Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a Community framework for noise classification of civil subsonic aircraft for the purposes of calculating noise charges" (COM(2001) 74 final — 2001/0308 (COD))
Date: 2002-05-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: aircraft, environmental tax, noise, noise protection

17.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 221/17

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of a Community framework for noise
classification of civil subsonic aircraft for the purposes of calculating noise charges’

(COM(2001) 74 final — 2001/0308 (COD))

(2002/C 221/05)

On 29 January 2002 the Council of the European Union decided to consult the Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 80(2) of the Treaty establishing the European Union, 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 30 April 2002. The rapporteur
was Mr Green.

At its 391st plenary session (meeting of 29 May 2002), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the
following opinion by 96 votes to zero, with two abstentions.

1. Background

1.1.
In its Communication on Air Transport and Environ-
ment (1) the Commission proposed the introduction of econ-
omic incentives designed to reward the best technology and to
punish the worst.

2.4.
The proposal is based on the absolute noise perform-
ance of individual aircraft as measured by ICAO for aircraft
noise certification. It makes the distinction between aircraft
noise at departure and at arrival.

The variation between the minimum and maximum

2.5.
noise charges should be no more than 1:20.

1.2.
The present initiative is based on the recommendation
on noise charges adopted in June 2000 by the Directors
General for Civil Aviation of the European Civil Aviation
Conference (ECAC).

2.6.
The proposal also contains a discretionary provision
on information to the public, concerning the noise productivity
of aircraft (i.e. the noise emitted per passenger or tonne of
cargo).

1.3.
As Community airport charging systems differ from
one Member State to another, the introduction of a common
framework for aircraft noise classification should enhance
transparency, fairness of treatment and predictability of the
noise component of the airport charges.

2.7. Moreover, a regulatory committee is to be set up to
assist the Commission in ensuring that the directive refers to
the most recent edition of Annex 16 — Vol. 1 to the
international civil aviation convention.

2. The Commission proposal

3. General comments

The Commission proposal

incorporates the general
2.1.
principles of ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation)
charging policy, namely transparency, cost-relatedness and
proportionality between noise charges and noise impact.

2.2.
The proposal also recommends the application of the
principle of revenue neutrality, which implies that the sum of
noise surcharges and rebates should not exceed the cost of
provision of the service.

2.3.
The common framework is established for charging
purposes only, and could not be used for operating restrictions.

( 1) COM(1999) 640 final.

3.1.
The EESC welcomes and supports the Commission’s
proposal for a common classification of aircraft noise, as this
contributes to harmonising the existing systems.

3.2.
The EESC however underlines that the responsibility
for decision to introduce noise charges in order to address
noise problems at airports remains with the Member States.

3.3.
The EESC therefore insists that the common framework
should not be interpreted as an invitation to introduce aircraft
noise charges at airports where there is no noise problem.

3.4.
The proposed Community framework for noise classi-
fication seems complicated, as at each airport extremely
detailed information is needed on each aircraft’s registered
noise data.

C 221/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2002

3.5.
The noise charge could be adjusted to take account of
the fact that large aircraft make less noise per unit of load
(whether passengers or freight). This is not clear from the form
contained in the annex. The adjustment could be made in the
form of a discount for the aircraft in question, after prior
consideration of each airport’s specific circumstances.

3.6.
The introduction of charges in some airports can lead
to airlines using their noisier aircraft on routes between
airports with no noise charges; thus all airports should consider
against this background to what extent noise charges are to be
introduced.

4. Specific comments

The only remark concerns the ratio of 1:20 between
4.1.
the maximum and minimum charges (Article 3.3 of the
proposal). Such a variation should not be limited to ‘a given
time period’, but should apply on a 24-hour basis. This means
for example that the maximum charge for a night flight could
not be more than 20 times the minimum charge for a day-
time flight.

The EESC therefore proposes the deletion of the words

4.2.
‘within a given time period’ in Article 3.3.

Brussels, 29 May 2002.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS