Considerations on COM(2011)827 - Common rules for the allocation of slots at EU airports - Main contents
Please note
This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.
| dossier | COM(2011)827 - Common rules for the allocation of slots at EU airports. |
|---|---|
| document | COM(2011)827  |
| date | December 1, 2011 |
(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the
13
allocation of slots at Community airports13 has been substantially amended several
14
times14. Since further amendments are to be made, it should be recast in the interests of clarity.
OJ C […], […], p. […]. OJ C […], […], p. […]. 13 OJ L 14, 22.1.1993, p. 1.
See Annex I.
14
(2) Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 made a decisive contribution to the achievement of the internal market in aviation and to the development of relations between the European Union, its Member States and third countries, by ensuring access to the Union's congested airports on the basis of neutral, transparent and non-discriminatory rules.
I ^ 95/93 recital 1 (adapted) |
(3) \E> However, O Tthere is a growing imbalance between the expansion of the air transport system in Europe and the availability of \S> certain airport infrastructures O airport infrastructure to meet that demand. There is, as a result, an increasing number of congested airports in the Community \E> the Union O.
•0- new
(4) The slot allocation system established in 1993 does not ensure the optimum allocation and use of slots and thus of airport capacity. In the context of growing airport congestion and the limited development of major new airport infrastructure, the slots are a rare resource. Access to such resources is of crucial importance for the provision of air transport services and for the maintenance of effective competition. To this end, the allocation and use of slots could be made more effective by introducing market mechanisms, by ensuring that the unused slots are made available to interested operators as soon as possible and in a transparent manner, and by reinforcing the underlying principles of the system with regard to the allocation, management and use of the slots. At the same time, although the historical slots meet the need for stability in schedules for the airlines, during the future assessment of the application of this Regulation, a gradual introduction of other market mechanisms could be envisaged, such as withdrawing and auctioning historical slots.
(5) It is therefore necessary to amend the slot allocation system at the Union's airports.
| ^ 95/93 recital 2 (adapted) |
(6) The allocation of slots at congested airports should \E> continue to <S1 be based on neutral, transparent and non-discriminatory rules.
•0- new
(7) The current slot allocation system should be adapted to the development of the market mechanisms used in certain airports for transferring or exchanging slots. In its Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the application of Regulation No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports15, the
COM(2008)227.
Commission undertook to make an appropriate proposal if it became apparent that revision of the existing legislation was required for competition or other reasons.
(8) Experience has shown that secondary trading, that is the exchange of slots for financial or other compensation, does not benefit from a uniform and consistent legislative framework, including guarantees of transparency and competitive safeguards. It is therefore necessary to regulate secondary trading in slots in the European Union.
^ 95/93 recital 6
^> new
(9) Transparency of information is an essential element for ensuring an objective procedure for slot allocation. ■=> It is necessary to enhance this transparency and take account of technological progress. <^
^ 95/93 recital 10 (adapted)
^> new
(10) Provisions to allow new entrants into the Community \E> Union <S1 market \E> should be laid down O. ^Experience shows that the current definition of new entrant has not succeeded in promoting competition to the full and that it should therefore be duly amended. Furthermore, it is necessary to combat abuses by limiting the possibility for an operator to attain the status of a new entrant if, together with its parent company, its own subsidiaries or subsidiaries of its parent company, it holds more than 10 % of the total number of slots allocated on the day in question in a given airport. Likewise, an air carrier should not be considered as a new entrant if it has transferred slots obtained as a new entrant in order to invoke this status again. <^
•0- new
(11) The priority given to an air carrier requesting a series of slots in an airport for a nonstop scheduled passenger service between that airport and a regional airport should be abolished, since this situation is already covered by the priority given to an air carrier requesting the allocation of a series of slots for a regular non-stop scheduled passenger service between two Union airports.
^ 95/93 recital 12 (adapted)
(12) It is also necessary to avoid situations⌦ Situations ⌫ where, owing to a lack of available slots, the benefits of liberalisation are unevenly spread and competition is distorted, ⌦ should also be avoided ⌫.
•0- new
(13) The progress made in implementing the Single European Sky has a major impact on the slot allocation process. The imposition of performance plans, which make the airports, the air navigation service providers and airspace users subject to performance improvement and monitoring measures, and the network management function, based on the establishment of a European network of routes and a central air traffic management, means it is necessary to update the slot allocation rules. It is therefore necessary to create an adequate framework allowing the network manager, the performance rewiew body and the national supervisory authorities to participate in the procedure of setting the airport capacity and coordination parameters. A new category of airports of importance to this network should also be created with a view to allowing the network to react better in crisis situations.
(14) The flight plans and the slots should be better matched to better exploit airport capacity and improve flight punctuality.
^ 95/93 recital 5 (adapted)
^> new
(15) The Member State responsible for the \E> schedules facilitated or O coordinated airport should ensure the appointment of a H> schedules facilitator or a<H coordinator whose neutrality should be unquestioned. ^To this end, the coordinators' role should be enhanced. Provision should be made for the legal, organisational, decision-making and financial independence of the coordinators with regard to stakeholders, the Member State and bodies subordinate to that State. To prevent the coordinator's activity suffering from a lack of financial, technical or human resources or expertise, Member States should ensure that the coordinators have all the resources needed for their work. <^
•0- new
(16) Additional obligations should be introduced for air carriers with regard to sending information to the coordinators. Provision should be made for additional penalties for omitting information or sending false or misleading information. For airports belonging to the network, the air carriers should have the obligation to communicate their flight intentions or other relevant information requested by the coordinator or schedules facilitator.
(17) The Union should facilitate cooperation between the coordinators and schedules facilitators to allow them to exchange best practices with a view to the establishment of a European coordinator in due course.
I ^95/93 recital 4 (adapted) |
(18) Under certain conditions, in order to facilitate operations, a Member State should be able to designate Aan airport \E> may be designated <S1 as coordinated provided that principles of transparency, neutrality and non-discrimination are followed \E> and subject to the conditions laid down in this Regulation O.
^95/93 recital 3 (adapted)
■=> new
(19) The requirement of neutrality is best guaranteed when tThe decision to coordinate an airport is \E> should be <S1 taken by the Member State responsible for that airport on the basis of objective criteria. ■=> Given the progress made in implementing the Single European Sky and the network manager function, it is useful to reconcile the methods for evaluating airport capacity to ensure better functioning of the European air traffic management network.^
•0- new
(20) Provision must be made for a procedure by which a Member State decides to modify the designation of a coordinated airport or a schedules facilitated airport to make it a schedules facilitated airport or an airport with no designation status, respectively.
^ 95/93 recital 7
The principles governing the existing system of slot allocation could be the basis of
developments in the Community.
that this system evolves in harmony with the evolution of new transport
•0- new
(21) The period of validity for a series of slots should be limited to the schedule planning period for which the series is granted. The priority for allocating a series of slots, even historical slots, should come from the allocation or confirmation by the coordinator.
^ 95/93 recital 8
It is Community policy to facilitate competition and to encourage entrance into the market, as provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for
Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes16, and whereas these objectives strong support for carriers who intend to start operations on intra-Community routes.
^ 95/93 recital 9
The existing system makes provision for grandfather rights.
^ 95/93 recital 11 (adapted)
^> new
(22) It is necessary to make \E> retain O special provisions, under limited circumstances, for the maintenance of adequate domestic air services to regions of the Member State \E> or Member States <S1 concerned ■=> when a public service obligation has been imposed <=■.
•0- new
(23) Since the environmental aspects may be taken into account in the coordination parameters and regional connectivity can also be fully ensured in the context of the public service obligations, experience has not demonstrated the usefulness of local rules. Furthermore, it cannot be excluded that such rules do not lead to discrimination in allocating slots. Consequently, the option of resorting to local rules should be restricted. All the technical, operational, performance and environmental constraints that should be applied by the coordinators or the facilitators should be defined in the coordination parameters. Recourse to local rules would also be reduced to monitoring the use of slots and the possibility of reducing the length of the series of slots in the cases provided for by this Regulation. With a view to promoting better use of airport capacity, two basic principles in slot allocation should be reinforced, namely the definition of a series of slots and the calculation of historical slots. At the same time, the flexibility given to air carriers should be better regulated with a view to preventing distortions in the application of this Regulation in the Member States. Therefore, better use of airport capacity should be encouraged.
(24) To allow air carriers to adapt to imperative situations of urgency, such as a marked decline in traffic or an economic crisis that severely affects the activity of air carriers, affecting a lager part of the scheduling period, the Commission should be allowed to adopt urgent measures to ensure the consistency of measures to be taken at coordinated airports. These measures will allow air carriers to retain priority for the allocation of the same series for the following scheduling period even if the 85% rate has not been met.
(25) The role of the coordination committee should be strengthened in two ways. On the one hand, the network manager, the performance review body and the national supervisory authority should be invited to follow the committee's meetings. On the
16
OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.
other hand, the coordination committee's tasks could include making suggestions or giving advice to the coordinator and/or Member State on any issue concerning the airport capacity, in particular in relation to the implementation of the Single European Sky and the working of the European Air Traffic Management Network. The committee should also be able to provide the performance review body and the national supervisory authority with opinions concerning the link between the coordination parameters and the key performance indicators proposed to the air navigation service providers.
(26) Experience shows that a significant number of slots are returned to the pool too late to be reallocated effectively. The airport managing body should be encouraged to use the airport charges system to discourage this type of behaviour. Despite having recourse to this mechanism, the airport managing body should not, however, discourage air carriers from entering the market or developing services.
^ 95/93 recital 13
It is desirable to make the best use of the existing slots in order to meet the objectives set out above.
| ^ 95/93 recital 14 (adapted) |
(27) It is desirable that third countries offer Community \E> Union O carriers equivalent treatment.
^ 95/93 recital 15 (adapted)
^> new
(28) The application of the provisions of this Regulation \E> should <S1 be without prejudice to the competition rules of the Treaty, in particular Articles \E> 101 <E1, and
\E> 102 O ■=> and 106 <=■.
^ 95/93 recital 16 (adapted)
(29) Arrangements for greater cooperation over the use of Gibraltar airport were agreed in London on 2 December 1987 by the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom in a joint declaration by the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the two countries, and such arrangements have yet to come into operation. ⌦ The Ministerial Statement on Gibraltar Airport, agreed in Cordoba on 18 September 2006, during the first Ministerial meeting of the Forum of Dialogue on Gibraltar, will replace the Joint Declaration on the Airport made in London on 2 December 1987, and full compliance with it will be deemed to constitute compliance with the 1987 Declaration. ⌫
•0- new
(30) The power to adopt delegated acts should be delegated to the Commission, in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in order to lay down the methods for developing a study on capacity and demand. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level.
(31) The Commission, when preparing and drawing up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.
(32) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control, by Member States, of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers17.
(33) The examination procedure should be used for the adoption of implementing instruments concerning the creation of a European coordinator, the template for the coordinator and schedules facilitator's annual activity report and the decision that one or more Member States should take measures with a view to remedying a third country's discriminatory behaviour with regard to the Union's air carriers.
(34) The Commission should adopt implementing acts that apply immediately, in accordance with the examination procedure, in duly justified cases linked to the need to ensure the continuation of historical slots, when required on imperative grounds of urgency.
^ 95/93 recital 17
(35) This Regulation should be reviewed after a fixed period of operation to assess its functioning,
•O- new
(36) Since the objective of the action - namely more homogeneous application of Union legislation on slots - cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States because of the international character of air transport, and can therefore be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives,
OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p.13.
^ 95/93 (adapted)