Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports" (COM(2002) 7 final — 2002/0013 (COD))
Date: 2002-03-21
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: aircraft, airport, marketing restriction, noise, noise protection, regulation (EU)

C 125/74

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

27.5.2002

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993
on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports’

(COM(2002) 7 final — 2002/0013 (COD))

(2002/C 125/15)

On 30 January 2002 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 80 (2) of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

On 19 February 2002 the Committee Bureau instructed the Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure
and the Information Society to prepare the work on the subject.

At its 389th plenary session on 21 March 2002, and in view of the urgency of the matter, the Economic
and Social Committee appointed Mr Tosh as rapporteur-general and adopted the following opinion
unanimously.

1. Background

Article 10(3) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 (1)
1.1.
establishes that slots which are allocated to an air carrier shall
not entitle that air carrier to the same series of slots in the next
equivalent period, unless it can demonstrate that they have
been operated by that air carrier for at least 80 % of the time
during the period for which they have been allocated. If the
80 % usage of the series of slots cannot be demonstrated, all
the slots constituting that series shall be placed in the slot
pool, unless the non-utilization can be justified as set out on
Article 10(5) (‘use-it-or-lose-it’ rule).

1.2.
The terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 and the
political developments that followed those events (Afghanistan
crisis) seriously affected the air transport operations of air
carriers and resulted in a significant drop in demand during
the remainder of the summer 2001 and winter 2001/2002
scheduling season.

1.3.
In order to make sure that the non-utilisation of slots
allocated for those seasons does not cause operators to lose
their entitlement to those slots, it appears necessary to provide
clearly and unambiguously that those scheduling seasons were
adversely affected by the terrorist attacks of 11 September
2001.

1.4.
Accordingly, the Commission proposes to introduce a
new Article 10a into the Regulation whereby coordinators are
obliged to accept that slots in both seasons (summer 2001 and
winter 2001/2002) are granted grandfather status.

1.5.
This will avoid lack of uniform application of the
provisions of the Regulation in the Community and the
different interpretation given to the current crisis in various
Member States.

1.6.
Finally, the proposal does not affect the Commission’s
proposal adopted on 20 June 2001 for a modification of
the currently applicable Regulation (2) insofar as this latter
proposal is wider in scope.

2. General comments and conclusions

2.1.
The ESC agrees with the Commission proposal insofar
as it takes into account exceptional circumstances and gives
legal certainty to coordinators.

2.2.
In fact, coordinators risked legal challenge unless
the question of the ‘use-it-or-lose-it’ rule was clearly and
unambiguously dealt with.

At the same time the proposal allows planning cer-

2.3.
tainty for carriers.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on
common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports
(OJ L 14, 22.1.1993, p. 1) — ESC Opinion: OJ C 339, 31.12.1991,
p. 41.

(2) COM(2001) 335 final, 20.6.2001, 2001/0140 (COD). EESC

Opinion in preparation.

27.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 125/75

2.4.
Finally, the ESC notes that the current proposal does not
affect the proposal adopted on 20 June 2001. It has a wider
scope, aims at ensuring that scarce capacity of slots at congested

airports is managed and used efficiently, albeit without mod-
ifying fundamentally the current system of slot allocation built
around the so-called ‘grandfather’ or ‘historical slots’.

Brussels, 21 March 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Decision of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for
the development of a trans-European transport network’

(COM(2001) 544 final — 2001/0229 (COD))

(2002/C 125/16)

On 14 November 2001, the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 156 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 26 February 2002. The rapporteur
was Mr Kleemann.

At its 389th plenary session held on 20 and 21 March 2002 (meeting of 21 March) the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 54 votes to 0, with 5 abstentions.

1.

Introduction

transport. The Commission proposal now on the table
responds to this Council mandate.

In its proposal the Commission is seeking to tighten
1.1.
up and modify the priorities of the trans-European network
with a view to optimising network capacity by concentrating
investments in areas with existing bottlenecks. Three projects
have already been completed and the importance of certain
rail and trans-alpine projects confirmed. Six new projects and
new sections to two existing projects have been added.

The ESC has been involved in each development phase
1.2.
of the TEN and has from the outset fully supported the
TEN blueprint and advocated clear criteria and appropriate
encouragement.

2. General comments

2.1.
The Gothenburg European Council referred to the need
to shift transport from road to rail, water and public passenger

2.2. Many factors are responsible for the rise in EU traffic
levels, but the growth in car traffic — both work-related and
private — plays a major part in the use of transport systems.
On the one hand, traffic levels have risen considerably because
of the need to commute between home and work, changes in
consumer behaviour and the disproportionate growth in
leisure travel. On the other hand, traffic density has increased
greatly in recent years, with heavy lorries in many regions and
conurbations. However, the globalisation of the economy, the
increased functioning of
the internal market, changes in
production methods and the logistics associated with this
contribute, among other things, to changes in the structure of
the economy and inevitably generate increased traffic across
all transport modes. With the accession of the applicant
increasingly affect cross-border routes
countries this will
which, according to the Commission, are also currently the
weakest points.