1. On October 2004, after a few days of operations on the new runway in the direction approved by the Environmental Impact Assessment process (illustrated in Figure 2), the airport had received a high number of noise complaints from the residents annoyed by aircraft noise (mainly from Gavá Mar community);
![](/fileadmin/_processed_/3/a/csm_3.4.2.3_Barcelona_configurations_1_542b97431d.png)
Figure 2. West and East configurations at the Barcelona Airport
2. The affected communities were the main drivers in creating the Technical Working Group of Noise (GTTR) dependent on the aforementioned Commission for Environmental Monitoring of the Airport Expansion Works (CSAAB). GTTR was a technical forum where different interest groups could present technical proposals and studies to minimise noise impact;
3. Part of the final solution was presented by airline pilots and air traffic controllers from Gavá and Castelldefels – switching each runway's role during the day. The longest runway should be used for departures and the shortest for landings (for safety reasons). The GTTR studied the new role using the shortest runway for take-offs and the longest runway for landings and some take-offs that required more length (depending on the kind of the aircraft) (see Figure 3);
![](/fileadmin/_processed_/2/8/csm_3.4.2.3_Barcelona_configurations_2_089597fce8.png)
Figure 3. Day time configurations
4. The previous cross runway (02-20) was avoided by introducing night configuration change, and the runway was used during night periods and on East configuration with less capacity. West configuration during the night period was permanently limited during the night (see Figure 4);
![](/fileadmin/_processed_/5/9/csm_3.4.2.3_Barcelona_configurations_3_32b086b13e.png)
Figure 4. Night-time configurations
5. To support this solution, technical, constructive studies were required, as well as operational, capacity and environmental/sustainability studies. The technical part had to assess cost and benefit, safety and time frame matters. Additionally, emissions and noise studies were performed, and the number of overflights in the different points of populated areas were calculated. All of them were presented and discussed inside the GTTR;
6. At least 11 options of the solution were rejected because of a ground capacity study, technical issues, or air capacity studies. Eventually, three options (which were compared to the reference option approved in the Environmental Noise Assessment process) were presented to the CSAAB, which selected one because of the environmental outcomes presented;
7. In 2005, after months of working hand in hand, GTTR received the approval from the CSAAB to implement the idea provisionally, for the period of four years. The implementation of the solution took almost one year, and it was a complete success;
8. Regarding transparency, CSAAB published a press release before the implementation of the solution. Together with the rest of the stakeholders, local authorities also disseminated the information, each one about its competences. New information was published after the implementation. All the noise measurements were accessible to the public;
9. The GTTR continued working and after new studies, new safety systems, new regulatory frameworks and hard technical work and new developments, in 2010, the GTTR presented it to CSAAB asking for approval for the extension of the solution, which was approved in 2005. They asked to extend it until the next Master Plan of the airport would be prepared (in 2020-2025);
10. The GTTR continues to search for a permanent solution and is meeting four times a year. They must study each proposal or initiative on possible actions aimed at improving noise exposure around the airport.