Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament,the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the application of Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports, as amended
Date: 2008-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air transport, airport, common transport policy, organisation of transport, transport capacity, transport planning

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 30.4.2008 
COM(2008) 227 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT,THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

On the application of Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of 
slots at Community airports, as amended 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT,THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

On the application of Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of 
slots at Community airports, as amended 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

Introduction 

On  21  April  2004  the  Parliament  and  the  Council  adopted  Regulation  (EC)  No  793/20041 
amending council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at 
Community  airports  (the  “Regulation”).  The  amendments  were  aimed  at  improving  the 
efficient  use  of  scarce  capacity  at  congested  Community  airports,  while  not  fundamentally 
altering  the  existing  system  of  slot  allocation.  To  that  end  Regulation  (EC)  No  793/2004 
introduced  new  provisions  with  regard  to  market  access  and  new  entrants,  enforcement  and 
the independence of the coordinator.  

The obligation laid upon Member States to ensure the introduction of sanctions to prevent slot 
abuse at coordinated airports has fostered a better use of existing capacity. The process of slot 
allocation has been improved through a number of new or modified provisions, such as a new 
definition  of  what  constitutes  a  series  of  slots,  further  strengthening  of  the  use-it-or-lose-it 
provisions,  the  possibility  for  air  carriers  to  re-time  slots  before  allocation  to  optimise 
schedules,  and  more  leeway  for  Member  States  to  introduce  local  rules  and  guidelines  at 
congested airports to improve the efficient use of scarce capacity. 

Despite  these  new  provisions,  stakeholders  and  Member  States  consider  that  a  number  of 
provisions are still not fully or completely implemented. 

This  conclusion  is  underpinned  by  the  Commission  Report  on  the  application  of  the  slot 
Regulation2, which concluded that there is a need to ensure better implementation in a number 
of areas with which stakeholders have experienced particular difficulties.  

First,  despite  the  obligation  on  Member  States  to  guarantee  the  functional  and  financial 
independence  of  the  coordinator  at  coordinated  airports,  there  still  appear  to  be  cases  of 
insufficient  application  of  these  requirements  in  some  Member  States,  which  could  impede 
the  coordinator’s  functioning  under  the  Regulation  in  a  neutral,  non-discriminatory  and 
transparent way.  

1 

2 

Regulation (EC) No 793/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 (OJ L 
138, 30.4.2004, p. 50) amending 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). 
COM(2007) 704, 15.11.2007. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Second, in some Member States significant problems remain with ensuring full transparency 
of  the  information  that  coordinators  and  schedules  facilitators  hold  regarding  historical, 
requested,  allocated  and  available  slots.  This  could  hinder  a  more  efficient  use  of  slots  and 
distort  competition  as  not  all  interested  parties  may  have  the  same  degree  of  access  to  this 
schedule data.  

Third, while local guidelines have the potential to allow for the better use of the existing slots 
at coordinated airports, it should be ensured that they comply with Community law.  

Fourth,  at  a  number  of  congested  Community  airports,  air  carriers  exchange  slots  for 
monetary and other consideration. Some doubts have been raised regarding the compatibility 
of such exchanges with the Regulation. 

Finally, there is a greater need for effective consistency between slots and flight plans in order 
to  avoid  slot  abuse  and  to  guarantee  compliance  with  the  Regulation,  as  evidence  suggests 
that verification of flight plans against slots rarely takes place in a systematic manner, even 
though the possibility to do so is provided for in the Regulation. 

The purpose of this Communication is to state the Commission’s views with regard to above 
mentioned  issues.  This  Communication  draws  from  -and  elaborates  on-  the  Commission’s, 
Member States’ and stakeholders’ experience with the application of the revised Regulation 
since its entry into force on 21 April 2004.  

1. 

INDEPENDENCE OF THE COORDINATOR  

Article 4(2)(b) of the Regulation states that “the Member State responsible for a coordinated 
airport shall ensure the independence of the coordinator at a coordinated airport by separating 
the  coordinator  functionally  from  any  single  interested  party.  The  system  of  financing  the 
coordinator’s activities shall be such as to guarantee the coordinator’s independent status”.  

Article  4(2)(c)  further  provides  that  Member  States  must  ensure  that  “the  coordinator  acts 
according to this Regulation in a neutral, non-discriminatory and transparent manner”.  

The  Commission  considers  that  the  independence  of  the  coordinator  is  essential  for  it  to 
properly carry out its task in accordance with the requirements laid down in Article 4(2)(c).  

The Commission is of the view that functional separation means inter alia that the coordinator 
should act autonomously from, not be instructed by, and not have a duty to report back to the 
airport  managing  body,  a  service  provider  nor  any  air  carrier  operating  from  the  airport 
concerned. 

The  Commission  further  considers  that  the  system  of  financing  the  coordinator’s  activities 
should be set up in such a way that the coordinator is financially autonomous from any single 
party  directly  affected  by  -or  having  an  interest  in-  its  activities.  The  coordinator  should 
therefore keep separate  accounts  and  budgets and not rely for the  financing  of his  activities 
only on the airport managing body, a service provider nor a single air carrier.  

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
2. 

NEW ENTRY 

Article 10(6) of the Regulation provides that slots placed in the pool set up by the coordinator 
in  accordance  with  Article  10(1)  must  be  distributed  among  applicant  air  carriers.  50%  of 
these slots must first be allocated to new entrants, as defined by Article 2(b), unless requests 
by  new  entrants  are  less  than  50%.  The  coordinator  must  treat  the  requests  of  new  entrants 
and other carriers fairly, in accordance with the coordination periods of each scheduling day. 

The question has been raised whether the obligation laid upon the coordinator to allocate the 
slots from the pool on a precise 50/50 basis, as provided for in Article 10(6), relates only to 
the initial allocation from the pool about four months before the start of the relevant summer 
and winter scheduling seasons, or whether this also applies throughout the scheduling season. 
It has been argued that Article 10(6) relates only to the initial allocation from the pool and that 
thereafter  coordinators  could  seek  to  provide  a  broadly  balanced  allocation  at  their  own 
discretion.  

The  Commission  observes  that  the  Regulation,  neither  in  Article  10(6)  nor  in  any  other 
provision,  limits  the  scope  of  this  Article  to  the  initial  allocation  of  slots  prior  to  each 
scheduling  season.  The  Commission,  therefore,  is  of  the  view  that  the  provisions  of  Article 
10(6) should be applied permanently and continuously, throughout the scheduling seasons. 

3. 

TRANSPARENCY OF SCHEDULE DATA 

Article 4(7) of the Regulation provides that “all schedules facilitators and coordinators shall 
cooperate to detect inconsistencies in schedules”.  

Article  4(8)  further  provides  that  “the  coordinator  shall  on  request  and  within  a  reasonable 
time make available free of charge for review to interested parties, in particular to members or 
observers  of  the  coordination  committee,  either  in  written  form  or  in  any  other  easily 
accessible form, the following information: 

(a) historical slots by airline, chronologically, for all air carriers at the airport, 

(b) requested slots (initial submissions), by air carriers and chronologically, for all air carriers, 

(c) all allocated slots, and outstanding slot requests, listed individually in chronological order, 
by air carriers, for all air carriers, 

(d) remaining available slots, 

(e) full details on the criteria being used in the allocation”. 

The  Commission  considers  that  transparency  of  information  is  essential  for  ensuring  an 
objective  procedure  for  slot  allocation  and  for  guaranteeing  that  the  coordinator  acts  in 
accordance  with  the  requirements  of  Article  4(2)(c).  The  Commission  therefore  calls  upon 
Member States to ensure that coordinators fully comply with the requirements laid down in 
Article 4(8). 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
Given  that  slots  are  needed  by  an  air  carrier  at  both  ends  of  a  flight  serving  coordinated 
airports and given that schedules should be consistent to ensure an efficient use of airport and 
airspace capacity, the value of the schedule data mentioned in paragraph 8 of Article 4 hinges 
to  a  large  extent  on  the  cooperation  of  schedules  facilitators  and  coordinators  as  set  out  in 
paragraph 7 of the said Article. 

The  Commission  recalls  that  European  coordinators  have  jointly  developed  a  combined 
database that contains the data of all slots they have allocated. The data is supplied by almost 
all coordinators and schedules facilitators and is accessible online and free of charge to all air 
carriers.  The  value  of  the  database  relies  on  accurate,  complete  and  up-to-date  data.  Proper 
provision  of  schedule  data  to  the  database  by  coordinators  and  schedules  facilitators  is 
therefore  pivotal  and  indispensable  to  facilitate  effective  collaboration  between  the  actors, 
contributing therefore to the fulfilment of their obligations under Article 4(7) and 4(8).  

The  Commission  therefore  calls  on  Member  States  to  encourage  all  coordinators  and 
schedules facilitators to submit their schedule data to the combined database.  

4. 

LOCAL GUIDELINES 

Article  8(5)  of  the  Regulation  provides  that  “the  coordinator  shall  also  take  into  account 
additional  rules  and  guidelines  established  by  the  air  transport  industry  world-wide  or 
Community-wide  as  well  as  local  guidelines  proposed  by  the  coordination  committee  and 
approved  by  the  Member  State  or  any  other  competent  body  responsible  for  the  airport  in 
question, provided that such rules and guidelines do not affect the independent status of the 
coordinator,  comply  with  Community  law  and  aim  at  improving  the  efficient  use  of  airport 
capacity.  These  rules  shall  be  communicated  by  the  Member  State  in  question  to  the 
Commission”. 

Article  5(1)  and  (3)  further  provides  that  local  guidelines  shall  be  proposed  by  the 
coordination committee at the request of any of its members and in accordance with its rules 
of procedure as provided for by Article 5(3). 

As  envisaged  expressly  in  Article  5(1)(a)  of  the  Regulation,  local  guidelines  may  take  into 
account  possible  environment  concerns,  including  those  relating  to  noise.  However,  any 
operating restrictions based on such concerns must be compatible with Community law.  

The  Commission  considers  that,  in  particular,  they  should  comply  with  Article  9(2)  of 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2408/92  on  access  for  Community  to  intra-Community  air  routes3, 
which  requires  inter  alia  that  restrictions  must  be  non-discriminatory  on  grounds  of 
nationality or identity of air carriers and not unduly distort competition between air carriers.  

3 

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-
Community air routes (OJ L 240, 24.8.1992). 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
In addition, operating restrictions aimed at noise reduction should comply also with Directive 
2002/30/EC  on  the  establishment  of  rules  and  procedures  with  regard  to  the  introduction  of 
noise related operating restrictions at Community airports4. 

5. 

EXCHANGE OF SLOTS 

Article 8a(1)(c) of the Regulation states that “slots may be exchanged, one for one, between 
air carriers”.  

Where  there  is  no  transparent  market  for  the  scarce  resource  of  slots  at  congested  airports, 
incumbent air carriers are often not aware of, or confronted with, the full opportunity costs of 
the  slots  they  hold.  As  a  consequence  an  air  carrier  may  retain  a  slot  even  when  its  market 
value far exceeds the value that the air carrier generates from retaining and using the slots.  

This,  in  turn,  implies  that  the  number  of  slots  made  available  both  to  new  entrants  and  to 
incumbent  air  carriers  seeking  to  add  services  may  be  lower  than  it  otherwise  would  be. 
Against  this  background  it  would  seem  that  the  application  of  the  Regulation  has  still  not 
consistently led to the most efficient use of slots. 

However,  the  Commission  recognises  that  exchanges  of  slots  for  monetary  and  other 
consideration, more commonly referred to as secondary trading, are taking place at a number 
of  congested  Community  airports.  This  has  had  certain  advantages,  notably  in  allowing  the 
creation of additional services on specific routes. 

The text of the current Regulation is silent on the question of exchanges with monetary and 
other consideration to reflect differences in value between slots at different times of day and 
other  factors.  Given  that  there  is  no  clear  and  explicit  prohibition  of  such  exchanges,  the 
Commission  does  not  intend  to  pursue  infringement  proceedings  against  Member  States 
where  such  exchanges  take  place  in  a  transparent  manner,  respecting  all  the  other 
administrative requirements for the allocation of slots set out in the applicable legislation. 

If it becomes apparent that for competition or other reasons revision of the existing legislation 
is required, the Commission will make an appropriate proposal. 

6. 

CONSISTENCY BETWEEN SLOTS AND FLIGHT PLANS 

Article 14(1) of the Regulation provides that “an air carrier’s flight plan may be rejected by 
the competent Air Traffic Management authorities if the air carrier intends to land or take off 
at a coordinated airport, during the periods for which it is coordinated, without having a slot 
allocated by the coordinator”.  

Experience  has  shown  that  verification  of  flight  plans  against  airport  slots  in  particular 
allocated  to  general  aviation  by  Air  Traffic  Management  authorities  and  coordinators  does 
rarely take place in a systematic and consistent manner.  

4 

Directive 2002/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the establishment of rules and 
procedures with regard to the introduction of noise-related operating restrictions at Community airports 
(OJ L 85, 23.8.2002, p. 40). 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
As  set  out  in  the  “Action  plan  for  airport  capacity,  efficiency  and  safety  in  Europe”5,  the 
Implementing  Rule  on  Air  Traffic  Flow  Management,  which  is  scheduled  to  be  adopted  by 
the  Commission  in  2008  on  the  basis  of  Article  9  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  551/2004  on  the 
organisation  and  use  of  the  airspace  in  the  Single  European  Sky6,  will  provide  for  a 
mechanism aimed at increasing the consistency between slots and flight plans. 

Effective  consistency  between  requests  for  single  slots  and  flight  plans  has  become 
increasingly  relevant  in  particular  for  general  and  business  aviation  flights,  which  by 
definition  operate  unscheduled  services  often  outside  the  allocated  slot  bracket  or  even 
without having obtained a slot from the slotpool in advance. As a result, these ad-hoc flights 
may  interfere  with  the  proper  operation  of  coordinated  airports,  where  slots  tend  to  reflect 
flight  plans  and  where  air  carriers  are  required  to  operate  in  accordance  with  the  slots 
allocated to them.  

Conclusions 

The Commission hopes that this Communication will stimulate a better use of scarce capacity 
at coordinated Community airports.  

The  Commission  will  continue  to  monitor  the  functioning  of  the  Regulation  and  will 
concentrate on ensuring proper implementation of the Regulation by Member States. 

In the light of this monitoring, the Commission will consider whether it is necessary to make a 
proposal to amend the Regulation. 

The  Commission  will  continue  to  facilitate  the  involvement  of  stakeholders  and  Member 
States  in  further  developments  regarding  slot  allocation.  In  this  respect,  the  Community 
Observatory on airports, which will be set up in the coming months, will serve as a forum in 
which all qualified parties will be in a position to effectively tackle slot issues.  

5 
6 

COM(2006) 819, 24.1.2004. 
Regulation  (EC)  No  551/2004  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  of  10  March  2004  on  the 
organisation and use of the airspace in the Single European Sky (OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 20). 

EN 

7 

   EN