madrid-gest ambiental 2012 ingles v4 - aena.es ambiental 2012_ingles_v4... · evaluate the...

Return to Contents

Madrid-Barajas Airport

2012Environmental Report

2 Return to Contents

Contents

Presentation ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 3Environmental Policy -------------------------------------------------------------- 4

> Environmental and Energy Principles -------------------------------- 4Environmental Management System ------------------------------------------ 6

> Main mechanisms for coordinating environmental actions ------ 7> Environmental and Energy Policy --------------------------------------- 7> Management Review ------------------------------------------------------ 9> Audits -------------------------------------------------------------------------11

Environmental Aspects ------------------------------------------------------- 13> Noise ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13> Airport’s Carbon Footprint ----------------------------------------------- 21> Water Quality ---------------------------------------------------------------28> Waste --------------------------------------------------------------------------43> Usage of Natural Resources ---------------------------------------------52> Flora ---------------------------------------------------------------------------59> Wildlife ------------------------------------------------------------------------66> Evaluation of Aspects 2012 ----------------------------------------------72

SERCOM and Environmental Awareness Activities --------------------79 Future Outlook ------------------------------------------------------------------99Glossary -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 101


Presentation

The Madrid-Barajas Airport continues to prioritize, as one of its pillars of management, the commitment to provide its services in a way that is sustainable and compatible with preserving the environment. In the year 2000 we adopted a socially responsible stance and made the decision to establish an environmental management system pursuant to the international ISO 14004 standard, the eventual goal being to certify the system. Year after year we have maintained and renewed this certification making significant improvements thanks to the efforts and cooperation of personnel from the AASA, companies, airlines, agencies, institutions and users.

These improvements have materialized into several achievements, like an over 35% increase in the recovery of non-hazardous waste and over 80% of hazardous waste as a result of the various measures implemented. We have also enhanced the sorting plant and built or expanded sorting areas for use by companies and airlines.

Another area where we are focusing our efforts and investments is in minimizing noise and its effects. Improved operations, the implementation of precision aviation systems, the modification of routes with the consensus of all the parties involved in aviation activities, the implementation of the Web Track application, accessible from the AASA website and offering reliable and transparent information on operations and related noise levels, as well as the route monitoring and surveillance activities are

all essential to minimizing environmental disturbances as much as possible.

In a related area, after adapting the environmental and energy policy following the creation of the new company (Aena Aeropuertos) in 2011, we have continued to reinforce our commitment in these areas by implementing various energy efficiency measures every year, including: the adoption of low-consumption systems, updating existing systems and using renewable energy. Thanks to these measures, the airport’s Automated Baggage Handling System (SATE in Spanish) was UNE-EN ISO 50001 certified in 2011. In 2012, the airport was also certified by the Airport Carbon Accreditation (ACA) Program. This accreditation recognizes the airport’s efforts to manage and reduce its CO2 emissions and certifies the validity of the steps being taken to control and gradually reduce its carbon footprint. The Madrid Barajas Airport was the first airport in Spain to be accredited at this requirement level.

Lastly, this report is being published so as to make available to our patrons, clients and employees the information on the Madrid-Barajas Airport’s environmental performance for 2012, information provided to complement that in the Sustainability Report, which is published annually.


Environmental policy

> Environmental and energy principles

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

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

1

2

To establish procedures to disseminate and update the legal, environmental and energy requirements applicable to Aena Aeropuertos’ activities and for complying with them.

To implement an Environmental Management System at each center that is compatible with this environmental and energy policy, and which allows for the periodic definition of environmental goals and objectives, as well as for the systematic monitoring and evaluation of its level of compliance so as to assure constant improvement and the prevention of contamination

3

4

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

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

To streamline the consumption of energy and natural resources through energy efficiency and the gradual utilization of renewable energies.

7

8

9

To have available the information and resources necessary to propose and achieve constant improvement objectives involving energy efficiency as a cornerstone for reducing CO2 emissions, as part of Aena Aeropuertos’ strategy for sustainable development.

To promote actions intended to minimize sound levels and that allow for preserving the quality of life in neighborhoods near the airport.

5

6


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 targets.

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

1 2

1 3

To behave transparently with the public agencies, institutions and communities involved in Aena Aeropuertos’ activity 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 Aeropuertos’ employees, contractors and concessionaires of its Environmental Policy and to make it available to our clients and to the rest of society.

1 0

1 1

Madrid, September 2011 AENA Aeropuertos, S.A. Management Committee.


Environmental Management SystemLEGAL DESIGNATION Madrid-Barajas AirportAddress: Avenida de la Hispanidad S/N 28042 Madrid

The Madrid-Barajas Airport is currently part of the company Aena Aeropuertos S.A. (henceforth Aena Aeropuertos), which started its activity on 8 June 2011 pursuant to Order FOM/1525/2011, which regulates the start date of the effective performance of its functions and responsibilities in the area of airport management, as determined by RD 13/2010 of 3 December.

The Madrid Barajas Airport has had an ISO 14001:2004 certified Environmental Management System since 2000. It was last renewed in 2011.

In 2011, Aena Aeropuertos adopted the principles of Aena’s environmental and energy policy, which was ratified by the Aena Aeropuertos, S.A. committee in September 2011.

Strategic operating policies that guide the management of AASA:

Maintain the highest levels of safety in airport operations

Improve the quality ofinfrastructure and services

Increase environmentalsustainability and energyefficiency

Improve society’s image ofAena Aeropuertos

Increase revenue

Cut costs

Control debt

Adapt infrastructure capacityto air traffic demands

Improve personnel training and development

Infrastructure & services

Quality & the

Environment

Safety

People

Economic efficiency

& financial viability

Increase personnel motivation and involvement

Foment technical innovation –optimize processes

Increase operability ofservices and improve intermodality

Maintain the highest levels of safety with regard to persons and goods

Maintain the highest levels ofsafety in preventing occupationalrisks


> Main mechanisms for coordinating environmental actionsSo as to coordinate environmental actions and activities, the Madrid-Barajas Airport organizes various committees and working groups that meet periodically. Of particular importance is the Environmental Subcommittee, comprised of representatives from various departments who deal with questions such as tracking objectives, audit results, non-conformities, the system for applying new environmental regulations, and so on.

There are also other working groups comprised of corporate environmental managers and other affected stakeholders that handle environmental issues of greater importance to society.

NAME OBJECTIVEMEETING

FREQUENCY

STAKEHOLDERS

CLIENTS MEMBERS PERSONS OTHERS

ENVIRONMENTAL SUBCOMMITTEE

Tracking of airport’senvironmentalmanagement system

Quarterly/ ad-hoc

Divisions: MA, OPS, SSAA, MTO/CON, Commercial

MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

– Management strategies

– Dissemination general instructions

– Previews– Sector

committees– Annual review

of EMS

Monthly

Assistant DirectorDivisions: GAB DIR, OPS, SSA, CGA, SEG, MTO/CON, TIC, CON,INFRA, MA, ECO-ADM, HR, COM.Departments: AJ, PRL, SEGOPSPRESS, Quality Management

DAILY BRIEFING Incident tracking Daily Company guests (ad hoc )

Assistant DirectorDivisions: CGA, OPS, TIC, MTO/CON, CON, INFRA, SEG, SSAA, MA


NAME OBJECTIVEMEETING

FREQUENCY

STAKEHOLDERS

CLIENTS MEMBERS PERSONS OTHERS

WEEKLY BRIEFING

Incident tracking Weekly

Companyguests(ad hoc)

Director, Assistant Director, Divisions: CGA, OPS, ECO-ADM, MTO/COM, CON INFRA, TIC, SEG, SSAA, RRHH, GAB DIR, MA, COM.Departments: Executive ServicesQuality ManagementAJ, PRL, SEGOPC, MTO NA, PRESS, RSO Manager

TWR chief,MaintenanceNA

TRAJECTORY ANALYSIS WORKING GROUP

Analyze andproposeimprovements forproperly followingair routes

Every fourmonths/ad hoc

Major airportcompanies,companyassociations:ALA, AECA, IATA

Div. MA, EISDev. Dept.

AESA, pilots associations,Air Navigation (airspaceand ACC)

CLEANING GROUP

Make personnel aware of importance of cleanliness to operational safety

QuarterlyAOC

Handling (3),indoor andoutdoor cleaningcompanies,RAESA, ALDEASA,aircraft cleaningcompanies, fuelsuppliers

Div. SSAA, DivCGA, SEGOPS,Ops ControlDept., Ramp GControl Sect.,Div. MA

NOISE TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP

Meetings with townhalls to presentnew proposals toaid in minimizingnuisances inmunicipalities

Quarterly/ad-hoc Div. MA,

Aena (Planning& EnvironmentalDevelopment Division),Development Ministry, AESA, town hall officials

CSAM (MONITOR MADRID/BARAJAS EXPANSION)

Trackimplementationof corrective andcompensatorymeasures stemmingfrom 1995/2001 EIS

Monthly(set everymeeting)

Director, Assistant Director, Div. MA

DGAC, AESA,Environment Ministry, Aena (Planning &Environmental Dev. Division) Madrid, SanFernando, Paracuellos,Algete, Alcobendas, SanSebastión Reyes, Cosladatown halls


> Management ReviewEvery year the Management Committee conducts a general review of the efficiency and continuous improvement of the airport’s Environmental Management System. As part of the review, Management determines opportunities for improvement and the need to change the system. The process considers:

> Audit results> Communications from interested external parties, including complaints> The organization’s environmental performance (waste management, monitoring of

atmospheric emissions, discharges, etc.)> Incidents and non-conformities detected during the year> The degree of compliance with targets and objectives> Situational changes that could affect the Policy or other aspects of the Management

System (new regulations, organizational changes, etc.)> Opportunities for improvement and proposed objectives for the new period.

Tracking Objectives and Actions 2012

Determine the airport’s greenhouse gas footprint for 2011 as per ISO 14064 (generated by its own activities) so as to maintain Level II based on the Airport Carbon Accreditation Program.

Evaluate the information needed to draft a 2011 greenhouse gases report (Level II).

Request data and prepare information on behalf of the divisions involved.

Determine the Phase I carbon footprint and prepare report (Phases I & II).

Present report, have AENOR certify and renew ACA accreditation.

Determine the carbon footprint emitted by others in order to come up with at least two actions to minimize it.

Request and obtain available data on vehicles, handling equipment and company facilities (data and minimization measures planned).

Calculate the carbon footprint of these sources, final report and evaluation of minimization measures. Anticipate using the EDMS model. Postponed to 2013.

Establish system for obtaining data.

Request data from third parties.

Obtain and analyze data and minimization measures. Postponed to 2013.

Improve the handling of non-hazardous waste to achieve 35% segregation

Optimize the use of waste sorting points.

Write quarterly tracking reports for the companies that generate the most waste. Inform companies and determine measures for improvement.

Have all the companies use the sorting plant.

Track any improvements monthly.

Actions incomplete/postponed

Actions complete Actions in progress



Optimize the handling of HW and reduce the amount of waste generated by 2%. Improve the recovery of hazardous waste. Reduce generation by 20%. Measures proposed to sort waste at point of origin by 2013

Establish a program of measures to handle and reduce the generation of hazardous waste.

Hold meetings with other divisions involved and waste manager to evaluate measures. Postponed to 2013.

Implement reduction measures. Postponed to 2013.

Keep total number of company non-compliances in 2012 to <10. (no. NC 2012=4)

Establish bid specifications for dissemination: categories, expected duration and assessment criteria.

Advertise the initiative.

Identify winners using the assessment criteria established.

Organize and announce the award ceremony.

Provide good practices manuals to all of the companies being monitored.

Provide consulting services and have at least five companies engage in environmental improvements.

Improve airport’s EMS and its dissemination through various activities

Assess the indicators to be included in the 2011 Sustainability Report by following the established methodology (GRI) and EFQM data.

Have the divisions involved request data and prepare the information.

Write and lay out the 2011 Sustainability Report. Include at least the main indicators

Validation of the report by an accredited agency. Postponed to 2013.

Update planning for complying with legal requirements.

Draft 2011 Environmental Statement.

Internally audit the Environmental Statement.

Analyze bird impacts and establish measures to maintain the indicator at 2011 levels (bird strike risk). No. of bird strikes 2012= 2.04 (no. impacts 2011=2.09)

Systematically review the risk analysis, reach consensus with all involved and establish measures to minimize the risk.

Carry out new measures to minimize the risk: control rabbit and hare populations.

Minimize the acoustic impact on towns surrounding the airport so as to limit 97% of the annual events (weighted average of all the NMTs outside the acoustic right-of-way) to 85 db (98.88% of noise events were kept at or below this value)

Study and implement those proposals made in the GTTR by the town halls that are technically, operationally and environmentally viable.

Monitor compliance with limit noise values (RD 1367/2007).

Monitor compliance with commitments agreed to with communities: Balance out landings on 18R and L in a South Configuration. Target = 50%

Study and implement the proposals made by the GTAT that ensure better tracking of flight paths.

Hold working meetings with at least two of the airlines that have the most non-compliances.

Continue tracking non-compliances and the issuance of complaints to AESA





Improve the public’s perception of the airport’s environmental performance so as to achieve a 60% satisfaction index on surveys (satisfaction index on 2012 surveys = 44.5%).

Carry out planning.

Implement measures proposed in the plan.

Introduce at least two improvements in how the information is communicated to the outside.

Search for parameterizable ideas and indicators.

Analyze indicators suitable for incorporation.

Create list of comparable indicators.

Improve energy efficiency. Reduce 2011 electricity usage by 2% (2012 savings with respect to 2011 = 2.26%)

Establish plant to implement the measures proposed in the T3 energy audit.

Implement electricity savings and efficiency system for terminal lighting. Expand current lighting activation control system to public areas of terminals T123, estimated to save 203,500 Kwh in 2012.

Implement new LED technologies in terminals T123: restrooms, T1 and T3 consignment signs, VIP lounge, outdoor lighting, T2 and T3 arrivals, lighted signs, nighttime lighting in offices and hallways. Estimated savings of 665,000 Kwh/year.

Supply and install LED obstruction warning lights.

> Audits The goals of the audits are to determine the conformity of the management system of the organization/company being audited with the audit criteria, to evaluate its ability to comply with the applicable legal and contractual requirements, and to determine its effectiveness in complying with the specified objectives and, when applicable, to identify possible areas for improvement.

The effectiveness and enforcement of the Environmental Management System’s requirements are evaluated every year through internal audits that are conducted prior to the certification renewal audits. In 2012, the certification renewal audit was conducted at the conclusion of the relevant three-year cycle. The results, as shown in the table below, were excellent, with only one minor non-conformity being identified.




Year Audit Conducted byNon- conformities

identified

2000 (February) Certification AENOR 12

2001 (December) Internal AENA-INECO 8

2001 (June) Follow-up AENOR 6

2002 (April) Internal AENA-INECO 12

2002 (May) Follow-up AENOR 3

2002 (November) Internal AENA-INECO 12

2003 (April) Renewal AENOR 4


2004 (March) Internal AENA-INECO 12

2004 (May) Follow-up AENOR 3


2005 (March) Internal AENA-INECO 10

2005 (April) Follow-up AENOR 3


2006 (May) Internal AENA-INECO 6

2006 (June) Renewal AENOR 4





2009 (January) Internal AENA-INECO 4

2009 (March) Renewal AENOR 0


2010 (March) Follow-up AENOR 0


2011 (March) Follow-up AENOR 0

2012 (February) Internal AENA-INECO 0

2012 (March) Renewal AENOR 1


Environmental aspectsThe Madrid-Barajas Airport identifies and tracks the environmental aspects associated with its activities so as to minimize any impact they might have.

Below is a brief presentation on the prevention and monitoring activities associated with each aspect and on the results obtained during the 2012 calendar year.

> Noise One of the primary concerns at the airport is to minimize the noise that affects nearby neighborhoods. This entails a considerable effort in several different areas:

> Improved operations: by introducing precision navigation routes (PRNAV), monitoring operations to detect potential violations of established procedures and participating in various working groups to review routes and improve maneuvers.

> Monitor and control noise by conducting noise measurements in affected municipalities around the airport.

> Communicate and reach a consensus with those involved in aviation activities.

> Implement the Noise Insulation Plan in dwellings as approved by local governments.

Minimizing the acoustic impact

Community relations

> In order to improve the dissemination of information on noise levels, an application called WebTrak was developed. This application has been available on the Aena Aeropuertos website since 10 January 2010 and offers reliable and transparent information regarding airplane operations and the sound levels they generate. The WebTrak application was updated on 27 September 2012 so that the following new features could be added:


• Provide better noise information: gives information on noise events.• Improve how the information is displayed in time: easier and more flexible access

to information.• Improve the graphical display with a new base map and better defined icons: the

goal is to make these “Interactive Noise Maps” an online tool that is much clearer and more transparent to the general public.

> In order to reach a consensus and minimize the noise impact, the airport holds meetings with municipal representatives. These meetings were held in 2012 to discuss the current status as well as the courses of action being pursued by Aena Aeropuertos to reduce environmental noise levels specific to each case in particular. For this same purpose, meetings are held with representatives from town halls affected by airport operations through the Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR in Spanish), which was created in 2009 as part of the CSAM. This group gathers proposals from municipalities and analyzes them in an effort to find alternatives to minimize noise levels.

Monitoring and enforcement of established procedures and applicable regulations

> Airplane flight paths are constantly monitored by the airport’s Environmental Division, which analyzes any potential procedural or regulatory violations and reports potential non-compliances to Spain’s Aviation Safety Agency, as appropriate.


> So as to gradually decrease the number of non-compliances and improve operations, thereby reducing noise levels in surrounding communities, individual meetings are held with specific airlines to discuss improvements to following standard routes, analyzing specific points of contention and coordinating follow-up actions to improve flight procedures. These meetings are yielding very good results.

> Periodic meetings are also held with the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group. This group met once in 2012 for the purpose of improving operations, reducing deviations and minimizing environmental impacts in and around the airport. This group includes representatives from various pilot and airline associations, from the Air Navigation Office and from the airport. It reviews and analyzes proposals for improving the arrival and departure routes for the Madrid-Barajas Airport.

> The airport engages in constant efforts to enforce all applicable regulations.

• DGAC Resolution of 30 August 2006 This resolution mandated a reduction in operations involving marginally compliant aircraft, its aim being to have these aircraft cease operations at the airport by 2012. This resolution required phasing out these operations by 15 to 20% each year.

These operations were completely eliminated in 2012 (waiver granted to Cubana de Aviación).

There is also a restriction on nighttime operations between 11pm and 7am local time for aircraft with a noise level equal to or greater than 4. This restriction has been in place since October 2006. No violations of this restriction were recorded in 2012.

• DGAC Aviation Circular 2/2006 of 26 July This circular contains various operational restrictions, including:

- A ban on departing from standard routes when below 10,000 ft (flight level 100).

- A restriction on the use of reverse thrusters at night, and of auxiliary power units and on conducting engine tests in facilities not designed for that purpose.

- A ban on arrival and departure movements or any type of aircraft maintenance during nighttime hours in the parking areas identified as R5, R6 and Dique Sur (South Dock).


• In 2011 Order FOM 231/2011 of 11 January was published, which approved acoustic rights of way for aviation, the associated Action Plan and the noise map for the Madrid-Barajas Airport. RD 1003/2011, which confirmed these acoustic rights of way for aviation, the associated Action Plan and the noise map for the Madrid-Barajas Airport established by Order FON 231/2011 of 13 January, confirmed the contents of said Order.

• Another significant regulation is the application at the airport of Law 34/2007 on Air Quality and Protecting the Atmosphere. Since 2007, pursuant to the second final stipulation in this law, a noise surcharge has been applied in addition to the normal landing fee, the amount of this surcharge depending on the aircraft category and on the time of the operation. The amount of this fee was collected in full in 2012.

The purpose of this measure is to discourage the use of noisy aircraft. This law also envisions a higher penalty for nighttime operations that is double that of daytime operations.

Acoustic classification(Category)

Justification Surcharge

Description 7 am to 10:59 pm (LT) 11 pm to 6:59 am (LT)

1 Marginally compliant (*) 70% 140%

2 Airplanes lacking the latest technology (**) 20% 40%

3 Airplanes with the latest technology 0% 0%

4 Airplanes in design stage 0% 0%

Improved operations

> P-RNAV maneuvers have been in place since 2009. These are based on precision navigation systems and are used for takeoffs in a North or South configuration. These systems are based on geographical coordinates that allow for fewer path deviations, thus minimizing the impact on nearby urban centers. The gradual incorporation of these systems in aircraft is allowing for significant improvements in takeoff operations at the airport. PRNAV maneuvers currently account for 94% of all operations, and SID routes for 6%.

(*) 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 given here are for illustrative purposes only, since the acoustic

classification depends on each aircraft’s noise certificate.


2007 Introduction of P-RNAV maneuvers on takeoff.

Nov 2007 Creation of the Trajectory Analysis Committee and its Technical Group.

6/06/2007 Modification of nighttime route for threshold 36L

10/07/2008At the 27th CSAM meeting, the creation of a Noise Technical Working Group (GTTR) is approved. Reporting to the CSAM, the GTTR will study possible technical initiatives to minimize sound levels.

7/05/2009 New P-RNAV routes go into effect for all northbound destinations.

04/06/2009 Sixth meeting of the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group.

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

13/10/2009 Second meeting of the Noise Technical Working Group.

11/12/2009 Seventh meeting of the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group.

08/10/2010 Third meeting of the Noise Technical Working Group.

14/12/2010 Eighth meeting of the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group.

2011 Ninth and tenth meetings of the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group.

20/09/12 Meeting of the Trajectory Analysis Technical Group

Comparison of operational improvement of P-RNAV versus conventional maneuvers:

Monitoring systemsSo as to track and monitor aviation operations and the sound emissions resulting from them, the Airport has two applications: the Acoustic Monitoring and Tracking System (SCVA) and the Noise Monitoring System (SIRMA).

> Noise Monitoring System (SIRMA) This system receives information on both the noise recorded at the NMTs (Noise


Monitoring Terminals) located within the airport complex and in nearby towns, as well as radar and flight plan data from the SACTA system.

This system associates the noise recorded on each NMT with the offending aircraft, from which it can obtain all of its flight information.

Identification and location of the NMTs

NMT LOCATION

1 La Moraleja

2 Algete

3 San Sebastián de los Reyes

4 Fuente el Fresno

5 Santo Domingo Sur

6 Fuente del Saz

7 Paracuellos

8 Mejorada

9 Belvis

10 San Fernando

11 Coslada Estación

12 Alameda de Osuna

13 Barajas

16 Tres Cantos

18 El Molar

20 Torrejón

21 Santo Domingo Norte

23 Los Berrocales

24 Ciudalcampo

25 Prado Norte

26 Club de Campo

27 La Granjilla


> Acoustic Monitoring and Tracking System (SCVA) This system has three cameras and two noise monitors that are used to enforce the nighttime operating restrictions put in place by the 2001 EIS in the area of ramps 5 and 6 and in the South Dock, which are the closest to populated areas.

The graph below shows the db (A) recorded by the NMTs in 2012, pursuant to applicable laws.

2012 NMT DATA

Map showing the location of the microphones that make up the SIRMA network and the air routes in use during 2012

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

leq_airplane dB(A) day 35 53 51 54 52 53 45 59 61 63 65 37 47 42 48 50 52 48 49 53 51 58

leq_airplane dB(A) night 28 32 30 45 44 44 35 45 51 47 50 23 32 21 38 44 44 41 24 53 43 39

010203040506070

dB (

A)

DATOS TMR´s 2012


The following table shows a comparison of Leq_airplane data from 2011-2012 for day and nighttime periods. The overall trend was for a decrease in sound levels on the order of 1-2 dB during the day, as well as constant orslightly decreasing nighttime values. The cause for the drop was the lower number of operations in 2012 with respect to 2011.

Leq_airplane dB(A) Leq_airplane dB(A)

day night

Location NMT 2011 2012 2011 2012

La Moraleja 1 37 35 28 28

Algete 2 55 53 30 32

San Sebastián de los Reyes 3 52 51 30 30

Fuente el Fresno 4 55 54 45 45

Santo Domingo (S) 5 53 52 43 44

Fuente el Saz 6 53 53 45 44

Paracuellos 7 46 45 36 35

Mejorada 8 59 59 46 45

Belvis 9 62 61 52 51

San Fernando 10 64 63 49 47

Coslada Estación 11 66 65 51 50

Alameda de Osuna 12 40 37 27 23

Barajas 13 47 47 34 32

Tres Cantos 16 44 42 22 21

El Molar 18 49 48 39 38

Torrejón 20 52 50 45 44

Santo Domingo (N) 21 53 52 44 44

Los Berrocales 23 50 48 43 41

Ciudalcampo 24 50 49 25 24

Prado Norte 25 54 53 54 53

Club de Campo 26 52 51 44 43

La Granjilla 27 58 58 40 39


> The airport’s carbon footprint So as to maintain its accreditation in ACI Europe’s ACA (Airport Carbon Accreditation) Program, in 2012 the Madrid-Barajas Airport determined for the second year in a row the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions produced by its activities.

The procedure used to quantify and verify the inventory and the associated reports is given in the ISO 14064 Standard, “Greenhouse Gases”. This standard details the principles and requirements for organizations of all kinds to design, develop and manage GHG inventories

The ACA Program is voluntary and includes more than 59 airports in its ranks, accounting for 52% of all European air traffic. There are four levels of accreditation: mapping, reduction, optimization and neutrality.

In April 2012, the Madrid-Barajas Airport achieved level 2 accreditation in the program in recognition of its efforts to manage and reduce its CO2 emissions by measuring its carbon footprint and implementing measures to reduce it over time. The Madrid-Barajas Airport became the first airport in Spain to be accredited at this level in the ACA program.

Return to Contents22

ACA ProgramOn 18 June 2008, through a resolution on climate change, ACI Europe (Airports Council International) committed to helping its member airports evaluate and reduce their carbon footprint. To this end, this organization, along with WSP Environmental, created the Airport Carbon Accreditation (ACA), a voluntary accreditation system for airports that promotes and allows for the implementation of management processes aimed at reducing emissions produced by airport operations. The ACA has different accreditation levels, as described below:

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 3+

MAPPING• Determine emissions sources within the operational boundary of the airport company.• Calculate the annual carbon emissions.• Compile a carbon footprint report.• Engage an independent third-party to verify the carbon footprint report

REDUCTION• All of the above plus:• Provide evidence of effective carbon management procedures.• Show that reduction targets have been achieved.

OPTIMIZATION• All of the above plus:• Widen the scope of carbon footprint to include third party emissions.• Engage third parties at and around the airport.

NEUTRALITY• All of the above plus:• Offset remaining emissions to achieve carbon neutral operations (can use internationally

recognized offset mechanisms).


The following measures are among those implemented by the airport to reduce its GHG emissions:

> Energy savings measures that allow for a reduction in the indirect emissions generated to produce electricity. Since 2006, more than 60% of the electricity used at the airport has come from the cogeneration plant located within the airport grounds, with the resulting reduction in the production of GHG. The Automated Baggage Handling System (SATE) in Terminal 4 and the low-voltage system are also being made more energy efficient. The implementation of these measures in the SATE facilities allowed for a reduction in their electricity consumption patterns of up to 29.5% in 2012 with respect to 2011. Other energy efficiency measures implemented at the airport in 2012 to cut down on indirect emissions included:

• Installation of presence detectors in T123.• Replacement of fluorescent bulbs with lower energy units in T4 and T4 Satellite.• Use of LED technology in T123.• Lighting in unused (ornamental or non-critical) areas in T4.

> Program to replace ground service equipment (GSE): in preparation for this program, a project was put out to bid for the planning and construction of a new compressed natural gas (CNG) station to service handling equipment, thus allowing a transition from the use of diesel to CNG as fuel. To this end, the emissions generated by the handling companies contracted to Aena Aeropuertos S.A. are being tracked and in 2012 other options were considered, like the use of LNG or LPG transported by tanker trucks.

> Incorporation of electric vehicles to the Aena Aeropuertos S.A. fleet. With an initial fleet of 10 vehicles at the airport, Aena Aeropuertos will analyze the viability of replacing all of the conventional vehicles used for airport activities. These vehicles use electricity as the sole source of energy for their motive power. They also have electrochemical batteries that supply all of the electricity to every one of the vehicle’s systems. The airport has 53 recharging stations where these cars are recharged during off or nighttime hours, when there is less demand at the airport for electricity. This is done so the effect of this charging on the electrical system is minimal. The use of these vehicles will lead to lower emissions of polluting gases, reducing CO2 emissions by 13,200 kilos per year and saving an estimated 13,000 euros per year.


Other measures carried out in 2012:

> The regulatory inspections of the Airport’s HVAC boilers.> Inspections for leaks of fluorinated greenhouse or ozone-depleting gases and

installation of detectors in systems as required.> The preparation of an Air Quality Plan and updating the inventory of emission

sources.

Air quality within the airport complex

The Madrid-Barajas Airport takes steps to identify, control, monitor and correct the atmospheric emissions generated as a result of all airport activities.

To do so, the airport obtains information on the quality of the air around the airport using a system that constantly measures atmospheric pollution known as REDAIR (Air Quality Monitoring Network), which provides concentration levels (inhalation values) for the main substances produced by airport activities, such as:

• PM10 and PM2.5 particulates• Nitrogen dioxide/Nitrogen oxides – NO2/NOx• Ozone - O3• Sulfur dioxide - SO2• Total hydrocarbons – TPH (methane and non-methane)• Lead• Benzene• Carbon monoxide - CO

This Air Quality Monitoring Network consists of three fixed stations (Redair 1, Redair 2 and Redair 3) and one mobile laboratory. The purpose of these stations is to constantly and automatically monitor air quality in the areas affected by airport operations (takeoffs, landings, taxiing) and to determine whether these values are in compliance with regulatory limits.


Location of REDAIR stations at the Madrid-Barajas Airport

In the Model for the Dispersion of Pollutants to the Atmosphere finished in 2009, it was concluded that the emissions measured within the airport complex at the current location of the fixed station Redair 3 were not representative because most of the pollution recorded was from vehicular traffic on roads near the airport. As a result, after several meetings with the regional government to discuss the relocation of this fixed station, and after two sampling campaigns lasting about one year each using the mobile laboratory (until March 2010 next to the central firefighting station and from May 2010 next to the satellite RFFS station), it was concluded that Redair 3 should be relocated to the north, that is, next to the satellite RFFS station.

The measuring stations house various pieces of analytical equipment and a weather substation. Once validated, the data are published daily on the Aena Aeropuertos website and added to a file containing air quality information that is subsequently sent to the Madrid City Hall and the Madrid regional government.

The pollutants that had the highest atmospheric concentrations in 2012 in terms of the levels currently specified in Royal Decree 102/2011 of 28 January on improved air quality were nitrogen dioxide (NO2), PM10 particulates and ozone (O3).


In the case of PM10 particulates, in 2012 the three stations recorded some violations of the daily limit value (50 μg/m3), but not on more than 35 occasions. These violations were recorded in June, July and August of 2012, coinciding with several intrusions of air masses from the African continent.

For ozone (O3), the legal limit for informing the public is an average value of 180 μg/m3 over one hour, which was exceeded five times during the year over a total of 14 hours in the network’s different stations.

As for nitrogen dioxide (NO2), in 2012 the hourly limit for the protection of human health was exceeded at Redair stations 2 and 3, the annual limit for the protection of human health was exceeded at Redair station 3 and the critical level of NOx for the protection of vegetation was exceeded at Redair stations 1, 2 and 3 and at the mobile unit.

0102030405060708090

2011 2012 2011 2012

Annual limit for the protection ofhuman health

Critical level for the protection of vegetation

µg/m

3

Redair 1

Redair 2

Redair 3


Comparing these values with those recorded by the regional government’s air quality network reveals that they follow the same trend as the daily averages recorded at Redair stations 1, 2 and 3, mirroring each other perfectly. The average values in the case of Redair 3 tend to be closer to the highest values in the regional government’s network:

Similarly, Redair stations 1 and 2 exhibited values that were slightly below those recorded by the Madrid government’s network over the course of 2012, though the values were similar in the first months of the year. The data from Redair station 3 are similar to those from the Madrid government’s network throughout the year:

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Con

cent

rati

on (µ

g/m

3)

REDAIR 3 GETAFE LEGANESALCALA DE HENARES ALCOBENDAS FUENLABRADAMOSTOLES TORREJON DE ARDOZ ALCORCONCOSLADA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80


Con

cent

rati

on (µ

g/m

3)

REDAIR 3 PLAZA DEL CARMEN CUATRO CAMINOS

AVDA.RAMON Y CAJAL ARTURO SORIA FAROLILLO

MORATALAZ BARAJAS CITY NETWORK AVG.


This is due to the direct influence of one of the main sources of NO2 emissions, vehicular traffic, since the airport is surrounded by several highways (A- 2, M-14, M-11 and M-50). The station most affected by this source is Redair 3, which is why its relocation is pending, as noted earlier.

The readings for the remaining pollutants measured at the stations (SO2, PM2.5, CO, lead and benzene) were well below the limits established by Royal Decree 102/2011 in both 2012 and 2011.

> Water quality The quality of the water in the bodies of water located in the Madrid-Barajas Airport, as well as of the water discharged into them as a result of its activities, is monitored through annual samples (Water Control Program) of water from surface, rain water, underground and wastewater sample points.

All of the samples are taken and tested under a water analysis and quality control service contract that is awarded to an accredited partner agency of the water authority for the purposes of water quality monitoring and control. This agency is duly accredited to take and test the required samples.

Monitoring of surface water: streams and lagoon

At the far eastern end of the Madrid-Barajas Airport and east of the airfield (runways 36R-18L and 32R-14L, formerly 33R-15L), in the Jarama River valley, is a permanent lagoon with an approximate surface area of two hectares. A portion of the Jarama River also runs through the airport, as do the Tía Martina-La Plata, Valdebebas, Zorreras and La Vega streams, which empty into the Jarama.

The water in the airport’s lagoon and upstream and downstream of the Valdebebas, Las Zorreras and La Vega streams is analyzed every six months.


The parameters measured are specified in the Water Control Program and the reference values are set by the Tajo Water Authority for this section of the Jarama River basin.

The table below shows the results of the analyses conducted in 2011 and 2012 at the sample points for the lagoon and the streams:

RESULTS OF THE HALF-YEARLY ANALYSES OF THE LAGOON 2011 AND 2012

ParametersReference

value (mgr/l)H1 2011 H1 2012 H2 2011 H2 2012

pH - 9.6 8.7 7.6 7.8

Conductivity - 111 138 133 103

Oil and grease - 0.44 0.8 0.58 0.46

COD - 50 62 37 36

BOD5 15 9 20 14 7

SS 25 8.8 59 6.40 23

Dissolved HC - <0.05 0.14 0.07 0.08

Ammonium 10 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.12

Total phosphates

3 0.67 0.10 0.18 0.11

Orthoimage of the Madrid-Barajas AirportSample points for surface waters: streams and lagoon


During 2011 and in the second half of 2012, none of the values for the parameters analyzed exceeded the objectives specified by the Tajo Water Authority. The BOD5 and suspended solids parameters were, however, exceeded when the sample taken in the first half of 2012 was analyzed. This was due to the very low water level, which also prevented taking a backup sample.

The above table shows that in both 2011 and 2012, the target limits for BOD5 and ammonium (NH4) were exceeded at the upstream and downstream sample points for the De La Vega stream and at the upstream point for the Zorreras stream. As is typical in the historical results, this parameter was exceeded due to the presence of discharges of urban origin, but since the sample point is upstream of the airport complex, the airport can be ruled out as the source of the pollution.

ANNUAL AVERAGE OF THE HALF-YEARLY ANALYSES OF THE STREAMS IN 2011 AND 2012

ParametersReference

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.

2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

pH - 7.95 8.1 8.3 8.5 7.8 8.05 7.9 7.9 8.05 8.05 7.65 7.45 8 7.8

Conducti-vity

- 812.5 1170 600 620.5 396 642.5 809 901 631 832 803 858.5 704 858.5

Oil/grease - 0.40 0.28 0.15 0.19 0.22 0.09 0.39 0.85 0.12 0.37 0.41 1.1 0.14 1

COD - 32.5 28.5 9.9 16.5 17 9.5 33 42.5 8 15 57.5 80.5 14.5 73

BOD5 15 7 7.5 5 5 5 5 6 11 5 5 9.5 21 5 13

SS 25 15 11.2 5.75 7.5 11.85 3.65 16 47 9.3 6.40 16 13.5 5.65 17

Dissolved HC

- 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.05 0.18 0.05 0.13 0.21 0.05 0.06 0.20 0.2 0.07 0.18

NH4 10 0.37 0.11 1.16 0.48 1.13 0.14 7 13.5 0.37 0.42 18.5 37.1 0.06 35.15

Total phosphates

3 0.50 0.86 0.49 0.64 0.30 0.41 1.60 2.3 0.40 1.35 0.8 1 1.19 1.6


Results of half-yearly analyses for 2011-2012Sample point: airport lagoon

Results of half-yearly analyses for 2011-2012Sample points: streams

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

H1 2011 H1 2012 H2 2011 H2 2012

Con

cent

rati

on (

mg/

l)

O & G

COD

BOD5

SS

Dissolved HC

NH4

Total Phosphorus

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

Valdebebas (upstream) (upstream) (upstream)

Valdebebas (junction)

Valdebebas (downstream)

Zorreras Zorreras (downstream)

De La Vega De La Vega (downstream)

Con

cent

rati

on (

mg/

l) O & G

COD

BOD5

SS

HC Dissolved


Since 2010 the airport has had a Surface Water Quality Monitoring Network (NINFA network) that allows for the constant measurement of the following water quality parameters: pH, temperature, turbidity, conductivity, dissolved oxygen, organic matter, hydrocarbons and ammonium. The data are monitored in real time in a control center located in the offices of the Environment Division.

This network consists of two measuring stations located in the Valdebebas stream called Ninfa 1 and Ninfa 2. Thanks to these measuring stations, the airport can assess the environmental damage of the activities that take place within the airport complex, diagnose the extent of any pollution that may be present and establish ways to reduce it.

Orthoimage of the Madrid-Barajas Airport Location of the NINFA Network stations


Treatment of rain water: oil-water separators (OWS) and desanders

The Madrid-Barajas Airport currently has 19 units for treating rain water: 14 oil-water separators (OWS) and five desanders, where any potential discharges from the apron are routed before being released into public water streams. There are a total of 16 discharge points to public water streams authorized by the Tajo Water Authority (CHT in Spanish).

Orthoimage of the Madrid-Barajas AirportDischarge points to public water streams authorized by the CHT

The airport analyzes the rain water every six months to determine its quality before discharging it to the streams. The results of these analyses are compared against the limit values authorized by the CHT in its discharge permit.


The results of the analyses for the 16 discharge points authorized by the CHT are shown in the table below:

As the above table shows, all of the results were within limits in both 2011 and 2012.

Discharge value limit (modification to the permit for the Discharge of rain water issued by the CHT in April 2010)

TPH ≤ 5 mg/l Suspended solids ≤ 35 mg/l

Authorized rain water discharge points

H1 H2 H1 H2

2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012 2011 2012

No. 1: Zorreras North & South <0.05 0.10 <0.05 0.20 4.4 4.2 3.2 25

No. 2: Valdebebas South <0.05 0.22 (*) <0.05 10 6 (*) 9

No. 3: Valdebebas North <0.05 0.12 (*) 0.14 3.9 5.5 (*) 26

No. 4: Apron 1.2 1.4 1.3 0.46 9 18 19 18 (**)

No. 5: Remote 0.9 1.6 (*) 0.7 10 6.1 (*) 16

No. 6: PIC area 0.23 0.50 (*) 2.1 7.5 6.1 (*) 3.9

No. 7: 36R threshold 0.8 5.1 (*) 1.1 4.5 10 (*) 13

No. 8: RWY 18L/36R OWS 1 <0.05 0.18 <0.05 <0.05 6.4 7.6 7.9 12

No. 9: RWY 18L/36R Desander 1 <0.05 0.15 <0.05 <0.05 3.4 5.6 6.0 19

No. 10: RWY 18L/36R Desander 3 <0.05 0.22 0.09 0.09 3.9 3.8 3.3 <3

No. 11: RWY 18L/36R Apron OWS 1.2 1.2 0.16 0.46 7.4 18 4.7 4.8

No. 12: RWY 15L/33R Pump tank 0.10 0.24 <0.05 0.26 14 16 7.8 7.3 (**)

No. 13: RWY 15L/33R Desander 1 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 6.1 5.2 16 15

No. 14: RWY 15L/33R Apron OWS 0.16 0.42 0.44 0.15 <3 4.8 8.4 17

No. 15: RWY 18L/36R Desander 2 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 6.3 4.8 5.0 8

No. 16: RWY 15L/33R Desander 2 0.09 0.10 <0.05 <0.05 4.7 5.5 17 23

(*) Could not be sampled due to low flowrate.(**) Results of backup sample.


0

1

2

3

4

5

TPH (limit ≤5 mg/l)

Zorreras North & South Valdebebas South

Valdebebas North Apron

Remote PIC area

36R threshold RWY 18L/36R #1 OWS

RWY 18L/36R PSH Apron RWY 15L/33R Pump tank

RWY 15L/33R PSH Apron

Average values for TPH and SS in the OWS samples for 2012

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

TPH (limit ≤5 mg/l)

Zorreras North & South Valdebebas South

Valdebebas North Apron

Remote PIC area

36R threshold RWY 18L/36R #1 OWS

RWY 18L/36R PSH Apron RWY 15L/33R Pump tank

RWY 15L/33R PSH Apron


Average values for TPH and SS in the desander samples for 2012

0

1

2

3

4

5

TPH (limit) ≤5 mg/l)

RWY 18L/36R Desander 1 RWY 18L/36R Desander 2


RWY 15L/33R Desander 2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

SS (limit ≤35 mg/l)



RWY 15L/33R Desander 2


Wastewater treatment

Industrial and urban-type wastewater generated in the airport’s various buildings and facilities is collected in the airport’s wastewater network and sent to the municipal wastewater network (Barajas Integrated Sanitary Sewer System).

So as to comply with the legal requirements in terms of the maximum discharge parameter values specified in Royal Decree 57/2005 of the Community of Madrid, the airport monitors the activities carried out by Aena Aeropuertos and by concessionaires by means of:

> Annual checks: discharge called “technical systems plot”, which groups the wastewater from the waste transfer plant, the cogeneration plant, the airplane sewage treatment plant and the airport’s no. 1 power plant.

> Monthly checks: samples taken from the area of terminals T123.

> Quarterly checks: samples taken at the four discharge points in the airport expansion area: T4 North, T4 South, T4 Satellite and Air Side Power Plant (CELA)-Control Tower (TWR).

In 2011 and 2012, the total hydrocarbons parameter was exceeded at the final discharge point on the T123 line, mainly due to the kerosene content in the sample, as was the oil and grease parameter due to unauthorized discharges that were routed to the sewage network. An exhaustive investigation has been underway since 2011 to determine the origin of this pollution.

The following table shows the analyses conducted at the discharge points in the airport expansion area:

Annual average of the quarterly analysesTerminal T4 discharge points 2012

Sample pointsT4 North

T4 Satellite T4 South TWR-CELA Systems plotLimit

(mg/l)

BOD5 (mgO2/l) 495 532.5 327.5 437 8 1000

COD (mgO2/l) 955.75 1082.5 569 768 35 1750

SS (mg/l) 477.5 973.25 345 167.67 13 1000

Total nitrogen (mg/l) 130.75 130.5 54 78 8 125

Oil and grease (mg/l) 39.25 45 59.5 21.77 1.6 100

Hydrocarbons (mg/l) 3.98 4.38 8 3.10 - 20


The allowable value for total nitrogen was exceeded at the T4 North and T4 Satellite discharge points, though all of the values were within specification at the T4 South and CELA-TWR discharge points. This violation was caused by the type of discharge, namely fecal water without dilution from other sources.

Annual value of quarterly analyses 2012Discharge points: T4 North, T4 South, T4 Satellite and CELA-TWR

The Madrid-Barajas Airport also has a wastewater treatment plant located on the north apron of T4 for processing the sewage water taken from airplanes before it is sent to the airport’s wastewater network. This processing significantly lowers the concentrations of ammonium and total nitrogen in the water pumped from the airplanes.

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

BOD5 COD SS Totalnitrogen

O & G HC

Con

cent

rati

on (

mg/

l)

T4 North

T4 Satellite

T4 South

CELA-TWR


Monitoring of ground water

The Madrid-Barajas Airport has a Strategic Environmental Monitoring Network (RECA) for monitoring the quality of the aquifers underneath the complex. This network consists of a total of 30 piezometers, 11 located in areas of the apron and airside of the T123 terminals, plus another 19 to cover the airport expansion area (Terminal T4). They are sampled every six months.

This network is used to track the environmental conditions of the entire ground water in the airport, both the terminals and the expanded area, allowing any potential pollution to be perfectly pinpointed and tracked.


The parameters monitored in the piezometers located in the T123 area are related directly to the type of activity that is performed there (only airport activities): total hydrocarbons (TPH), total BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene), PAH (naphthalene, acenaphthylene, pyrene, anthracene, etc.), pH and electrical conductivity (E.C.).

As for the piezometers located in the T4 area, the parameters monitored are related to the activities that take place in those areas occupied by the airport expansion: oil and grease or lipophilic substances, ammonium, pH and electrical conductivity (E.C.).

A summary of the results of the analyses of the ground water samples taken from the RECA piezometers over the course of 2012 are shown in the table below:

ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE T123 PIEZOMETERS

Bore hole (old

reference)

Bore hole (new

reference)

Sample date

June 2012 December 2012

E.C. at pHTPH’s

(C10-C40)BETX** PAH ** E. C.a 25ºC pH

TPH’s (C10-C40)

BETX** PAH **

μS/cm mg/l μg/l μg/l μS/cm mg/l μg/l μg/l

Action levelDutch regulation

2,500 6.5-9.5 0.6 30 0,05 2.500 6.5-9.5 0.6 30 0.05

184/08-24 10D-56* (C10-C40) - - - - - - - -

184/08-30 10D-23 BETX** <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

184/08-33 10D-28 PAH ** <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 1106 7.6 0.13 <0.05 <0.05

184/08-35 10D-41E.C. at 25ºC

<0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

184/08-39 10D-57 pH TPH <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID8-2 8C-1 (C10-C40) <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID14 9D-1 BETX** <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 666 7.3 0.18 <0.05 <0.05

ID19 9D-5 PAH ** - <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID-20 9D-3* - - <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID29 9D-25 - - <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID-43 10D-55* - - - - - - - - - -

ID49 10C-12 1000 7.3 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 972 7.1 0.5 <0.05 <0.05

ID65 8D-3 760 7.2 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 691 7.3 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05

ID69 10D-42 980 6.9 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 843 7.3 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05

ID102 9D-2 760 6.9 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID146 10D-10 1050 6.7 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 862 6.9 0.5 <0.05 <0.05

ID152 9D-18 960 6.7 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID156 9D-6 760 7.2 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

ID159 9D-4 770 7.0 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 674 7.2 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05

ID162 10D-20 1240 6.8 <0.2Xylene

1.5<0.05 1098 7 1.9 <0.05 <0.05

ID163 9D-28 800 6.8 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 874 7 <0.10 <0.05 <0.05

ID170 10D-54* - - - - - - - - - -

P-7 10D-68 1130 6.6 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

P-8 10D-69 1210 6.7 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

P-9 10D-70 1170 6.9 <0.2 <0.05 <0.05 - - - - -

(*) Piezometers destroyed by construction (**) Parameters for annual campaigns


(*) Piezometers destroyed by construction

ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE T4 PIEZOMETERS

Bore hole(old

reference)

Bore hole(new

reference)

Sample date

June 2012 December 2012

E.C. at 25ºC

pHLipophilic

substancesAmmonium E. C.a 25ºC pH

Lipophilic substances

Ammonium

μS/cm mg/l mg/l μS/cm mg/l mg/l

Maximum allowable concentrations

RD 140/2003 (Annex I)2,500 6.5-9.5 1 0.5 2,500 6.5-9.5 1 0.5

NAT-01 8B-1 - - - <0.05 - - - -

NAT-02 8A-1 1010 7.3 <1 <0.05 890 7.1 0.59 <0.05

NAT-03 7A-1 550 7.2 <1 <0.05 502 7.2 <0.05 0.067

NAT-04 6A-1 500 6.7 <1 <0.05 620 7.2 0.07 <0.05

NAT-05 6B-1 830 6.7 <1 <0.05 742 6.9 <0.05 <0.05

NAT-06 5B-2 - - <1 0.06 - - - -

NAT-07 6B-2 - - <1 0.10 - - - -

NAT-08 7B-1 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

NAT-09 7B-2 500 6.8 <1 0.27 459 6.8 <0.05 <0.05

18R-01 5B-1 540 7.2 <1 0.06 492 7.1 0.17 <0.05

18R-02 4B-1 930 7 <1 <0.05 868 7.1 <0.05 <0.05

18R-03 2B-1 1150 6.9 <1 <0.05 1077 7.1 0.17 <0.05

18R-04 2C-1 910 6.4 <1 0.32 836 6.6 0.07 0.19

18R-05 3C-1 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

18R-06 3C-3* - - - - - - - -

18R-07 3C-4 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

18R-08 3C-5 - - <1 0.07 761 7 0.06 <0.05

18L-01 2D-2 - - <1 <0.05 730 7.1 <0.05 <0.05

18L-02 2D-1 980 6.6 <1 <0.05 825 7 <0.05 <0.05

18L-03 3D-2 - - <1 4.2 - - - -

18L-05 5D-1 1090 6.9 <1 <0.05 979 7.1 <0.05 <0.05

18L-06 6D-1 - - <1 0.14 - - - -

18L-07 6D-2 - - <1 0.62 - - - -

18L-08 5C-1 420 7.8 <1 0.07 321 7.6 <0.05 0.059

18L-09 4C-2 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

18L-10 4C-1 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

SAT-01 6D-3 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

SAT-02 7D-1 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

SAT-03 7C-1 990 6.9 <1 <0.05 907 7.3 0.35 <0.05

15L-01 7E-1 930 6.7 <1 0.36 - - - -

15L-02 7E-2 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

15L-03 7E-3 - - <1 <0.05 1345 7.3 <0.05 <0.05

15L-04 8F-1 1700 7.2 <1 <0.05 - - - -

15L-05 9G-1 1180 7 <1 0.61 959 7.2 <0.05 0.056

15L-06 10F-1 3300 6.9 <1 <0.05 2970 7.1 <0.05 <0.05

15L-07 8E-1 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

15L-08 7E-4 - - <1 0.16 - - - -

15L-09 8D-2 - - <1 <0.05 - - - -

15L-10 8D-1 840 6.6 <1 <0.05 747 6.9 <0.05 <0.05


As the above tables show, the ground water in the area of Terminal T123 has a pH that is practically neutral and a high mineral content, more than in those waters that have flowed through the material in the tertiary facies.

The analyses for TPH, PAH and BTEX were below their respective limits for every sample point except for 10D-20, where a TPH reading of 1.9 mg/l was detected in the second half of the year and a one-time value for xylene of 1.5 μg/l was obtained in the first half of the year. The analyses for the remaining piezometers were within specifications.

In the area of Terminal T4, the pH oscillated between weakly acidic and weakly basic, the electrical conductivity values were between 321 and 1,700 μS/cm, and >3,300 μS/cm in the bore holes drilled to the south.

The oil and grease concentration was below the detection limit (<1 mg/l). Ammonium concentrations were detected for the first time in June 2012 in piezometers 7E-1 and 2C-1, apparently originating in the De la Vega stream. The limit for this parameter was exceeded in the first half of the year in piezometers 3D-2, 6D-2 and 9G-1 (0.61-4.2 mg/l).

There was a general downward trend in the amount of free-phase hydrocarbons resulting from the decontamination actions carried out in previous years.

Trend in free-phase hydrocarbons


> WasteThe size of the installations at the Madrid-Barajas Airport, the constant flow of passengers and all of the associated activities create a significant volume of both hazardous and non-hazardous waste.

TYPE OF WASTE SOURCE

• Electrical & electronic devices • Maintenance of terminals, vehicles, facilities, power plants, etc.• Contaminated absorbent material

• Empty contaminated containers• Cleaning of waste treatment facilities (OWS, grease

separators, etc.)• Used oil

• Oil filters

• Lead batteries

• Live-fire training by the Rescue and Firefighting Service (RFFSI)• Aerosols

• Antifreeze

• Fluorescent bulbs • Medical service

• Medical waste

• Oily water

• Storing waste from old dump in a room• Oily sludge

• Leachate

• Ammonium sulfate • Liquid Effluent Treatment Plant

• Paper and cardboard

• Scrap metal

• Wood

• Plant waste

• Glass • Terminal and roadway cleaning

• Containers

• Tires and rubber • Restaurants and businesses

• Rubble

• Toner • Offices

• Recoverable material (triage)

• Facilities and garden maintenance• Bulk

• Air filters

• Category I ABP• Taken from passengers at security checkpoints pursuant to

flight security regulations• Liquids and liquid-like substancesr

• Inert

• Purifier sludge

• Cooking grease

• Used soil

• Garbage

HA

ZAR

DO

US

WA

STE

NO

N-H

AZA

RD

OU

S W

AST

E


The priorities of the Madrid-Barajas Airport in terms of handling the waste that is generated are to:

> Optimize the handling of hazardous and non-hazardous waste by minimizing its generation and sorting more of the recoverable waste (in the case of non-hazardous waste).

> Reduce the generation of garbage and use it for biomethanation.> Encourage good practices among employees so as to minimize the amount of waste

generated.> Ensure waste is properly sorted, stored and handled.

To achieve these objectives, the Environment Division monitors the waste generated by the various activities that take place at the airport. This monitoring is carried out through the operational control of the activities and waste deposit points of Aena Aeropuertos by an environmental monitoring service, as well as through the periodic environmental tracking of contractor companies and concessionaires that is done by the Service for the Environmental Monitoring of Companies (SERCOM).

In order to ensure the proper handling of the waste generated and to encourage its separation in a way that is environmentally friendly, the airport also provides the following:

> Over ten airside and landside waste drop-off points for public use in Terminals ¡, 2 and 3 and Terminals T4 and T4S.

> A waste transfer plant located next to terminal T4.> A waste triage plant adjacent to the existing transfer plant.> Individual airside and landside drop-off points to aid those companies that produce

more than 20 tons of waste a year in sorting it at the point of origin.


The hazardous and non-hazardous waste that is generated is received, identified, classified, prepared and temporarily stored at these drop-off points in containers specific to each type of waste.

Then the internal handling of solid urban, recoverable and hazardous wastes is centralized in the transfer plant, where these wastes are stored before being removed by authorized transporters and handlers, in keeping with applicable laws.

Next to the waste transfer plant is the triage plant, where any non-hazardous waste from the cleaning of aircraft and, to the extent possible, from bags and containers, that can be recovered is sorted manually by plant operators, some of whom are disabled, pursuant to the agreement signed with the Iberia Association of Parents of Handicapped Persons (APMIB). This recovered waste is taken to recycling plants and the rest is sent to authorized biomethanation plants and turned into compost that can be used as fertilizer and biogas that can be used to generate electricity. This biogas can also be used in cement plants, which cuts down on the need to burn fossil fuels.

In order to complement the opening of the triage plant and in an effort to maximize the amount of waste that is sorted, since 2011 the airport has had new areas specifically for dropping off waste called “yards”. These yards are fenced off areas with containers where companies that engage in activities inside the airport complex can put their trash. These areas are distributed throughout the airport, located so as to be close to the facilities and sized based on the needs of the companies. Over 20 of these yards and drop-off points for waste are located both landside and airside in terminals T123, T4 and T4 Satellite.

Thanks to all of these facilities and to the efforts of every airport employee, there has been a clear upward trend month after month in the percentage of waste recovered, meaning a reduction in the amount of waste left over (organic) and of other non-recoverable waste. This reduction is leading us closer every year to our eventual goal of zero non-recoverable waste production at the airport:


Of the total amount of non-hazardous waste generated and handled at the airport in 2012 (11,792.6), 4,147.1 tons was non-hazardous waste that was able to be recovered, meaning the amount of non-hazardous waste that was recovered in 2012 was 38%.

NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE RECOVERED ATPOINT OF ORIGIN (Tons)

2010 2011 2012

Paper and cardboard 1,227.09 1,908.15 1,685.08

Scrap metal 78.55 98.76 110.95

Wood 123.54 173.38 130.02

Plant waste 85.82 105.60 61.3

Glass 102.86 88.24 88.18

Containers 748.11 1,395.02 1,217.75

Tires 8.68 5.72 20.38

Rubber - - 72.80

Rubble 112.34 44.10 36.36

Toner 30 Uds. 565 Uds. 1.16

Recoverable materials (triage) 24.48 460.80 641

Bulk 8.84 40.92 44.76

Air filters - - 15.7

Category I ABP (animal byproducts) (*) 2.02 21.62

(*) This type of waste was not generated or handled during the year.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

% N

HW

sor

ted

70%

80%

90%

100%

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

2010

Dec

2011 2012

38%


The year 2012 saw a general reduction in the amount of recoverable non-hazardous waste with respect to 2011. This was due mainly to a 9% drop in total passenger traffic and a 13% drop in the number of operations in 2012 with respect to 2011. Due to this decreased airport activity and to the lower volume of construction work carried out at the airport in 2012, the amount of paper and cardboard, wood, plant waste, containers and rubble that was recovered dropped by 12%, 25%, 42%, 13% and 18% respectively.

In the case of animal byproduct (ABP) waste, the considerable increase with respect to 2011 was due to the fact that in 2011, rabbits culled by the wildlife control service were only removed in November and December (see Wildlife section), whereas in 2012 this activity took place throughout the year. ABP waste was also generated in customs (perishable waste).

The graph below shows that the amount of paper and cardboard waste recovered in 2012 accounted for almost 41% of all the non-hazardous waste sorted at the point of origin.

Percentages of NHW sorted at the point of origin in 2012

40.64%

2.68%

3.14%1.48%

2.13%0.49%

29.37%

0.88%

15.46%

1.08% 0.52% 1.76%0.38%

Paper & cardboard

Scrap metal

Wood

Plant waste

Glass

Tires

Containers

Rubble

Triage

Bulk

ABP

Rubber

Air filters


As for the generation of non-recoverable non-hazardous waste, a similar trend is observed as a consequence of this reduced airport activity:

OTHER NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE (Tons) 2010 2011 2012

Urban waste 8,135.52 7,780.26 6,929.02

Liquids and liquid-like substances 370.54 258.44 357.14

Perishables 31.68 (*) (*)

Inert 164.36 75.28 36.36

Purifier sludge 175.40 30.14 108.10

Cooking grease (*) 6.42 5

Used soil (OWS) (*) (*) 209.9


0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Liquids andliquid-likesubstances

Inert (aproncleaning andmaint.)

Purifiersludge

Cookinggrease

Used soil(OWS)

2010 370.54 164.36 175.40 0 0

2011 258.44 75.28 30.14 6.42 0

2012 357.14 36.36 108.10 5.00 209.90

Tons


With regard to the 39% increase in the amount of recoverable material sorted (triage) in 2012 with respect to 2011, the amount of the leftover trash (organic waste), 11%, is reduced directly, since the waste is more effectively sorted at the point of origin now since the triage plant went into operation in September 2010.

In 2012, new types of non-hazardous waste were handled, such as rubber with traces of metal (recoverable) from the apron, air filters (recoverable) from the maintenance conducted on airport cooling equipment and used soil (inert) from the mounds that are dragged and pile up in the OWS.

As for the generation of hazardous waste at the airport, the following amounts have been produced from 2010 to 2012:

HAZARDOUS WASTE (Tons) 2010 2011 2012

Medical 0.88715 0.74351 0.79798

Absorbent materials 10.86 13.01 10.22

Used oil (*) 14.54 2.62

Contaminated used containers 0.58 2.49 3.36

Fluorescent bulbs 6.17 5.84 7.37

Oil filters 0.24 0.17 1.07

Pb batteries 24.14 6.01 28.92

Oily water 188.54 341.86 113.48

Aerosols 14.92 12.10 3.23

Leachates (*) (*) 7.70

Discarded equipment with HCFC, HFC 4.70 0.14 2.58

6.200

6.400

6.600

6.800

7.000

7.200

7.400

7.600

7.800

8.000

8.200

8.400

2010 2011 2012

Rest

15 %reduction

8,135.52 7,780.26 6,929.02

Tons

Rest


HAZARDOUS WASTE (Tons) 2010 2011 2012

Discarded equipment different from that specified in codes 160209 to 160213

9.12 8.82 16.78

Hazardous components removed from discarded equipment 11.81 23.75 7.96

Inorganic waste (*) (*) 8.98

Transformers (*) (*) 17.18

Paint and varnish (*) (*) 1.95

Other batteries and battery packs (*) (*) 0.12

Round alkaline batteries (*) (*) 0.13

Button cells (*) (*) 0.022

Ni-Cd alkaline batteries (*) (*) 0.012

Chemical products (medicines) (*) (*) 0.77

Antifreeze (*) (*) 7.98


There was a considerable increase in the generation of empty containers, discarded equipment with HCFC and HFC and discarded equipment different from that specified in codes 160209 to 160213. This was all due mainly to the fact that the airport’s internal waste handler had to empty out warehouses and the materials held therein belonging to those companies that ceased operations at the airport in 2012, as well as to the replacement of cooling units that used the refrigerant R-22 pursuant to the regulation on greenhouse and ozone depleting gases. The increase in the generation of oil filters, lead batteries and fluorescent bulbs was due to preventive maintenance conducted during the year.

The most notable reductions, in contrast, involved the generation of used oil, aerosols, oily water, dangerous components removed from discarded equipment and absorbent materials, which experienced drops of 82%, 73.3%, 113.5%, 66.5% and 30.83% respectively. This was primarily due to the reduced number of airport operations in 2012, as noted earlier.

New types of waste were generated in 2012 that were not seen in previous years, such as paint and varnish waste generated from the cleaning of warehouses that were vacated by companies that ceased operating at the airport, expired medicines from the medical service and which are currently handled by the internal waste manager, and several types of batteries and cells that were added to the agreement between Aena Aeropuertos and the European Recycling Platform (ERP).

As part of this agreement it was decided that the electrical and electronic devices (RAEE in Spanish) generated by the airport would be handled through said agency’s integrated system for handling electrical and electronic devices, as a result of which they are now also being handled by the airport’s waste manager.


The following chart shows that the oily water generated by the live-fire training of the RFFS accounted for 46.7% of all the hazardous waste handled at the airport in 2012.

Percentage of hazardous waste handled in 2012

Of the total amount of hazardous waste generated and managed in 2012 (243.2 tons), 207.6 tons corresponded to hazardous waste that was eventually recovered, meaning the percentage of hazardous waste recovered in 2012 was 85.4%, a significant increase with respect to previous years.

4.20%1.08%

1.33%11.89%

0.33%1.38%0.44%

3.03%

3.27%

1.06%

6.90%

46.66%

3.17%

3.69%

7.06%0.80%

0.05%0.05%

0.01%

0.005%

0.32%

3.28%

Absorbent materials

Used oil

Aerosols

Pb batteries

Medical

Cont. empty containers

Oil filters

Fluorescent bulbs

RAEES (160215)

RAEES (160211)

RAEES (160214)

Oily water

Leachate

Inorganic waste

Transformers

Paint and varnish

Other cells and batteries

Round alkaline batteries

Button cells

Ni-Cd batteries and cells Chemical products (medicines)


> Consumption of natural resources One of today’s most pressing problems is the depletion of natural resources. That is why, and due to their limited nature, the consumption of these resources must be optimized and measures adopted that result in their sustainable use.

The consumption of natural resources is regarded with the utmost importance at the airport. As a consequence, said consumption is periodically tracked and monitored with the resulting data analyzed so as to propose corrective actions and implement measures to minimize this use.

The most significant natural resources consumed at the airport are:1. Water (network and well)2. Electricity3. Fuels4. Paper

1. Water consumption

> Potable water

Between 2010 and 2012, the consumption of municipal water decreased alongside passenger traffic, though there was an increase in 2011 in the consumption of municipal water despite the drop in passenger traffic. This was due to the increase in commercial surface area.

POTABLE WATER CONSUMPTION RATIO (liters/ passenger)

2010 2011 2012

23.09 23.78 24.91


The graph below shows the trend in water usage over the past three years:

Municipal water usage 2010-2012

Year 2010 2011 2012

Municipal water (m3) 1,151,385 1,181,307 1,126,002

> Well water

The water extracted from wells is used to irrigate green areas. In 2012, the consumption of well water increased considerably with respect to 2010 and 2011 due to the installation of a new irrigation network to expand its coverage and enable the irrigation of new green areas.

Well water usage 2010-2012

Year 2010 2011 2012

Well water (m3) 36,247 36,085 48,643

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

2010 2011 2012

1,090,000

1,100,000

1,110,000

1,120,000

1,130,000

1,140,000

1,150,000

1,160,000

1,170,000

1,180,000

1,190,000

2010 2011 2012


2. Electricity consumption

The electricity used at the airport stems mainly from the operation of:> Climate control systems> Lighting systems

Its use is not exclusive to buildings, since much of it is devoted to lighting roadways and apron operations.

Among the various plans proposed to optimize its use, the easiest to implement is to reduce consumption by adopting two highly efficient principles:

> Savings> Energy efficiency

The efficiency improvements carried out and aimed at continuous improvement are framed within the principles of Aena’s environmental and energy policy. The measures adopted and listed below have helped the airport to:

> Reduce its energy needs> Lower the associated environmental impact

As the table below shows, electricity usage has gone down considerably thanks to the efficiency measures implemented since 2009, including:

> Optimization of the SATE circuits,> Expanded use of timers and photosensors to control circuits;> Regulation of washroom lighting;> Control of lighting in transformer centers, the State Pavilion, signalman’s building,

airfield maintenance building, the central RFFS station and others;> Closing of modules in P2 and P4 parking lots;> Replacement of 58W fluorescent bulbs with 51W bulbs;> Installation of presence sensors in hallways and transit areas of terminals;> Installation of LED technologies;> Use of renewable energy through the installation of solar panels on airside buildings

(RFFS stations, power plants, etc.).


Electricity consumption went down by 2.26% in 2012 thanks to the low-voltage electricity efficiency measures included in the 2012 environmental management plan, as well as to the optimization of the SATE.

3. Fuel consumption

> Vehicles

There was a slight increase in the amount of fuel used in vehicles due to the lower number of passenger cars and the increase in the number of high-consumption firefighting cars.

During 2011 ten electrical vehicles were put in operation as part of a pilot program. There is also a plan to build natural gas service stations so that the airport’s fleet of gas-powered vehicles can be expanded, replacing conventional fuels and thus reducing the emissions associated with road transport.

VEHICLE FLEET FUEL (L)

2010 149 187,689.90

2011 152 197,902.24

2012 145 203,258.92

329,689

316,924

313,366

306,161

290,000

295,000

300,000

305,000

310,000

315,000

320,000

325,000

330,000

335,000

2009 usage

2010 usage

2011 usage

2012 usage


> Boilers

The amount of fuel used in boilers went up slightly in 2012 with respect to 2011 due to weather conditions, but was still far below the amount used in 2010.

Fuel used in boilers 2010 1,979,442 L

Fuel used in boilers 2011 1,210,704 L

Fuel used in boilers 2012 1,387,723L

Fuel usage in boilers

1,435,381

1,979,442

1,210,704

1,387,723

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

2009 usage

2010 usage

2011 usage

2012 usage

193,026.56

187,689.90

197,902.24

203,258.92

175,000.00

180,000.00

185,000.00

190,000.00

195,000.00

200,000.00

205,000.00

2009 usage

2010 usage

2011 usage

2012 usage


> Diesel generators

Fuel usage in the diesel generators dropped significantly with respect to 2011. This was because of shorter duration test runs in 2012 and fewer breakdown of the generators.

Fuel used in diesel generators 2010 6,212 L



> Live-fire training

There was a considerable decrease in the use of fuel due to the installation of a simulator in 2011 to conduct live-fire training. It is also worth noting that the fuel used is degraded and is donated by some of the airlines.

Fuel used in RFFS training 2010 0

Fuel used in RFFS training 2011 12,000 L

Fuel used in RFFS training 2012 12,600 L

> Paper usage

The year 2012 saw a significant reduction in paper usage thanks to the measures laid out in that year’s environmental management plan.

Paper usage 2010-2012

Year 2010 2011 2012

Paper usage (Kg) 23,329 18,224 15,169

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2010 2011 2012


2010 2011 2012

Paper usage (Kg/AASA employee) 19.75 15.67 13.04

Nº. of AASA employees 1,181 1,163 1,163

Actions taken:

> Paper usage data compiled on all airport divisions.> All airport divisions informed of reduction targets.> Determination of reduction measures to be taken by each airport division.> Monthly tracking of results, analysis of missed targets with relevant managers.> The results were published quarterly in the airport’s environmental newsletter.


> Flora Within the airport there are 92 hectares of plant diversity (riparian and forest vegetation) as well as some 18 hectares of landscaped green areas, the main functions of which are:

• Reduce temperature (“heat island” effect)• Soil stabilization• Influence on climate and water• Decrease in pollutants• Carbon absorption• Increase diversity of landscapes• Visual barriers• Decrease noise pollution• Delimit spaces• Support wildlife• Increase biodiversity

There are four different ecosystems at the airport:

1. Forest2. Riparian3. Prairie4. Landscaped areas

The map in the image shows the distribution of airside

ecosystems


Forest ecosystemThe forest ecosystems are landscapes dominated by trees and consists of biologically integrated communities of plants, animals, fungi, etc., along with the local soils (substrates) and atmosphere (climates) with which they interact.

At the Madrid-Barajas Airport this ecosystem consists of more or less closed and uniform populations of stone pine (Pinus pinea) and Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis) surrounded by Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica).

Associated with these are species typical of Mediterranean forests like the holm oak (Quercus ilex), the alamo (Populus alba) and the common cypress (Cupressus sempervirens). The main forested areas are between runways 32R/14L and 32L/14R.

Different tree species associated with the forest ecosystems inside the airport.

These forested areas play a key role in absorbing CO2 by trapping this compound during photosynthesis and releasing oxygen into the atmosphere.

In addition to the two main areas of pine trees between the runways, 2,746 stone pines were recently planted on Rey Road and at the T4 taxi stand to aid in sequestering carbon.

Riparian ecosystem

In addition to providing food, energy and materials of different origins and cultural services associated with leisure, well-being and cultural identity, rivers and their shorelines intervene in regulating local climate by raising evapotranspiration, limiting temperature extremes and storing CO2. What is more, they keep the erosion of hillsides in check and buffer flooding, process organic matter and control the inflow of nutrients, exhibiting a high capacity for self-purification. Lastly, they act as an ecotone, or transition area, between water and land environments, being influenced by the water in both by comprising a space shared by the water, sediment and nutrient cycles.


The airport is on the right bank of the Jarama River and is crosses by five streams: La Vega, Zorreras, Valdebebas, Tía Martina and La Plata.

Both the La Vega and the Zorreras and ValdebebasTía Martina La Plata streams, located between the runways, have a succession of plant species consisting of ash (Fraxinus angustifolia), elm (Ulmus minor and Ulmus pumila), alamo (Populus alba), willow (Salix sp), tule (Scirpus lacustris) and reed (Phragmites australis). The vegetation along the Jarama features a continuous corridor of varying width of ash (Fraxinus angustifolia), elm (Ulmus minor, Ulmus pumila), alamo (Populus sp), willow (Salix sp), French tamarisk (Tamarix sp), tule (Scirpus lacustris) and reed (Phragmites australis).

Airport lagoon

There is a seasonal lagoon between runways 32R/14L and 32L/14R that is surrounded by populations of stone pine (Pinus pinea), Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis), Arizona cypress (Cupressus arizonica), alamo (Populus alba) and reed (Phragmites australis), among others.


Prairie ecosystem

These are areas with seasonal prairies deprived of tree species, save for the presence of a few isolated tree trunks and shrubs. The vegetation is xerophilic, meaning it is well adapted to places with very little water. The predominant vegetation is herbaceous, with grasses, spiny shrubs and aromatic plants being fairly common. The most common species present here are broom (Retama sphaerocarpa), rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis), bugloss (Anchusa officinalis), cotton lavender (Santolina chamaecyparissus) and everlast (Helichrysum stoechas).

The strips occupied by grassland are the most important within the airport, since they are closest to the runways. The slopes on the sides of the runways are hydroseeded with alfalfa (Medicago sativa), sainfoin (Onobrychis sativa), wheat grass (Agropyrum sp), Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) and orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata).

Hydroseeded area next to the runways

Landscaped areas

The Madrid-Barajas Airport has a total of 18.6 ha of gardens and adjacent areas that contain species typical of man-made habitats. They serve to complement the natural formations described above, imbuing the airport with color and diversity. This floral canvas includes species like the strawberry tree (Arbutus unedo), the London plane tree (Platanus x hispanica), the black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia), the Judas tree (Cercis siliquastrum), the Himalayan cedar (Cedrus deodora), wild privets (Ligustrum vulgare), cypress (Cupressus sempervirens), the red cherry tree (Prunus cerassifera var. atropurpurea), white alamo (Populus alba), the olive tree (Olea auropaea), oleander (Nerium oleander), rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis), cherry laurel cerezo (Prunus


laurocerassus), firethorn (Pyracantha coccinea), lavender (Lavandula ssp.), cotton lavender (Santolina chamaecyparissus) and others. These species are located primarily airside and outside the state Pavilion.

Compensatory measures

In order to offset the impact from the expansion of the Madrid-Barajas airport system, the airport, in compliance with the ninth condition of the 2001 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS 01), has carried out a series of activities to restore habitats and protect wildlife in municipalities surrounding the airport:

> Restoration of the banks on the San Roman stream (Torremocha del Jarama) and of the Galga stream (municipalities of Talamanca del Jarama and Valdetorres del Jarama).

> Repopulation of broadleaf trees in Soto de la Heredad de las Torres (Algete).

> Repopulation of the hillside forest in Paracuellos del Jarama.

> Construction of a recovery center for wildlife (Tres Cantos).


The EIS 01 also specified that a number of plots within the LIC or in other areas of interest in the Jarama and Henares river basins in the Community of Madrid had to be purchased. These plots would subsequently be restored and improved so as to return them to their natural conditions as much as possible to offset the ecological impact that directly affects some 1,250 hectares.

The work to purchase these lands started in March 2007 and continues to this day until the 750 hectares of river areas and 500 hectares of hills specified in the aforementioned ninth condition of the EIS 01 are all bought up.

The following actions were carried out in 2012:

PROJECT ACTIONS DURATION SPECIES TASKS

Santorcaz radio station, owned by the Ministry of Defense

Maintenance tasks in the project’s second year.

June – September 2012

Aleppo pine (Pinus halepensis), holm oak (Quercus ilex ballota) and gall oak (Quercus faginea), etc

Minimum watering, digging of tree wells, annual leveling and basic maintenance.

Peñabermeja Naval Base, owned by the Ministry of Defense

Maintenance tasks in the project’s second year.

June – September 2012

Holm oak (Quercus ilex ballota), olive tree (Olea europaea sylvestris) and almond tree (Prunus dulces), etc.

Minimum watering, digging of tree wells, annual leveling and tree guard maintenance.

Addendum to the project to restore the plant cover in the hills and riversides in the municipality of Torremocha de Jarama and surrounding areas

Execution tasks and first year maintaining the project.

Riverbank area

• Execution: February-April 2012

• Maintenance: June – September 2012

Alder (Alnus glutinosa), narrow-leaved ash (Fraxinus angustifolia), alamo (Populus alba), black poplar (Populus nigra), gall oak (Quercus faginea), holm oak (Quercus ilex ballota), white willow (Salix alba), dogwood (Cornus sanguínea), hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), etc

Riverbank area

• Execution: existing work (clearing work and maintenance paths) and riverbank vegetation.

• Maintenance: minimum irrigation and fencing of area involved

Mountain area

• Execution: February-March 2012 (no maintenance tasks are planed in this area)

Aleppo pine (Pinus halapensis), maritime pine (Pinus pinaster), gall oak (Quercus faginea), holm oak (Quercus ilex ballota), cork oak (Quercus suber), strawberry tree (Arbutus unedo), fig (Ficus carica), olive tree (Olea europea sylvestris), etc

Mountain area

• Execution: existing work (tilling, digging holes, removing dead trees), planting, making firewall areas and auxiliary strips.


The image on the left shows the tree guards in Santorcaz. The image on the right shows the saplings in Torremocha.

The image on the left shows the fencing around the Torremocha site. The image on the right shows saplings being watered in Peñabermeja.


> WildlifeBirds pose a potential hazard to aircraft, especially in areas close to airports, where aircraft fly lower.

Small birds fly in flocks, which is of some concern to pilots as these flocks may require certain evasive maneuvers. What is more, an impact against a sensitive part of the aircraft can cause minor damage (swift, starling, bee eater, etc.)

Large birds (buzzards, storks, birds of prey, etc.) can cause severe damage depending on where they impact.

The abundance of birds inside the Madrid-Barajas Airport complex is explained by its location between areas to which birds are particularly drawn. To the northwest is the SPA called “Cereal grasslands of the Jarama and Henares rivers”. To the east are the “Cliffs and ledges of the Jarama and Henares rivers” and to the north and northwest the “Viñuelas coppice” and the Pardo Mountain. There are other areas that attract birds, like the cereal fields in Paracuellos de Jarama, Algete and Alcobendas, the municipal dump in Colmenar Viejo and urban parks like Juan Carlos I.

Within the complex there are areas that appeal to terrestrial wildlife and birds and that require various control measures. These areas include forests, hydroseeded strips, wetlands and buildings: > Forested areas between runways > Seasonal streams and a lagoon > Areas with shrubs, pastureland and uncultivated land > Plots with woody species > Structures and buildings (terminals, adjacent buildings, airplane hangars, etc.)


The image below shows those areas of the airport with the highest bird concentrations.

AREAS WHERE BIRDS GATHER:Area 1: congregations of starlings and pigeons.Area 2: congregations of pigeons, starlings, egrets and ducks.Area 3: congregations of pigeons, starlings and jackdaws.Area 4: congregations of ducks, pigeons, egrets, raptors, swifts and storks.Area 5: rest area for the griffon vulture.

FEEDING AREASArea I: crops, seeds, cereals, fruits.Area II: invertebrates, insects, fish.

BIRD MOVEMENTSMovement A: Used by pigeons, starlings, jackdaws and swifts.Movement B: Used by pigeons, starlings, royal egrets, ducks, swifts and storks.Movement C: Used by pigeons, starlings, ducks, vultures, swifts and storks.Movement D: Used by pigeons, ducks, kites, royal egrets, egrets, vultures, swifts and storks.Movement E: Used by ducks, royal egrets, western marsh harriers, vultures, buzzards, swifts and

storks.Movement F: Used by ducks, royal egrets, kites, buzzards, kestrels, swifts and storks.


These settings both inside and outside the airport grounds are particularly appealing to birds and offer ideal conditions for various bird, insect, reptile and mammal species that either settle there or pass through.

So as to reconcile the presence of this wildlife with aviation safety, the airport, in concert with various relevant agencies, plans preventive measures every year, depending on the time of year and species. The airport has also had a wildlife control service since 1970 whose primary function is to establish danger conditions that are easily identifiable by birds, thus neutralizing any possible factors that may appeal to birds and draw them to dangerous areas. By keeping them away, this diminishes the presence of those species that would pose the greatest hazard in and around the runways.

The Wildlife Control Service (WCS) has the following resources at its disposal:

> Over 100 birds of prey raised in captivity that fly over the airport in controlled runs, 365 days a year from dawn till dusk.

> Gas cannons to scare away the birds that land on the sides of the runways.

> Electronic sounds and alarm warnings (sirens) installed on SCF patrol cars.

> Nets and trap cages to capture birds.

> Pyrotechnics to scare away large birds.


In addition to the activities constantly performed by the Wildlife Control Service (use of pyrotechnics, falcons, installation of anti-nesting devices, etc.), in 2012 the WCS engaged in other activities, some of them already in place and some of them newly implemented:

1. Location and removal of stork nests

In cooperation with forestry agents from the Community of Madrid, the WCS removed 40 chicks (8 common buzzards (Buteo buteo), 28 storks (Ciconia ciconia), 1 eagle owl (Bubo bubo) and three northern goshawks (Accipiter gentilis)) and 5 stork eggs, which were handed over to the Community of Madrid’s Wildlife Recovery Center (CRAS).

Image of one of the buzzards removed from a white alamo.

2. Use of fire arms to scare away pigeons

Due to the increase in the number of pigeon sightings in 2012, the airport requested permission from the Community of Madrid to use firearms to scare them away. This measure proved to be enormously effective, especially as a method of deterrence, since no bird strikes have taken place since its implementation. As a result, this method was included in its program of activities for 2013 by the WCS.

3. Biological monitoring of streams

Since the application of this measure the presence of insectivores has gone down, with an 18% decrease in 2012 with respect to 2011 and a 52% decrease in bird strikes involving insect-eating birds in 2012 with respect to the year before.

Biological measures in the La Vega stream


4. Live-capture of rabbits using ferrets and nets

This measure was used from May to December and resulted in the capture of 2,509 rabbits.

5. Selective capture using nets and traps

In 2012, specimens of the Falconidae and Accipitridae families were captured, including buzzards, eaglets, kestrels and white-tailed kites.

In addition, and in concert with the Community of Madrid, protocols were established for dealing with different bird species. Procedures were put in place to deter those birds that pose a particular hazard to aviation by luring them away using dead animals or by removing their nests. A primary goal at all times is to preserve the species, meaning that any animals captured are sent to the Community of Madrid’s Wildlife Recovery Center.

The Madrid-Barajas Airport is also studying new measures to control wildlife by exchanging know-how and information with other airports, both in Spain and abroad, organizations and experts.

Along these lines, in May 2012 the Environment Division at the airport convened the second wildlife monitoring commission for the purpose of:

> Sharing and analyzing information on factors that attract birds, incidents recorded as well as any other information relevant to the study of birds in an airport environment and their effect on it.

> Learning of the measures carried out at the airport to control birds.

> Having all of the attendees propose new cooperative steps and measures for controlling birds.

This event was organized by the Environmental Division and featured the participation of the own airport’s Operational Safety Department, the Community of Madrid’s Environment Office, the Paracuellos de Jarama town hall, representatives from the airlines Iberia, Avianca, Aireuropa, Easyjet, as well as from AESA and the CIAIAC.


The meeting set a starting point for establishing cooperation between the airport and those charged with maintaining and/or exploiting those areas with the largest influence on Madrid-Barajas in terms of wildlife.

The Environment Division justified the impossibility of eradicating the populations of birds that fly over the airport, but stated its firm commitment to continue engaging in new measures to control wildlife by looking into new inspection procedures, contacting other international airports and holding twice-yearly meetings on monitoring bird activity.

The Environment Division made perfectly clear to airlines the importance of reporting events promptly, in keeping with ICAO guidelines.


> Evaluation of aspects 2012There is a system in place at the airport for identifying all of the environmental aspects associated with its activity annually, both those derived from the normal course of airport activities and those that stem from abnormal or emergency situations, and their related potential impacts should they occur.

Once identified, and so as to ensure that guidelines for controlling them are defined and that they are considered when setting objectives, these aspects are evaluated. This makes it possible to compare them among each other and identify those that have a significant impact on the environment. To this end, relevant indicators are established that allow the airport to evaluate their relevance. A reference value is also established for each for comparison purposes in order to determine if the aspect is increasing or decreasing. This reference value can be a legal limit, historically generated amounts, etc.

The most significant aspects identified at the Airport are the noise caused by airport activities and the discharge of wastewater to collectors at certain points in the airport.

The listing below shows a listing of environmental aspects and an assessment of their significance in the last four years.

Environmental aspect

IndicatorAssessment

2009-8Assessment

2010-09Assessment

2011-10Assessment

2011-12

Noise from airport activities

Leq airplane dayLeq airplane afternoonLeq airplane night

Significant Significant Significant Significant

Emissions from boilersValue of mostrestrictive legalparameter

Not Significant Significant Significant Significant

Emissions from aircraft on takeoff and landing operations (indirect)

Fuel used / no. ofoperations


Emissions from movements of AASA vehicles on the apron

Fuel used/no. of vehicles

Not Significant Not SignificantEvaluated by fuel type

Not Significant

Emissions from movements of AASA vehicles on the apron

L. gasoline/no. of AASA vehicles

-- -- Significant Significant

Emissions from movements of AASA diesel vehicles on the apron

L. diesel/no. of AASA diesel vehicles

-- -- Significant Not Significant

Emissions from movements of AASA diesel vehicles on the apron

L. diesel/no. of AASA diesel vehicles

-- -- Significant Not Significant

Emissions from movements of AASA gas vehicles on the apron


-- --

Not assessed since AASA does not use gas

-



IndicatorAssessment

2009-8Assessment

2010-09Assessment

2011-10Assessment

2011-12

Atmospheric emissions from diesel generators

Run time

Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Atmospheric emissions from RFFS training (direct) Liters of fuel/session


Emissions from movements of external vehicles (Indirect)



Paper/cardboard Kg/employee Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Glass Kg/employee Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Non-recoverable waste Kg/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Tires Kg/vehicle Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Wood (formerly bulk) m3/employee Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Scrap metal Kg/employee Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Plant waste Kg/Ha Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Toner Units/employee Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Containers Kg/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Perishable waste Kg/passenger Not Significant Not SignificantNo longer handled by airport

Not Significant

Cooking grease (1)Kg/ employee x mm passengers

--- Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

ABP waste - 1 (2) ¿? --- Not Significant Not Significant Significativo

Liquids and liquid-like substances (3)

Kg/passenger Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Inert waste (previously not-recoverable)

Kg/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Recoverable material (2) Kg/ OPERATION --- --- Not Significant

Rubble (4)Kg/ Total Airport Surface Area

--- --- Not Significant Not Significant

Bulk (previously Inert recoverable waste)

Kg/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Purifier sludge Kg/operation Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Empty containers that held HW Kg/employee Significant Significant Significant Significant

Fluorescent bulbs Kg/m2 of installation Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Significant

Oil filters Kg/vehicles x no. of operations


Used oil Liters/operation Not Significant Significant Significant Not Significant

Oil-water mixture Kg/operation Not Significant Not Significant Significant Not Significant

Halon Kg/operation Not Significant Significant Not generated Not Significant(1) Until 2010, grouped with perishable waste; since November 2010, food waste and waste from confiscated animal products are handled by TRAGSEGA and cooking grease

by AASA.(2) Waste type not generated before, evaluated assuming an intermediate score since no previous reference exists (3) Waste that was first generated in 2007 starting with the enactment of new security regulations for transporting liquids in hand luggage (Regulation EC 1546/2006).(4) This waste type was not handled in 2009 or 2010.



IndicatorAssessment

2009-8Assessment

2010-09Assessment

2011-10Assessment

2011-12

Contaminated absorbent material (formerly Rags and impregnated materials)

Kg/vehicle Significant Significant Significant Significant

Solvents Kg/vehicle Not generated Not Significant Not generated Not Significant

Lead batteriesKg/vehicle x operations

Significant Significant No Significant Significant

Medical wasteKg/passengers x employees


Electrical and electronic equipment

Kg/employee Not Significant Significant Itemized No Significant

Dangerous components from discarded equipment (ELW 160215)

Kg/m 2 installation --- --- Significant Not Significant

Discarded equipment different from codes 160209 to 160213 (ELW 160214)

Kg/m 2 installation --- --- Significant Significant

Discarded equipment with chlorofluorocarbons, HCFC, HFC, (ELW 160211)

Kg/m 2 installation --- --- Not Significant Not Significant

Antifreeze Kg/vehicle Significant Not Significant Not generated Not Significant

Ni-Cd batteries Kg/vehicle Significant Not Significant Not generated Significant

Oily sludge Not Significant Not Significant Not generated Significant

Aerosols Kg/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Ammonium sulfate (5) Kg/operation - - - Significant

Leachate Kg - - - Significant

Chemical products (expired medicines)

Kg/passenger - - Significant Significant

Disused vehicles Vehicles/employee Not Significant Significant Significant Significant

Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (end of line)

Value of most restrictive legal parameter


Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (Excrement Lot)



Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (T4 North)



Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (T4 Satellite)



Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (T4 South)



Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (TWR)


Significant Significant Significant Not Significant

Discharge of wastewater to sewage network (Main RFFS plant)


Not Significant Not SignificantEffluent point removed

Not Significant



IndicatorAssessment

2009-8Assessment

2010-09Assessment

2011-10Assessment

2011-12

Discharge of airport rain water (36R threshold)



Discharge of airport rain water (RWY 15L-33R Pump tank)



Discharge of airport rain water (RWY 15L-33R Desander 1)






Discharge of airport rain water (RWY 15L-33R Apron)












Discharge of airport rain water (RWY 18L-36R Apron OWS)



Discharge of airport rain water (RWY 18L-36R OWS 1))



Discharge of airport rain water (Apron OWS)


Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Discharge of airport rain water (Remote OWS)



Discharge of airport rain water (PIC Area OWS)



Discharge of airport rain water (Valdebebas North)



Discharge of airport rain water (Valdebebas Sur)



Discharge of airport rain water (CELA area)


Not SignificantEffluent point removed

Effluent point removed

Not Significant

Discharge of airport rain water (Zorreras North & south OWS)



Discharge of airport rain water (Zorreras South OWS)





IndicatorAssessment

2009-8Assessment

2010-09Assessment

2011-10Assessment

2011-12

Discharge of airport rain water (T4 passenger parking


Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Discharge of airport rain water (T4 taxi stand)


Not Significant Not Significant Significant Significant

Discharge of airport rain water (P11 employee parking T4)


Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Electricity consumptionKwh/airport surface area x no. of operations

Significant SignificantEvaluated by area

Not Significant

Electricity consumption in T- 123 and T-4/T4S

Kwh/airport surface area x no. of operations


Electricity consumption in airfield and related areas

Kwh/ no. of operations

--- --- Significant Significant

Electricity consumption in other facilities

Kwh/m2 facilities --- --- Significant Not Significant

Electricity consumption in the SATE

Electricity/baggage ratio


Potable water consumption m3/passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Fuel consumption in boilers Liters/ passenger Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Paper consumption Kg/employee Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Fuel consumption in AASA diesel vehicles

Liters/vehicle Significant Significant Significant Not Significant

Fuel consumption in AASA gasoline vehicles

Liters/vehicle Significant Significant Significant Significant

Well water consumption m3/m2 irrigated surface area


Compressed natural gas consumption for vehicles (5)

m3N/ vehicle Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Well water consumption for irrigation

m3/ irrigated surface area

Significant Significant Significant Not Significant

Fuel consumption for diesel generators

Liters/ passenger Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Fuel consumption for live-fire training

Liters /no. sessions Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Consumption by electric vehicles --- --- --- Significant Significant(5) Aspects identified in 2008 when compressed natural gas was first used in the vehicle fleet.


Potential aspects

Potential aspects are those that no not occur under normal operating conditions but that could arise under abnormal conditions or in an emergency situation (accidents, fires, etc.).

Potential aspects are evaluated based on the following parameters> Magnitude of the impact> Probability of occurrence

Based on the probability of occurrence and on the consequences associated with each case, a total score is assigned to indicate their significance. The results for the last four years are shown below:

Potential aspect

IndicatorAssessment

2009Assessment

2010Assessment

2011Assessment

2011

Ground contamination due to break in fuel tanks

Probability Significant Significant Significant Significant

Magnitude Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Significant

Ground contamination due to spill of hazardous substances

Probability Significant Significant Significant Significant

Magnitude Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Ground contamination due to break in wastewater pipes

Probability -- -- Significant Significant


Ground contamination due to break in fire hydrant network

Probability -- -- Significant Not Significant

Magnitude Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant -

Water contamination due to break in fuel tanks

Probability Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant


Water contamination due to spill of hazardous substances

Probability Not Significant Not Significant No valorado Not Significant


Water contamination due to break in wastewater pipes



Uncontrolled spill due to fire Probability Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Magnitude Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Uncontrolled spill due to aircraft accident



Uncontrolled emissions due to fire




Potential aspect

IndicatorAssessment

2009Assessment

2010Assessment

2011Assessment

2011

Uncontrolled emissions due to aircraft accident

Probability Not Significant Not SignificantNo longer handled by airport

Not Significant


Proliferation of Legionnaires’ disease

Probability --- Not Significant Not Significant Significant


Generation of waste due to fire Probability Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant


Generation of waste due to aircraft accident

Probability --- --- Not Significant Not Significant


Emission of ozone depleting substances

Probability Not Significant Significant Not Significant Not Significant

Magnitude Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant

Emission of fluorinated greenhouse gases (6)

Probability Not Significant Not Significant Not Significant Significant

Magnitude Not Significant Significant Significant Significant

Damage to vegetation due to aircraft accident (6)

Probability Magnitude


Contamination of ground by past activities

Probability Magnitude

Significant --- --- Significant

Number of bird strikes per 10,000 operations (6)

--- --- --- Risk acceptable Risk acceptable

(6) Aspects not evaluated in prior periods since they were not identified due to lack of relevant information or to not having been associated with a particular emergency situation.


SERCOM (Service for Monitoring Companies) and Environmental Awareness Activities

SERCOM, the Service for the Environmental Monitoring of Companies, part of the Environment Division, was created in 2001 during the process to implement the airport’s UNE-EN ISO 14001 Environmental Management System. Its purpose is to track the indirect environmental impact of every company that carries out activities within the airport complex.

Over 200 companies at the airport are currently monitored, some going back a long time (like some airlines) while others are new to the program.

As for the different types of activities monitored, these are categorized as follows: airlines, handling activities (cleaning, air cargo and passenger), restaurants, air catering, fuel suppliers, workshops, concessions, construction and maintenance.

The SERCOM working methodology is defined in an internal Environmental Management System document called MA-PG-08 Companies.

The main functions of the SERCOM are:

FUNCTIONS of the SERCOM

Ensure that all companies at the airport:

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

Comply with existing environmental laws and other internal requirements. Exercise good environmental practices.

Exercise good environmental practices.

Minimize their environmental impact.

Raise employee awareness through:

Advising company managers or representatives.

Periodic monitoring of activities and facilities.

Issuing of good practices manuals, awareness posters, etc.

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 environmental clauses of technical specifications (Environmental Monitoring Plan [EMP] and Waste Management Plan [WMP]).


FUNCTIONS of the SERCOM

Advise companies on the proper environmental management of their activities.

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

Incentivize companies to practice proper environmental management by organizing environmental competitions.

Detect company needs by establishing channels of communication, such as surveys.

The SERCOM working methodology is shown in the following flow diagram:

Results of the Environmental Monitoring of Companies in 2012

AENA

“La Plovera” Central Offices

INTRANET

Centralized records

• List of Contracts Awarded

Request EMPCentralized record

Send EMPCentralized record

Report conformity with EMP

• Project directors• Bid-winning companies• Others

• Project committees (List of contracts awarded)

• Send EMP Internal report of conformity

with EMP

Monthly rev

Monthly rev

MA-PG-08 Applicable

Environmental appraisal

Closed

MA-PG-08 Not Applicable

EMP Database

Decentralized records



FINANCIAL ADMIN DEPT.

Madrid-Barajas Airport

Madrid-Barajas Airport Environment Department


The SERCOM detects temporary deviations or changes that have a significant impact on the environment. In the case of repeated deviations, the SERCOM informs the department head of the Environmental Management System, who then opens a non-conformity.

As the table below shows, despite a higher number of deviations opened by the SERCOM in 2012 with respect to 2011 due to the volume of environmental issues detected, the number that resulted in the opening of non-conformities was lower.

Comparison of deviations opened (by SERCOM groups) and NC 2012-2011

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

‘A’DEVIATIONS

OPENED

‘B’DEVIATIONS

OPENED

NC OPENED

2011

2012


In percentage terms, the tables also support this conclusion by showing how the percentage of non-conformities opened in 2012 went down with respect to the total number of open deviations.

This improvement was due to greater awareness and involvement by the company personnel responsible for addressing said deviations and resulting in part from the awareness efforts carried out by the Madrid-Barajas Airport’s Environment Division, which handed out specific manuals and whose SERCOM personnel provided constant advice.

A smaller number of non-conformities involving the periodic monitoring of companies was detected in 2012 in comparison to 2011. The non-conformities detected in companies in 2012 dropped 20% with respect to those detected in 2011.

95%

5%

Deviations ResolvedOpen NC 2012

94%

6%

Deviations resolved 2012Open NC 2011

Percentage Open NC with respect to total number of deviations 2012

Percentage Open NC with respect to total number of deviations 2011


The graph below shows the number of non-conformities detected in 2011 and 2012 and their status as of the writing of this report:

Status of NCs 2012-2011

Non-conformities are addressed at periodic meetings with the companies with the most repeat offenses so as to decide on the most suitable corrective actions.

In 2012, most of the non-conformities detected involved handling activities (ground equipment or aircraft maintenance). Second place was held by fuel supply companies. The handling companies also held the top place in 2011.

2012 NC by activity

5

4

1

4

2 2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

NCs DETECTED NCs OPENED NCs CLOSED

2011

2012

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Construction companies

Fuel supply

Businesses, restaurants and catering

Handling

Airlines

Other


Types of non-conformities: As the graph below shows, the non-conformities involved documentary deficiencies and waste handling deficiencies in equal proportions. Of note is the absence of non-conformities involving the absence of contamination prevention measures, in contrast to 2011, when non-conformities of this type prevailed (60%). This change in proportions among the different categories could be attributed to the writing and distribution by the SERCOM of specific manuals on the prevention of contamination from an operational and documentary standpoint, and to the exhaustive and constant training provided by SERCOM, both during its periodic inspections and on those occasions when the companies request technical advice from the service.

The absence of operational non-conformities (spills in facilities, absence of measures to prevent contamination, etc.) could be due to the fact that they occurred during the SERCOM’s first monitoring cycle, when the practices employed were not correct. Then, as the good practices proposed were implemented, these non-conformities went down gradually as the companies put into practice the good practices recommended, eventually resulting in no non-conformities of this type being detected.

NC TYPES 2012

50%

0%

50%

0%

Waste handling

Spills in facilities

Documentary deficiencies

Lack of measures to prevent contamination

20%

0%

20%60%

Waste handling




NC TYPES 2011

Evaluation of the companies: improvements

The SERCOM identifies the improvements made at the companies, an improvement being any action that has a positive impact on the airport environment.

As the graphs below for the years 2012 and 2011 show, the improvements detected by the SERCOM in 2012 had to do with minimizing the generation of both hazardous and non-hazardous waste, as it was these areas that the SERCOM emphasized during its periodic visits. In 2011, however, the most significant improvements involved the measures to prevent contamination.

COMPANY IMPROVEMENTS 2012

50%

0%

50%

0%

Waste handling



Lack of measures to prevent contamination

20%

0%

20%60%

Waste handling



37%

26%

10%

11%

16%

Minimize generation of HW and NHW

Measures to prevent contamination

Measures to save electricity

Reduced usage of natural resources

Other

13%

13%

20%

20%

34%


Waste handling

Environmental awareness


Other


COMPANY IMPROVEMENTS 2011

Environmental awareness activities held in 2012

Contest for Best Environmental Performance by a Company in 2012

For the fourth year in a row, the Madrid-Barajas Airport held the “Environmental Contest for Companies”. On this occasion, the contest evaluated the initiatives aimed at improving overall sustainability as well as fostering the sustainable use of energy.

The goals of this environmental contest, which was held for the fourth time in 2012, are to encourage sustainable environmental practices and determine their effect on a specific environmental aspect, and to recognize those companies and organizations operating at the Madrid-Barajas Airport that are developing and implementing measures to prevent contamination.

The prizes were awarded on 5 June 2012, World Environment Day, in the Sala Expoambiente (Expoenvironment Hall), at a ceremony attended by representatives from the various companies that were nominated for awards.

The first prize went to GATEGOURMET SPAIN, a company that offers catering services to companies, in recognition of the energy-saving measures implemented and of the initiatives

carried out to encourage employee integration, training and equality, as well as for its cooperation with various foundations and NGOs.

37%

26%

10%

11%

16%



Measures to save electricity

Reduced usage of natural resources

Other

13%

13%

20%

20%

34%


Waste handling

Environmental awareness


Other


Also receiving awards were SIEMENS, operator of the Automated Baggage Handling system (SATE), CLH Aviación, which manages the network of fire hydrants and is the main aircraft fuel supplier, and Pan Air, Líneas Aéreas, a company that specializes in transporting cargo. They all received a certificate recognizing their second place awards.

The trophy presented to the winner by the airport’s director was a piece crafted in the shape of an airplane turbine blade by the sculptor José Onieva and donated by Siemens.

Delivery of Good Practices Manuals by the SERCOM.

Over the course of 2012, all of the companies monitored by the SERCOM were given a Good Practices Manual that was tailored to the activity that each company engages in at the airport. This document aims to provide guidelines on both the potential impacts associated with the various airport activities as well as on the preventive and corrective actions associated with them. It is given out annually and updated with the latest legislative and internal regulatory changes that might be applicable in each area of interest.


Environmental communicationsThe Madrid-Barajas Airport makes available to the public a service for handling the claims, complaints and information requests of an environmental nature that are received by the airport through its Environmental Service and Information Office (OFIMA).

OFIMA analyzes and logs every complaint and information request. The methods of communication available for these purposes are:

> Telephone> Postal mail> E-mail> Aena Aeropuertos website> Web-Trak (through the Aena Aeropuertos website)

A total of 1,392 complaints and information requests were received in 2012, most of them, 53.4%, through Web-Trak.

Complaints and information requests and means of reception in 2012

31.50%

53.40%

8.60%

6.20% 0.00%0.30%

E-MAIL

WEB-TRAK

ANSWERING MACHINE

TELEPHONE

LETTER


The graph below shows the trend in the number of complaints and information requests received over the past five years. The number of messages received in 2012 was 28.62% lower than in 2011, 50.17% lower than in 2010, 68.62% lower than in 2009 and 51.53% lower than in 2008. The number of complaints and information requests received on average every year from 2008-2012 was 2,688.

Complaints and requests 2008-2012

Of the 1,392 complaints and requests received in 2012, 1,292 were complaints, 42 requested information only and 58 involved both a request for information and a request.

In 2012, the month that saw the most communications was July, with 180, with February having the least, at 36.

Complaints and requests 2008-2012. Monthly trend

1,392

1,950

2,793

4,435

2,872

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

2008 148 149 140 237 171 172 340 263 485 207 222 338

2009 291 331 242 237 420 688 867 397 336 224 244 157

2010 189 224 218 150 299 298 259 230 330 293 173 130

2011 164 133 150 106 218 133 230 283 242 106 121 64

2012 60 36 91 135 153 156 180 166 101 168 100 46

01002003004005006007008009001000


> Complaints and information requestsFactors influencing the number of complaints and information requests received

The trend in recent years does not follow any particular pattern. There are several factors that could cause a considerable increase in the number of complaints, such as:

1. Temporary runway work as long as said (unscheduled) work forces the nighttime closing of some of the runways in use during the period in question.

2. The use of the south configuration at the airport. Any time this mode of operation is placed into effect, the number of complaints received goes up.

In 2012, the month with the most hours spent in a south configuration was August with 305.12.

Hours in a south configuration 2008-2012


2008 54.5 52.18 53.6 220.2 158.4 33.82 145.2 169.2 182.7 78.13 75.88 83.3

2009 100.6 116.4 39 156.8 210.2 280.7 326.7 212.4 120.9 109 140.4 210.6

2010 73.3 244.1 228.7 157.4 192.6 163.1 175.4 180.1 172 240.2 96.02 161.3

2011 169.8 158.1 222.7 193.7 227.6 137.4 158.4 310.8 146.7 119.5 198.6 101.3

2012 0 1.75 104.9 210.3 214.9 284.1 214.6 305.1 191 180.6 136.6 142.6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350


Complaints and information requests by municipality

Distribution of Complaints and Information Requests by Municipality 2012

1. ALGETE

A total of 296 complaints and information requests were received. The neighborhood with the highest number of complaints was Santo Domingo, accounting for 93.2% of the total. In 2012, most of the complaints were received between March and August, mostly as a result of operating in a south configuration. As a whole, the year 2012 saw a 71.3% drop with respect to 2010 and a 57.3% drop with respect to 2011.

The number of complaints from Prado Norte fell considerably, with only 4 complaints being received in 2012.

As for the town of Algete, the number of complaints received dropped by 64.4% with respect to 2011.

2. SAN SEBASTIÁN DE LOS REYES

A total of 85 complaints and information requests were received from this municipality, a 48.8% drop with respect to 2010 but over twice (2.4x) the figure from 2011. The neighborhood with the highest number of complaints was La Granjilla, accounting for 56.5% of the total.

21.96%

6.11%

0.07%

15.95%

2.08%1.22%

53.30%

Algete

S.S. Reyes

Torrejón

Tres Cantos

San Fernando

Unknown Other


3. TRES CANTOS

The number of complaints received, 222, dropped by 63.4% with respect to 2010 and 61.3% with respect to 2011. All of the complaints were from the Soto de Viñuelas development, located in the northeast of the town.

4. TORREJÓN DE ARDOZ

Only one complaint was received from Torrejón de Ardoz, this despite the high number of hours spent in a south configuration. Barely any complaints have been received from this town since October 2010.

5. SAN FERNANDO DE HENARES

This town’s 29 complaints and information requests did not reflect operations in a south configuration, as is normally the case. This number also represented an 85.6% drop with respect to 2010 and a 68.5% drop with respect to 2011.


> Nature of the complaintsReason for complaints

The main reason for the complaints is the noise caused by reported overflights (AIP), which account for 887 of the complaints, a number that is 47.9% lower than in 2011 and 60.)% lower than in 2010. The towns from which the most of the complaints were received were Santo Domingo, Campo Real and Tres Cantos.

In 2012 the group “other municipalities” sent in the most complaints, 742. Of this group, Campo Real accounted for the most with 537 notifications, which made up 72.37% of this group’s total. The next town was Algete, with 298 complaints, most from the neighborhood of Santo Domingo. This was followed by Tres Cantos with 222 complaints, San Sebastián de los Reyes with 85, San Fernando with 29, “Unknown” with 17 and Torrejón with 1

Of all the complaints associated with reported overflights, 37% were with the airport in a south configuration.

11.58%

14.73%

5.73%

9.49%

5.82%

6.83%

12.43%

11.98%

0.25%

7.66%

0.40%

13.10%

S.C.

ARR overflights

Nighttime operations

Noise non-compliance

Noise in general

SPA overflights

DEP overflights

Flyover altitude

Change in daytime operations


> Reasons for requesting informationOne hundred information requests were received in 2012. The various reasons behind these requests are shown in the graph below:

Reasons for information requests

The town with the most information requests was the Santo Domingo neighborhood of Algete, with a total of 20, of which 12 had to do with the south configuration, 3 with sound events and 5 with miscellaneous topics.

The town with the second highest number of information requests was the Club de Campo neighborhood in San Sebastián de los Reyes, with a total of 18, of which 5 involved CSAM trajectories and reports, 2 on sound events, 1 question about the acoustic footprint, NMTs or sound insulation, and 10 on miscellaneous topics.

25.69%

9.17%

44.95%

8.26%

11.93%

South configuration information request

CSAM trajectories/report requests

Miscellaneous

Asking about sound events


Distribution of information requests in 2012*

Municipality Neighborhood

Requests

Information on S.C.

Sound events

CSAM Traject./

REPORTS

NMT, footprint, insulation,

etc.

Misc.

SS REYESSS PUEBLO 1 2

CLUB DE CAMPO 2 5 1 10

PARACUELLOSTOWN CENTER 1 1 1

ALTOS DEL JARAMA 1

ALGETE

ALGETE PUEBLO 1 1 3 1

PRADO NORTE 1 1

SANTO DOMINGO 12 3 5

MADRID CAPITAL 1 2 7

ÁVILA 1

BARCELONA 1

BUDAPEST (HUNGARY) 1

COLMENAR VIEJO 1

COSLADA 1

UNKNOWN 3

QUITO (ECUADOR) 1

FUENLABRADA 1 1

GRAN CANARIA 2 1 2

MEJORADA 1

EL MOLAR 3 1

PALMA DE MALLORCA 2 1

SAN FERNANDO 3 2

SOTO DEL REAL 2

TORRELAGUNA 5 2

TORRES DE LA ALAMEDA

2 2

VENTURADA 1 2

VIGO 1

* An information request may be associated with more than one area


> Environmental awareness activitiesArea expoambiente

Área Expoambiente refers to the set of facilities and resources made available by the airport to enhance environmental awareness while at the same time advertising the airport’s efforts to make aviation compatible with respecting the environment. To this end, the airport has two facilities located in T2 where presentations are given on the aspects and impacts associated with the airport’s activities:

> Exhibition airplane: In this space, audiovisual aids and interactive games are used to teach the measures used to reduce and assimilate the impacts resulting from airplane operations. It is intended for three types of visitors: children, teens and adults.

> Expoambiente hall: also targeted at various audiences, it relies on informative panels and movies to convey the importance of preserving the environment that surrounds us. This hall features an auditorium where presentations and conferences are held on the work being done at the airport in this area. The themes are geared to the visitors’ interests.

Starting in 2011, various itineraries for visiting these spaces were defined based on the audience in question. These include:

> Schoolchildren from the ages of 12 to 14: environmental workshops dealing with aviation and environmental topics.

> University students: specialized conferences and visits to those facilities that allow for the proper environmental management of the airport.


A total of 294 visitors were welcomed in 2012, 15.3% less than in 2011.

Distribution of visitors to the Área Expoambiente, by point of origin. 2012.

Of the visits to the Área Expoambiente, 85.4% were to the exhibition airplane and 51% were from municipalities within the Community of Madrid. We should note that 18.4% of all the visitors received were from towns affected by the noise produced by airport operations. This large number of visitors stems from the interest shown by the airport in advertising the actions it undertakes to improve the environment in those towns that are affected by its operations.

Other environmental awareness activities> The Environmental Monitoring Service, a part of the Environment Division, gives talks

to raise environmental awareness among airport operations personnel. In 2012, these activities were aimed at the airfield maintenance personnel.

> The publication of environmental reports, informative brochures, etc., that are distributed through the Aena Aeropuertos website or at information counters.

Municipalities affectedby airport operationsMunicipalities outsidethe Community of MadridScience Week

School field tripsGreen airport visitsPromotional orinstitutional visits

Municipalities withinthe Community of Madrid


> The distribution via e-mail to all airport personnel of quarterly environmental newsletters.

> The conduct of quality surveys to assess the environmental surveillance, the environmental monitoring of companies and the oversight provided by the Environment Division.

> The airport’s participation in Science Week.

> Visits to the Área Expoambiente and environmental workshops for the children of airport employees.

> World Environment DayAs it does every year, the Madrid-Barajas Airport celebrated World Environment Day, which is celebrated on 5 June every year in over 100 countries around the world. This initiative is sponsored by the United Organizations, which in 1972 decreed 5 June as the date of this celebration in an effort to call society’s attention to the need to preserve the environment.

Each year the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) sets a theme and a motto to commemorate this date. In 2012 the theme for this day was “Green Economy: Does it include you?” It focused on the need to develop economies that improve the well-being of mankind while also being socially equitable and significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological damage.

In keeping with this theme, the Madrid-Barajas Airport’s Environment Division set up an exhibit in the central station of the Madrid metro on June 4 and 5 where visitors had the chance to inspect the electric vehicles used at the airport, talk with the falcon keepers from the Wildlife Control Service and see up close one of the falcons used to keep away birds at the airport.

Display cases were also set up for visitors to discover the airport’s flora and fauna, get information on the energy saving measures in use within the airport complex and make objects from recycled materials.


Future outlookIn keeping with the strategic action plans set out by Aena Aeropuertos in its environmental and energy policy, the Madrid-Barajas Airport engages in new initiatives year after year that are intended to improve energy efficiency and minimize the environmental impact of its activities.

Of note in 2012 were the measures taken in the area of energy management, such as the installation of LED technologies in terminals and roadways, the implementation of renewable energy through the use of solar panels on airside buildings (fire stations, power plants, etc.) and the optimization of the circuits in the automated baggage handling system (SATE), which resulted in this installation being ISO 50001 certified. New measures will continue to be implemented in coming years, expanding the use of LEDs and photovoltaic panels to parking lots, improving SATE operations and the like.

Also notable in 2012 were the efforts made to improve the amount of non-hazardous waste that is sorted, and thus recovered; the construction of a triage plant, where waste is manually sorted; and the installation of 20 new spaces for companies to sort their waste. All of this resulted in an increase of over 35% in the amount of packaging and paper/cardboard products that were sorted and recovered. As for hazardous waste, we should also note that in 2012 over 80% of this waste was recovered. The airport is also committed to not only continue increasing this fraction in years to come, but to reduce the amount that is generated in the first place.

The year 2012 also saw the airport once again determine the carbon footprint associated with its activities. The approval of this footprint by the certifying agency AENOR, pursuant to ISO 14064, Greenhouse Gases, allowed the airport to be accredited at the second level of the Airport Carbon Accreditation program, a voluntary effort aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and that already features over 50 member airports in Europe, with the Madrid-Barajas Airport being the first Level II-certified airport in Spain. In the next few years the airport plans to increase its certification level, the ultimate goal being to achieve neutrality in terms of carbon emissions.

The airport remains committed to preserving the various ecosystems that exist within the airport complex and that serve as sinks for the greenhouse gases generated by restoring degraded areas and maintaining existing ones while making their preservation consistent with aviation safety. The wooded areas, which occupy a surface area of 90 hectares, the landscaped terminal areas, the meadows between the runways and the river habitats comprise a veritable green lung within the airport complex.

In neighboring towns, where the compensatory measures associated with the 2001 Environmental Impact Statement are being carried out, the airport is replanting and


restoring neglected areas in concert with the Community of Madrid. The year 2012 saw the completion of the restoration of the plant cover in the mountain and riparian areas of Torremocha de Jarama and nearby lands (Phase II) and the second forest reforestation program in the towns of Santorcaz and Peñabermeja.

Lastly we note that reducing the annoyances caused by noise continues to be a primary concern of the Madrid-Barajas Airport. Web-Trak, available on the Aena website since 2010, was enhanced in 2012 to allow users to more efficiently track landing and departing airplanes at the Madrid-Barajas Airport and the noise associated with them, all the while providing historical noise information. Operations were also improved through the implementation of precision aviation routes. Finally, obtaining consensus from every party involved in aviation activities through the formation or work and analysis groups and continuing to monitor and control noise levels continue to be an essential component of minimizing the acoustic impact on the environment.


GLOSSARYAASA: Aena Aeropuertos, Inc.ABP: Animal by-product.ACA: Airport Carbon Accreditation.ACI: Airport Council International. AECA: Spanish Association of Business Accounting and Administration. AEMET: State Weather Agency.AENOR: Spanish Standardization and Certification Association.AESA: Spanish Aviation Safety Agency.AIP: Aeronautical Information Publication.ALA: Airline Association.AOC: Association of Airline OperatorsAPM: Automatic People Mover (automatic shuttle train between terminals T4 and T4S). APMIB: Iberia Association of Parents of Handicapped Persons.ARCOMADRID: International Contemporary Art Fair. ARGOS: Operating Plan through Balanced Scorecards. AT: Technical Assistance.BTEX: Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and Xylene.CAM: Autonomous Community of Madrid.CDA: Constant Descent Approach.CDTI: Center for Industrial Technical DevelopmentCELA: airside power plant.CELT: landside powerplant.CGA: Airport Management Center.CHT: Tajo Water Authority.CIAIAC: Civil Aviation Accident and Incident Investigation Commission.CLH: Compañía Logística de Hidrocarburos.CNG: Compressed Natural GasCOAM: Movement Area Operations Coordinator.COM: Commercial.CSAM: Commission for Tracking the Actions to Expand the Madrid Airport System.dB(A): A-weighted decibels.DGAC: Civil Aviation General Directorate.DGCMA: Quality Management and Environment Division.EFQM: European Foundation for Quality Management.EIS: Environmental Impact StatementELW: European List of Waste.EMAS: Eco-Management and Audit Scheme.EMP: Environmental Monitoring Program.EMS: Environmental Management System.


ERP: European Recycling Platform – pan-European Integrated Management System for sorting and recycling waste from electrical and electronic devices.EUROCONTROL: European Organization for Safety in air Navigation.GHG: Greenhouse Gas. GRI: Global Reporting Initiative.GSE: Ground Service Equipment.GTTR: Noise Technical Working Group.HW: Hazardous wasteHYDROSEEDING: spraying a mixture of seeds and other materials on the ground to restore the environment.IATA: International Air Transport Association.ICAO: International Civil Aviation Organization.ISO: International Standards Organization. Leq airplane, period: Equivalent constant level generated by the airplane in the period in question.LIC: Site of interest to the community.LNG: Liquefied Natural GasLPG: Liquefied Petroleum GasMA: Environment.MAGRAMA: Ministry of Agriculture, Food and the Environment.MTO/CON: Maintenance / Preservation.NC: Non-conformity.NGO: Non-Governmental OrganizationNHW: Non-hazardous wasteNINFA: Surface Water Quality Monitoring Network.NMT: Noise Monitoring Terminal.OFIMA: Environmental Service and Information Office.O&G: Oil and grease.OPS: operations.ORTOIMAGEN: digital image that has been processed to correct shifts due to sensor perspective and the relief.OWS: oil-water separatorPAH´S: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. PMx: Suspended particles in the atmosphere, the subscript indicates the diameter of the particle.PRL: Occupational Risk Prevention.P-RNAV: Precision navigation routes. RAEE: Waste from electrical and electronic devices.RECA: Strategic Environmental Monitoring Network.RECOVER: any operation whose main result is to have waste serve a final purpose by replacing other materials that would otherwise have been used to serve a specific purpose, or having the waste be processed to fulfill that purpose.REDAIR: Automatic Air Quality Monitoring Network.RFFS: Rescue and Firefighting Service.RSO: Operational Safety Manager.


SACTA: Automated Air Traffic Control System.SATE: Automated Baggage Handling System.SCVA: Acoustic Tracking and Monitoring System. SERCOM: Service for the Environmental Monitoring of Companies.SIRMA: Noise and Flight Path Monitoring System.SPA: Special Protection Area for birds.SS: Suspended solids.SSAA: Airport Services.T4: Terminal 4.T4s: Terminal 4 satellite.TIC: IT specialists.TOC: Total Organic CarbonTPH: Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons. TRIAGE: selection and classification method.TWR: Control tower.UNEP: United Nations Environment ProgramVOC: Volatile Organic CompoundsWCS: Wildlife Control Service.WEB-TRAK: application for disseminating information on the acoustic impact of operations.WMP: Waste Management PlanWSP ENVIRONMENTAL: International environmental consultancy.

madrid-gest ambiental 2012 ingles v4 - aena.es ambiental 2012_ingles_v4... · evaluate the...

Documents