CELEX: 52011PC0827
Language: en
Date: 2011-12-01
Title: Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common rules for the allocation of slots at European Union airports

|
			
		
		
		52011PC0827
		
			Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on common rules for the allocation of slots at European Union airports /* COM/2011/0827 final - 2011/0391 (COD) */
			
				
		
		
			
			   	EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

1.                      
CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL
1.1.                
Context

1.                      
At airports where demand among airlines for
landing and takeoff slots exceeds the airport's capacity, slot allocation
mechanisms are used to define a set of rules to be followed for the allocation
of slots. The granting of a slot at an airport means the airline may use the
entire range of infrastructure necessary for the operation of a flight at a
given time (runway, taxiway, stands and, for passenger flights, terminal
infrastructure). Depending on the characteristics of the airport, slot
allocation may be necessary at specific times of the day or during certain busy
periods. The objective is to ensure that access to congested airports is
organised through a system of fair, non-discriminatory and transparent rules
for the allocation of landing and take-off slots so as to ensure optimal
utilisation of airport capacity and to allow for fair competition.
2.                      
The European Community adopted Council
Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the
allocation of slots at Community airports (the Slot Regulation) in 1993 and
amended it in several important respects in 2004. Because aviation is by its
nature a global business, but also subject to local regulations, it is
important to note that slot allocation works differently in different parts of
the world. In Europe, the Slot Regulation draws on the global guidelines of the
International Air Transport Association (IATA).
3.                      
The main features of the current slot allocation
system are the following: Member States must designate an airport as
coordinated if a thorough capacity analysis proves that there is a significant
shortfall in capacity at this airport[1]. A second step is for the
Member State to appoint an airport coordinator. The coordinator is in charge of
allocating airport slots and is obliged to act in an independent, neutral,
non-discriminatory and transparent manner. 
4.                      
Slots are allocated for the summer scheduling
season or for the winter scheduling season. If an air carrier has used a series
of slots[2] for at least 80 % of
the time during a season, it will be entitled to the same series of slots in
the next corresponding season ('historical slots', 'grandfather rights' or
'80-20 rule'). If the threshold is not reached, the slots go to the slot pool
for allocation. 50 % of the pool slots are allocated first to new entrants[3].
5.                      
There are currently 89 fully coordinated
airports in countries where the Slot Regulation applies (the European Economic
Area plus Switzerland). Of these airports, 62 are coordinated year-round, and
27 are coordinated seasonally. These airports include some where demand
substantially exceeds capacity at all times, such as London Heathrow and Paris
Orly, and others where capacity is scarce during certain peak periods. 18 Member
States have at least one coordinated airport and should therefore appoint a
coordinator.

1.2.                
Reasons and objectives for the proposal

6.                      
The implementation of the Slot Regulation has
significantly improved slot allocation at busy European airports in terms of
neutrality and transparency, making a major contribution to the creation of the
internal market in aviation. The Slot Regulation was introduced at a time when
the European air transport market was still dominated by a small number of
traditional national carriers. Nowadays, however, there is much more
competition. Since 1992, the number of intra-EU routes operated has more than
doubled and there has been a 150 % increase in long-haul flights departing
from European airports. In 1992, just 93 European routes were served by more
than two airlines. In 2010 there were 479 such routes. It is questionable
whether such progress could have been achieved without a system to ensure that
slots at busy airports are allocated free of any undue influence from government,
national carriers or airports. 
7.                      
As highlighted by Eurocontrol and ACI-Europe[4],
one of the key challenges facing Europe is airport congestion. According to
Eurocontrol's Long Term Forecast in December 2010[5],
even taking into account currently planned infrastructure enhancements, as much
as 10 % of demand for air transport will remain unmet in 2030 due to
a shortage of airport capacity. Moreover, the impact assessment accompanying
this proposal demonstrates that the EU's busiest airports are unlikely to see
any improvement in the current situation, even taking into account planned
capacity enhancements[6].
8.                      
In view of the shortage of capacity at critical
airports and the spill-over effect on the mobility of European citizens,
building new runways and airport infrastructure is the obvious answer. However,
the impact of infrastructure on the environment and on land planning is a
growing concern. In addition, the current economic crisis reaffirms the
importance of ensuring the long-term sustainability of budgets. Instead of
relying on expanding 'hard' infrastructure, more cost-effective solutions have
to be found to tackle congestion.
9.                      
Clearly, slot allocation cannot generate
additional capacity. Moreover, slot allocation cannot solve the many problems
created by a lack of capacity, such as how to adequately cater for air links to
Europe's regions from capacity-constrained airports, or provide congested hubs
with better connections to all world regions. Enhanced slot allocation schemes
will never satisfy these important needs. However, they can be an effective
tool for managing scarce capacity.
10.                  
Therefore, it is necessary to review the Slot
Regulation to determine to what extent it can be improved with a view to
matching capacity to demand for air transport in all sectors (long-haul,
regional, cargo, etc.). The importance of slot allocation in creating an
integrated and efficient market for the Single European Transport Area was
recognised in the March 2011 White Paper on transport, which is itself part of
the flagship initiative on a resource-efficient Europe launched under the
Europe 2020 Strategy. Accordingly, the Commission has given serious
consideration to the introduction of market-based mechanisms for the use of
airport slots, since appropriate incentives and benefits can positively
influence the behaviour of players in the market (airlines) so that the
available scarce capacity is used by those able to make best economic use of
it. In this way, although there would be no extension of the physical capacity,
a more rational use of the limited capacity available would be achieved.
11.                  
Such a market in airport slots (in the form of
secondary trading) has been in operation at UK airports for some time, as the
Commission recognised in a 2008 Communication[7]. Indeed, slots
at London Heathrow have changed hands for high prices: in March 2008 it was
widely reported that Continental Airlines had paid $ 209 million (or
€ 143 million at the then exchange rate) for four pairs of slots at
Heathrow. 
12.                  
Recent years have seen greater attention paid to
the need to strengthen the performance of the aviation system at European
level. The changes to the management of air traffic in Europe from 2009 onwards
as part of the Single European Sky initiative reflect the fact that, in certain
respects, management is best conducted at European or regional level. This is
seen in the creation of functional airspace blocks and in the strengthening of
central functions such as network management. Given the nature of the network,
which comprises both point to point and hub and spoke operations, the impact of
problems in one part of the network (for example, closure of an important node)
cannot be isolated to that part of the network. This becomes even more apparent
when critical parts of the network are running at or near capacity, which
reduces the margin available for accommodating diverted flights, for example.
Consequently, improving the performance of the European system also implies
improving its resilience. 

1.3.                
Objectives of the proposal

13.                  
The general objective is to ensure optimal
allocation and use of airport slots in congested airports. The specific
objectives are:
(1)                   
to ensure strengthened and effectively
implemented slot allocation and use; and
(2)                   
to enhance fair competition and competitiveness
of operators.

1.4.                
Provisions in force in the policy sphere
of the proposal

14.                  
The proposal concerns the amendment of Council
Regulation (EEC) 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the
allocation of slots at Community airports. Slot allocation is not dealt with
directly by any other provisions.

1.5.                
Consistency with the other policies and
objectives of the European Union

15.                  
This initiative is one of the actions necessary
for the Single European Transport Area as described in the Commission's White
Paper: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area — Towards a competitive and
resource efficient transport system [COM(2011) 0144]. It is also part of the airport package of measures
identified as a strategic initiative in the 2011 Commission Work Programme
[COM(2010)623], contributing to tapping the potential of the Single Market for
growth.

2.                      
RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH INTERESTED PARTIES AND
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS
2.1.                
Consultation of interested parties

16.                  
After first consulting the interested parties in
2007, and after adopting the Communications of 2007 (COM(2007)704) and 2008
(COM(2008)227), in September 2010 the Commission launched a comprehensive
online public consultation, the objective of which was to evaluate the current
operation of the Regulation and to elicit stakeholders' comments on a detailed
list of policy options which could be addressed through the revision of the
Regulation. A second stakeholders' hearing was organised on 29 November 2010
and was attended by 16 Member States and representatives of each of the
relevant stakeholder groups.
17.                  
A summary of the consultation is published on
the Commission's website[8]. Air carriers are broadly
satisfied with the functioning of the current Slot Regulation, so most
respondents within this group do not support any changes. The fact that the
slot allocation system in effect regulates access to some of the most popular
airports in the world explains the sensitivity of the issue, in particular for
airlines. Several airlines stress that the most important issue is the shortage
of airport capacity, which changes to the Slot Regulation would not address.
18.                  
Airports and airport associations see more need
for change, so are more likely to see benefits in the options put forward in
the consultation. This also applies, to a lesser extent, to the slot
coordinators. There is more divergence among the Member States and 'other'
respondents, although these stakeholders generally support amendments to the
Slot Regulation.

2.2.                
Collection and use of expertise

19.                  
Continuous monitoring by the Commission of the
functioning of the Regulation has been accompanied by several external studies,
the results of which are available on the Commission website[9].
In particular, the Commission decided in 2010 to undertake a thorough
assessment of the current situation for the period 2006-2010[10].
This concluded that the efficient use of airport capacity in Europe is
currently hindered by a number of problems.

2.3.                
Impact assessment

20.                  
The impact assessment provides an overview of
the different options which have been considered. In summary the content of the
three packages is as follows.
21.                  
The first policy package included measures to
improve the effectiveness of slot allocation and the use of slots, without
changing the administrative nature of the current system. There would be a
number of improvements to the current system, but market-based mechanisms would
not be introduced. Due to the limited scope of this package, the estimated
benefits are rather modest: an average annual increase of 0.4 % in the
number of passengers carried.
22.                  
The second package incorporated the elements of
the first package but added several more, including market-based mechanisms (in
the form of explicit provision for secondary trading across the EU). It also
included several pro-competitive proposals, such as revision of the new entrant
rule and making the criteria for granting priority for allocation of a slot for
the following season (so-called grandfather rights) slightly stricter. For the
2012-25 period, the package was estimated to result in an average annual
increase of 1.6 % (or 23.8 million) in the number of passengers carried, a net
economic benefit of € 5.3 billion, as well as a significant increase in
employment (up to 62 000 full-time jobs). 
23.                  
This policy package will have negative
environmental impacts as CO2 emissions will increase due to the greater number
of flights. However, due to the inclusion of aviation CO2 emissions in the
general EU emissions trading system (ETS) from 2012, there should be no growth
in total CO2 emissions attributable to this policy package. Moreover, since the
existing capacity would be used more intensively, the environmental impact of
capacity expansion would be avoided.
24.                  
The third package comprised all elements of the
second package, but took the market-based mechanism a step further by
withdrawing 'grandfather' or 'historical' slots and having them auctioned. This
policy package would lead to an increase of 1.9-2% passengers that travel by
air, corresponding to 27.3-28.7 million passengers per year. However, as this
measure has never before been implemented, the potentially positive impact has
to be balanced against the risk that the option could dramatically affect
airlines by increasing substantially their operating costs, as a result of
disruption to their schedules and hub and spoke business model founded upon a
wide portfolio of slots at congested airports. Consequently, this package would
lead to less significant economic benefits of between € 2.8 and 5 billion.
25.                  
In view of the assessment of the different
policy packages on the basis of the efficiency, effectiveness and consistency
criteria, it is recommended that the second package be implemented as its
benefits would be considerably higher than the costs incurred.

3.                      
LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL
3.1.                
Summary of the proposed action
3.1.1.          
Introduction of the possibility for
secondary trade in slots and increased competition

26.                  
In order to encourage greater slot mobility, the
proposal expressly allows airlines to buy and sell slots. Improving slot
mobility will help allow airlines to adapt their slots portfolios according to
their scheduling needs. The Slot Regulation already allows airlines to exchange
slots with other airlines. In many cases, this involves exchanging a slot at a
valuable time of day for a 'junk slot', i.e. a slot late in the evening or in
the early afternoon, which is not particularly useful. Following the trade, the
'junk slot', which was only acquired for trading purposes, is returned to the
pool. Under the current Regulation, a transfer of slots is permitted
only in a very limited number of cases.
27.                  
The existing new entrant rule, which accords
priority to airlines with only a few slots at a coordinated airport, has not
yielded the desired results. Typically, the emergence of a strong competitor at
a given airport requires it to build up a sustainable slot portfolio to allow
it to compete effectively with the dominant carrier (usually the 'home'
carrier). Under the current rules, airlines quickly fall outside the definition
of 'new entrant' at an airport, even when their slot holdings are rather limited.
Therefore it is proposed to broaden the definition of 'new entrant', to help
facilitate the growth of sustainable competitors and reduce the schedule
fragmentation that occurs when slots are allocated to a larger number of
airlines unable to translate these slots into a viable alternative to dominant
carriers.

3.1.2.          
Strengthening the transparency of the
slot allocation process and the independence of slot coordinators

28.                  
The proposal contains a number of provisions to
ensure that the slot allocation process is supported by a sufficient degree of
transparency. This is important not only for airlines using slots, but also for
public authorities responsible for regulatory functions. This becomes even more
important in a system where slots can be traded among airlines. 
29.                  
The proposal will allow stricter criteria for
the independence of the coordinators with regard to any interested party to be
defined. It also advocates enhanced cooperation between the coordinators,
initially through the development of common projects covering, for instance,
the development of common slot allocation software or even merging the
coordination activities for airports situated in different Member States. On
the basis of progress made, the Commission could eventually propose, at a later
stage, the creation of a European coordinator responsible for slot allocation
at all European Union airports. 

3.1.3.          
Integration of slot allocation with the
reform of the European air traffic management system (Single European Sky)

30.                  
The proposal aims to make an important
contribution to strengthening the management of the aviation network at
European level by associating the European Network Manager with the slot
allocation process. Thus, the Commission may request a capacity analysis at an
airport, should the network manager deem this necessary for ensuring coherence
with the airport operational plan (already provided for in the regulation
setting up the network manager). Such capacity analyses would be carried out in
accordance with standards agreed at European level. Moreover, the Commission
could make recommendations to the Member State on the capacity assessment if
the network manager suggests that it does not fully take into account the needs
of the European network. The objective of these recommendations would be to
allow the Member State to take into account the European network perspective
and increase awareness of the impact of airport capacity assessment upon the
whole network, for instance in terms of delays.
31.                  
The proposal also introduces a new category of
airport: the 'network airport'. Such airports are not coordinated, but are
identified as important since they may offer alternatives during times of
network disruption. Thus, the proposal provides that coordinators gather
information on the operations at these airports. 

3.1.4.          
Amendment of the '80-20' rule and
definition of a series of slots and resort to the airport charge system to
discourage the late return of slots to the pool

32.                  
To help ensure that existing capacity is used
optimally, the proposal makes some changes to the criteria for the use of
airport slots in order for 'grandfather rights' to be granted. In order for
airlines to be granted priority for the allocation of a given slot in the next
corresponding scheduling season, they need to have used at least 85 % of
the allocated series of slots (instead of 80 % at present). 
33.                  
In addition, the minimum series length (i.e. the
minimum number of weekly slots required for priority allocation for the
following corresponding season) is raised from 5 to 15 for the summer season
and 10 for the winter season. Increasing the series length would reduce
fragmentation of the slot structure at an airport, since short series
attracting grandfather rights can prevent longer series being operated by other
airlines. Exceptions are provided for certain types of traffic (charter)
to take the characteristics of regional airports into account.
34.                  
To ensure that slots reserved prior to the start
of an operating season are in fact operated as planned by airlines, the
proposal would authorise airports to use an airport charge system to dissuade
air carriers from belatedly returning slots to the pool. Reserving airport
capacity and not using it generates a cost which is currently borne by the
airlines operating from the airport. The proposal encourages the airport
managing body to introduce a charge system to discourage behaviour that leads
to less efficient use of airport capacity. 

3.2.                
Provisions that remain unchanged

35.                  
The following provisions are taken over without
substantial modification from the current Regulation: Article 2(a), (b)(i),
(e), (g), (k), (l), (o) and (p); Article 3(1), (2), (4) and (6); Article 4(1)
second indent, and (5); Article 5(3)(a) and (d), and (4), (5) and (6);
Article 6(3)(a), (b) and (c); Article 8(1)(a)(i), (ii), (iii) and (v), and
(c); Article 9(3), (6), (7) and (9); Article 10(1), (5)(a)(i) and (iii), and
(c) and (d), and (6); Article 12; Article 13(2), second indent, (b) and (c),
and (3), first and second indents; Article 16(1) and (5); Article 19; Article
21(2); and Article 21(2).

3.3.                
Legal basis

Article 91 of the TFEU.

3.4.                
Subsidiarity principle

36.                  
The subsidiarity principle applies insofar as
the proposal does not fall under the exclusive competence of the Union. The
objectives of the proposal cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States
for the following reasons. The harmonisation of conditions for access to
congested airports in the EU remains necessary to prevent barriers due to
conflicting national practices. Therefore problems related to access to
congested airports require a solution at European level.
37.                  
The objective of ensuring the functioning of the
internal aviation market by reducing obstacles to intra-EU trade arising from
different national standards or practices could not be sufficiently achieved by
Member States. Consequently, in line with the principle of subsidiarity and
given the scale and effects of the problem, action is required at EU level.
38.                  
European rules on slot allocation are an
essential accompaniment to the European legislation underpinning the internal
market in aviation, since a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory system for
allocating capacity at those airports for which demand exceeds supply is
essential to give substance to the freedom for European air carriers to provide
intra-EU air services, as set out in the relevant European legislation.
39.                  
Therefore, the proposal complies with the
subsidiarity principle.

3.5.                
Proportionality principle

40.                  
The additional burden for economic operators,
slot coordinators and national authorities is limited to that necessary to
ensure non-discriminatory slot allocation and optimal allocation of scarce
capacity at the most congested airports in Europe.

3.6.                
Choice of instruments

41.                  
Proposed instrument: Regulation.
42.                  
The legal instrument would have to be of general
application. It contains a number of obligations that are directly applicable
to airport coordinators, air carriers and to entities responsible for airport
and airspace management in Europe together with the Commission. Therefore, the
most appropriate legal instrument is a Regulation, since alternative options
would not be sufficient to achieve the proposed objectives.

4.                      
BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

43.                  
The proposal has no implications for the EU
budget.

5.                      
OPTIONAL ELEMENTS
5.1.                
Simplification

44.                  
The proposal provides for simplification of legislation,
since it recasts the Slot Regulation to incorporate existing amendments to the
Regulation and the amendments contained in the current proposal.

5.2.                
Repeal of existing legislation

45.                  
Adoption of the proposal will lead to the repeal
of the existing Slot Regulation.

5.3.                
European Economic Area

46.                  
The proposed act concerns an EEA matter and
should therefore extend to the European Economic Area.
2011/0391 (COD)
ê 95/93
(adapted)
Proposal for a
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
AND OF THE COUNCIL
on common rules for the allocation of
slots at Community Ö European
Union Õ airports
(Recast)
(Text with EEA relevance)
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE
COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Economic Community Ö on the
Functioning of the European Union Õ, and in
particular Article Ö 100(2) Õ, thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the
European Commission,
After transmission of the draft legislative
act to the national Parliaments,
Having regard to the opinion of the
European Economic and Social Committee[11],
Having regard to the opinion of the
Committee of the Regions[12],
Acting in accordance with the ordinary
legislative procedure,
Whereas:
ò new
(1)              
Council Regulation
(EEC) No 95/93 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots
at Community airports[13] has been substantially
amended several times[14]. Since further
amendments are to be made, it should be recast in the interests of clarity.
(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.
ê 95/93
recital 1 (adapted)
(3)              
Ö However, Õ Tthere
is a growing imbalance between the expansion of the air transport system in
Europe and the availability of Ö certain airport
infrastructures Õ airport infrastructure
to meet that demand. There is, as a result, an increasing number of congested
airports in the
Community Ö the Union
Õ.
ò 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.
ê 95/93
recital 2 (adapted)
(6)              
The allocation of slots at congested airports
should Ö continue
to Õ be based on
neutral, transparent and non-discriminatory rules.
ò 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 airports[15], the 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. 
ê 95/93
recital 6
ð new
(9)              
Transparency of information is an essential
element for ensuring an objective procedure for slot allocation. ð It is necessary to enhance this
transparency and take account of technological progress. ï
ê 95/93
recital 10 (adapted)
ð new
(10)          
Provisions to allow new entrants into the Community
Ö Union Õ market Ö should be
laid down Õ. ðExperience 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. ï
ò new
(11)          
The priority given to
an air carrier requesting a series of slots in an airport for a non-stop
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. 
ê 95/93
recital 12 (adapted)
(12)          
It is also necessary to avoid situationsÖ Situations Õ where, owing
to a lack of available slots, the benefits of liberalisation are unevenly
spread and competition is distorted, Ö should also
be avoided Õ.
ò 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 evaluation 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 interest for 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.
ê 95/93
recital 5 (adapted)
ð new
(15)          
The Member State responsible for the Ö schedules
facilitated or Õ coordinated
airport should ensure the appointment of a Ö schedules
facilitator or a Õ coordinator
whose neutrality should be unquestioned. ðTo 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. ï
ò 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 network airports,
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. 
ê95/93 recital 4
(adapted)
(18)          
Under certain conditions, in order to facilitate operations, a Member
State should be able to designate Aan
airport Ö may be
designated Õ as coordinated
provided that principles of transparency, neutrality and non-discrimination are
followed Ö and
subject to the conditions laid down in this Regulation Õ. 
ê95/93 recital 3
(adapted)
ð new
(19)          
The requirement of
neutrality is best guaranteed when tThe decision to coordinate an airport is Ö should
be Õ taken by the
Member State responsible for that airport on the basis of objective criteria. ð Given the progress made in
implementing the Single European Sky and in 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.ï
ò new
(20)          
Provision must be made
for the 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.
ê 95/93
recital 7 
The principles
governing the existing system of slot allocation could be the basis of this
Regulation provided that this system evolves in harmony with the evolution of
new transport developments in the Community.
ò 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.
ê 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 routes[16], and whereas these objectives require strong
support for carriers who intend to start operations on intra-Community routes. 
ê 95/93
recital 9
The existing
system makes provision for grandfather rights.
ê 95/93
recital 11 (adapted)
ð new
(22)          
It is necessary to make Ö retain Õ special
provisions, under limited circumstances, for the maintenance of adequate
domestic air services to regions of the Member State Ö or Member
States Õ concerned ð when a public service obligation has
been imposed ï.
ò 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 shown that local rules are
useful. 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. The resort to
local rules would also be reduced to supervising 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 the 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 during 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 in allocating 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 doubly strengthened. 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 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 charge 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.
ê 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.
ê 95/93
recital 14 (adapted)
(27)          
It is desirable that third countries offer Community
Ö Union Õ carriers
equivalent treatment.
ê 95/93
recital 15 (adapted)
ð new
(28)          
The application of the provisions of this
Regulation Ö should Õ be without
prejudice to the competition rules of the Treaty, in particular Articles Ö 101 Õ, and Ö 102 Õ ð and 106 ï.
ê 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. Ö 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. Õ
ò 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 powers[17].
(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. 
ê 95/93
recital 17 
(35)          
This Regulation should be reviewed after a fixed
period of operation to assess its functioning,
ò 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,
ê 95/93
(adapted)
HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
Ö Scope and
definitions Õ
Article 1
Scope
ê 793/2004
Art. 1, pt. 1 (adapted)
1. This Regulation shall apply to Community
Ö European
Union Õairports.
ê 95/93
(adapted)
2. The application of this Regulation to
the airport of Gibraltar is understood to be without prejudice to the
respective legal positions of the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom Ö of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland Õ with regard to
the dispute over sovereignty over the territory in which the airport
is situated.
3. Application of
the provisions of this Regulation to Gibraltar airport shall be suspended until
the arrangements in the joint declarations made by the Foreign Ministers of
Spain and the United Kingdom on 2 December 1987 have come into operation. The
Governments of Spain and the United Kingdom will so inform the Council of that
date. 
Article 2
Definitions
For the purpose of this Regulation:
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(a) 
(a1)        'slot' shall mean the permission given by a coordinator in
accordance with this Regulation to use the full range of airport infrastructure
necessary to operate an air service at a coordinated airport on a specific date
and time for the purpose of landing or take-off as allocated by a coordinator
in accordance with this Regulation;
(b2)        'new entrant' shall mean:
(ia)    an air carrier requesting, as part of a series of slots, a slot
at an airport on any day, where, if the carrier's request were accepted, it
would in total hold fewer than five slots at that airport on that day; or
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(a) (adapted)
ð new
(iib)   an air carrier requesting a series of slots for a non-stop
scheduled passenger service between two Community Ö European
Union Õ airports,
where at most two other air carriers operate the same non-stop scheduled
service between those airports or airport systems
on that day, and where, if the air carrier's request
were accepted, the air carrier would nonetheless hold fewer than ð nine ï five slots at that
airport on that day for that non-stop service. or
(iii)     an air carrier requesting a series of slots at an
airport for a non-stop scheduled passenger service between that airport and a
regional airport where no other air carrier operates a direct scheduled
passenger service between those airports or airport systems on that day, where,
if the air carrier's request were accepted, the air carrier would nonetheless
hold fewer than five slots at that airport on that day for that non-stop
service.
              An air carrier holding ð , which together with its parent
company, its own subsidiaries or the subsidiaries of its parent company, holdsï more than 5 ð 10 ï % of the total slots ð allocated ï available on the day in
question at a particular airport, or more than
4 % of the total slots available on the day in question in an airport
system of which that airport forms part, shall not be
considered as a new entrant at that airport;
ò new
              An
air carrier which transferred, within the meaning of Article 13, slots
obtained as a new entrant to another air carrier in the same airport in order
to be able to invoke again the status of a new entrant at that airport, shall
not be considered as a new entrant at that airport;
ê 95/93
ð new
(c)          'direct air service' shall mean a
service between two airports including stopovers with the same aircraft and
same flight number;
(d3)        'scheduling period' shall mean either the summer or winter
season as used in the schedules of air carriersð , in accordance with the rules and
guidelines established by the air transport section on a global basis ï;
ê 95/93
(adapted)
(e4)        'CommunityÖ Union Õ air carrier'
shall mean an air carrier with a Ö currently
valid Õ operating
licence issued by a Member State in accordance with Regulation (EC) No
1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council; 
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(b) (adapted)
ð new
(f5)         (i)'air carrier'
shall mean an air transport undertaking holding a Ö currently
valid Õ operating
licence or equivalent at the latest on 31 January for the following summer
season or on 31 August for the following winter season; for the purposes
of Articles 45,
89, 8a10 ð , 11 ï and 1013,
the definition of 'air carrier' shall also include business aviation operators, when they operate according to a schedule;
for the purposes of Articles 7, 17
and 1418; the definition of 'air carrier'
shall also include all civil aircraft operators;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2( b)
(ii6)        'group of air carriers' shall mean two or more air carriers
which together perform joint operations, franchise operations or code-sharing
for the purpose of operating a specific air service;
ò new
7)           'air
navigation service provider' shall mean any air navigation service provider
within the meaning of Article 2(5) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004[18];
8)           'groundhandling
service provider' shall mean any provider of groundhandling services within the
meaning of Article […] of Regulation No […] (on groundhandling
services); or any airport user within the meaning of Article […] of
Regulation No […] (on groundhandling services) which self-handles within
the meaning of Article […] of Regulation No […] (on groundhandling
services);
9)           'network
airport' shall mean an airport which is not confronted with congestion problems
but which, in the event of a sudden and significant increase in traffic or in
the event of a sudden and significant reduction of its capacity, could have an
impact on the functioning of the European air-traffic management network
(hereinafter 'the network'), in accordance with Article 6 of Regulation
(EC) No 551/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council[19];

ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(c)
(i10)       'schedules facilitated airport' shall mean an airport where
there is potential for congestion at certain periods of the day, week or year
which is amenable to resolution by voluntary cooperation between air carriers
and where a schedules facilitator has been appointed to facilitate the
operations of air carriers operating services or intending to operate services
at that airport;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(b)
(g11)      'coordinated airport' shall mean any airport where, in order
to land or take off, it is necessary for an air carrier or any other aircraft
operator to have been allocated a slot by a coordinator, with the exception of
State flights, emergency landings and humanitarian flights;
ê 95/93
(h)          'airport system' shall mean two
or more airports grouped together and serving the same city or conurbation, as
indicated in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(c) (adapted)
ð new
(j12)       'managing body of an airport' shall mean the body which, in
conjunction with other activities or otherwise, has the task under national
laws or regulations of administering and managing the airport facilities and
coordinating and controlling the activities of the various operators present at
the airport or within the airport system concerned;
(k13)      'series of slots' shall mean at least ð 15 ï five slots having been requested
for a ð summer scheduling period and 10
slots for a winter scheduling period ï Ö requested Õ for the same
time on the same day of the week regularly in
the same scheduling period ð for consecutive weeks ï and allocated Ö by the
coordinator Õ in Ö on Õ that Ö basis Õ way or, if that is not
possible, allocated at approximately the same time;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(c)
(l14)       'business aviation' shall mean that sector of general
aviation which concerns the operation or use of aircraft by companies for the
carriage of passengers or goods as an aid to the conduct of their business,
where the aircraft are flown for purposes generally considered not for public
hire and are piloted by individuals having, at a minimum, a valid commercial
pilot licence with an instrument rating;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.2(c) (adapted)
ð new
(m15)     'coordination parameters'
shall mean the expression, in operational terms, of all the capacity available
for slot allocation at an airport during each coordination Ö scheduling Õ period ð and the operational rules on
capacity use ï, reflecting all technical, operational and environmental factors
that affect the performance of the airport infrastructure and its different
sub-systems.
ò new
16)         'flight plan' shall mean specific
information provided to air traffic services units, relative to an intended
flight or portion of a flight of an aircraft;
17)         'scheduled air services' shall
mean a series of flights with the characteristics defined in Article 2(16)
of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008; 
18)         'programmed non-scheduled air
service' shall mean a series of flights which do not meet all the conditions of
Article 2(16) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, but which operate so
regularly or frequently that they constitute a recognisably systematic series;
19)         'network
manager' shall mean the body established under Article 6 of Regulation
(EC) No 551/2004;
20)         'performance
review body' shall mean the body established under Article 11 of Regulation
(EC) No 549/2004;
21)         'national
supervisory authority' shall mean the body or bodies nominated or established
by Member States as their national authority pursuant to Article 4 of
Regulation (EC) No 549/2004. 
ê 95/93
(adapted)
ð new
Ö Designation
of airports Õ
Article 3
Conditions for airport coordination
ð or schedules facilitation ï 
ê 793/2004
Art.1.3(a) (adapted)
1. Ö Member
States shall be under no obligation Õ to designate
any airport as schedules facilitated or coordinated save in accordance with the
provisions of this Article.
Ö Member
States shall not designate Õ an airport as
coordinated save in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3.
ê 95/93
è1 793/2004 Art. 1.3(b)
2. A Member State may, however, provide for
any airport to be designated as a è1 schedules facilitated airport ç, provided that
principles of transparency, neutrality and non-discrimination are met.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(c)
ð new
3. The Member State responsible shall
ensure that a thorough capacity ð and demand ïanalysis is carried out at an airport with no designation status ð, at an airport belonging to the
European air traffic management network (hereinafter 'the network')ï or at a schedules facilitated airport by the managing body of that
airport or by any other competent body when that Member State considers it
necessary, or within six months:
(i)           following a written request from
air carriers representing more than half of the operations at an airport or
from the managing body of the airport when either considers that capacity is
insufficient for actual or planned operations at certain periods; or
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(c)
ð new
(ii)          upon request from the Commission, in particular where an airport is in reality accessible only for air
carriers that have been allocated slots or where air carriers and in particular
new entrants encounter serious problems in securing landing and take off
possibilities at the airport in question ð , or when the network manager
considers it necessary to ensure that the airport's operational plan is
consistent with the network's operational plan, in accordance with
Article 6(7) of Commission Regulation (EU) No 677/2011[20]ï .
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(c)
This analysis, based on
commonly recognised methods, shall determine any
shortfall in capacity, taking into account environmental constraints at the
airport in question. The analysis shall consider the possibilities of
overcoming such shortfall through new or modified infrastructure, operational
changes, or any other change, and the time frame envisaged to resolve the
problems. 
ò new
The analysis is
based on methods determined by a Commission delegated act, in accordance with
Article 15 of this Regulation. The methods take account of the
requirements of the network operations plan, as required by Annex V to
Regulation (EU) No 677/2011.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(c) (adapted)
ð new
It The analysis shall be updated if
paragraph 56
has been invoked, or
when there are changes at the airport influencing significantly its capacity
and capacity usage ð or at the request of the
coordination committee, the Member State or the Commission ï. Both the analysis and the method used shall be made available to
the parties having requested the analysis and, upon request, to other
interested parties. The analysis shall be communicated to the Commission at the
same time. 
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(d)
4. On the basis of the analysis, the Member
State shall consult on the capacity situation at the airport with the managing
body of the airport, the air carriers using the airport regularly, their
representative organisations, representatives of general aviation using the
airport regularly and air traffic control authorities.
ò new
5. The Commission
can ask the network manager to deliver an opinion on how the capacity is set in
relation to the network operating needs. The Commission can make
recommendations. The Member State shall give reasons for any decision that does
not follow these recommendations. The decision shall be communicated to the
Commission.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.3(d)
ð new
56. Where capacity problems occur for at least one scheduling period,
the Member State shall ensure that the airport is designated as coordinated for
the relevant periods only if:
(a)          the shortfall is of such a
serious nature that significant delays cannot be avoided at the airport, and
(b)          there are no possibilities of
resolving these problems in the short term.
67. By way of derogation from paragraph 56(b), Member States may, in exceptional
circumstances, designate as coordinated the airports affected for the
appropriate periodð , which can be less than a
scheduling period ï .
ò new
By way of
derogation from paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6, Member States may, in emergency
situations, designate as coordinated the airports affected for the appropriate
period.
8. If the updated
analysis on capacity and demand in a coordinated or schedules facilitated
airport shows that this airport has sufficient capacity to meet actual or
planned operations, the Member State, after consulting the bodies mentioned in
paragraph 4, may change its designation to a schedules facilitated airport
or an airport with no designation status. 
ê 95/93
è1 793/2004 Art. 1.3(e)
è1 7. çWhen a capacity sufficient to meet actual or
planned operations is provided at a è1 coordinated airport ç, its designation as a fully coordinated airport
shall be lifted.
ò new
9. At the request
of the Commission, which may act on its own initiative or on the initiative of
the network manager, and after consulting the bodies mentioned in paragraph 4,
the Member State shall ensure that an airport with no designation status be
designated as belonging to the network. The decision shall be communicated to
the Commission. If the Commission considers that the airport is no longer of
interest for the network, the Member State, after consulting the bodies
mentioned in paragraph 4, shall change the designation of the airport to that
of an airport with no designation status.
10. If a decision
is taken under paragraphs 6, 8 or 9, the Member State shall communicate it
to the bodies mentioned in paragraph 4 no later than 1 April for the
winter scheduling period and no later than 1 September for the summer
scheduling period.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
ð new
Article 6
4
Coordination parameters
1. At a coordinated ð or schedules facilitated ï airport, the Member State responsible shall ensure the
determination of the ð coordination ï parameters for slot allocation twice
yearly, while taking account of all relevant technical, operationalð , performance ï and environmental constraints as well as any changes thereto. ð These constraints shall be notified
to the Commission. The Commission, if necessary with the aid of the network
manager, shall examine the constraints and deliver recommendations which the
Member State must take into account before proceeding to determine the
coordination parameters. ï
This exercise shall be based on an
objective analysis of the possibilities of accommodating the air traffic,
taking into account the different types of traffic at the airport, the airspace
congestion likely to occur during the coordination period and the capacity
situation.
32. The determination of the parameters and the methodology used as
well as any changes thereto shall be discussed in detail within the
coordination committee with a view to increasing the capacity and number of
slots available for allocation, before a final decision on the ð coordination ï parameters for slot allocation
is taken. All relevant documents shall be made available on request to
interested parties.
ò new
3. The
determination of the coordination parameters shall not affect the neutral and
non-discriminatory character of the slot allocation.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
ð new
4. The parameters shall be communicated to the airport coordinator in
good time before initial slot ð filing ï allocation takes place
for the purpose of scheduling conferences.
25. For the purpose of the exercise referred to in paragraph 1, where
the Member State does not do so, the coordinator shall define relevant
coordination time intervals after consultation of the coordination committee
and in conformity with the established capacity.
ê 95/93
(adapted)
ÖOrganisation of
coordination, schedules facilitation and data collection activities Õ
Article 4
5
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(a)
The schedules facilitator and the
coordinator
ê 793/2004 Art.
1.4(b) (adapted)
ð new
1. The Member State responsible for a ð network airport ï , a schedules facilitated or coordinated airport shall ensure the
appointment of a qualified natural or legal person as schedules facilitator or
airport coordinator, respectively after having consulted the air carriers
using the airport regularly, their representative organisations and the
managing body of the airport and the coordination committee, where such a
committee exists. The same schedules facilitator or coordinator may be
appointed for more than one airport.
ò new
2. Member States
shall encourage close cooperation between the coordinators and schedules
facilitators to develop common projects at a European level. In light of the
progress of these projects, the progress made in implementing the Single
European Sky and the results of the assessment report mentioned in
Article 21, the Commission shall adopt implementing measures for creating
a European coordinator. The implementing measures shall be adopted in
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 16(2). The
principles governing the coordinator's independence in paragraph 3 of this
Article apply mutatis mutandis to the European coordinator. 
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(b) (adapted)
ð new
23. The Member State responsible for a schedules facilitated or
coordinated airport shall ensure:
(a)          that at a schedules facilitated
airport, the schedules facilitator acts under this Regulation in an independent,
neutral, non-discriminatory and transparent manner;
(b)          Ö that, Õ the independence of the
coordinator at a coordinated airport by separating the coordinator functionally
Ö , the
coordinator Õ ð shall be independent in legal,
organisational and decision-making terms of ï from
any single interested party, ð of the Member State and bodies under
the jurisdiction of that State; this means that: ï
ò new
              (i) in
legal terms, the coordinator's essential functions, which consist of allocating
slots in an equal and non-discriminatory manner, shall be given to a natural or
legal person who or which is not a service provider in the airport, an airline
operating from the airport or the managing body of the airport in question;
              (ii)
in organisational and decision-making terms, the coordinator shall act
autonomously in relation to the Member State, the airport managing body,
service providers, airlines operating from the airport in question, not receive
instructions from them nor be obliged to report to them, with the exception of
the Member State, not be part of structures that are directly or indirectly
responsible for their daily management and have executive decision-making
powers with regard to the assets required for its function. The Member States
shall ensure that the coordinator's professional interests are taken into
consideration in such a way as to allow the coordinator to operate in complete
independence;
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(b)
(c)          Tthe system of financing the
coordinator's activities shall be such as to guarantee the coordinator's
independent status. 
(cd)        that
the coordinator acts according to this Regulation in a
neutral, non-discriminatory and transparent way.
ò new
The financing
referred to under point (c) shall be provided by the air carriers who operate
in the coordinated airports and by the airports in such a way as to ensure that
the financial burden is distributed equitably among all interested parties and
that the financing does not largely depend on a sole interested party. The
Member States shall ensure that the financial, human, technical and material
resources and expertise required by the coordinator for carrying out his duties
are at his disposal at all times.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(b) (adapted)
34. The schedules facilitator and the coordinator shall participate in
such
international
scheduling conferences of air carriers Ö at
international level Õ as are permitted by
Ö in
accordance with Õ Community
Ö Union Õ law.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(b)
ð new
45. The schedules facilitator shall advise air carriers and recommend
alternative arrival and/or departure times when congestion is likely to occur.
56. The coordinator shall be the sole person responsible for the
allocation of slots. He shall allocate the slots in accordance with the
provisions of this Regulation and shall make provision so that, in an
emergency, slots can also be allocated outside office hours.
67. The schedules facilitator shall monitor the conformity of air
carriers' operations with the schedules recommended to them. 
The coordinator shall monitor the
conformity of air carriers' operations with the slots allocated to them. These
conformity checks shall be carried out in cooperation with the managing body of
the airport and with the air traffic control authorities and shall take into
account the time and other relevant parameters relating to the airport
concerned. 
7. All schedules facilitators and coordinators shall cooperate to
detect inconsistencies in schedules ð and to encourage air carriers to
resolve them ï.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(b) (adapted)
ð new
Article
6
Ö Transparency
of coordination activities and schedules facilitation Õ
1. ð At the end of each scheduling
period, ï Tthe
coordinator ð or schedules facilitator ï shall submit on request
to the Member States concerned and to the Commission an annual activity report ð describing the general slot
allocation and/or schedules facilitation situation, examining ï, concerning,
in particular, the application of Ö Article Õ ð 9(5) and Articles ï8a13 and 14
18, as well as any complaints
regarding the application of Articles 89 and 10 submitted to the
coordination committee and the steps taken to resolve them. ð The report shall also contain the
results of a survey conducted among the interested parties on the quality of
services provided by the coordinator. ï
ò new
2. The Commission
may adopt a template for the activity report mentioned in paragraph 1. That
implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure
referred to in Article 16(2).
ê 95/93
è1 793/2004 Art. 1.4(c)
è1 8. 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: ç
ò new
3. The
coordinator shall maintain an up-to-date, freely-accessible electronic
database, containing the following information:
ê 95/93
(a)          historical slots by airline,
chronologically, for all air carriers at the airport;
ê 95/93
(adapted)
(b)          requested slots (initial submissions)
by air carriers and chronologically for all air carriers;
ê 95/93 
ð new
(c)          all allocated slots, and
outstanding slot requests, listed individually in chronological order, by air
carriers, for all air carriers;
(d)          remaining available slots ð with respect to each type of
constraint taken into consideration in the coordination parameters. The
database shall allow the air carriers to verify the availability of slots
corresponding to their requests ï;
ò new
(e)          slots
transferred or exchanged, indicating the identity of the air carriers involved
and whether the transfer or exchange was made for compensation of a financial
or other nature. Aggregate data on financial compensation shall be published
each year;
ê 95/93
ð new
(ef)         full details on the criteria being
used in the allocation ð coordination parameters ï.
ò new
This information
shall be updated regularly. At the end of each season, the coordinator shall
publish the activity report mentioned in paragraph 1.
4. The
coordinator shall ensure that the data are stored and remain accessible for at
least five consecutive equivalent scheduling periods.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(d)
9. The information
referred to in paragraph 8 shall be made available at the time of the
relevant scheduling conferences at the latest and as appropriate during the
conferences and thereafter. On request, the coordinator shall provide such
information in a summarised format. A cost-related fee may be charged for the
provision of such summarised information.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.4(e) (adapted)
ð new
105. Where relevant and generally accepted schedules information standards ð on the format of ï Ö schedules
information Õ are available,
the schedules facilitator, the coordinator and the air carriers shall apply
them provided that they comply with Community  Union  law.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
Article 7
Information for schedules
facilitators and coordinators
1. Air carriers operating or intending to
operate at a schedules facilitated or coordinated airport ð belonging to the network ï shall submit to the schedules facilitator or coordinator, respectively,
all relevant information requested by them. ðIf this information changes, the air
carriers shall inform the schedules facilitator and the coordinator as soon as
possible. ï All relevant information shall be provided in the format and within
the time-limit specified by the schedules facilitator or coordinator. In
particular, an air carrier shall inform the coordinator, at the time of the
request for allocation, whether it would benefit from the status of new
entrant, in accordance with Article 2(2), in respect of requested slots.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
For all other airports with no particular
designation status, ð the air carriers operating or
intending to operate from that airport, ï the managing body of the airportð , the groundhandling service
providers and the air navigation service providers ï shall provide, when requested by a coordinator, any information in its Ö their Õ possession
about the planned services of air carriers.
ò new
On request from
the network manager, the schedules facilitator and the coordinator shall send
the network manager all the information referred to in this paragraph.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
ð new
2. Where an air carrier fails to provide
the information referred to in paragraph 1, unless it can satisfactorily
demonstrate that mitigating circumstances exist, or provides false or
misleading information, the coordinator shall not take into consideration the
slot request or requests by that air carrier to which the missing, false or
misleading information relates. ð It shall withdraw the series of
slots if they were already allocated and/or recommend that penalties be imposed
by the competent body under national law. ï The coordinator shall give that air carrier the opportunity to
submit its observations.
3. The schedules facilitator or the
coordinator, the managing body of the airport and the air traffic control
authorities shall exchange all the information they require for the exercise of
their respective duties, including flight data and slotsð , in particular with a view to
ensuring the application of Article 17 ï.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
Article 5
8
Coordination committee
1. At a coordinated airport, the Member
State responsible shall ensure that a coordination committee is set up. The
same coordination committee may be designated for more than one airport.
Membership of this committee shall be open at least to the air carriers using
the airport(s) in question regularly and their representative organisations,
the managing body of the airport concerned, the relevant air traffic control
authorities, and
the representatives of general aviation using the airport regularlyð , the network manager, the
performance review body and the national supervisory authority of the Member
State concerned ï.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 
ð new
The tasks of the coordination committee
shall be:
(a)          to make proposals concerning or
advise the coordinator and/or the Member State on:
(i)      the possibilities for increasing the capacity of the airport
determined in accordance with Article 3 or for improving its usage;
(ii)     the coordination parameters to be determined in accordance with
Article 64;
(iii)     the methods of monitoring the use of allocated slots;
(iv)    local guidelines for the allocation
of slots or the monitoring of the use of allocated slots, taking into account,
inter alia, possible environmental concerns, as
provided for in Article 89(58);
(v)     ð factors affecting the ï improvements to traffic
conditions prevailing at the airport in question;
(vi)    serious problems encountered by new entrants, as provided for in
Article 109(96);
(vii)    any issue concerning the airport capacity ð , in particular in relation to the
implementation of the Single European Sky and the working of the network ï ;
ò new
(b)          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 as
defined by Commission Regulation (EU) No 691/2010.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 
ð new
(bc)        to mediate between all parties concerned on complaints on
the allocation of slots, as provided for in Article 1119.
2. Member State representatives and the
coordinator shall be invited to the meetings of the coordination committee as
observers. ð On its request, the Commission may
participate in these meetings. ï
3. The coordination committee shall draw up
written rules of procedure covering, inter alia participation, elections, the frequency
of meetings, and language(s) used. 
Any member of the coordination committee
may propose local guidelines as provided for in Article 89(58). At the request of the coordinator,
the coordination committee shall discuss suggested local guidelines for the allocation of slots as well as those
suggested for the monitoring of the use of allocated slots.
A report of the discussions in the coordination committee shall be submitted to
the Member State concerned with an indication of the respective positions
stated within the committee. ð This report shall also be
communicated to the performance review body and the network manager ï.
ê 95/93
(adapted)
Ö Allocation
of slots Õ
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6 
ð new
Article 109
Slot
pool
1. The coordinator shall set up a pool,
which shall contain all the slots not allocated on
the basis of Article 8(2) and (4). All new slot
capacity determined pursuant to Article 3(3) shall be placed in the pool.
2. A series of
slots that has been allocated to an air carrier for the operation of a
scheduled or a programmed non-scheduled air service shall not entitle that air
carrier to the same series of slots in the next equivalent scheduling period if
the air carrier cannot demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the coordinator that they have been operated, as cleared by the
coordinator, by that air carrier for at least 80% of the time during the
scheduling period for which they have been allocated.
62. Without prejudice to Article 810(2) ð and (3) ïof this Regulation and without prejudice to Article 19(2) of
Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, slots placed in the pool shall be
distributed among applicant air carriers. 50 % of these slots shall first
be allocated to new entrants unless requests by new entrants are less than
50 %. ð The preference given to new entrants
shall be respected during the entire scheduling period. ï The coordinator shall treat the requests of new entrants and other
carriers fairly, in accordance with the coordination periods of each scheduling
day.
Among requests from new entrants,
preference shall be given to air carriers qualifying for new entrant status
under both Article 2(b2)(i) and (iib), or
Article 2(b)(i) and (iii).
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
3. Without prejudice to Article 10(2), in a
situation where all slot requests cannot be accommodated to the satisfaction of
the air carriers concerned, preference shall be given to commercial air
services and in particular to scheduled Ö air Õ services and
programmed non-scheduled air services. In the case of competing requests within
the same category of services, priority shall be given for year round
operations.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6
ð new
74. A new entrant which has been offered a series of slots within one
hour before or after the time requested but has not accepted this offer shall
not retain its new entrant status for that ð series during the ï scheduling period.
85. In the case of services operated by a group of air carriers, only
one of the participating air carriers can apply for the required slots. The air
carrier operating such a service accepts responsibility for meeting the
operating criteria required to ð benefit from the priority ï maintain historical precedence
referred to in Article 810(2).
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6 (adapted)
ð new
Slots allocated to one air carrier may be
used by (an)other air carrier(s) participating in a
joint operation ð belonging to a group of air
carriers ï, provided that the designator code of the air carrier to whom the
slots are allocated remains on the shared flight for coordination and
monitoring purposes. Upon discontinuation of such operations, the slots so used
will remain with the air carrier to whom they were initially allocated. Air carriers
involved in shared operations shall advise coordinators of the detail of such
operations prior to the beginning of sSuch operations Ö shall be
notified to the coordinator by the air carriers belonging to the group Õ ð and may not begin prior to the
express confirmation by the coordinator ï.
ò new
If a series of
slots allocated to an air carrier is used by another air carrier outside the
conditions of this paragraph, the coordinator shall withdraw the series and
return it to the pool after consulting the carriers concerned.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6
96. If serious problems continue to exist for new entrants, the Member
State shall ensure that a meeting of the airport coordination committee is
convened. The purpose of the meeting shall be to examine possibilities for
remedying the situation. The Commission shall be invited to that meeting.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
67. If a requested slot cannot be accommodated, the coordinator shall
inform the requesting air carrier of the reasons therefore and shall indicate
the nearest available alternative slot.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
58. The coordinator shall also take into account additional rules and guidelines
established by the air transport industry world-wide or Community Ö Union Õ-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
Ö Union Õ law, and aim
at improving the efficient use of airport capacity ð and have been notified in advance to
and pre-approved by the Commission ï. These rules shall be communicated by the Member
State in question to the Commission.
ò new
The local
guidelines may only concern the supervision of the use of slots allocated or
the amendment of the definition of the series of slots for reducing its length below
10 slots for the winter scheduling period or below 15 slots for the
summer scheduling period, but under no circumstances below 5 slots.
The reduction of the length of the series of slots applies only in airports
where demand for air services is highly seasonable. 
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
79. The coordinator shall, in addition to the planned slot allocation
for the scheduling period, endeavour to accommodate single slot requests with
short notice for any type of aviation, including general aviation. To this end,
slots remaining in the pool referred to in Article 10 after distribution among the
applicant carriers and slots available at short notice may be used.
Article 810
Process of Ö Historical
Õ slots
allocation
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
1. Series of slots are allocated from the
slot pool to applicant carriers as permissions to use the airport
infrastructure for the purpose of landing or take-off for the scheduling period
for which they are requested, at the expiry of which they have to be returned
to the slot pool as set up according to the provisions of Article 109.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
2. Without prejudice to Articles 7, 8a,
9, 10(1)
12, 13 and 1417, paragraph (1) of
this Article shall not apply ð priority is to be given to the air
carrier concerned for the allocation of the same series during the following
equivalent scheduling period, if that air carrier so requests within the
time-limit mentioned in Article 7(1), if ï when the following conditions are
satisfied:
(a)          a series of slots has been used
by an
Ö that Õ air carrier
for the operation of scheduled and programmed non-scheduled air services, and
(b)          that air carrier can demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the coordinator that the series of slots in question has
been operated, as cleared by the coordinator, by that air carrier for at least 80 ð 85 ï % of the time during the scheduling period for which it has
been allocated.
In such case that
series of slots shall entitle the air carrier concerned to the same series of
slots in the next equivalent scheduling period, if requested by that air
carrier within the time-limit referred to in Article 7(1).
43. Re-timing of series of slots before the allocation of the
remaining slots from the pool referred to in Article 9 to the other applicant
air carriers shall be accepted only for operational reasons ð such as, changes in the type of
aircraft used or route operated by the air carrier ï or if slot timings of applicant air carriers would
be improved in relation to the timings initially requested.
It shall not take effect prior to the express confirmation
until expressly confirmed by the
coordinator.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6
ð new
34. Slots allocated to an air carrier before 31 January for the
following summer season, or before 31 August for the following winter
season, but which are returned to the coordinator for reallocation before those
dates, shall not be taken into account for the purposes of the usage
calculation ð provided that the remaining
allocated slots constitute a series within the meaning of
Article 2(13) ï.
ò new
Slots coinciding
with public holidays shall be incorporated into the series for the following
season without any need to justify their non-use.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6 (adapted)
ð new
45. If the 80 ð 85 ï % usage of the series of slots cannot be demonstrated, ð the priority provided under
paragraph (2) shall not be given ï all the slots constituting that series shall be
placed in the slot pool, unless the
non-utilisation can be justified on the basis of any of the following reasons:
(a)          unforeseeable and unavoidable
circumstances outside the air carrier's control leading to:
(i)      grounding of the aircraft type
generally used for the air service in question;
(ii)     ð total or partial ï closure of an airport or airspace;
(iii)     serious disturbance of operations at
the airports concerned, including those series of slots at other Community
Ö Union Õ airports
related to routes which have been affected by such disturbance, during a
substantial part of the relevant scheduling period;
(b)          Ö an Õ interruption
of air services due to action intended to affect these servicesð , for example, in the event of a
strike ï which makes it practically and/or technically impossible for the
air carrier to carry out operations as planned; 
(c)          serious financial damage for a Community
Ö Union Õ air carrier
concerned, resulting in the granting of a temporary licence by the licensing
authorities pending financial reorganisation of the air carrier in accordance
with Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008;
(d)          judicial proceedings concerning
the application of Article 12 for routes where public service obligations
have been imposed according to in accordance with Article 16 of
Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 resulting in the temporary suspension of the
operation of such routes.
ò new
A ban on
operating in the European Union adopted on the basis of Commission Regulation
(EC) No 474/2006[21] cannot be accepted as a
justification for the non-use of the series of slots within the meaning of this
paragraph.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.6
56. At the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, the
Commission shall examine the application of paragraph 45 by the coordinator to an airport
falling within the scope of this Regulation.
It shall take a decision within two months
of receipt of the request in accordance with the procedure referred to in
Article 1316(2).
ò new
7. If the
conditions set out in paragraph (2)(a) and (b) are not met, the Commission may
however decide that priority for the allocation of the same series should be
awarded to the air carriers for the following scheduling period, if this is
justified on imperative grounds of urgency linked to exceptional events
requiring coherence in the application of measures to be taken in these
airports. The Commission shall adopt the necessary measures, the application of
which shall not exceed the length of one scheduling period. It shall adopt
these immediately applicable implementing acts in accordance with the procedure
referred to in Article 16(3).
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
Article 8b
Exclusion of compensation claims
8. ð The priority for aï The entitlement to series
of slots referred to in Article 8(2) of this Article shall not give rise to
any claims for compensation in respect of any limitation, restriction or
elimination of ð this priority ï thereof imposed under Community
Ö Union Õ law, in
particular in application of the rules of the Treaty relating to air transport.
ò new
Article 11
Slot reservation
1. The managing
body of a coordinated airport may decide to use the airport charge system with
the aim of dissuading air carriers from belatedly returning slots to the pool
referred to in Article 9 and to hold them liable for having reserved
airport infrastructure without using it. The following principles shall be
respected:
(a) the procedure
set out under Article 6 of Directive 2009/12/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council[22] shall be observed before
this decision is taken. The coordinator shall also be consulted. For
coordinated airports not covered by Article 1(2) of
Directive 2009/12/EC, the airport managing body shall consult the
coordination committee and the coordinator;
(b) this decision
shall not affect the non-discriminatory and transparent character of the slot
allocation process and the system of airport charges;
(c) this decision
shall not discourage air carriers from developing services or entering the
market and it shall be limited to covering the costs incurred by the airport
for reserving the airport capacity corresponding to the slots which remained
unused; 
(d) air carriers
shall not be held liable for having reserved airport infrastructure without
using it for slots allocated but returned to the pool
before 31 January for the following summer scheduling period or
before 31 August for the following winter scheduling period, for slots
coinciding with public holidays and returned to the pool before the same dates
and for slots for which the non-use can be justified on the basis of
Article 10(5);
(e) this decision
shall be communicated to the coordinator, the interested parties and the
Commission at least six months before the start of the scheduling season concerned.
2. The coordinator
shall send the airport managing body all the information necessary for the
implementation of the decision referred to in the first paragraph.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 
Article 912
Public service obligations
1. Where public service obligations have
been imposed on a route in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EC) No
1008/2008, a Member State may reserve the slots required for the operations
envisaged on that route at a coordinated airport. If the reserved slots on the
route concerned are not used, they shall be made available to any other air
carrier interested in operating the route in accordance with the public service
obligations, subject to paragraph 2. If no other carrier is interested in
operating the route and the Member State concerned does not issue a call for
tenders under Article 16(10), Article 17(3)
to (7), and Article 18(1) of
Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, the slots shall either be reserved for
another route subject to public service obligations or be returned to the pool.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
2. The tender procedure established in
Article 16(10), Article 17(3) to (7) and Article 18(1) of
Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 shall be applied for the use of the slots
referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article if more than one Community
Ö Union Õ air carrier is
interested in serving the route and has not been able to obtain slots within
one hour before or after the times requested from the coordinator.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ÖSlot
mobility Õ 
Article 8a
13
Slot mobility
Ö transfers
and exchanges Õ
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
ð new
1. Slots may be:
(a)          transferred by an air carrier
from one route or type of service to another route or type of service operated
by that same air carrier;
(b)          transferred:
ð between two air carriers, with or
without monetary or any other kind of compensation; ï
(i)      between
parent and subsidiary companies, and between
subsidiaries of the same parent company;
(ii)     as
part of the acquisition of control over the capital of an air carrier;
(iii)     in
the case of a total or partial take-over when the slots are directly related to
the air carrier taken over;
(c)          exchanged, one for
one, between air carriers, ð with or without monetary or any
other kind of compensation ï.
ò new
2. The Member
State shall establish a transparent framework to allow contact between air
carriers interested in transferring or exchanging slots in conformity with
Union law.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
2. The transfers
or exchanges referred to in paragraph 1 shall be notified to the coordinator
and shall not take effect prior to the express confirmation Ö until
expressly confirmed Õ by the
coordinator. The coordinator shall decline to confirm the transfers or
exchanges if they are not in conformity with the requirements of this
Regulation and if the coordinator is not satisfied that:
(a)          airport operations would not be
prejudiced, taking into account all technical, operational ð , performance ï and environmental constraints;
(b)          limitations imposed according to
Ö in
accordance with ÕArticle 912 are respected;
(c)          a transfer of slots does not fall
within the scope of paragraph 3 Ö of this
Article Õ.
ò new
For the transfers
or exchanges referred to in paragraph 1(b) and (c), the air carriers shall
give the coordinator the details of any monetary or any other kind of
compensation. The transfers or exchanges may not be subject to conditions
intended to limit the possibility for the air carrier wishing to obtain the
slots from entering into competition with the air carrier which transfers or
exchanges the slots.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5
3. Slots allocated to a new entrant as
defined in Article 2(2) may not be transferred as provided for in paragraph
1(b) of this Article for a period of two equivalent scheduling periods, except
in the case of a legally authorised takeover of the activities of a bankrupt
undertaking.
Slots allocated to a new entrant as defined
in Article 2(b)(ii(2)(b)
and (iii) may
not be transferred to another route as provided for in paragraph 1(a) of this
Article for a period of two equivalent scheduling periods unless the new
entrant would have been treated with the same priority on the new route as on
the initial route.
Slots allocated to a new entrant as defined
in Article 2(b2)
may not be exchanged as provided for in paragraph 1(c) of this Article for a
period of two equivalent scheduling periods, except in order to improve the
slot timings for these services in relation to the timings initially requested.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.5 (adapted)
ð new
Article
14
Ö Competition
provisions Õ
This Regulation shall not affect the powers
of public authorities to require ð approve ï the transfer of slots between air carriers and to direct how these
are allocated pursuant to national competition law or to Articles 81 ou 82
Ö 101,
102 Õ ðor 106 ï of the Treaty or Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004[23].
These transfers can only take place without
monetary compensation. 
ê 545/2009
Art. 1, paragraph 1
Article 10a
For the purpose of
Article 12(2), coordinators shall accept that air carriers are entitled to the
series of slots for the summer 2010 scheduling period that were allocated to
them at the start of the summer 2009 scheduling period in accordance with
this Regulation.
ò new
Delegated acts
and committee 
Article 15
Exercise of the delegation
1. The power to
adopt the delegated acts is conferred on the Commission subject to the
conditions laid down in this Article.
2. The power to
adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(3) in fine shall be conferred on
the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the entry into force of
this Regulation. 
3. The delegation
of powers referred to in Article 3(3) in fine may be revoked at any time by the
European Parliament or by the Council. A decision of revocation shall end the
delegation of the powers specified in the decision specified therein. The
revocation shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision
in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date
specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts
already in force. 
4. As soon as it
adopts a delegated act, the Commission shall notify it simultaneously to the
European Parliament and to the Council.
5. The delegated
acts referred to in Article 3(3) in fine shall enter into force only if no
objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council
within a period of two months following notification of that act to the
European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period,
the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that
they will not object. That period shall be extended by two months at the
initiative of the European Parliament or of the Council.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9 (adapted)
Article 16
ÖCommittee Pprocedure Õ
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9
ð new
1. The Commission shall be assisted by a
Committee. ð That committee is a committee within
the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.ï
2. Where reference is made to this
paragraph, Articles 5 and 7 of Decision 1999/468/EC shall
apply, having regard to the provisions of Article 8 thereof
ð Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011[24]
shall apply ï .
The period laid
down in Article 5(6) of Decision 1999/468/EC shall be set at three months.
ò new
Where the opinion of the committee is to be obtained
by written procedure, that procedure shall be terminated without result when,
within the time-limit for delivering an opinion, the chair of the committee so
decides or a majority of two thirds of the committee members so request.
3. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article
8 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011, in conjunction with Article 5 thereof, shall
apply.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9
34. The committee may also be consulted by the Commission on any other
matter concerning application of this Regulation.
4. The Committee
shall adopt its rules of procedure.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9 (adapted)
ð new
Ö Implementing
measuresÕ
Article
17
Ö Consistency
between the slots and the flight plans Õ
1. ðWhen an air carrier submits a flight plan,
it shall include a reference to the slot allocated. The network manager shall
reject ï Aan
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. ðBusiness aviation operators shall not be
deemed to have been allocated a slot if they would have to operate outside the
time-band offered by the slot and if the delay is not attributable to air
navigation services. ï
ò new
2. The Member
State shall adopt the measures necessary for the exchange of information
between the coordinator, the network manager, the air navigation service
providers and the airport managing body.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9
ð new
Article 1418
Enforcement 
21. The coordinator shall withdraw the series of slots provisionally
allocated to an air carrier in the process of establishing itself and place them
in the pool on 31 January for the following summer season or on 31 August for
the following winter season if the undertaking does not hold an operating
licence or equivalent on that date or if it is not stated by the competent
licensing authority that it is likely that an operating licence or equivalent
will be issued before the relevant scheduling period commences. ðThe competent licensing authorities shall
give regular information updates to the coordinator and respond to its requests
within a reasonable period of time. ï
3. The coordinator
shall withdraw and place in the pool the series of slots of an air carrier
which it has received following an exchange pursuant to Article 9(1)(c) if they
have not been used as intended.
42. Air carriers that repeatedly ð or ï and
intentionally operate air services at a time significantly different from the
slot allocated as part of a series of slots or use slots in a significantly
different way from that indicated at the time of allocation and thereby cause prejudice to airport or air
traffic operations shall lose their ð priority ï status as referred to in
Article 810(2).
The coordinator may decide to withdraw from that air carrier the series of
slots in question for the remainder of the scheduling period and place them in
the pool after having consulted the air carrier concerned and after issuing a
single warning. ðIf the air carrier requests equivalent
slots, the coordinator is not obliged to allocate them. ï
ò new
The Member State
shall ensure that the coordinator establishes an efficient system for
supervising the application of this paragraph.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9
ð new
53. Member States shall ensure that effective, proportionate and
dissuasive sanctions or equivalent measures are
available ð and are applied ï to deal with 
- repeated ð or ï and
intentional operation of air services ð without a corresponding slot
or ï at times significantly different from the allocated slots or with
the use of slots in a significantly different way from that indicated at the
time of allocation;, where this causes prejudice to
airport or air traffic operations
ò new
- the return of
slots after 31 January for the following summer season or after
31 August for the following winter season, or the retention of unused
slots; the penalty should in any case take account of the possible use of the
mechanism provided by Article 11;
- the refusal to
communicate to the coordinator or the schedules facilitator the information
specified under Articles 7 and 13 or the communication of false or
misleading information. 
The coordinator
shall be duly informed of the application of penalties.
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.9
ð new
64. Without prejudice to Article 10(45), if the ð 85 ï 80 % usage rate as
defined in Article 810(2) cannot be achieved by an air
carrier, the coordinator may decide to withdraw from that air carrier the
series of slots in question for the remainder of the scheduling period and
place them in the pool after having consulted the air carrier concerned.
Without prejudice to Article 10(45), if after an allotted time
corresponding to ð 15 ï 20 %
of the period of the series validity no slots of that series of slots have been
used, the coordinator shall place the series of slots in question in the pool
for the remainder of the scheduling period, after having consulted the air
carrier concerned. ð The coordinator may decide to
withdraw the series of slots before the end of a period corresponding to
15 % of the period of validity of the series if the carrier does not show
that it intends to use them. ï
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.7 
Article 1119
Complaints and rights of appeal
1. Without prejudice to rights of appeal
under national law, complaints regarding the application of Articles 7(2), 8,
8a, 9, 10,
13, 17 and 18(1),(2) and to
(4) and (6) shall be
submitted to the coordination committee. The committee shall, within a period
of one month following submission of the complaint, consider the matter and if
possible make proposals to the coordinator in an attempt to resolve the
problem. If the complaint cannot be settled, the Member State responsible may,
within a further two month period, provide for mediation by an air carriers' or
airports' representative organisation or other third party.
2. Member States shall take appropriate
measures, in accordance with national law, to protect coordinators with regard
to claims for damages relating to their functions under this Regulation, save
in cases of gross negligence or wilful misconduct.
ê 95/93 
Article 1220
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.8 (adapted)
ð new
Relations with third countries
1. ÖThe Commission
may, in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 16(2), decide that
a Member State or Member States should take measures, Õ ð including the withdrawal of
slots, ï Ö in respect of
an air carrier or air carriers of a third country with a view to remedying the
discriminatory behaviour of the third country concerned Õ Wwhenever it appears that, with respect
to the allocation and use of slots at its airports, a third country:
(a)          does not grant Community
Ö Union Õ air carriers
treatment comparable to that granted by this Regulation to air carriers from
that country, or
(b)          does not grant Community
Ö Union Õ air carriers
de facto national treatment, or
(c)          grants air carriers from other
third countries more favourable treatment than Community Ö Union Õ air carriers,.
the Commission may, in accordance with
the procedure referred to in Article 16(2), decide that a Member State or
Member States shall take measures, including the suspension in
whole or in part of the application of this Regulation in
respect of an air carrier or air carriers of that third country with a view to
remedying the discriminatory behaviour of the third country concerned.
ê 95/93
(adapted)
2. Member States shall inform the
Commission of any serious difficulties encountered, in law or in fact, by Community
Ö Union Õ air carriers
in obtaining slots at airports in third countries.
Ö Final
provisions Õ
ê 793/2004
Art. 1.10
ð new
Article 14a
21
Report and cooperation
1. The Commission shall submit a report to
the European Parliament and the Council on the operation of this Regulation at
the latest three ð four ï years after its entry into force. The report shall address in
particular the functioning of Articles 8, 8a and 9, 10ð 11 ï and 13.
2. Member States and the Commission shall cooperate
in the application of this Regulation, particularly as regards the collection
of information for the report mentioned in paragraph 1.
ê
Article 22
Repeal
Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 is hereby
repealed.
References to the repealed Regulation shall
be construed as references to this Regulation and shall be read in accordance
with the correlation table in Annex II.
ê 95/93
(adapted)
Article 1523
Entry into force
This Regulation shall enter into force on
the Ö first day
of the second scheduling period starting after Õthirtieth day following
that of its publication in the Official Journal of the
European Union.
This
Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all
Member States.
Done at Brussels, […]
For the European Parliament The
President The President
For
the Council                                             For the Council
[…]                                                                […]
é
ANNEX I
Repealed Regulation with list of
its successive amendments

 Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 || (OJ L 14, 22.01.1993, p.1) 
 Regulation (EC) No 894/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council || (OJ L 142, 31.5.2002, p.3) 
 Regulation (EC) No 1554/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council || (OJ L 221, 4.9.2003, p.1) 
 Regulation (EC) No 793/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council || (OJ L 138, 30.4.2004, p.50) 
 Regulation (EC) No 545/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council || (OJ L 167, 29.6.2009, p.24) 
_____________
ANNEX II
Correlation table
 Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 || This Regulation 
 Article 1(1) and (2) || Articles 1(1) and (2) 
 Article 1(3) || — 
 Article 2(a) || Article 2(1) 
 Article 2(b) || Article 2(2) 
 Article 2(c) || — 
 Article 2(d) || Article 2(3) 
 Article 2(e) || Article 2(4) 
 Article 2(f)(i) || Article 2(5) 
 Article 2(f)(ii) || Article 2(6) 
 — || Article 2(7) 
 — || Article 2(8) 
 — || Article 2(9) 
 Article 2(g) || Article 2(11) 
 Article 2 (h) || — 
 Article 2(i) || Article 2(10) 
 Article 2(j) || Article 2(12) 
 Article 2(k) || Article 2(13) 
 Article 2(l) || Article 2(14) 
 Article 2(m) || Article 2(15) 
 — || Article 2(16) 
 — || Article 2(17) 
 — || Article 2(18) 
 — || Article 2(19) 
 — || Article 2(20) 
 — || Article 2(21) 
 Article 3(1) || Article 3(1) 
 Article 3(2) || Article 3(2) 
 Article 3(3) || Article 3(3) 
 Article 3(4) || Article 3(4) 
 — || Article 3(5) 
 Article 3(5) || Article 3(6) 
 Article 3(6) || Article 3(7) 
 Article 3(7) || Article 3(8) 
 — || Article 3(9) 
 — || Article 3(10) 
 Article 4(1) || Article 5(1) 
 — || Article 5(2) 
 Article 4(2)(a) || Article 5(3)(a) 
 Article 4(2)(b) first sentence || Article 5(3)(b) 
 — || Article 5(3)(b)(i) 
 — || Article 5(3)(b)(ii) 
 Article 4(2)(b) second sentence || Article 5(3)(c) 
 Article 4(2)(c) || Article 5(3)(d) 
 — || Article 5(3), in fine 
 Article 4(3) || Article 5(4) 
 Article 4(4) || Article 5(5) 
 Article 4(5) || Article 5(6) 
 Article 4(6) || Article 5(7) 
 Article 4(7) || Article 5(7) and Article 6(1) 
 — || Article 6(2) 
 Article 4(8) || Article 6(3) 
 — || Article 6(4) 
 Article 4(9) || — 
 Article 4(10) || Article 6(5) 
 Article 5(1), first subparagraph || Article 8(1), first subparagraph 
 Article 5(1)(a) || Article 8(1)(a) 
 — || Article 8(1)(b) 
 Article 5(1)(b) || Article 8(1)(c) 
 Article 5(2) || Article 8(2) 
 Article 5(3) || Article 8(3) 
 Article 6(1) || Article 4(1) 
 Article 6(2) || Article 4(5) 
 Article 6(3) || Article 4(2) 
 — || Article 4(3) 
 Article 6(1), in fine || Article 4(4) 
 Article 7 || Article 7 
 Article 8(1) || Article 10(1) 
 Article 8(2), first subparagraph, introductory sentence || Article 10(2), introductory sentence 
 Article 8(2), first subparagraph, first and second indents || Article 10(2)(a) and (b) 
 Article 8(2), second subparagraph || — 
 Article 8(3) || Article 9(3) 
 Article 8(4) || Article 10(5) 
 Article 8(5) || Article 9(8), first subparagraph 
 — || Article 9(8), second subparagraph 
 Article 8(6) || Article 9(7) 
 Article 8(7) || Article 9(9) 
 — || Article 11 
 Article 8a || Article 13 
 Article 8a(1) || Article 13(1) 
 — || Article 13(2), first subparagraph 
 Article 8a(2) || Article 13(2) second subparagraph 
 — || Article 13(2), in fine 
 Article 8a(3) || Article 13(3) 
 Article 8b, first sentence || Article 10(7) 
 Article 8b, second sentence || Article 14 
 Article 8b, third sentence || — 
 Article 9 || Article 12 
 Article 10(1) || Article 9(1) 
 Article 10(2) || — 
 Article 10(3) || Article 10(4) 
 Article 10(4)(a) first, second and third indents || Article 10(5)(a)(i), (ii) and (iii) 
 Article 10(4)(b), (c) and (d) || Article 10(5)(b), (c) and (d) 
 — || Article 10(5), in fine 
 Article 10(5) || Article 10(7) 
 — || Article 10(6) 
 Article 10(6) || Article 9(3) 
 Article 10(7) || Article 9(4) 
 Article 10(8) || Article 9(5) 
 Article 10(9) || Article 9(6) 
 Article 10a || — 
 Article 11 || Article 19 
 Article 12 || Article 20 
 Article 13(1) and (2) || Article 16(1) and (2) 
 — || Article 16(3) 
 Article 13(3) || Article 16(4) 
 Article 13(4) || — 
 — || Article 15 
 Article 14(1) || Article 17(1) 
 — || Article 17(2) 
 Article 14(2) || Article 18(1) 
 Article 14(3) || — 
 Article 14(4) || Article 18(2) 
 Article 14(5) || Article 18(3) 
 Article 14(6)(a) and (b) || Article 18(4), first and second subparagraphs 
 Article 14a || Article 21 
 — || Article 22 
 Article 15 || Article 23 
 — || Annex I 
 — || Annex II 
_____________
[1]               Airports with potential for congestion at certain
periods only will be designated as schedules facilitated. At these airports the
procedure is based on a voluntary cooperation between air carriers. A schedules
facilitator will be designated and its role is to facilitate the operations of
air carriers.
[2]               A slot series is defined in Article 2(k) of the Slot
Regulation: '[…] at least five slots having been requested for the same time on
the same day of the week regularly in the same scheduling period and allocated
in that way or, if that is not possible, allocated at approximately the same
time'. 
[3]               A 'new entrant' is defined in Article 2(b) of the
Slot Regulation as a carrier with only a limited presence at an airport. 
[4]               Airport Council International Europe
(www.aci-europe.org).
[5]               http://www.eurocontrol.int/statfor/gallery/content/public/forecasts/Doc415-LTF10-Report-Vol1.pdf.
The figures in the Eurocontrol report refer to IFR (instrument flight rules)
flight movements only.
[6]               See Table 1, Forecast Airport Congestion, impact
assessment accompanying this proposal, p. 17. 
[7]               COM(2008) 227.
[8]               http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/studies/airports_en.htm.
The summary is included in section 8 of the study on possible revisions to the
Slot Regulation (Steer Davies Gleave, 2011).
[9]               In particular we would mention: Study to assess
the effects of different slot allocation schemes, National Economic
Research Associates (NERA), 2004, and Study on the impact of the
introduction of secondary trading at Community airports, Mott MacDonald,
2006. All the studies mentioned here are available at http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air/studies/airports_en.htm.
[10]             See the study by Steer Davies Gleave referred to in
footnote 8.
[11]             OJ C […], […], p. […].
[12]             OJ C […], […], p. […].
[13]             OJ L 14, 22.1.1993, p. 1. 
[14]             See Annex I.
[15]             COM(2008)227.
[16]             OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.
[17]             OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p.13. 
[18]             OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 1.
[19]             OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 20.
[20]             OJ L 185, 15.7.2011, p. 1.
[21]             OJ L 84, 23.3.2006, p. 14. 
[22]             OJ L 70, 14.3.2009, p. 11. 
[23]             OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
[24]             OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13.