NoC19/44 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 25.1.93
Opinionon:
—theDraftCommissionRegulation (EEC)ontheapplicationofArticle85(3)oftheTreaty
tocertaincategoriesofagreements,decisionsandconcertedpracticesconcerningjoint
planningandcoordinationofschedules,jointoperations,consultationsonpassengerand
cargotariffsonscheduledairservicesandslotallocationatairports,and
—theDraftCommissionsRegulation (EEC)amendingRegulation (EEC)No83/91onthe
applicationofArticle85(3)oftheTreatytocertaincategoriesofagreementsbetween
undertakingsrelatingtocomputer-reservation systemsforair-transportservices(!)
(93/C19/15)
On22September1992,theCommitteeBureaudecided,underArticle20(3)oftheInternal
RegulationtodrawupanAdditionalOpinionontheabovementioned proposals.
TheSectionforTransportandCommunications ,whichwasresponsibleforpreparingthe
Committee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon18November1992.TheRapporteur
wasMrMoreland .
Atits301stPlenarySession(meetingon24November1992)theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
1.TheCommissionproposal
1.1.ThisisaproposalforaCommissiondecision
underArticle85(3)oftheTreaty(i.e.theCompetition
provisions)onaspectsofairtransportinthelightof
therecentagreementbytheCouncilknownasthe
'ThirdAirPackage'.Themainconditionsareasfollows:
—schedulingwillrelatetolessbusyperiodsorroutes
ortofacilitateinterlining;
—jointoperationscanbeonlyonlowcapacityroutes
orthosenotpreviouslycovered;
—consultationsontariffsmustgiverisetointerlining
andtakeplace,asregardsnormaltariffs,onlyin
thecontextofamultilateralmeetingonceayear
andforpromotionaltariffstwiceayear;
—newentrantshavepriorityintheallocationof50%
ofnewlycreatedorunusedslots;
—theCommissionmaywithdrawtheexemptionsif
theyresultinanabsenceorreductionofcompe­
tition;
—aparentcarrier(i.e.anairline)shouldprovidetoa
competingcomputerreservationthesameinfor­
mationasitprovidedonitsowncomputer-reser­
vationsystem.1.2.Themaincomponentsoftheproposalsare:
toexemptfromthecompetitionrulesundercertain
conditions :
—jointplanningandcoordinationoftheschedulesof
airservicesbetweenCommunityairports;
—jointoperatorsofascheduledairserviceonanew
oronalowdensityroutebetweenCommunity
airports;
—theholdingofconsultationsontariffsforthecar­
riageofpassengerswiththeirluggageandoffreight
onscheduledairservicesbetweenCommunityair­
ports;
—slotallocationandairportschedulinginsofaras
theyconcernairservicesbetweenairportsinthe
Community ;
—agreementstoprovideComputer-Reservation Ser­
vices.2.Generalcomments
2.1.TheCommitteenotesthattheblockexemption
followsonfromtheagreementbytheCouncilonthe
'ThirdAirPackage'.TheCommitteewouldingeneral
agreethatthereisaneedforablockexemptionand, (')OJNoC253,30.9.1992,p.6.

25.1.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC19/45
bilitiestoobtainorprolongindividualexemptionsfor
jointoperationsfallingoutsidethescopeofthisgroup
exemption .
3.3.Article4:SpecialProvisions...Tariffsinparticular,wouldagreethattariffconsultationbe
restrictedtointerlining .Itsupportstheprovisionsfor
consultationinexceptionalcircumstances .
HowevertheCommitteeisconcernedthat:
a)TheextentoftheCommission'sroleinconsul­
tationsontariffsshouldnotbeoverlybureaucratic ;
b)SlotsandComputer-Reservations Systemsarethe
subjectofproposalsbeforetheCouncil.Asthe
CommitteeemphasizedinitsOpiniononprevious
blockexemptionsonthesesubjects,aCouncil
decisionontheseissuesshouldnotonlybe'recon­
sidered'butshouldtakeprecedence .(Shouldthe
Councilfailtotakeadecisionontheseissuesby
theendof1992,theCommissionshouldextend
existingexemptionsorbasetheexemptionsonthe
existingpositionintheCouncilwitharevision
whentheCouncilreachesafinaldecision.)3.3.1.TheCommitteegenerallysupportsthisArticle
butasstatedin2.1,itbelievestheCommissionshould
notnecessarilysendobserversorhavereportsregularly,
althoughthereshouldbeeffectivemonitoringtoremove
anyfearofabuse.Alsothereneedstobeamoreprecise
definitionof'normal'and'promotional'fares.Further
theCommission shouldensurethatthelimitationson
consultationdonotworktothedisadvantageofsmall
airlines.
3.4.Article5:SpecialProvisions...Slots
3.DraftCommissionRegulation (EEC)ontheappli­
cationofArticle85(3)oftheTreatytocertain
categoriesofagreements,decisionsandconcerted
practicesconcerningjointplanningandcoordi­
nationofschedules,jointoperations,consultations
onpassengerandcargotariffsonscheduledair
servicesandslotallocationatairports3.4.1.TheCommitteenotesthattheCommission
hasacceptedtheCommittee'sviewthatthesubjectis
tooimportanttobelefttoaCommissiondecisionand
ismoreappropriately aCouncildecision,andpresumes
thisArticleisintendedonlytoforceaCouncildecision
(whichtheCommitteeagreesshouldbetakenassoon
aspossible).
3.4.2.TheCommitteenotesthatthisisbasicallythe
sameasthe1990Commission decision.Shoulditnot
havebeenup-datedinthelightofCouncildiscussion
(whichtheCommission isallowedtositinon)(see
paragraph2b).Specificcomments
3.1.Preamble
(1)notclearifthisreferstotheprovisionoftransport
servicesbetweenCommunityairports.4.DraftCommissionRegulation (EEC)amending
Regulation (EEC)No83/91ontheapplicationof
Article85(3)oftheTreatytocertaincategoriesof
agreementsbetweenundertakingsrelatingtocom­
puter-reservation systemsforair-transportservices
4.1.TheCommitteenotesthattheCommission will
reconsiderArticle7ainthelightofaCouncildecision
onitsproposalforaCodeofConduct.Thewhole
proposalshouldbeconsideredinthislight.3.2.Article3:SpecialProvisionsforJointOperations
3.2.1.TheCommitteerecognizesthatthecreation
ofablockexemptionremovestheneedforairlines,
actingwithintherestrictionsofthe'ThirdAirPackage',
togothroughallthetimeconsumingproceduresof
applyingtotheCommissiontosetupjointoperations .
However,thecircumstances behindjointoperations
varyconsiderablyandtheremaybejustifiablejoint
operationsnotnecessarilywithintherestrictionsof
the'Package'.Consequently theCommissionshould
considerthealternativeofanexamination onacase­
by-casebasis.4.2.ProposedNew7a
Paragraph2.Thissurelyconflictswiththeproposed
code-of-conduct modificationwhichspecificallyrejects
mandatoryparticipationinallCRSatthehighestlevel
offunctionality .
3.2.2.Article3.F
4.3.Theconditionsproposedreallyapplytoairline­
ownedsystemsratherthanjointlyownedsystems.
ConsequentlytheCommissionshouldbearinmindthat
theapplicationoftheblockexemptionwillbeItisunclearastotheextentwhichtheexistenceofa
groupexemptionforjointoperationsprejudicespossi­

NoC19/46 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 25.1.93
discriminatory asbetweenCRSsystems.Thisunder­
linestheneedfortheblockexemptiontobesuperseded
bythe'codeofconduct'(astheCommitteehaspointed
outpreviously).
4.4.TheCommitteewouldremindtheCommission
ofitsconcernthatCRSsystemsshouldbecompetitiveacrosstheCommunityandthatthedominanceofone
systemoveranotherinaMemberStateshouldnot
reflectthepredominance ofanowner-airline inthat
MemberState.
4.5.TheCommitteewillreserveanyfurthercom­
mentsonCRStoitsOpinionontheCodeofConduct.
DoneatBrussels,24November1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilRegulation (EEC)amendingRegulation (EEC)
No1785/81onthecommonorganizationofthemarketsinthesugarsector(*)
(93/C19/16)
On9October1992theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle43oftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity ,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheEconomicandSocialCommitteedecidedtoappointMrCharlesPelletierasRapporteur­
GeneralforitsOpinion.
Atits301stPlenarySession(meetingof25November1992),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionunanimously .
1.3.BywayofderogationfromArticle16(2)of
Regulation (EEC)No1785/81,areducedimportlevy
ispaidonthistonnage,basedontheinterventionprice
ratherthanthethresholdprice.1.Preliminarycomments
1.1.Article303ofthePortugueseActofAccession
of12June1985containedtransitionalarrangements
fortheimportofrawsugartosupplythePortuguese
refiningindustry.
1.2.Thesetransitionalarrangementsallowtheannu­
alimportof75000tonnesofrawsugarfromfourACP
StateswithwhichPortugueserefinerieshadconcluded
multiannualagreementspriortoPortugal'saccession
totheEC.1.4.TheActofAccessionalsostatesthatifCom­
munitysuppliesofrawsugarareinsufficient,Portugal
canbeauthorizedbyCommissionRegulationtoimport
fromthirdcountries,atthesamereducedlevy,the
amountofsugarnecessarytomakeupthesuppliesto
itsrefineries .
1.5.Thesetransitionalarrangements ,designedto
ensurethatthePortugueserefiningindustryreceivesall
thesuppliesitneedstomeetdomesticconsumer
(J)OJNoC265,14.10.1992,p.3. demand,expireon31December1992.