintain the health of this forest, pesticides are applied to control the Pine Processionary (Thaumetopoea pityocampa, Denis & Schiffemüller, 1775), a leaf-eating insect that feeds on pine needles.

To round out the airport’s green lung, there are 20 ha of garden areas surrounding the terminals and other built-

up areas that host a variety of species (ginkgo, water cypress, cedar, olive, poplar and juniper trees, as well as oleander, among others). In 2009 some 2,700 stone pines were planted in these areas to offset the land clearing that took place in 2008 to expand the cargo area facilities at the south end of the airport.

After the completion of the airport expansion, and so as to integrate the airport into the surrounding land-scape, various activities were undertaken, such as seed-ing landfi ll areas and paths used during construction, stabilizing hillsides by hydroseeding of grasses, etc. This method was also used during construction to stabilize berms. Some of the river habitats were also recovered, such as those of the Jarama River and of the various streams that cross the airport.

68


Irrigation, weeding and levelling of terrain as part of the second year of maintenance of the land associa-ted with the project to “replant dead seedlings on the banks of the Galga stream in the municipalities of Talamanca de Jarama and Valdetorres de Jarama” and to “replant dead seedlings as part of the environ-mental restoration of the right bank of the Jarama River between Belvis de Jarama and the San Fernando bridge”.

Also fi nished was the project to “relocate herding paths affected by the expansion of the Madrid-Barajas Airport”, though its acceptance by the Community of Madrid is still pending.

Actions outside the airport

As part of the compensatory measures outlined in the 2001 Environmental Impact Statement (expansion of the Madrid-Barajas Airport system), various environmental actions are carried out in towns adjacent to the airport.

The following actions were taken in 2009:

69

The fi rst maintenance phase concluded in the fi rst quarter of the year, and with it all of the work planned as part of the project to “Repopulate the vegetation in the Soto de la Heredad ranch”. The Community of Madrid accepted the project in April 2009.

Work was also started on the project to “Restore the vegetation cover in the mountain and river habitats of Torremocha de Jarama and adjoining terrains” be-longing to unspecifi ed ranches.

As for preventive measures, and depending on the season of the year and species in question, a program can be established to deter the fauna. This can include spraying, mowing, relocation of nests and installation of deterrent devices in wetlands to keep birds away. The relocation of nests, chicks, eggs and the capture of adults is carried out in concert with other agencies for their subsequent transportation to wildlife rehabilitation centres, like the one built by Aena as a compensatory measure associated with the expansion of the airport (Condition 9 DIA 01).

70


Fauna

Within the airport grounds there are different habitats that provide the conditions necessary for diverse species of birds, mammals, insects and reptiles to thrive in these areas.Among the habitats present are the following:

Pine groves and wooded areas.Grassy areas and fruit trees between and on the edge of runways.Wetlands (lagoon, Jarama River and streams).Building and hangar areas.

So as to reconcile the presence of fauna inside the air-port complex with the aviation safety measures neces-sary to minimize the risk of bird strikes with aircraft, a fauna control service has been in place since 1970. The key function of this service is to establish danger condi-tions that are easily identifi able by birds so as to keep them away from hazardous areas and to reroute bird paths, thus diminishing the presence near runway areas of those species that pose the greatest safety risk.

In keeping with this endeavour, over 60 birds of prey have been raised in captivity and specifi cally trained for this purpose by professional falconers. Trained birds of prey are released during daylight hours on a daily ba-sis. When other birds detect the presence of a predator (falcon) in the area, they immediately fl ee. This avoids the need for the indiscriminate culling of these birds. Other deterrents include the use of detonating primers and gas cannons.

71

Wildlife rehabilitation centre in Tres Cantos built by Aena as

compensatory measure DIA 01, accepted by the Community

of Madrid in September 2009.

72


The airport complex houses various ecotones (transi-tion areas between different ecosystems), as a result of which it is frequented by a large number of bird species. Using data on bird movements from 2007, 2008 and 2009, and based on international models, the birds were classifi ed according to the hazard they

pose, taking into account the probability of a bird strike (due to the species’ presence at the airport) and the severity of a potential impact resulting from the body mass of the various species. The results are shown in the following table:

IMPACT PROBABILITY

SEV

ERIT

Y

VERY HIGH HIGH MODERATE LOW VERY LOW

VER

Y H

IGH

Griffon vultureCommon stork

Eagle owlBlack vulture

Golden Eagle, European Shag,

Cranes

Bonelli’s Eagle, Greylag Goose,

Bustard

HIG

H Pigeon, Wood Pigeon, Stock Pigeon,

Common BuzzardMallard, Red Kite

Cattle Egret,Grey Heron, Caspian

Gull, Black Kite, Red-legged Partridge

Booted Eagle, Short-toed Eagle, Montagu’s Harrier, Western Marsh Harrier, Stone Curlew, Gadwall, Lesser Black-

backed Gull, Gyr Falcon, Peregrine Falcon, Short-

eared Owl, Barn Owl, Little Bustard

Osprey, Goshawk, Common Teal, Eurasian

Woodcock, Eurasian Coot, Little Egret,

Night Heron, Northern Shoveler, Common Moorhen, Common

Pochard, Tufted Duck

MO

DER

ATE

Common Kestrel Owl Long-eared Owl

Lapwing, Pigeon Hawk,Sparrow Hawk, Black-headed Gull, Jackdaw,

Green Woodpecker, Magpie

Eurasian Hobby, Golden Plover, Great Spotted

Cuckoo, Common Turtledove, Collared

Dove

LOW Spotless Starling European Bee-eater White Wagtail

Hoopoe,European Nightjar,

Red-necked Nightjar, Oriole

Southern Grey Shrike, Tawny Owl, Calandra

Lark, Roller, Lesser Kestrel, Common Stilt,

Quail, Cuckoo, Common Blackbird, Mistle Thrush, Song Thrush, Fieldfare

VER

Y L

OW

Barn Swallow, Common Swift

House Martin, Sand Martin, House

Sparrow, Goldfi nch

Meadow Pipit,Crested Lark, Blackcap,

Linnet,European Greenfi nch

Shrike, Skylark,Rock Bunting, Reed

Bunting, Cirl Bunting, Tree Sparrow, Spanish

Sparrow, Grey Wagtail, Siskin, Brambling,

Chaffi nch, Woodlark, Corn Bunting

High-risk species

Medium-risk species

Low-risk species

73

Evaluation of aspects

Every year, the Madrid-Barajas Airport identifi es those environmental aspects associated with its activities and services.

Once identifi ed, and so as to ensure that standards for monitoring them are in place and that they are taken into account when defi ning goals, they are evaluated. This is done through representative indicators for assess-ing their relevance. A reference value is also established for each and compared to the indicator to determine whether or not the aspect is signifi cant or not, based

on whether its environmental impact has gone up or down. This reference value may be a legal limit, the quantities generated over a certain period of time, etc.

The most relevant environmental aspects identifi ed at the airport are: noise originating from airport activities and atmospheric emissions of pollutants from aircraft takeoffs and landings and from traffi c movements on the apron (both of which are indirect aspects).

74


A listing of environmental aspects and their signifi cance over the past four years is shown below

ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT

INDICATOR 2006 ASSESSMENT 2007 ASSESSMENT 2008 ASSESSMENT 2009 ASSESSMENT

Noise from takeoff and landing operations

Daytime Leq < 65 dBA Nighttime Leq <

55 dBASignifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Boiler emissions95% of the most restrictive legal

parameterSignifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Emissions from aircraft on takeoff

and landing operations

95% of the most restrictive legal


Emissions from platform movements

of Aena vehicles


parameterSignifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Atmospheric emissions from power

stations

Time of operation < 5% of airport

operationNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Atmospheric emissions from

fi refi ghting trainingLitres of fuel/session Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Paper/cardboard Kg/employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Glass Kg/employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

75



Non-recoverable waste

Kg/passenger Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Tyres Kg/vehicle Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Bulk waste m3/employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Scrap metal Kg/employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Plant waste Kg/Ha Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Toner Units/ employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Packaging Kg/passenger Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Perishable waste Kg/passenger --- --- Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Liquids and liquid-like substances

Kg/passenger Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Non-recoverable inert waste

Kg/passenger --- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Recoverable inert waste

Kg/passenger --- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Recoverable inert waste

Kg/passenger --- --- Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Purifi er sludge Kg/employee Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Fluorescent bulbs Kg/m2 of facility Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Oil fi lters Kg/vehicle Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

76




Oil used Litres/employee Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Hydrocarbon/water mixture

Kg/operation Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Halons -- -- -- Signifi cant

Oil and grease soaked rags and

materialsKg/vehicle Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Medical waste Litres/passenger Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Lead batteries Kg/vehicle Not signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Solvents Kg/vehicle Not signifi cant Not signifi cant --- Not signifi cant

Electrical and electronic equipment

Kg/employee Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Antifreeze Kg/vehicle Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Ni-Cd Batteries Kg/vehicle --- Signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Hydrocarbon sludge --- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Aerosols Kg/passenger --- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Disused vehicles VFU/employee --- --- Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Discharge of waste water to collector

(end of line)




(Fecales plot)


parameterNot signifi cant --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

77




(T4 North)


parameterSignifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant


(T4 Satellite)


parameterNot signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant


(T4 South)


parameterSignifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Discharge of waste water to collector (Control Tower)


parameterNot signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Discharge of waste water to collector (Main FFS Purifi er)


paramete--- Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Discharge of airport rain water (36R

Threshold)


parameterNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Discharge of airport rain water (Rwy

15L-33R Pump Tank)




15L-33R Desander1)




15L-33R Desander2)




15L-33R Platform)




18L-36R Desander1)



78





18L-36R Desander2)




18L-36R Desander3)




18L-36R Platform HSP)



Discharge of airport rain water (Rwy18L-36R HSP 1)



Discharge of airport rain water

(Platform HSP)


parameterNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant


(HSP Remotos)




(PIC Area HSP)




(Valdebebas North)




(Valdebebas South)




(CELA Area)


parameterNot signifi cant --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Discharge of airport rain water (North

Trenches HSP)



79



Discharge of airport rain water (South

Trenches HSP)



Discharge of airport rain water (T4

passenger parking)


parameterNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Discharge of airport rain water (T4 Taxi

Stand)



Discharge of airport rain water (P11 T4 employee parking)


parameterNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant

Electricity consumption

Kw/passengerNot signifi cant Not signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

2006: Kw/m2

facility

Potable water consumption

m3/ passenger Signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Heating oil consumption

Litres/ passenger Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Paper consumption Kg/employee Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Diesel consumption for Aena vehicles

Litres/vehicle Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Gasoline consumption for

Aena vehiclesLitres/vehicle Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Well water usagem3/m2 irrigable

surfaceSignifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

CNG consumption for vehicles (**)

m3N/ vehicle --- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

(*)This waste was fi rst generated in 2007 following the enactment of the new security regulations on the transportation of liquids in carry-on luggage (EC Regulation No. 1546/2006).(**) Aspects identifi ed in 2008 following adoption of CNG use in the vehicle fl eet.

80


Potential aspects

Potential aspects are those that do not occur under nor-mal operating conditions, but which could result from abnormal or emergency situations (accidents, fi res, etc.).

Potential aspects are evaluated based on the following parameters:

Magnitude of impact

Probability of occurrence

The signifi cance of these events is determined based on their consequences, in the event that they occur, and on the probability of their occurrence. The results for the last four years are shown below:

POTENTIAL ASPECT


Contamination of soil from rupture in fuel

tanks

ProbabilityMagnitude

Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Contamination of soil from hazardous

material spill


Not signifi cant Signifi cant Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Contamination of soil from rupture of waste water

collectors



Contamination of soil from rupture of fi re

hydrant network



Contamination of water from rupture

in fuel tanks



Contamination of water from

hazardous material spill



Contamination of water from rupture

of waste water collectors



81

POTENTIAL ASPECT


Uncontrolled spill due to fi re


Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant Signifi cant

Uncontrolled spill due to aviation accident



Uncontrolled emissions due to fi re



Uncontrolled emissions due to fi re



Proliferation and spreading of

Legionella



Generation of waste due to fi re



Generation of waste due to aviation

accident



Emission of ozone depleting substances



Emission of fl uorinated

greenhouse gases (***)


--- --- Not signifi cant Signifi cant

Impact on vegetation due to aviation accident (***)


--- --- Not signifi cant Not signifi cant

Contamination of soil from past activities


--- --- --- Signifi cant

(***) Aspects not evaluated in previous periods due to a lack of a relevant legislation or for not having been associated with a specifi c emergency situation.

82

SERCOM (Environmental Monitoring Service for Companies)

SERCOM, the Environmental Monitoring Service for Companies, was created in 2001 as part of the imple-mentation and certifi cation process for the airport’s Environmental Management System, in keeping with international standard UNE-EN ISO 14001, so as to track the environmental impact of every organization that carries out activities within the airport complex.

In late 2009, the contract to provide “Environmental Management Services for the Madrid-Barajas Airport” was renewed with SGS Tecnos.

Currently, over 200 companies are monitored, including airlines, restaurant companies, handling operators, etc.

SERCOM’s operating methods are specifi ed in Environ-mental Management System procedure PG-MA-08, Mo-nitoring of Companies. This procedure was updated in 2008 and is applicable to all the activities and services of those organizations that conduct activities at the airport (contractors, concessionaires or other companies under contract) and that may impact the environment. This procedure also specifi es those norms that said compa-nies must be aware of and comply with in order to carry out their activities at the airport.

The main functions of SERCOM are as follows:

SERCOM FUNCTIONS

1. Ensure that all airport companies:

Know the Madrid-Barajas Airport environmental policy as well as any internal airport procedures that are applicable to it

Comply with existing environmental laws and other internal requirements

Exercise good environmental practices

Minimize their environmental impact

2. Raise employee awareness re:

Advising company managers or representatives

Periodic monitoring of activities and facilities

Issuing of good practices manuals, awareness posters, etc.

Organizing contests for best environmental performance

3.- .- Verify input of centralized and decentralized records and of requests that do not adhere to normal contracting methods. Supervise the suitability of the environmental documentation required in the PPT’s environmental clauses (Environmental Monitoring Plan [EMP] and Waste Management Plan [WMP])

4. Advise companies on the proper environmental management of their activities

5. Inform companies of any non-conformities detected and track corrective actions

83

The SERCOM work method is as shown in the following fl ow chart

SERCOM keeps the companies informed of Aena’s en-vironmental policy and of the applicable procedures, advises them on proper environmental management,

ensures compliance with any environmental regulations that are applicable to them and identifi es any deviations or non conformities.

Centralized records

Decentralizedrecords

- Project committee(Listing of contracts awar-

ded) adjudicaciones)Internal communication

Conformity EMP and WMP

Request EMP and WMP Centralized record

Send EMP and WMP Centralized record

EMP/WMP Database

MA-PG-00Applicable

Environmental diagnosis

MA-PG-00 N/A

CLOSED

Inform of conformity with EMP & WMP after evaluation (EMP:SERCOM; WMP:

Waste Handler)

Decentralized records

AENA

MADRID - BARAJASAIRPORT

FINANCIALADMIN OFFICE

CENTRAL OFFICES “La Piovera”

INTRANET

- Records of reports- Bid-winning companies

- Others...SERCOM ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DEPARTMENT

Monthly Enu.

Monthly Enu.

Listing of contracts awarded

84

A graph of all non conformities found in 2008 and 2009 is shown below.

The drop in the number of non conformities was due to the greater environmental knowledge that SERCOM, through its periodic checks, training and awareness campaigns, managed to ingrain among the companies that are currently operating at the Madrid-Barajas Air-port. Also, throughout 2009, a practice was established whereby meetings are held with managers from those companies where non conformities are identifi ed and their Aena representatives. Periodic meetings are sched-uled to come up with and negotiate the most appro-priate actions for correcting the environmental impact of the non conformities. Meetings are also held once the cause of the non conformity is corrected to monitor the effi ciency of the measures adopted.

Most of the non conformities detected in 2009 in-volved airline activities (whether from the maintenan-ce of ground equipment or aircraft) and the gasoline stations, unlike 2008, where the top spot was held by the airlines, followed by construction companies.

The drop in non conformities fi led against construction companies last year resulted from a construction volume in the airport complex that was even lower than in the previous year, and from the heightened environmental awareness provided by good practices manuals specifi c to their activities and stemming from the results obtai-ned in the previous year.


14

12

10

8

6

4

2

STATUS OF NC 2008 - 2009

20082009

NC detected NC open NC closed

85

As for the reasons behind the non conformities, as the graph shows, the highest percentage involved defi -ciencies associated with waste management (58%), in contrast to 2008, in which the documentary defi cien-cies associated with various aspects comprised 36% of the non conformities detected. In 2009 the percentage of non conformities detected involving the handling of waste was far above that of 2008 since the non con-formities in 2008 were partially operational and partia-lly documentary, as a result of which they were divided among the two categories.

The key similarities noted involve the main categories into which the NCs detected fall. The categories for spills in the facilities and pollution contamination measures were steady for both years, though the predominance of spills into public streams in 2008 was replaced by the consumption of natural resources in 2009.

It is safe to assume that operational non conformities (in comparison to both documentary and logistical defi -ciencies) were detected during the fi rst monitoring cycle implemented by SERCOM, since the methods employed were incorrect. It was not until the good practices pro-posed were put into practice that the non conformities associated with certain categories started to drop subs-tantially. As for documentary defi ciencies, which in 2008 mainly involved the handling of waste, good practices manuals were developed and distributed in an effort to specifi cally address this type of incident. As a result of this undertaking, the number of non conformities asso-ciated with this aspect dropped considerably.

2

1

NC 2009

OTHERS

AIRLINES

HANDLING

BUSINESSES, RESTAURANTS

& CATERING

FILLING STATIONS

CONSTRUCTION COS.

1

86


NC TYPES 2009

NC TYPES 2008

Waste managementSpills in facilitiesDocumentaryDischargesLack of contamination prevention measures

Waste managementSpills in facilitiesDocumentaryDischargesLack of contamination prevention measures

58%

29%

14%

36%

14%

7%

0%

14%

14% 14%

87

Company evaluation: IMPROVEMENTS

SERCOM identifi es the improvements made by compa-nies, these being understood as any action taken by a company that has a positive effect on the airport en-vironment. As we can see in the following graphs for 2008 and 2009, in both ses the most signifi cant im-provements were made in the area of waste manage-

ment. The improvements detected in this area in 2009 accounted for 75% of the total, versus 40% in 2008. Some of the measures contained in the “others” cate-gory in 2008 included those involving contamination prevention.

88


COMPANY IMPROVEMENTS 2009

COMPANY IMPROVEMENTS 2008

Waste managementContamination preven-tion measures

Improved waste management Reduced HW production Personnel awareness of waste managementOthers

75%

40%

20%

10%

30%

25%

89

Environmental communications


OFIMA (Environmental Service and Information Offi ce, a department of the Environmental Division) is charged with handling any complaints, claims and requests for information of an environmental nature that may be re-ceived at the airport.

All claims or information requests made by any of the communications outlets available (postal service, e-mail, telephone and webpage) are recorded and analyzed so as to gather the data needed to adequately reply to the inter-

ested party. The main reasons behind the communications are to report potential non compliance with AIP procedu-res, modifi cations to trajectories, a confi guration change affecting airport operability, noise data requests, etc. The graph below shows the trend in claims and informa-tion requests over the past fi ve years.

200520062007

20092008

4,434

2,872

3,719

6,193

5,377

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May Jun Jul

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

90


COMPLAINTS AND INFORMATION REQUESTS BY MONTH 2005 - 2009

200520062007

20092008

The month with the highest number of complaints and information requests in 2009 was July

In 2009, 4,434 communications were received and log-ged into the claims and information request database, broken down as follows: 3,995 complaints, 82 informa-

tion requests and 357 involving both an information re-quest and a complaint. This communications volume was 54.4% higher than in 2008.

91

The reasons behind the 520 information requests re-ceived in 2009 are listed below:

55.4% requested information concerning the south confi guration.

11.9% involved noise events.

16.0% corresponded to requests about trajectories or CSAM reports.

2.9% asked about acoustic footprints, NMTs or re-quested information on soundproofi ng.

13.8% requested miscellaneous information.

INFORMATION REQUESTS BY CATEGORY

South confi gurationNoise eventsTrajectories/CSAM reportsNMT, footprints, soundproofi ng, etc. Misc.

55.4%

11.9%

13.8%

16.0%

2.9%

COMPLAINTS BY CATEGORY: 2009

92


The reasons for the complaints also varied, although two in particular result in the number of complaints in-creasing or decreasing when placed into effect:

A modifi cation or increase in the number of air routes.

The use of the airport’s south confi guration.

The following graph shows the percentages for the complaint categories received in 2009.

South confi guration Flyovers on landing Flyovers on takeoff Route modifi cations Noise in general ZEPA fl yoversNoise violationFlyover altitudesNighttime operationsChange in daytime operations and air pollutionMiscellaneous

32.80%

6.80%

6.20%

4.80%

15.50%

26.30%

2.60%

1.90%0.70%

0.10%

2.30%

93

Algete SS. Reyes Madrid Torrejón Tres Cantos S. Fernando ParacuellosUnknownOthers

It should be noted that the airport was in a south con-fi guration (s.c.) for 2,023 hours in 2009, 51.25% more than in 2008 and about double the hours in 2007, hence the increase in the number of complaints in 2009.

A comparison of the complaints received and handled over the last three years is shown below, classifi ed by municipality.

COMPLAINTS BY AREA 2007

26.06%

11.48%

18.15%

6.56%

3.39%

10.30%

20.30%

1.88%

1.88%

Tres Cantos S. Fernando SS. Reyes Unknown TorrejónHoyo de ManzanaresMadridParacuellosTotal other townsAlgete

SS. ReyesTres CantosTotal other townsS. Fernando Torrejón Paracuellos Unknown Madrid Algete

94




15.42%

10.06%

5.08%

10.34%

49.44%

4.14%

2.51%

1.85%

1.15%

12.11%

6.25%

2.71%

9.27%

9.86%

1.71%

1.47%

0.72%0.65%

55.25%

95

In 2009, the three municipalities with the greatest num-ber of complaints fi led were Algete, Tres Cantos and San Fernando.

The town of Hoyo de Manzanares was not grouped in with “Other municipalities” in 2009 due to the high number of complaints received from that location in August and September.

The complaints in 2009 fl uctuated in concert with the various campaigns organized by affected neigh-bourho-ods, like the one in the Prado Norte subdivision of the town of Algete requesting a change in the nighttime route for runway 36L, and in Santo Domingo involving the south confi guration (May, June and July) and calling for compliance with the ruling issued by the Supreme Court and Madrid’s Superior Court. A high number of complaints was similarly received from San Fernando in July, August and September, also resulting from an organized neighbourhood movement calling for a shift in the departure route from runway 15R in the direction of Torrejón.

Algete: 85.4% of the complaints were received from the community of Santo Domingo, representing a 2.3% increase with respect to 2008. This was due to the signifi cant increase in the number of hours operating in a south confi guration (23.1% for the year). In Santo Domingo, most of the complaints were received in May, June and July, coinciding with the peak of south confi guration operations. The Prado Norte subdivision accounted for 9% of the complaints (a drop of 44.5% with respect to 2008), and the town of Algete for 5.6%.

Tres Cantos: the Soto de Viñuelas subdivision issued the largest number of complaints, with most of those received in November.

San Fernando de Henares: the month with the greatest number of hours in a south con-fi guration. The number of complaints received was 2.9 times higher than in 2008.

San Sebastián de los Reyes: most of the complaints from this municipality were received from the Club de Campo, Fuente del Fresno and Dehesa Vieja sub-divisions. The majority of complaints were received in June. Club de Campo saw a four-fold increase with respect to 2008 due to the south confi guration, while Dehesa Vieja saw a 38.5% drop due to the imple-mentation of PRNAV routes. Complaints from Fuente del Fresno went down by 70.6% with respect to 2008 due to the modifi cation of a short westbound route.

Torrejón de Ardoz: the complaints received from this municipality involved the use of the south confi gura-tion. There was a 36.1% drop with respect to 2008 stemming from the increased use, up to 70%, of PRNAV routes in the s.c. Most complaints were received in May.

Hoyo de Manzanares: there were 16% more complaints received from this town than in 2008, most received in August and September.

Paracuellos del Jarama: the protests were associated with operations in a south confi guration, the greatest number of complaints being received in July.

Madrid: an average of 2.6 complaints a month were received from the city of Madrid in 2009. Most of these were received in July, and the area with the highest number of complaints was the neighbourhood of La Embajada.

96


Environmental awareness activities

The airport engages in activities to raise awareness as well as to inform the public of the progress of its main environmental performance indicators. These activities include:

The Expoambiente Area, which received a total of 284 visits and 6,097 visitors.

Environmental awareness talks held by the Environ-mental Division’s Environmental Monitoring Service. These discussions were held with a total of 56 emplo-yees from the Ramp Control (TOAM and COAM) and Flight Field Maintenance and Preservation groups.

Similar discussions on environmental issues were held with new fl ight controllers and operations personnel, dealing with aspects such as noise pollution and air-port operations. All in all, three groups comprising over 50 individuals received this environmental trai-ning in 2009.

A series of quarterly statistical bulletins on noise and air pollution control was also published for distribu-tion at Aena counters and at the information panels set up in the terminals.

The environmental bulletins published quarterly by the Environmental Division were also distributed via email to all Aena personnel at the airport.

Quality surveys were conducted to evaluate the SER-COM environmental monitoring services, as well as the oversight provided by the Environmental Division.

The noise information gathered by the SIRMA net-work, as well as air pollution data from the REDAIR network, are available around the clock on Aena’s public website.

97

World Environment Day

As we do every year, last June 5 the Madrid-Barajas Airport celebrated World Environment Day, honouring yet again this initiative promoted by the United Nations. The theme for 2009 “Your planet needs you, UNite to combat climate change”, was chosen in an effort to propose solutions and opportunities to reduce the gre-enhouse effect.

On the occasion of this celebration, that week the air-port engaged in a series of environmental events and activities related with the theme chosen for 2009. Some of these included guided visits to the airplane exhibit and the conferences that were held in the T2 assem-bly hall, which featured Mr. José Sanz Dodero, Assistant Director, who opened the ceremony, and Ms. Paloma Librero, Head of the Environmental Division, who dis-cussed the events being carried out at the airport to combat climate change.

The event also featured the participation of Mr. Alfredo Iglesias, member of the State Aviation Safety Agency (DGAC), who talked about “Climate change strategies in the aviation industry”, and of Mr. Javier Casado, from Spain’s National Meteorological Service (AEMET), who talked about some of the studies being done on climate change and provided examples on “regional weather scenarios”.

Mr. Miguel Ángel Oleaga, Airport Director, concluded the act with the awarding of the fi rst annual prizes to the company with the airport’s best environmental per-formance. On this occasion, and based on the SERCOM inspections, this award recognized the actions taken by those organizations that work within the airport com-plex to manage waste.

Director of the company CLH receiving the commemorative trophy from the Director of the airport.

98


The day ended with a guided tour of a segment of the herding route that surrounds the airport that was re-stored by Aena and during which participants were able to observe the fl ora and fauna and take part in a workshop on planting spice plants. Everyone present received a guide to these plants that included cooking recipes. The outing concluded with a picnic.

99

Future outlook

Future outlook

The Madrid-Barajas Airport continues to make signifi -cant efforts to improve its infrastructure so as to reduce the impact on the environment. The refurbishment of a hydrocarbon separation plant (HSP Remote) and the connection of several buildings to the airport’s sew-age system (main FFS, falcon breeding building, etc.) , thus eliminating discharges from these areas into public water streams, are just some of the examples of the actions taken in 2009. The actions planned for 2010 include enhancing the effi ciency of the waste transfer station, which will be outfi tted with a triage station that will allow for paper and cardboard to be separated from recyclable plastics.

Actions are also being taken to minimize the effects of noise at the Madrid-Barajas Airport. To this end, the year 2009 saw the completion of the efforts to incorporate P-RNAV routes on northbound destinations. Meetings continued to be held with town halls and airlines to reach a consensus from everyone involved in aviation activities. To achieve this, a noise technical working group was created, reporting to CSAM, to create proposals for modifying current routes and initiatives of a technical nature aimed at reducing the nuisance created in neigh-bouring towns.

So as to provide reliable information to all concerned on the impact of noise, a new system, called Web Track, was being prepared in 2009 that will display the paths taken by arriving and departing aircraft at Madrid-Barajas Air-port, as well as the resulting noise levels. This system will be available on the Aena website starting in January 2010.

In coming years we will continue carrying out those acti-vities specifi ed in the collaborative agreement between the Community of Madrid and Aena aimed at impro-ving air quality in Madrid. The gradual replacement of current GSE by other equipment relying on cleaner burning fuels is achievable thanks to the planned improvements to the airport infrastructure, which includes the construction of natural gas fi lling stations.

100

Future outlook

In order to improve the airport’s green areas, 2,700 pine trees were planted in 2009 within the airport complex to offset the expansion of the facilities in the south car-go area. Beyond the airport complex, and as part of the compensatory actions specifi ed in the 2001 Environ-mental Impact Study intended to ensure the values of the LIC (Lugar de Interés Comunitario - Place of Interest to the Community) and the overall consistency of the “Natura 2000” network, the year 2009 saw the restora-tion of 287 ha of forest and riparian environments in the municipality of Terremocha del Jarama and surrounding areas. Maintenance work also continued on projects carried out in previous years, such as the restoration of the La Galga stream (in the towns of Talamanca del Jarama and Valdetorres del Jarama) and of Jarama River (between Belvis del Jarama and the San Fernando

Bridge), the replanting of vegetation in the Soto de la Heredad ranch and the repositioning of herding routes affected by the airport expansion.

Lastly, we note that in 2009, the Madrid-Barajas Air-port published its fi rst Sustainability Report, aimed at reporting on its economic, social and environmental ac-tivities. Our plan is to publish this report once again in 2010, and we are committed to gradually achieving the standards of the GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), which will allow for the report to be verifi ed by a certifi ed ex-ternal agency.

101

Glossary

Glossary of terms

CHT: Tajo Water Authority

CSAM: Commission to Monitor Expansion Activities of the Madrid Airport System.

DGAC: Spain’s Civil Aviation Authority

PAH: Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

dB(A): A-weighted decibels.

GSE: Ground Support Equipment

CNG: Compressed Natural Gas

GTTR: Noise Technical Working Group

TPH: Total petroleum hydrocarbons

Leq airplane day: Equivalent continuous level generated by the airplane for the daytime period (from 07:00 to 23:00 local time).

Leq airplane night: Equivalent continuous level generated by the airplane for the nighttime period (between 00:00 - 07:00 and 23:00 - 23:59 local time).

NC: Non conformity

102

Glossary

OFIMA: Environmental Service and Information Offi ce

WMP: Waste Management Plan

HSP: Hydrocarbon Separation Plant

PRNAV: Precision Navigation

EMP: Environmental Monitoring Plan

RECA: Strategic Environmental Monitoring Network

REDAIR: Automatic Air Quality Monitoring Network

HW: Hazardous Waste

NHW: Non-Hazardous Waste

USW: Urban Solid Waste

AMTS: Acoustic Monitoring and Tracking System

EMS: Environmental Management System

FFS: Firefi ghting Service

SERCOM: Environmental Monitoring Service for Companies

SIRMA: Noise Monitoring and Glide Path System

NMT: Noise Monitoring Terminal

TMA: New Terminal Control Area

ZR: Selective Waste Pick-up Area

Madrid - BarajasAirport2009 Environmental Management Report

Aeropuerto de Madrid - Barajas

madrid - barajas airport - aena madrid ing interactivo.pdfmadrid-barajas airport published its ﬁ...

Documents