This project is funded Support to the by the European Union Implementation of the Association Agreement and of the National Strategy in the Transport Sector in Ukraine

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine

Deliverable Nº2: Final Report

Kyiv, 18 October 2018

Contents 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background...... 1 1.2 Study Goals and Tasks ...... 1 1.3 Organization of the Study ...... 2 1.3.1 Data Collection, Review of Existing Data and Prior Studies ...... 2 1.3.2 Airport Site Visit ...... 6 1.3.3 Surveys with Airport Users and Stakeholders ...... 8 1.4 Airport Planning Parameters ...... 8 1.5 General Opportunities and Benefits ...... 9 1.5.1 Improved safety and security of air transport operations ...... 10 1.5.2 Savings in fuel and operating costs for the airlines and other operators ...... 12 2 Airport Existing Conditions ...... 13 2.1 Airport History ...... 13 2.2 Inventory ...... 14 2.2.1 Airport Data ...... 16 2.2.1.1 Location ...... 16 2.2.1.2 Classification ...... 16 2.2.1.3 Airport Use ...... 16 2.2.1.4 Land Use ...... 17 2.2.1.5 Geology of the Airport Property ...... 17 2.2.2 Airside Facilities ...... 18 2.2.2.1 Runway ...... 18 2.2.2.2 Runway Safety areas ...... 19 2.2.3 Obstacle surfaces ...... 21 2.2.3.1 Taxiway ...... 21 2.2.3.2 Apron ...... 22 2.2.3.3 Navigational Aids ...... 23 2.2.3.4 Apron Floodlights ...... 23 2.2.3.5 Meteo facilities ...... 23 2.2.3.6 Wind sock ...... 24 2.2.3.7 Perimeter Fence ...... 24 2.2.4 Terminal Complex Area ...... 24 2.2.5 Cargo Facilities ...... 24 2.2.6 MRO Hangars ...... 24 2.2.7 Flight Schools and Aeroclubs ...... 26 2.2.8 AFIS Unit ...... 27 2.2.9 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) ...... 28 2.2.10 Fuelling System ...... 28 2.2.11 Utilities ...... 28 2.2.12 Access Road ...... 29 2.3 Airspace analysis ...... 30 2.3.1 Background ...... 30 2.3.2 Vicinity of the Airport ...... 31 2.3.3 Airspace ...... 31 2.3.3.1 Dangerous, Forbidden and Restricted Areas ...... 33 2.3.3.2 Nearby Airports ...... 33 2.3.3.3 Radio Navigation Aids ...... 34 2.3.3.4 Airways, Reporting Points and TMA ...... 34 2.3.3.5 Compatibility with Other Airports in the Area ...... 35

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

2.4 Analysis of Irregularities ...... 35 2.4.1 Passenger Terminal ...... 35 2.4.2 Runway pavement ...... 35 2.4.3 Taxiway ...... 36 2.4.4 Aircraft parking apron ...... 36 2.4.5 Aerodrome Flight Information Service (AFIS) ...... 37 2.4.6 Navigation aids ...... 37 2.4.7 Airport security ...... 37 3 Ukrainian Aviation Policy ...... 38 3.1 Airport Ownership ...... 38 3.2 Airport Certification ...... 38 3.3 Airport Obstacle ...... 38 3.4 Access to Market ...... 39 3.5 Air routes Rights ...... 39 3.6 Ground Handling ...... 40 3.7 Aviation Security ...... 40 3.8 Air Traffic Control Services ...... 41 3.9 Air Charter Services ...... 41 3.10 Airfares ...... 42 3.11 Airport Charges ...... 42 4 Market Analysis ...... 43 4.1 Ukrainian Outlook ...... 43 4.1.1 Ukrainian Economic Outlook ...... 43 4.1.2 Common Aviation Area Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and Ukraine ...... 45 4.1.3 Ukrainian Aviation Market ...... 48 4.1.3.1 Domestic Passenger Market...... 50 4.1.3.2 International Passenger Market ...... 51 4.2 Bila Tserkva Outlook ...... 51 4.2.1 Bila Tserkva Aviation Activity ...... 51 4.2.2 Bila Tserkva Catchment Area ...... 53 4.2.2.1 Accessibility ...... 53 4.2.2.2 Catchment Area for Passengers ...... 53 4.2.2.3 Catchment Area for Cargo ...... 54 4.3 Multiple Airport System in the Region of Kiev ...... 55 4.4 Key Neighbouring Airports ...... 57 4.4.1 Kiev-Boryspil International Airport ...... 59 4.4.2 Kiev-Zhuliany International Airport ...... 61 4.4.3 Gostomel Aerodrome ...... 63 4.4.4 Svyatoshino Aerodrome ...... 64 4.4.5 Vasilkiv Airport ...... 65 4.4.6 Uzin/Chepelevka Airport ...... 65 4.5 Airline Market ...... 66 4.5.1 Commercial Airlines ...... 66 4.5.2 Cargo Freighters ...... 67 4.6 Competence with other Modes of Transport ...... 69 4.7 SWOT Analysis ...... 70 5 Scenarios for Airport Development ...... 72 5.1 Air Traffic Forecast Methodology ...... 72 5.2 Potential to Attract Air Traffic ...... 74 5.2.1 Economy ...... 75

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

5.2.2 Multiple Airport Systems ...... 76 5.2.3 Ukrainian Regulation ...... 78 5.2.4 Low Cost Airlines ...... 78 5.2.5 Airport Management ...... 80 5.2.6 Tourism ...... 81 5.3 Scenarios of Airport Growth ...... 82 5.3.1 Base Scenario ...... 83 5.3.1.1 Air Passengers - Base ...... 83 5.3.1.2 Air Cargo - Base ...... 84 5.3.1.3 Aircraft Movements – Base ...... 85 5.3.2 High Scenario ...... 86 5.3.2.1 Air Passengers - High ...... 86 5.3.2.2 Air Cargo - High ...... 87 5.3.2.3 Aircraft Movements - High ...... 88 5.3.3 Low Scenario ...... 89 5.3.3.1 Air Passengers - Low ...... 89 5.3.3.2 Air Cargo - Low ...... 90 5.3.3.3 Aircraft Movements - Low ...... 91 5.4 Air Traffic Forecast ...... 92 5.4.1 Air Passenger Forecast ...... 92 5.4.2 Cargo Activity Forecast ...... 94 5.4.3 Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast ...... 96 5.4.4 Passenger Peak Hour Forecast ...... 99 6 Airport Alternatives ...... 100 6.1 Aircraft size and model ...... 100 6.2 Airport Classification ...... 101 6.3 Runway ...... 101 6.3.1 Runway Length ...... 101 6.3.2 Strength of the Runway ...... 102 6.3.3 Runway Width ...... 104 6.3.4 Runway Strip ...... 104 6.3.5 Runway End Safety Area ...... 105 6.3.6 Wild Hazard Management ...... 105 6.4 Taxiway Configuration ...... 106 6.4.1 Taxiway Width and Shoulders ...... 106 6.4.2 Critical Distances ...... 107 6.4.3 Landing, Safety and Obstacle Free Zones ...... 107 6.5 Runway safety areas...... 108 6.6 Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ...... 108 6.6.1 Conical Surface ...... 111 6.6.2 Inner Horizontal Surface ...... 111 6.6.3 Transitional Surface ...... 111 6.6.4 Inner Transitional Surface...... 111 6.6.5 Approach Surface ...... 111 6.6.6 Inner Approach Surface ...... 112 6.6.7 Balked Landing Surface ...... 112 6.6.8 DVOR/DME protection surface...... 113 6.6.9 ILS localizer antenna protection surface...... 113 6.6.10 ILS glide path antenna protection surface...... 113 6.6.11 PANS-OPS Basic ILS Surfaces ...... 113 6.6.12 Conclusions of the Airport Obstacle Analysis...... 114

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

6.7 Airfield Lighting System ...... 115 6.8 Radio Navigation Aids ...... 116 6.9 Commercial Aircraft Parking Apron Capacity...... 116 6.10 Passenger Terminal ...... 118 6.11 Car Parking Capacity ...... 119 6.12 Access road ...... 120 6.13 Air Cargo Facilities ...... 121 6.13.1 General recommendations ...... 121 6.13.2 Goods flow inside the terminal ...... 122 6.13.3 Cargo terminal area parameters ...... 124 6.13.4 Cargo terminal building dimensions ...... 126 6.13.5 Cargo Apron ...... 127 6.13.6 Aircraft Maintenance Area and Hangar Facilities ...... 128 6.14 Aircraft Rescue & Fire Fighting Services ...... 131 6.14.1.1 Aerodrome category ...... 131 6.14.1.2 Fire station area ...... 131 6.14.1.3 Fire station location ...... 131 6.15 Air Traffic Control Tower ...... 133 6.15.1 ATCT Location ...... 133 6.15.2 ATCT Height ...... 134 6.15.3 ATCT Area ...... 134 6.15.4 Aeronautical Fixed Service ...... 135 6.15.5 Air Traffic Control Service ...... 135 6.16 Support Facility Requirements ...... 135 6.16.1 Fuel Supply ...... 135 6.16.2 Emergency Power ...... 136 6.16.3 Ground Service Equipment (GSE Facilities) ...... 136 6.16.4 Solid Waste Incinerator for Trash & Airport Waste Management ...... 136 6.17 Perimeter fence ...... 138 7 Summary of Airport Requirements ...... 140 7.1 Requirements for 2020 - 2030 ...... 142 7.1.1 Airfield Improvements ...... 142 7.1.2 Terminal Buildings and MROs ...... 142 7.1.3 Cargo Building and Equipment ...... 143 7.1.4 Navigation equipment ...... 143 7.1.5 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting ...... 143 7.1.6 Support Facilities ...... 143 7.1.7 Access road and parking ...... 143 7.2 Requirements for 2030 - 2040 ...... 144 7.2.1 Airfield Improvements ...... 144 7.2.2 Terminal Buildings and MROs ...... 144 7.2.3 Cargo Building and Equipment ...... 144 7.2.4 Access road and parking ...... 144 7.2.5 Support Facilities ...... 144 7.3 Requirements for 2040 – 2050 ...... 145 7.3.1 Terminal Buildings and MROs ...... 145 7.3.2 Cargo Building and Equipment ...... 145 7.3.3 Access road and parking ...... 145 7.3.4 Support Facilities ...... 145 8 Cost Estimation ...... 146 9 Financial Simulation Models ...... 150

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

9.1 Introduction ...... 150 9.1.1 Objective ...... 150 9.1.2 Scope ...... 150 9.1.3 Methodology ...... 150 9.1.4 Operational, Macro-Economic and Socio-Economic assumptions ...... 152 9.2 Capital Costs of Airport Development ...... 153 9.3 Operation and Maintenance Costs ...... 153 9.4 Revenues ...... 157 9.5 Investments and amortization assumptions ...... 163 9.5.1 Investments ...... 163 9.5.2 Amortization ...... 163 9.6 Debt-Free Financial Performance ...... 164 9.6.1 Debt-Free Cash Flow ...... 164 9.6.2 Net Present Value ...... 165 9.6.3 Internal Rate of Return ...... 166 9.7 Financial Performance with Debt ...... 167 9.7.1 Assumptions ...... 167 9.7.2 Model ...... 167 9.7.3 Cash Flow with Debt ...... 168 9.8 Debt-Free vs. Debt Project ...... 170 10 Conclusions ...... 172 10.1 Unfavourable Facts ...... 172 10.2 Favourable Facts ...... 173

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

Index of Tables

Table 1. Inventory of Airside Facilities and Infrastructures at Bila Tserkva Airport ...... 15 Table 2. Airspace Organization of Ukraine ...... 30 Table 3. Foreign Trade Indicators ...... 45 Table 4. Flights destinations from Kiev-Boryspil Airport by Ukraine International Airlines 50 Table 5. Aircraft Movements (take-offs & landings) by MRO aircraft and Itinerant General Aviation ...... 52 Table 6. Actual Low-Cost Airlines that serve Kiev ...... 62 Table 7. Time, Price and Distance Travel by Train or Car from Bila Tserkva to main National Destinations connected by Air ...... 69 Table 8. Schedule of Suburb Trains between Stations from Bila Tserkva ...... 69 Table 9. Matrix of Factors with the highest incidence in the foreseeable development from Bila Tserkva Airport ...... 82 Table 10. Base Prognosis of Passengers Volume ...... 84 Table 11. Base Prognosis of Cargo Activity ...... 85 Table 12. Base Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment ...... 86 Table 13. Prognosis of Passengers Volume in Scenario 3 ...... 87 Table 14. Prognosis of Cargo Volume in High Scenario ...... 88 Table 15. High Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment ...... 89 Table 16. Prognosis of Passengers Volume in Scenario 1 ...... 90 Table 17. Prognosis of Cargo Volume in Low Scenario ...... 91 Table 18. Low Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment ...... 91 Table 19. Air Passenger Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 92 Table 20. Air Cargo Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 94 Table 21. Base Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 96 Table 22. Low Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 97 Table 23. High Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 98 Table 24. Passenger Peak Hour Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 99 Table 25. Critical Aircraft for Commercial Passengers and Cargo ...... 101 Table 26. Runway Length Requirements for Different Aircraft Models ...... 102 Table 27. Runway Strip Requirements ...... 105 Table 28. Runway End Safety Area Requirements ...... 105 Table 29. Taxiway Width and Shoulders Requirements ...... 107 Table 30. Summary of Critical Distances for Aerodrome Reference Code for instrument runways ...... 107 Table 31.Dimensions and Slopes of Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ...... 109 Table 32. Dimensions to accommodate the required B737-800 aircraft ...... 117 Table 33. Apron Requirements for Commercial Aircraft Positions ...... 117 Table 34. Minimum and Maximum Terminal Requirements for the period from 2020 to 2050 ...... 119 Table 35. Estimate of requirements of number of parking spots ...... 119 Table 36. Estimate of parking area requirements (m2) ...... 120 Table 37. Estimate of number of parking stands and area necessary for passengers and employees ...... 120 Table 38. Categories of Cargo Terminals ...... 125 Table 39. Surface parameters for cargo facilities by average airport sample ...... 125 Table 40. Surface parameters for cargo facilities by IATA ...... 125 Table 41. Cargo Terminal Area Requirements ...... 126 Table 42. Cargo Apron Requirements ...... 128 Table 43. Number of Aircraft Maintenance Facilities and New Area Required ...... 130

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

Table 44. Time of response of Fire Fighting Service facilities ...... 132 Table 45. UKBC airport requirements ...... 140 Table 46. Airport Development Phasing ...... 141 Table 47. Cost estimation by categories ...... 146 Table 48. Priority 1 – 2020 - Airport improvement base costs ...... 147 Table 49. Priority 2 – 2030 - Airport improvement base costs ...... 148 Table 50. Priority 3 – 2040 - Airport improvement base costs ...... 149 Table 51. Operational Assumptions ...... 153 Table 52. Expense components’ KPIs for financial projection ...... 156 Table 53. Operation & Maintenance Costs – Baseline Case ...... 156 Table 54. Aeronautical income KPIs used for financial projections ...... 159 Table 55. Non-Aeronautical income KPIs used for financial projections ...... 159 Table 56. Revenues – Baseline Case ...... 162 Table 57. Capital Development Program...... 163 Table 58. Amortization ...... 164 Table 59. Cash Flow – Baseline Scenario...... 166 Table 60. Assumptions of the Debt ...... 167 Table 61. Term of Debt ...... 168 Table 62. Cash Flow with Debt ...... 170 Table 63. Sensitivity Analysis – Debt-Free vs. Debt ...... 171

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

Index of Figures

Figure 1. Visual approach chart to UKBC ...... 32 Figure 2. Air routes in high level airspace over UKBC ...... 33 Figure 3. Air routes in low level airspace over UKBC ...... 33 Figure 4. Evolution of the Gross Domestic Product of Ukraine ...... 44 Figure 5. Volume of air passengers in Ukraine Airlines by market...... 48 Figure 6. Air traffic Share by Airport ...... 49 Figure 7. Monthly Number of MRO Operations from 2013 to 2017 ...... 52 Figure 8. Monthly Number of General Aviation Operations from 2013 to 2017 ...... 53 Figure 9. Catchment Area ...... 54 Figure 10. Cargo Catchment Area ...... 55 Figure 11. Location of Key Airport Competitors ...... 59 Figure 12. Gross Domestic Product Benchmarking ...... 60 Figure 13. Forecasting Model ...... 74 Figure 14. Gross Domestic Product Benchmarking of Countries with Similar Total Air Passenger Traffic at Present as the Air Traffic Expected in Ukraine in 2030 ...... 75 Figure 15. Correlation of per capita GDP records in European countries with respect to air operations in the corresponding countries...... 76 Figure 16. Air Passenger Forecast 2020-2050...... 93 Figure 17. Air Cargo Forecast 2020-2050 ...... 95 Figure 18. Flight Distances from Bila Tserkva ...... 102 Figure 19. ACN/PCN Competitive Comparison ...... 103 Figure 20. Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ...... 110 Figure 21. Illustration of Basic ILS Surfaces ...... 114 Figure 22. Proposed angled nose out apron configuration ...... 117 Figure 23. Proposed commercial apron construction with taxilane ...... 118 Figure 24. Cargo Process Flow Diagram ...... 123 Figure 25. Outline of cargo terminal building arrangement ...... 127 Figure 26. Typical Cargo Apron ...... 128 Figure 27. Existing MRO Hangars Relocation ...... 129 Figure 28. Proposed ARFF location ...... 132 Figure 29. Proposed location of the TWR ...... 134 Figure 30. Proposed perimeter fence ...... 139 Figure 31. Airport Layout Plan for 2020 ...... 142 Figure 32. Airport Layout Plan for 2030 ...... 144 Figure 33. Airport Layout Plan for 2040 ...... 145 Figure 34. Typical Airport Returns and Size Comparison ...... 151 Figure 35. Financial Analysis Approach ...... 152 Figure 36. OPEX structure in 2017 ...... 155 Figure 37. Operation & Maintenance Costs – Baseline Projections...... 157 Figure 38. Aeronautical vs. Non-Aeronautical Revenues (2017) ...... 158 Figure 39. Aeronautical revenues’ components (2017) ...... 158 Figure 40. Non-Aeronautical revenues’ components (2017) ...... 158 Figure 41. Airport Revenues – Baseline Projections ...... 162 Figure 42. Net Profit and Cash-Flow Projections ...... 165 Figure 43. Debt Cash-Flow Projections ...... 169

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018

Index of Pictures

Picture 1. Framing with the History of Bila Tserkva Airport from 1927 to 1946 ...... 13 Picture 2. UKBC Layout Plan ...... 14 Picture 3. Bila Tserkva airport location ...... 16 Picture 4. Land Property in the Airport ...... 17 Picture 5. Aerial view of runway 18/36 ...... 18 Picture 6. View of runway from threshold 18 ...... 18 Picture 7. View of runway from threshold 36 ...... 19 Picture 8. View of the West side of the runway strip from threshold 18 ...... 19 Picture 9. View of the East side of the runway strip from threshold 36 ...... 20 Picture 10. Area in front of runway 18 for a RESA...... 20 Picture 11. Area in front of runway 36 for a RESA...... 21 Picture 12. View of the taxiway system ...... 22 Picture 13. View of the aircraft apron ...... 22 Picture 14. Meteo facility ...... 23 Picture 15. Perimeter fence ...... 24 Picture 16. Ukrainian Air Alliance Hangar – Outside View ...... 25 Picture 17. Ukrainian Air Alliance Hangar – Inside View ...... 25 Picture 18. Aviamir Hangar – Outside View ...... 25 Picture 19. Aviamir Hangar – Inside View ...... 25 Picture 20. Aeroclub Pilot ...... 26 Picture 21. Aeroclub Pilot Hangar ...... 26 Picture 22. Kyiv Aviation School ...... 27 Picture 23. Exterior view of the AFIS unit ...... 27 Picture 24. Aerial view of the airport access road ...... 29 Picture 25. Airport Access Road ...... 29 Picture 26. Airside Security Guard ...... 29 Picture 27. Nearby airports ...... 34 Picture 28. Pavement damage ...... 36 Picture 29. Aerial View Kiev-Boryspil International Airport ...... 60 Picture 30. Aerial View of Kiev-Zhuliany International Airport ...... 61 Picture 31. Aerial View of Gostomel Airport ...... 63 Picture 32. Aerial View of Svyatoshino Airport (UKKT) ...... 64 Picture 33. Aerial View of Vasilkiv Airport ...... 65 Picture 34. Planned Belt Highway Crossing the Airport Property ...... 121 Picture 35. Trailer mounted containerised and mobile incinerator ...... 138 Picture 36. Typical ICAO perimeter fencing ...... 139

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -1-

1 Introduction

1.1 Background

As part of the Government of Ukraine’s Strategy on Air Transport, airport infrastructure development is set as a priority. Ukraine’s airport network comprises of 15 main airports handling a total annual volume of 16.5 million passengers, and 11 smaller aerodromes with no passenger or cargo activity, or either restricted or seized certificate.

Besides the main hub airport of Kiev-Boryspil, managed by Boryspil International Airport State Enterprise, handles a volume of traffic of 10.5 million passengers; the remaining airports, under the responsibility of the City Councils account for 6 million annual passengers.

Bila Tserkva City Council has expressed the need to monitor the financial feasibility required for the development of Bila Tserkva airport operated by Bila Tserkva Cargo Aviation Complex.

On 07.12.2017, the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine Volodymyr Omelyan has requested the support of the EU Delegation to Ukraine to prepare a pre-feasibility study regarding this objective, which could be performed by the experts of the TA Project “Support to the Implementation of the Association Agreement and of the National Strategy in the Transport Sector in Ukraine”.

The main goal of the consulting services would be to establish a firm basis for modernizing and upgrading the airport to enable its development. A modern, efficient and expandable airport would serve the needs of Bila Tserkva well into the future, would be the core for economic growth and would serve as a bridge between this region and the outside world.As such, this objective entails taking into account the scope of the plan and the existing operations; planning for potential new infrastructure to respond to changes in domestic and international air traffic; identifying the rehabilitation and expansion investments required; and providing a preliminary cost for these investments, leading to the development of an investment plan.

1.2 Study Goals and Tasks

The specific objectives of the present consulting services, as the Head of operation of the EU Delegation, Mr Berend de Groot, proposed to the Ministry of transport Mr Volodymyr

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report – 18/10/2018 -2-

Omelyan in the letter from 21/12/2017, would consist in carrying out a two phase-study, will the following content:

During a first phase of activities, a preliminary review of all present assets condition and legal status, connections, and existing activities that can contribute to the project, and a marketing study to identify demand of the services of a more developed multimodal platform of services, in order to confirm and properly dimension the development opportunities.

The second phase, which depends on a positive result from the first phase, involves the detailed scenarios of development, including the possible organization of the activities, the institutions' responsibilities, the investment costs, a financial analysis, all related social and environment impacts of the operations, and all other information useful to prepare to further stages of the studies

According to this scope of work, the purpose of this analysis is to now provide a better idea of the Bila Tserkva benefits and costs involved in implementing the recommended equipment/facilities. This analysis will help paint a clearer picture for the client and any future financing institutions, who will decide whether or not to fund these improvements at Bila Tserkva Airport.

The tasks addressed in this report, include:

• Collecting and compiling existing data on the airport. This was accomplished by inspection visits to the airport. • Evaluating the condition and capacity of existing airport facilities, • Determining airport facility and infrastructure requirements, and • Developing preliminary investment costs.

1.3 Organization of the Study

1.3.1 Data Collection, Review of Existing Data and Prior Studies

A major data collection exercise commenced at the start of the project. As mentioned above, prior to traveling to Kiev, the Project sent the Ministry a list of data required by the Consultant Team for carrying out the study and preliminary analyses.

Given our experience in carrying out assignments of a similar nature, the preliminary list of data required included the following:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -3-

• Information on the existing facilities at UKBC, including as-built drawings and construction/installation records, design and specification documents and airport layout plans. • Air activity and traffic statistics at the airport. • Government National Development Plans for the different economic sectors in the region as well as the region's socio-economic and demographic profile and forecast. • Market data and future plans to expand service to UKBC. • Maps and plans of the area around the airport and environmental information concerning the region. • A list of the Ukrainian aviation regulations to be utilized for Airport Planning purposes. • Existing land uses and commercial activities around the airport. • Any other relevant data on the airport, the city and the region that is pertinent to the preparation of the pre-feasibility study. • AIS/AIP • Information concerning the airlines that currently operates in the airport and information from those airlines that have shown an interest in using the airport. • The number and type of airplanes based in the airport. • Airport ranking according to the ICAO standards • Airport history • Airport Property Boundary • Percentage of use of the runway system and taxi runways • Airport Drainage System • Pavement Conditions of the Runway, taxi runways and landing strips • Conditions, size and characteristics of facilities to manage national and international cargo • Conditions and features of airplane fuel system • Conditions and features of building and fire and air rescue squads • Status and features of hangers and airplane maintenance areas, if any • Sensitive weather factors within the airport proper and surrounding areas

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -4-

• Conditions and features of radio support equipment, runway lighting, taxi and takeoff runways • Features and conditions of the radar and communication system, if any • Conditions and features of facilities for general aviation and helicopters. • Information about the existing access roads and those roads projected for the airport or surrounding areas. • Airport meteorological information at the existing airport • Features of the landing and take-off procedures: aircraft separations • Information concerning the geological and geophysical conditions of the area in which the airport is situated. • Features of the type of air operations that currently take place in the airport. Number of landings and take-offs by airplane type. • Information regarding the regional development plan for Ondangwa • Air space in the airport area, according to landing and take-off procedures that are currently operational. • Maximum number of airplanes that can simultaneously operate in the air space controlled by the airport • Critical aircraft • Aircraft parking configuration: • number of aircraft positions • size of aircraft allowed to park at each position • Apron layout • Average time of occupation of the commercial aircraft positions • Number of fuel tanks and capacity • Annual jet A1 fuel consumption • Annual AVGAS fuel consumption • Itinerant (not based aircraft) general aviation operations • Average itinerant general aviation aircraft on ground • Type of aircraft fuelling system: hydrants or cistern trucks • Observations about the drainage water flow to all its spillways and tributaries that exist in the surroundings

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -5-

• Form of external power supply to the airport (power lines, KVAs, company) and emergency generators • Information about the solid waste management • Annual percentage of both VFR and IFR meteorological flight conditions • Apron floodlights: number of poles, height and power of each floodlight • Aircraft parking configuration: • number of aircraft positions • size of aircraft allowed to park at each position • Apron layout • Average time of occupation of the commercial aircraft positions • Number of fuel tanks and capacity • Annual jet A1 fuel consumption • Annual AVGAS fuel consumption • Itinerant (not based aircraft) general aviation operations • Average itinerant general aviation aircraft on ground • Type of aircraft fuelling system: hydrants or cistern trucks: • Observations about the drainage water flow to all its spillways and tributaries that exist in the surroundings. • Form of external power supply to the airport (power lines, KVAs, company) and emergency generators • Information about the solid waste management: Being managed by the local authority. • Annual percentage of both VFR and IFR meteorological flight conditions. • Apron floodlights: number of poles, height and power of each floodlight

During their initial visit to Bila Tserkva, the Consultant Team members reviewed the information which has been made available and work to obtain any additional information needed for their analysis. The AASIST specialist worked with its local counterparts from BTDC and the Ministry in order to obtain information required from other local agencies, which included:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -6-

• existing aviation regulations, • land use plans, • zoning plans and regulations, • urban development plans, • freight and logistics data, etc.

Data was also collected through the visit to the airport, interviews with representative organizations, authorities and other stakeholders, surveys, research and requests for information from the different organizations and stakeholders interested in the development of the airport.

The Consultant Team consulted with the Ministry of Transportation, SAAU, UkSATSE, BTDC, and Kiev-Boryspil International Airport regarding plans they may impact the development of Bila Tserkva airport.

The Consultant Team gathered all available relevant information regarding the operations and current infrastructure and facilities for the airport, as well as their economic base, resources, markets, population, industrial development, tourism, and transport systems of the airport’s current and potential area of influence.

Information regarding any current and proposed development plans for the airports was obtained from the National Transportation Strategic Plan and analysed during this task. These proposed plans provided the team with a preliminary indication of the potential of the airport.

1.3.2 Airport Site Visit

In order to analyse the strengths and weaknesses of the existing Bila Tserkva Airport, the Consultant carried out a bottom-up approach starting with an individual analysis and then to consider the opportunities and challenges facing the airport, particularly in light of Bila Tserkva’s strategic location. By using this procedure, the Consultant Team understood the strengths and weaknesses of the airport and then fit this information into the entire context of the aviation system in Ukraine in order to determine the appropriate role of the airport.

As part of this task, the AASISTS team visited the airport involved in the study to carry out a review of the available facilities and their condition and their potential to serve international, domestic and regional traffic. During this visit the Consultant conducted a general assessment of the following systems and infrastructure at the airport:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -7-

• Runways, taxiways, aprons, and all internal roads, and the condition of the pavement structure; • Pavement markings and guidance signs on runway, taxiways and apron; • Airport access roads; • Fuel supply systems; • Facilities for complementary airside services; • Hangars and aircraft repairing facilities; • Surface drainage systems serving the runways, taxiways and adjacent lands and their receiving basins; • Infrastructure for collection, treatment and disposal of toxic and solid wastes generated at each airport; and • Any other infrastructure, system or equipment relevant for the current or future management and operations at each airport.

During the on-site inspection, photographs were taken, and any deficiencies encountered were recorded. The information gathered before the visit was supplemented by the observations of the Consultant Team during the inspection of existing facilities at the airport.

Although an extensive or detailed review of airport infrastructure condition is beyond the scope of this visit, AASISTS team members are experienced in these types of visits and are quickly able to provide:

• An inventory of key facilities; • An assessment of their condition; • A summary of operating performance and constraints; • A review of the current and future access routes or intermodal connections to the Airport; • Identification of issues associated with ownership, transfer of military facilities, and/or expansion of facilities; and • A review of the extent of existing and potential commercial and real state opportunities.

The team of technical experts that visited the airport consisted of a senior airport planner who will be responsible for evaluation of airside and access facilities, terminal buildings and other structures at the airport and the Project Manager of the AASSIST Project.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -8-

Unfortunately, the actual air traffic records of passenger, aircraft operations and cargo volumes handled at the Ukrainian airports and carried by airlines were not released to the Consultant. Although the consultant insisted on obtaining these statistics, they were not provided. The SAAU service collects such information for statistical purposes. Also, aeronautical charts for the airspace analysis were requested. All this information was not accessible for the study.

1.3.3 Surveys with Airport Users and Stakeholders

An important step in assessing existing conditions at the airport and preparing air traffic expectations is to meet with major airport users and stakeholders to understand their outlook for the future.

As part of this task, the Consultant Team interviewed service providers and relevant aviation authorities. Representatives from these groups were interviewed in order to obtain their thoughts on the potential of service levels, operational/capacity problems, anticipated expansion plans and growth rates, non-standard facilities, conditions, deficiencies, lack of needed facilities, etc.

Besides covering the basic questions, at the end of the interviews the Consultant provided for an opportunity to exchange ideas beyond the areas specifically covered in the main questions, as appropriate. Areas of interest for exchanges include the current and expected conditions of the national and international economic environment, the tourism and hotel industry in the region, the expected development of the air carrier industry (passengers and cargo) in the region, the current and desired level of service, the security standards, the current and expected tariff structure, and other factors that may affect the traffic projections and the required investments program.

1.4 Airport Planning Parameters

The criteria used to determine the immediate needs are based on the operating conditions of the different airport components, their physical condition and if they comply with recommendations and criteria established by national and international organizations. These recommendations and criteria are relevant in airport operations and are from such organizations as International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), International Air Transport Association (IATA) as well as the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -9-

This inventory and evaluation of existing conditions includes an analysis of facility shortcomings and which will be addressed later in the report by recommendations for improvements with their corresponding costs.

The determination of the airport system capacity generally follows the methodologies recommended by the international organisms such as IATA, ICAO and the FAA of the United States.

A list of the Ukrainian, ICAO, IATA and FAA planning criteria to be utilized for Airport Planning purposes are provided below:

• ICAO Annex 14, Volume 1 – Aerodrome Design and Operations • ICAO Security Manual, Doc. 8973, 8th Edition, 2011 • ICAO Annex 17, 10th Edition, April 2017 - Aviation Security • ICAO Airport Planning Manual – Part One, Master Planning (Doc 9184- AN/902 Part 1) • ICAO Aerodrome Design Manual (Doc 9157-AN/901) • ICAO Air Traffic Services Planning Manual – Part Three (Doc 9426- AN/924) • FAA AC 150/5300-13 – Airport Design • FAA AC 150/5060-5 – Airport Capacity and Delay • FAA AC 150_5360_9, Planning and Design of Airport Terminal Building at Non-hub locations • USTSA, May 2011 - Recommended Security Guidelines for Airport Planning, Design and Construction • IATA - Airport Development Reference Manual, 10th Edition of March 2014

1.5 General Opportunities and Benefits

The basic reasoning behind the linkage between the regional economy and the aviation system is clear. Almost all aspects of the economy depend upon the airline, gains in the sector help the region's competitiveness. As more people and more packages are transported by air, the net result is a fast, efficient and healthy economy:

• Airlines save fuel and operating costs. • People save time.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -10-

• Businesses save money. • Economic opportunities expand.

In consequence, the benefit of improving Bila Tserkva airport is reflected in the economic impact on the surrounding area denoted by supporting employment, generating prosperity, and providing economic stability.

The opportunities and benefits that the improvement projects will generate for the economy, such as economic development, increased tourism and foreign trade are assessed by looking at the full extent of the airport impact on the local, regional and national economy, the cost-benefit of the airport safety and security systems, those additional flights that will be enabled by greater system capacity, and the benefit of reduced flight cancellations and reduced carbon dioxide emissions.

Indeed, the identified airport improvements at Bila Tserkva Airport focus on the direct benefits to airport operations staff, aircraft operators and passengers. These benefits include aircraft operating cost savings, passengers’ value of time, reduced operating costs for the air traffic control and airport operation system, improved safety, and environmental benefits from reduced aircraft emissions.

In summary, the improved airport equipment (airfield lighting system and ILS, AWOS, VIGP), facilities (passenger terminal building, cargo terminal, MRO hangars, GSE maintenance, power station, incinerator) and infrastructure (runway, runway strip, RESAs, taxiway, apron, perimeter fence, security road) focuses on airport safety operations, in accordance with international safety norms, automation to support airport security and runway operations, and enhanced the situational awareness for pilots. The improved approaches and night operations address ways to increase access and flexibility for approach operations through a combination of procedural changes, improved aircraft capabilities, and better precision approach guidance.

1.5.1 Improved safety and security of air transport operations

One of the initial premises of this study is providing the State Aviation Administration and aircraft operators with documented proof that Bila Tserkva airport’s use is safe or, otherwise, ensure continued safety, regularity and efficiency of aircraft operations at the airport.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -11-

Recommending structural changes and improve day-to-day operations ensure the aerodrome is in compliance with the relevant ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and Civil Aviation Regulations.

Considering the specifications of the regulations in force at Bila Tserkva Airport, the safety measures to ensure an adequate level of protection of the aircraft operations shall be at least as follows:

• The dimensions of the airfield components. The runway and the taxiway connector are characterized by: a) ensuring a prepared or suitable, unobstructed, drained, levelled total area of 300 meters wide surrounding the runway for reducing damage to aircraft in the event of unintentional excursion from the runway surface, b) providing an area of 60 meters long in the direction of the runway centreline by 45 meters wide to reduce the erosive effect of the high wind forces produced by airplanes at the beginning of their take-off rolls, and c) implementing a cleared and graded area, adjacent to the end of the strip, of 240 meters long in the direction of the extended runway centreline and 90 meters wide, which is, as far as practicable, clear of all but frangible objects at the runway end that reduces accidents to aircraft landing or exceeding the runway end. • The proposed airfield lighting system as an integral part of an airport's operational capability during periods of bad weather and night operations provides visual reference and guidance as well as information. Aerodrome lighting ensures that pilots and aircraft can identify from air and ground the runway, taxiways, apron, approach direction, approach angle, direction of the wind, orientation in the ground and location of the main characteristics of an airport in conditions of low or reduced visibility. • The security measures that reasonably guarantee that only authorized personnel and vehicles are accessible to the area of operations. Heightening awareness about access control security is guaranteed by

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -12-

preventing individuals gaining unlawful access to the airside area and stowing away on planes because of implementing a secured perimeter fence.

1.5.2 Savings in fuel and operating costs for the airlines and other operators

The developed airfield infrastructure focuses on precision instrument operations based on ILS CAT I, but the implementation of RNAV GNSS procedures implies reductions in flight times and corresponding fuel use due to more direct routings and more efficient descent profiles, leading to less delays and reductions in cancelled flights.

Optimum descent profiles will help operators to reduce costs significantly. The greatest cost savings are likely to be achieved by providing engine-idle descents from cruising altitude direct to final approach. Optimized engine-idle descents have the least environmental impact.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -13-

2 Airport Existing Conditions

2.1 Airport History

Bila Tserkva Aviation Repair Plant can be considered one of the oldest enterprises of the city since it started its work in 1927. Then, by order of the Government, about 500 hectares of land was withdrawn from the lands of the Fursiv village council reserve to create a military airfield. Aircraft repair shops were created, as well as the first airplane hangar built in 1936, which is still used in production.

Picture 1. Framing with the History of Bila Tserkva Airport from 1927 to 1946

After the end of WWII in 1946, about 219 aircraft repair facilities were created in the airport property, renamed as the 148th Aircraft Repair Plant. A large air force repair company was created, which complied with all the requirements for the competent repair of aircraft. The company carried out repairs and modernization of aircraft Tu-16, Tu-22, Tu-22M, Tu-95, aircraft engines and manufactured consumer goods. In general, the plant was the flagship in the repair of military aircraft in the former Soviet Union. The aircraft repair plant was improved with vital skilled personnel of aviation: technicians, specialists, scientists, workers, employees and servicemen.

After the independence of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, transferred 148 factories and a military airfield from the Ministry of Defence to Bila Tserkva City Council. In 2000, Belotserkivskiy cargo aviation complex or BPC " KP " was created to manage the

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -14- runway, airplanes, and aircraft management buildings. The main activity of the company is the provision of repair in the aviation direction.

2.2 Inventory

An inventory was carried out through a physical inspection of all the airport facilities and an analysis of available information. The inventory concentrated mainly on the airport facilities so as to establish their immediate needs.

Picture 2. UKBC Layout Plan

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -15-

A summary of the main aeronautical data of Bila Tserkva airport is listed in Table 1. It follows a description of the existing condition and use of the main infrastructure, facilities and equipment. This chapter uses the collected inventory data.

Table 1. Inventory of Airside Facilities and Infrastructures at Bila Tserkva Airport

Airport Data ICAO Airport Code UKBC IATA Airport Code - ARP 49°47'46" N 30°01'28" E Aerodrome Elevation 180 meters ASL Temperature of reference 22ºC Mag Var / Annual change 7º East Type of traffic permitted VFR Category Nil ARFF facilities Equipment Nil Distance to THDs Nil Fuel # tanks Nil farm Capacity Nil Obstacles Nil Area Nil Pavement Nil Apron Commercial Peak Nil hour Control Height tower Traffic control Runway Runway 18/36 Length x width 2500 x 42 meters Bearing 184° / 004° Elevation 179 meters / 170 meters ASL Slope 0.3% TORA 2475 / 2475 Declared TODA 2675 / 2675 distances ASDA 2475 / 2475 18/36 LDA 2475 / 2475 number 1 Runway Dimensions 16 m wide exits Type Concrete Distance from THD

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -16-

2.2.1 Airport Data

2.2.1.1 Location

Its geographical reference point is 49°47'46" N / 30°01'28" E with an elevation of 179 meters above sea level. The airport is located 6 km. to West of Bila Tserkva.

Bila Tserkva Airport is operated by the City Council of Bila Tserkva since 2000 and is designated as UKBC by ICAO. According to ICAO airport classification, UKBC currently complies to 4F Non-Instrument Flight Rules airport.

Picture 3. Bila Tserkva airport location

2.2.1.2 Classification

The criteria for the establishment of a code reference for the Bila Tserkva Airport has been extracted directly from Annex 14, Volume 1, 7th Edition, July 2016, Table 1-1.

In accordance to the physical characteristics of the runway’s length and width (2500 m x 42), commercial aircraft parking lot, actual critical aircraft (AN-12) and other criteria that ICAO considers in determining the classification, this airport would be considered as Code 4E.

2.2.1.3 Airport Use

At present, the airport is used for maintenance flights connecting Bila Tserkva to other countries. MRO related movements in 2017 (not including GA operations) were:

• Ilyushin 76 - 8 operations • Antonov 12 - 35 operations • Mi-2 helicopter - 4 operations

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -17-

The airport is also utilized as a fixed base airport for a flight school and a private aeroclub of general aviation.

2.2.1.4 Land Use

In Picture 4, which follows, the different land property areas of the airport are indicated as well as their use.

• Airport 91 Ha • Bila Tserkva District Council 151 Ha • Ministry of Defence 107 Ha • Heliport of National Guard 11.2 Ha • Aircraft repair plant 60.5 Ha • Private households Gayok 87.5 Ha

Picture 4. Land Property in the Airport

2.2.1.5 Geology of the Airport Property

The geological characteristics of the airport plot:

• From level 0.0 to 1.0-1.20 m - soil-vegetative layer to a depth of 0.80 m with roots of plants, solid consistency; • from level 1.0-1.20 to 5.0 m - light gray, brown-gray and brownish yellow, forest, with carbonate inclusions.

The level of groundwater is recorded at a depth of 5,20 to 14,40 m. The land of the aerodrome is not overflooded with groundwater.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -18-

2.2.2 Airside Facilities

2.2.2.1 Runway

Bila Tserkva Airport’s single runway is constructed of armo-concrete pavement and is 2 500 meters in length and 80 meters in width. The available runway width for aeronautical operations has been shortened to 42 meters. Runway 18 is considered to be the primary runway direction. Runway 18/36 has a longitudinal slope of 0.3% and a transversal slope of 1%.

Pavement strength of runway 18/36 is PCN 21/R/B/X/U indicating a bearing strength of 21, made of concrete pavement, and on a medium sub-grade. It has a maximum allowable tire pressure of 1.75 MPa and the characteristics of the pavement have been evaluated by using aircraft experience.

Picture 5. Aerial view of runway 18/36

Picture 6. View of runway from threshold 18

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -19-

Picture 7. View of runway from threshold 36

2.2.2.2 Runway Safety areas

ICAO states that the runway strip in visual flight rules shall be 75 meters wide from runway centreline to both sides of the runway and shall extend before the threshold and beyond the end of the runway or stopway for a distance of 60 m where the aerodrome reference code number is 4.

At present, Runway 18/36 provides a clear and graded runway strip of 150 meters from runway centreline. The runway does comply with minimum recommendations for visual runway strip and security zones.

Picture 8. View of the West side of the runway strip from threshold 18

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -20-

Picture 9. View of the East side of the runway strip from threshold 36

The runway end safety area is an area symmetrical about the extended runway centre line and adjacent to the end of the strip primarily intended to reduce the risk of damage to an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway.

According to Annex 14, a runway end safety area shall be provided at each end of a runway strip and shall extend from the end of a runway strip to a distance of at least 90 m where the code number is 4. The width of a runway end safety area shall be at least 90 meters.

At present, runway 18/36 does provide a RESA for safety operations. There is enough space available to implement a RESA of 240 meters long.

Picture 10. Area in front of runway 18 for a RESA

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -21-

Picture 11. Area in front of runway 36 for a RESA

2.2.3 Obstacle surfaces

It was observed the apparently unsafe proximity of residential buildings parallel to the runway centreline adjacent to the airport on the right side of the approach to runway 18. Despite of the proximity, the first section of the approach surface of runway 18 is not protruded by them.

The approach surface is a combination of sloped planes preceding the threshold. The approach surface’s divergence required for a Code Number 4 non-instrument approach runway is 10% with a length of the inner edge of 150 m and a distance from the runway end of 60 m. The first section of the approach surface must have a length of 3,000 m and a slope of 2.5%. Runway strip

2.2.3.1 Taxiway

There is one main taxiway of 455 m x 18 m that connects from runway 18 threshold through taxiway 4 to the singular apron and the taxiway 3.

Main taxiway is 455 m long and 18 meters wide. Pavement classification is PCN 34/R/B/X/U indicating a bearing strength of 34, made of concrete pavement, and on a medium high-grade. It has a maximum allowable tire pressure of 1.75 MPa and the characteristics of the pavement have been evaluated by using aircraft experience.

Taxiway 3 is 400 meters long and 16 meters wide. Pavement classification is PCN 27/R/B/X/U indicating a bearing strength of 27, made of concrete pavement, and on a medium high-grade. It has a maximum allowable tire pressure of 1.75 MPa and the characteristics of the pavement have been evaluated by using aircraft experience.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -22-

Taxiway 4 is 260 meters long and 18 meters wide. Pavement classification is PCN 34/R/B/X/U indicating a bearing strength of 34, made of concrete pavement, and and on a medium high-grade. It has a maximum allowable tire pressure of 1.75 MPa and the characteristics of the pavement have been evaluated by using aircraft experience.

Picture 12. View of the taxiway system

2.2.3.2 Apron

There is an apron, which covers a total area of 4,000 m2 and built in concrete with a PCN 21/R/B/X/U indicating a bearing strength of 21, made of concrete pavement, and on a medium high-grade. It has a maximum allowable tire pressure of 1.75 MPa and the characteristics of the pavement have been evaluated by using aircraft experience.

Picture 13. View of the aircraft apron

The configuration of the apron allows parking of 1 aircraft intended for maintenance operations.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -23-

2.2.3.3 Navigational Aids

The airfield has no precision approach path indicator lighting system or any other airfield lighting system.

2.2.3.4 Apron Floodlights

The aircraft apron does not provide lighted poles.

2.2.3.5 Meteo facilities

UKBC has a meteo farm and an automatic report weather equipment. The meteo office is one of the oldest buildings at Bila Tserkva Airport. Picture 14. Meteo facility

Even though the station is not fully computerized, it contains all the necessary equipment for gathering the meteorological data this type of airport requires. Among other equipment, it contains the following:

• Pluvial bucket • Pluviographs • Thermometers • Barograph • Antenna WEF/ET/APT

The data is collected and registered in a standard format with information regarding wind velocity and orientation, average temperature, rain, evaporation, relative humidity, etc.

All the above information needs to be submitted by the meteorological authority, which also contains information regarding the wind behaviour for the design of the wind rose.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -24-

2.2.3.6 Wind sock

For indication of wind direction, the aerodrome has two windsocks, serving to inform the wind direction to the pilots.

2.2.3.7 Perimeter Fence

During the inventory performed by the Consultant, it was revealed that no perimeter fence was installed.

Picture 15. Perimeter fence

2.2.4 Terminal Complex Area

None passenger terminal is currently in operation at the Bila Tserkva Airport.

2.2.5 Cargo Facilities

There are no a cargo facility at Bila Tserkva Airport.

2.2.6 MRO Hangars

The airport provides two aircraft maintenance hangars that generate an average activity of aircraft movements between 3 and 6 aircraft per month in the last 5 years:

• one with capacity to accommodate two IL-76 aircraft, owned by the City Council and given in concession to Ukrainian Air Alliance. The hangar has a maintenance area available of about 6,500 sqm.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -25-

Picture 16. Ukrainian Air Alliance Hangar – Outside View

Picture 17. Ukrainian Air Alliance Hangar – Inside View

• The other hangar has been concessioned to Aviamir since 1997. It has a maintenance area of 4,000 sqm., with capacity to house up to 5 AN-12.

Picture 18. Aviamir Hangar – Outside View

Picture 19. Aviamir Hangar – Inside View

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -26-

2.2.7 Flight Schools and Aeroclubs

There are a number of flight schools and aeroclub base in UKBC:

• Ukrainian Training Centre, AVIATOR UTC • Kyiv Aviation School • Aeroclub 'PILOT'

The number and types of aircrafts based on the Belaya Tserkov are: A-23, Аntonov-2, Antonov-12, Aquila, Bristell, Cessna – 150, Cessna -172, Cessna – 337, Ka-26 – helicopter, Tecnam P2002, Tecnam P2006, Pipistel, Van's Aircraft Rv-7, Van's Aircraft Rv-10, Van's Aircraft Rv-14, Cirrus SR-22, Velocity, Ехtra, Zodiac, М-20, Piper РА-32, Piper РА-78, СТ2К.

Picture 20. Aeroclub Pilot

Picture 21. Aeroclub Pilot Hangar

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -27-

Picture 22. Kyiv Aviation School

2.2.8 AFIS Unit

The AFIS building is a single continuous structure. The entire building is in fair condition.

The AFIS cab floor is at 10 m height from the ground level with poor visibility to runway 01 threshold. The control tower does not perform control functions, only communication with the aircraft. Distance from threshold 18 is 825 meters and 2,330 m from threshold 32.

Picture 23. Exterior view of the AFIS unit

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -28-

UKBC AFIS provides meteorological information according to the rules of visual flights by the operational group of meteorological service of flights (OGMO) in accordance with the instructions on meteorological support of aircraft flights in the airspace of Bila Tserkva 2 hours prior to the start of the flights and during the flight. OGMO make observations with the use of meteorological equipment installed at the Belaya Tserkov airfield and visual visibility targets, visual observation of visibility, weather phenomena, quantity and form of clouds.

At the request of the AFIS controller, additional weather monitoring is carried out and sent to the air traffic controller in Boryspil ACC no later than 2 minutes.

According to observations, OGMO produces weather METAR and SPECI reports, which are transmitted to the HCTS and the AFIS controller by established communication lines. In the absence of METAR weather reports, SPECI is not available.

OGMO at UKBC includes: wind offset, weather forecasts for routes, conducts meteo instruction, provides meteorological information to flight crews for pre-flight training and flight documentation.

2.2.9 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF)

No ARFF facility or service is available at the airport.

2.2.10 Fuelling System

The airport has no aviation jet fuel facilities. There are 2 ancient underground tanks for TS-1 fuel storage, but the equipment is out of compliance with ICAO requirements and useless.

Refuelling of aircraft undergoing maintenance is carried out by "Fuel refuelling company" Avstar "Ltd. according to direct contracts between the fuelling company and the aircraft operators. Fuelling is carried out at the parking lot for maintenance of the PS, which is equipped with fuel dispensers.

2.2.11 Utilities

The Bila Tserkva Airport has basic utility service such as electricity, water, sewage, solid waste treatment and telephone.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -29-

Electric power is provided from RP-13 Bila Tserkva REM to RP-18 KP BIM "BWAC" by two cable lines ACB-10 3х120 bandwidth 270 A e-550 m and cable line AAB-10 3х95 bandwidth 240 A e-550 m.

The reserve power source is installed on the ADF with a capacity of 20 CCT (diesel power plant).

2.2.12 Access Road

The airport access roadway is the paved road to Skvrya in good condition, leading to the existing airside.

Picture 24. Aerial view of the airport access road

Picture 25. Airport Access Road

Picture 26. Airside Security Guard

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -30-

2.3 Airspace analysis

The purpose of this analysis is to identify, in a very preliminary way, existing conditioning factors for designing the airspace for Bila Tserkva Airport.

2.3.1 Background

The political-administrative unit responsible for the provision of air navigation services in the country is the State Aviation Administration of Ukraine (SAAU), created in accordance with the Decree Nº 1085 of December 2010. SAAU facilitates responsibilities in ATM through the Ukrainian State Air Traffic Services Enterprise (UkSATSE), which, in turn, counts on the following services: Air traffic management, Air navigation standards management, Telecommunications and electronics management, Meteorological management, Training and Certification, and Aeronautical services management.

The most recent references on air navigation in Ukraine are collected in several individual documents, but the most general one is the Air Code of Ukraine (Law N3393-VI) of May 2011.

Ukraine was organized in 5 Flight Information Regions (Dnipropetrovsk FIR, Kyiv FIR, Lviv FIR, Odesa FIR and Simferopol FIR), but due to the airspace closure in the Eastern part of Ukraine and Crimea, new special flight planning conditions and procedure for Odesa and Dnipropetrovsk sectors were developed. RVSM airspace has been established between FL 290 and FL 410. The common transition altitude is established at 10.000 ft.

The following table lists the ACCs and APPs (with associated FIRs) in the Ukrainian airspace, including the airspace in which the provision of ATS is delegated to Ukraine (part of the airspace of the Black Sea):

Table 2. Airspace Organization of Ukraine

Number of Sectors ATC Unit En-route TMA Associated FIR(s)

Kyiv ACC 7 4 UKBV Kyiv FIR Simferopol’ ACC 5 2 UKFV Simferopol’ FIR Odesa ACC 3 2 UKOV Odesa FIR L’viv ACC 4 1 UKLV L’viv FIR Dnipropetrovs’k ACC 4 1 UKDV Dnipropetrovs’k FIR Kharkiv APP 3 UKDV Dnipropetrovs’k FIR Donets’k APP 2 UKDV Dnipropetrovs’k FIR

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -31-

2.3.2 Vicinity of the Airport

Orography could imply important restrictions on procedures, but it is not the case for Bila Tserkva. It is considered that there will be no restrictions due to orography although this will have to be verified in further and more detailed studies.

The presence of towns within the airport vicinity could also restrict procedures. Population residential areas must not be over-flown at low altitudes, due to both environmental and safety problems. Such problems are not likely to occur here, since there are no large population areas in the approach and departure areas.

Finally, it would be important to know whether there are any nearby areas under some kind of special environmental protection where low-altitude over-flying should be avoided.

2.3.3 Airspace

Bila Tserkva aerodrome is part of the Kyiv ACC. The airspace surrounding Bila Tserkva Airport is classified as Class G (flight in uncontrolled airspace is typically under visual flight rules) with a Technical Management Areas (TMA) assigned to it. The protection of air navigation is provided by the Boryspil ACC, where requests for departure protection must be made with a minimum of 4 hours' notice. The flight information service area is centred on AFIS Bila Tserkva in a 10KM circle.

Traffic density is very low, so airplanes flight slowly and in visual flight rules conditions. Under visual flight rules, pilots will be able to know and understand the airspace, airport layout, and operations procedures to follow while parked, moving along the ground, and manoeuvring in the vicinity of a non-controlled airport. Pilots flying under visual flight rules assume responsibility for their separation from all other aircraft and obstacles. Also, aircraft operating under instrument flight rules should not expect separation from other traffic.

VFR flights are conducted under conditions of visibility and distance from the clouds at least equal to those specified below. Unless authorized by Boryspil ACC, an aircraft in VFR flight shall not take off or land from the control area of Bila Tserkva, or enter the traffic area or circuit of this aerodrome:

a) if the ceiling is less than 450 m (1,500 ft); or b) when the ground visibility is less than 5 km.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -32-

According to the visual approach chart, any flight shall not be cleared to descend below the appropriate initial approach altitude as specified for this particular approach procedure unless the pilot has reported passing the appropriate point defined by AFIS; or the pilot reports that he can maintain visual contact with the aerodrome; or the pilot is conducting a visual approach.

When flying in accordance with visual flight rules, it is the responsibility of the aircraft to guarantee its own separation from obstacles and other aircraft by the use of sight.

Figure 1. Visual approach chart to UKBC

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -33-

Figure 2. Air routes in high level airspace over UKBC

Figure 3. Air routes in low level airspace over UKBC

2.3.3.1 Dangerous, Forbidden and Restricted Areas

Dangerous, forbidden and restricted areas are not expected to condition the development of UKBC airspace since they are either located too far away, they only affect aircraft flying at low altitudes or their restrictions can be accepted without major consequences. At present, Bila Tserkva aerodrome only presents a prohibited area for visual manoeuvring within sector 050º-145º centred at the Aerodrome Reference Point (ARP) in a radius of 13.5km below 700 meters of altitude.

2.3.3.2 Nearby Airports

There are a number of airports and aerodromes around UKBC which may condition airspace design. Kyiv-Boryspil and Kyiv-Zhuliany international airports are the most significant. Uzin / Chepelevka, Svyatoshino, Gostomel, and Vasilkov aerodromes are also located in a radius of 100 km around UKBC.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -34-

Picture 27. Nearby airports

A detailed compatibility study should be carried out for both airports, since their operational procedures may interfere with each other, resulting in safety problems and excessive workloads for controllers and limitations on their capacity.

Concerning military airports around UKBC, a pilot training area is assigned to Vasilkiv air base. This training area covers the airspace over Bila Tserkva. As a result, applicable agreements and air traffic control coordination are expected to be signed by military authorities in order to harmonise civil and military operations.

2.3.3.3 Radio Navigation Aids

Existing radio navigation aids are not enough to provide ATM services to UKBC. The installation of a new VOR/DME and an ILS precision instrument approach system for runway 18 should be planned at the airport. A single VOR/DME would allow for instrument approaches and take-offs at the airport, but operations could be somehow restricted.

On the other hand, RNAV procedures should be adopted for the entire Kiev airspace in the near future, which will possibly require additional radio aids, preferably DME.

2.3.3.4 Airways, Reporting Points and TMA

The current TMA for Kiev and its division into sectors will have to be redesigned in order to be adjusted to UKBC requirements. The design of a TMA is a complex process which extends beyond airport planning. Redesigning the TMA will mean that some reporting points will be changed, removed or created with no particular difficulties involved. On the other

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -35- hand, some of the airways in the vicinity of the airport may be modified and some new ones may have to be created. In the same way, this TMA will depend on procedures followed for departures and arrivals.

2.3.3.5 Compatibility with Other Airports in the Area

As mentioned above, Visilkiv Air Base in the area may not pose a problem since the necessary agreements are expected to be coordinated with military authorities. However, if this were not the case, the necessary detailed compatibility studies should be carried out.

Regarding Uzin/Chepelevka, Svyatoshino and Gostomel in the area, they are not expected to exert a significant interference on UKBC procedures due to the type of traffic they handle, although they will have to be considered when the new UKBC airspace is defined.

Kyiv-Zhuliany Airport procedures will have to be coordinated with UKBC, because approach and departure routes may interfere each other.

Regarding Kyiv-Boryspil Airport, there is no evident inconveniences to designing procedures to coordinate both airports. At present, the interference between UKBC and the two main airports is not critical because there is a light traffic at UKBC.

In conclusion, no significant difficulties have been identified that could make this location no operational.

2.4 Analysis of Irregularities

The objective of this section is to illustrate the results of the inventory and physical diagnostic performed at Bila Tserkva Airport for the existing facilities, equipment, and the airport as a whole.

2.4.1 Passenger Terminal

The are no passenger terminal facilities available at present. A new construction will be required.

2.4.2 Runway pavement

The runway is in fair conditions and a major rehabilitation of the full runway pavement should be planned in the near term. In addition, the runway needs to be re-marked.

There is no edge lighting for this runway.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -36-

As for fissures and depressions, the visual inspection of the runway determined the presence of deficiencies in the surface such as detaching of the surface layer, potholes, sinks, cross-cutting and surface cracks, damages of intersection and edges slabs, destruction of filler joints. Repaired areas were observed, but no significant structural problems were observed.

The runway was built in 1957 with concrete slabs of 20 cm. of thickness on a sandy foundation 15 cm thick. In 1972, another 20 cm of concrete was added to the existing slabs. Since then, the runway has not received surface treatment. Repaired areas were observed. There were no significant structural problems.

In addition to this, the PCN reported in the AIP is 21; however, such a low PCN is remarkable for a concrete thickness of 40 cm.

Picture 28. Pavement damage

2.4.3 Taxiway

The taxiway system that connects the runway to the apron is in fair conditions.

2.4.4 Aircraft parking apron

The apron surface is in fair condition and requires re-paving. The bearing strength is adequate for the aircraft loads as expected.

ICAO recommends that the average illumination should be 20 lux horizontally and 20 lux at a height of 2 m vertically at the aircraft stand.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -37-

2.4.5 Aerodrome Flight Information Service (AFIS)

In compliance with the Air Traffic Services Planning Manual Doc 9426, Sections 1.5.3. and 1.5.4., the establishment of an aerodrome control service does not necessarily imply the immediate provision of a special ATC facility (control tower) but it is rather intended to mean that the service will be provided by adequately qualified ATC personnel, having means and facilities at their disposal appropriate for the given situation. These means and facilities can range from relatively simple arrangements, as the existing AFIS unit, to a complete system of ATC services, including radio voice communication and electronic data processing and display equipment. The area of responsibility for control of such a tower should, in addition to aerodrome traffic, also consider all traffic operating within a reasonable distance of the aerodrome. While no precise limitations can be imposed because the distance will vary in accordance with the traffic handled at the moment, experience seems to show, however, that it should normally not exceed 25 NM. Where only VFR traffic is controlled, the designation of a controlled airspace is not necessary and also not generally desirable. However, if the density of VFR traffic reaches proportions which would make the traffic pattern of departing and arriving aircraft difficult because of ‘overflying aircraft, an aerodrome traffic zone may be established to permit the control tower either to exercise control over aircraft not intending to land at the aerodrome in question or to make them avoid that zone.

2.4.6 Navigation aids

At present, UKBC has no approach aids capabilities. All approach procedures are visual meteo conditions.

According to the criteria established in the "Manual of Design of Aerodromes, Part 1, Runways" of ICAO. The runway is not used in all weather conditions, but only in visual conditions. If the runway were to be used by non-precision instrument procedures based on VOR or GNSS, special attention should be given to obstacles within the areas of aeronautical use.

2.4.7 Airport security

The security conditions are particularly deficient on the airside of the airport. The lack of a perimeter fence causes serious risks for both operational safety and aviation security, because the airport is exposed to continuous invasion of the runway by the population living in the housings adjacent to the airport.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -38-

3 Ukrainian Aviation Policy The State Aviation Administration of Ukraine (SAAU) was appointed by the Ukrainian Government under Provision No. 389/2011, dated 6 April 2012, as the main authority regulating aviation and approved by presidential decree and by Regulation No. 520, dated 8 October 2014, to define the functions and main aims of the SAAU.

The principal aviation policy is the Air Code 2011. It covers the regulation on aircraft (registration, airworthiness, maintenance), operators (air operator’s certificates and licences), personnel (required crew, powers and duties of commander, certification and access of aviation personnel to aviation activities), aerodromes and requirements of safety of environment, and the Law on the State Programme on Civil Aviation Air Safety 2017.

3.1 Airport Ownership

Most airports in Ukraine are owned by local government. Only two airports - Boryspil International Airport and Lviv International Airport Danilo Galytsiy - are state owned.

Some local airports such as Dnipropetrovsk International Airport, Ivano-Frankivsk International Airport, Mariupil and Kharkiv are privately owned.

3.2 Airport Certification

Certification is a procedure to confirm the compliance of the entity or the particular aviation activity to the established requirements of the aviation rules of Ukraine and the issuance of the corresponding certificate.

Airports must receive appropriate certification to commence operation in compliance with Airports Certification Rule No. 407, Registered in the Ministry Justice of Ukraine dated 23 June 2006 for N 740/12614, and the Technical Requirements and Administrative Procedures for the Certification of Airfields, No. 849, approved by the Order of the State Aviation Service of Ukraine dated November 6, 2017, registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on December 28, 2017 for № 1574/31442.

3.3 Airport Obstacle

The procedure for coordinating the location and height of objects at the vicinity of the aerodromes whose activities may affect the safety of flights and the operation of radio engineering civil aviation equipment is regulated by:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -39-

• Airports Certification Rule No. 407, Registered in the Ministry Justice of Ukraine dated 23 June 2006 for N 740/12614, • the Technical Requirements and Administrative Procedures for the Certification of Airfields, No. 849, approved by the Order of the State Aviation Service of Ukraine dated November 6, 2017, registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on December 28, 2017 for № 1574/31442, and • the order No. 721 approved by the order of the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine dated November 30, 2012.

3.4 Access to Market

The Rule on managing air transportation flow No. 567, dated 20 July 2016 regulates the access to airports.

To make domestic or international air transportation or charter international flights in or outside Ukraine on a basis of at least one flight per week, or not less than three flights per month, or aviation transportation in other countries, the air operator must have a traffic right allowance (TRA) issued by the SAS and be at least 50 per cent controlled by Ukraine or Ukrainian citizens. Requirements on nationality of ownership are contained in the Aviation Rules of Ukraine Procedure. The allowance is issued in accordance with the Aviation Rules of Ukraine’s Procedure to issue and to cancel rights to operate air routes, adopted by SAS Order No. 686, dated 24 October 2014, as amended.

Slot allocation is regulated by the Order of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine No. 645 of 16 July 2004. The reality is that airports have many opportunities to discriminate against air carriers.

According to Ukrainian Air Code, to operate domestic scheduled and charter flights is totally open to local carriers. As for international routes, airlines are officially assigned city pairs via diplomatic channels.

3.5 Air routes Rights

Air routes may be operated by several operators if each operator has a TRA on the same route. TRA for regular international routes is given to each route under agreements and arrangements concluded between aviation authorities. The air operator may apply for a TRA

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -40- if it makes regular flights in the country for at least 12 months before submission of its application.

There are no special rules for foreign air carriers. Their applications are considered together with the applications of Ukrainian operators.

3.6 Ground Handling

Regarding operations, the Air Code of Ukraine correspond to standards and ICAO recommended practices for ground handling services, as well as into the Rules of airport certification, approved by the Oder of the State Aviation Service of Ukraine No. 407 of 13 June 2006.

On access to ground handling providers, there is no regulatory act dealing with the access of ground handling companies to the market. It means that access to the ground handling services depends on the airport.

3.7 Aviation Security

The Law of Ukraine "On the State Program aviation safety of civil aviation”, Law No. 1965-VIII, on 21 March 2017, regulates the aviation security in compliance with the standards and recommended practice of the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago, December 7, 1944) and the obligations stemming from Ukraine's participation in The Convention on Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft (Tokyo, 14 September 1963), the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft (The Hague, December 16, 1970), the Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the safety of civil aviation (Montreal, 23 September 1971), the Protocol to Combat illegal acts of violence at airports serving international civil aviation (Montreal, 24 February 1988), Convention on the Labeling of Plastic Explosives the purpose of their detection (Montreal, March 1, 1991), Appendix 17 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation "Security. Protection of international civil aviation against acts of unlawfulness interference ", the Aviation Safety Guide (Doc 8973), as well as other international instruments and legislative acts of Ukraine.

The following actions must be obeyed to guarantee the efficiency of unlawful practices:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -41-

• control of the access of persons and vehicles to the controlled area of airports, protected areas of protection, sterile zones and critical areas. • safety controls for personnel and vehicles allowed into limited access zones; • safeguarding and access control before and after a flight and special aircraft inspection; • safety controls for crew, passengers, hold baggage, luggage, cargo, courier and mail dispatches, flight and airport supplies and onboard stores including meals; • the physical protection of the airport perimeter and its patrol; and • the location of parking no closer than 50 metres to the airport building.

3.8 Air Traffic Control Services

Air traffic flow and capacity management in Ukraine is managed through collaborative decision-making between the European air traffic management network and local network operations portals. The Rules are based on appropriate Eurocontrol regulations.

UkSATSE - a state-owned enterprise to service air traffic on corridors, routes, and airports - control the performance of regular domestic and international flights as well as transit regular flights.

The Regulation on the Use of the Airspace of Ukraine Nº 401was approved by the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of March 29, 2002 and by the Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated December 6, 2017, No. 954.

3.9 Air Charter Services

The Rules on Charter Service Performance approved by Order of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine No. 297, dated 18 May 2001 regulate the Charter services.

An Air Carrier performing charter flights when entering into an agreement with the customer of the performance of charter flights should provide for the provision of services and reimbursement provided for by these Rules

Rules of air transportations of passengers and baggage, approved by the order of the Ministry of Infrastructure of Ukraine dated November 30, 2012 № 735, registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on December 28, 2012 under No. 2219/22531

A foreign carrier may receive the right for charter service landing on the Ukrainian territory if:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -42-

• it transports high officials and official delegations of other countries; • it transports humanitarian cargo from Ukraine by a decision of the government of Ukraine; • it is a personal private jet with a non-commercial purpose; • its purpose if to repair, maintain or retrofit the aircraft; • it transports spare parts or engines; • it transports goods for repair; • it transports cargo to the consignor or consignee’s country; • it transports of up to 15 persons or up to two tonnes of cargo; or • as a series of charter flights on a route with no regular transportation.

3.10 Airfares

Airfares are not regulated in Ukraine, although the SAS has the right to cancel overly high tariffs in case of insufficient competition or to stop the application of low tariffs if they are lower than prime cost.

3.11 Airport Charges

The establishment of airport charges for aircraft and passenger services at the airports of Ukraine is regulated by Order of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine No. 433, dated 14 April 2008 and registered with the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine of May 14, 2008 under No. 408/15099.

The airport charges are marginal. In order to encourage airline companies as commercial partners of the airports, the decision of the airport operator may apply reductive coefficients up to 0.2 to the marginal rates of the airport charges listed below while carrying out regular flights based on the economic efficiency and in compliance with the requirements of the legislation on protection of economic competition and considering the price of a ticket.

The establishment of powers of executive authorities and executive bodies of city councils for regulation of prices for aircraft and passenger services at the airports, related to the provision of:

 aircraft landing/take-off determined per one tonne of maximum take- off weight of the aircraft specified in the airworthiness certificate

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -43-

depending on the type of traffic and depending on the hour of aircraft landing/take-off (day or night time). • For international flights • $12.06 per 1 tonne of MTOW. • For domestic flights • $ 4.08 per 1 tonne of MTOW.  passenger services at airport terminals, applied for use of the passenger terminal prior to check-in. The airport passenger services charge is set on a per passenger basis depending on the type of traffic (domestic or international). • For international flights • $ 12.68 per each departed passenger. • For domestic flights • $ 4.00 per each departed passenger.  aircraft extra parking determined per each full day or a part thereof in % from the landing/take-off charge at the daytime or per hour of extra parking and per tonne of aircraft MTOW irrespective of the type of traffic. Standard (charge-free) time of parking of passenger aircraft is 3 hours. • $0.23 per each hour of extra parking and per each tonne of the aircraft MTOW.  aviation security determined for each passenger sent depending on the type of traffic (domestic or international). The aviation security charge for the cargo aircraft shall be determined for each ton of the MTOW depending on the type of traffic. • For international passenger flights • $3.50 per each departed passenger. • For domestic passenger flights • $1.52 per each departed passenger. • For international cargo flights • $2.30 per 1 tonne of MTOW. • For domestic cargo flights • $ 1.13 per 1 tonne of MTOW.

4 Market Analysis

4.1 Ukrainian Outlook

4.1.1 Ukrainian Economic Outlook

The Ukrainian economy is showing signs of stabilization after years of political and economic turmoil. According to the IMF, in 2017 the country recorded a 2% GDP growth.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -44-

Estimates for 2018 forecast a 3.2% growth. However, since 2014 and the conflict with Russia over Crimea, the country has suffered from territorial division.

Figure 4. Evolution of the Gross Domestic Product of Ukraine

In 2017, the Government of Ukraine has passed several reforms in order to foster household consumption and fiscal consolidation. The minimum wage was doubled last year, and inflation was better controlled.

Ukraine’s unemployment amounted to 9.7% of the active population in 2017 and is expected to decrease to 9.3% in 2018.

The agricultural sector has a major role in Ukraine’s economy. In 2016, it contributed 13.7% to the GDP. Ukraine is rich in mineral resources, primarily iron and magnesium, as well as in energy resources (coal and gas).

The Ukrainian manufacturing sector employs 26% of the population and represents 27.1% of the GDP, though recently its contribution to the GDP has greatly diminished. The Ukrainian manufacturing sector is dominated by heavy industries such as iron and steel. These two sectors alone account for around 30% of the industrial production. However, steel production is now way below its pre-2008 level. Coal mining, chemical products, mechanical products (air planes, turbines, locomotives and tractors) and ship building are also important sectors.

The service sector employs almost 60% of the workforce and contributes 59.2% of the GDP. Ukraine is an energy transit country, providing transportation to western Europe and the Balkans, for Russian and Caspian oil and gas through its territory.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -45-

Ukraine is a very open economy, with the share of foreign trade in the country’s GDP at 104.8% in 2016. In 2016, the country’s trade deficit reached -6.9 billion dollars as exports decreased by 1.6% and imports rose by 8.4%.

Overall, foreign trade has been hit hard by the conflict with Russia. Ukraine is now pushing for the development of trade relations with European union state members, as part of a shift to become less dependent on Russia. In 2017, exports of goods to the EU increased by 29.9% compared to 2016 and imports grew by 21.3%. Ukraine’s main trade partners in Europe are Germany, Poland and Italy.

Its main customers are Russia (12.7%), Turkey (7.3%), China (6.3%), Egypt (5.5%), and Poland (5.2%), amounting to 60% of exports. Main export goods are iron and steel, fuels and oil, nuclear reactors and boilers, machinery and machine tools (around 30% of exports), as well as cereals.

The main suppliers are Russia (20%), Germany (10.6%), China (10.1%), Belarus (6.5%), Poland (6.2%), Hungary (4.3%), and the United States (4%). Main import goods are petroleum gas and other gaseous hydrocarbons (12.6%), Petroleum oils (10.2%), Coal and solid fuels (4.3%), Medicaments (2.9%), Motor cars (2.2%).

Table 3. Foreign Trade Indicators

Foreign Trade Indicators 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Imports of Goods (million USD) 84,639 76,787 54,330 36,317 39,151 Exports of Goods (million USD) 68,530 64,338 54,199 37,859 36,364 Imports of Services (million USD) 13,994 15,538 11,702 9,787 11,185 Exports of Services (million USD) 21,373 21,851 14,582 12,129 12,394 Trade Balance (million USD) -21,846 -22,128 -7,128 -3,455 -6,942 Foreign Trade (in % of GDP) 91.8 95.1 100.7 107.1 104.8 Source: WTO – World Trade Organization; World Bank, 2016

4.1.2 Common Aviation Area Agreement between the European Union and its Member States and Ukraine

According to a proposal for a Council Decision on the conclusion of a Common Aviation Area Agreement between the European Union and Ukraine in April 2014, the aim of this Agreement is the gradual creation of a Common Aviation Area between the European Union, its Member States and Ukraine. For this purpose, this Agreement sets out the rules, technical requirements, administrative procedures, basic operational standards, implementing rules applicable between the Parties under the conditions set out also hereafter.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -46-

This Common Aviation Area shall be based on:

• free access to the air transportation market access to the air transport markets of the Parties, • equal conditions of competition, and respect of the same rules – including in the areas of safety, security, air traffic management, social harmonisation and the environment, • making possible for air carriers to offer the travelling and shipping public competitive prices and services in open markets, • air carriers treated in a transparent and non-discriminatory manner regarding their access to air transport infrastructures especially where these infrastructures are limited, including but not limited to access to airports.

The EU and Ukraine shall grant to the other the following rights for the conduct of international air transport by the air carriers of the other Party:

a) the right to fly over its territory without landing - first freedom; b) the right to make stops in its territory for any purpose other than taking on or discharging passengers, baggage, cargo and/or mail in air transport (non-traffic purposes) - second freedom; c) while operating an agreed service on a specified route, the right to make stops in its territory for the purpose of taking up and discharging international traffic in passengers, cargo and/or mail, separately or in combination – third, fourth, and sixth freedom;

Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to confer on the air carriers of Ukraine the right to take on board, in the territory of any EU Member State, passengers, baggage, cargo and/or mail carried for compensation and destined for another point in the territory of that Member State – seventh, eighth and ninth freedoms.

Without prejudice to Article 16(1) of the Regulation EC 1008/2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the European Community, EU air carriers and, on the basis of reciprocity, air carriers of third countries shall freely set air fares and air rates for intra- Community air services.

Either the EU or Ukraine grants to the air carriers of the other Party the rights to provide air transport services on the routes specified hereunder:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -47-

a) for air carriers of the European Union: Any point in the European Union – intermediate points in the territories of European

Neighbourhood Policy partners1, ECAA countries2, or countries listed in Annex V – Any point in Ukraine – points beyond; b) for air carriers of Ukraine: Any point in Ukraine – intermediate points in the territories of European Neighbourhood Policy partners, ECAA countries or countries listed in Annex V – Any point in the European Union. Existing and new rights, including rights to serve beyond points under bilateral agreements or other arrangements between Ukraine and EU Member States, which are not covered under this Agreement, can be exercised and agreed, provided that there is no discrimination between air carriers on the basis of nationality; c) Air carriers of the European Union shall also be entitled to perform air transport services between points in Ukraine, whether or not such air transport services originate or terminate within the EU.

2. The services operated according to (a) and (b) shall originate or terminate in the territory of Ukraine, for air carriers of Ukraine, and in the territory of the European Union for air carriers of the European Union.

3. Air carriers of both EU and Ukraine may on any or all flights and at their option:

a) operate flights in either or both directions; b) combine different flight numbers within one aircraft operation; c) serve intermediate and beyond points, as specified in paragraph 1(a) and (b) of this Annex, and points in the territories of the Parties in any combination and in any order; d) omit stops at any point or points;

1 "European Neighbourhood Policy partners" shall here be understood as Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia and the Republic of Moldova, i.e. shall here not include Ukraine. 2 "ECAA countries" are the Parties to the Multilateral Agreement establishing a European Common Aviation Area, which are: The Member States of the European Union, the Republic of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Republic of Iceland, the Republic of Montenegro, the Kingdom of Norway, the Republic of Serbia and Kosovo (This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo Declaration of Independence).

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -48-

e) transfer traffic from any of its aircraft to any of its other aircraft at any point; (f) make stopovers at any points whether within or outside the territory of either Party; f) carry transit traffic through the other Party's territory; and g) combine traffic on the same aircraft regardless of where such traffic originates.

4. Each Party shall allow each air carrier to determine the frequency and capacity of the international air transport it offers based upon commercial considerations in the marketplace. Consistent with this right, neither Party shall unilaterally limit the volume of traffic, frequency or regularity of service, or the aircraft type or types operated by the air carriers of the other Party.

4.1.3 Ukrainian Aviation Market

In 2017, the Ukrainian aviation activity of passengers showed high growth rates for the second year in a row, by 30.1%, continuing with the recovery of the market after the decline of air traffic in 2014 and 2015, thanks to development of the international air traffic.

As seen in Figure 5, by 2016, the air passenger volumes regained the trend in the years before 2014. The number of enplaned passengers in 2017 increased by 27.5 percent in comparison to 2016. The total volume of commercial passengers amounted to 10.55 million passengers.

Back to 2013, the domestic air services provided 130,000 seats. Since that year, Aerosvit, UTair-Ukraine, and Wizz Air Ukraine discontinued their domestic air operations. The main factors explaining the drop of 25% from 2013 to 2014 are:

• Air service withdrawal to Donetsk, Luhansk, and Simferopol, • A reduction in the average income per capita (the price of a domestic roundtrip flight ticket may exceed the average monthly wage, 240€), • The economic recession, and • The depreciation of the Grivna,

Figure 5. Volume of air passengers in Ukraine Airlines by market.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -49-

Source: SAAU

In 2017, 93% of the total volume of air passengers was transported by five leading air carriers, such as:

• Ukraine International Airlines • Wind Rose • Azur Air Ukraine • Atlas Ukraine • Bravo

In terms of aircraft operations, the number of departed and arrived aircraft was about 159,900 in 2017, a 20% higher than 2016.

In terms of aeronautical activity by airport, the most active is Boryspil with a share of 64% of the air traffic. Behind Boryspil, as seen in Figure 6, the main airports are Zhuliany with 11% of the market, Odessa and Lviv with 7% of activity each.

Figure 6. Air traffic Share by Airport

Boryspil 64%

Others Zhulyany 2% 11% Zaporizhznia 2% Dnipro Odessa 2% Kharkiv 5% Lviv 7% 7%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -50-

The volume of air freight and mail increased by 11.4% and amounted to 82.8 thousand tons.

4.1.3.1 Domestic Passenger Market

In 2016, Ukrainian airlines increased their domestic capacity by 5%, but the domestic market remains very undeveloped for local operators. Only three airlines - Ukraine International Airlines (UIA), Windrose and Motor Sich - move passengers between domestic airports, and just UIA covers 75% of the existing routes and accounts for 84% of all the domestically available seats.

In 2016, city pair between Kiev and Kharkiv was the busiest domestic air route in Ukraine, with 18,200 seats available. It is the only carrier serving that city pair. In total, UIA serves six regional airports, see Table 4.

In 2017, the passenger and freight air transportation were carried out by 32 domestic airlines, which established a growth by 17 percent in comparison to 2016.

Table 4. Flights destinations from Kiev-Boryspil Airport by Ukraine International Airlines

Round Frequency Destination Distance trip cost (Flights/Week) Kharkiv 390 km 210€ 14 Lviv 500 km 100€ 7 Dnipro 380 km 140€ 7 Odesa 440 km 115€ 7 Ivano-Frankivsk 475 km 72€ 7

UIA contributes 84% to the overall domestic aviation market. By 2016, UIA increased 2% up to 67,000 domestic available seats. UIA takes advantage of its main position at Boryspil, because more than 50% of UIA domestic passengers make a connection at Boryspil.

The other two airlines, Windrose and Motor Sich, focus on point-to-point services, but this market has considerably declined over the past few years.

Windrose connects Kiev with Dnipro with 12 frequencies per year with two Embraer 145.

UIA shares the route Kyiv-Zaporizhya with Motor Sich and the route Kyiv-Dnipro with Dniproavia. All the air routes connect Boryspil and Zhuliany airports with regional destinations.

Motor Sich connects Zaporizhzhya to Kiev, Lviv and Odessa.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -51-

UIA operates domestic routes with Boeing 737-300, -500, -800, and -900 (from 135 to 215 passengers), and also Embraer E190 (104 seats).

Windrose flies with Embraer ERJ145, and Motor Sich uses Antonov An-140 jets and An-24 turboprops, seating 48 to 52 passengers.

Some of the factors that describe the low volume of domestic air traffic that makes the air routes not profitable exposed by experts in air transport in Ukraine are:

• high price of fuel at Ukrainian airports, • the lack of price elasticity, and • the unbalanced competence with the train.

4.1.3.2 International Passenger Market

Ukraine’s local traffic was up 23% thanks to flow to/from Egypt and Turkey contributing to 22 extra daily flights and its Eastern European flow which added 21 daily flights to the network.

Windrose Airlines connects Kiev to Bucharest, Sofia, Sharm El Sheikh, Verona, and Rovaniemi.

New foreign airlines entered the Ukrainian market in 2017, such as Qatar Airways from Qatar, Ernest SpA from Italy and Kish Air from Iran.

The Ukrainian airlines transported about 5.83 million passengers on international scheduled commercial flights and foreign airlines about 4.97 million passengers.

4.2 Bila Tserkva Outlook

4.2.1 Bila Tserkva Aviation Activity

The aeronautical activity at UKBC focuses on two segments of traffic: the aircraft for maintenance and the general aviation flights of the flight schools and the aeroclub.

Table 5 shows the use of the airport by general aviation, not based at the airport, and number of aircraft movements for maintenance purposes.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -52-

Table 5. Aircraft Movements (take-offs & landings) by MRO aircraft and Itinerant General Aviation

Month 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 MRO GA MRO GA MRO GA MRO GA MRO GA 1 2 39 2 31 3 25 3 95 1 88 2 3 31 4 30 6 47 5 154 1 67 3 2 42 2 38 10 80 7 168 10 166 4 5 99 4 43 7 88 1 287 2 219 5 3 192 0 69 3 181 4 166 6 256 6 10 324 4 129 7 94 2 273 2 354 7 4 193 4 199 2 96 4 332 4 346 8 4 130 0 130 4 194 3 292 5 304 9 5 118 6 131 4 118 4 295 3 377 10 6 119 3 111 4 299 2 239 7 260 11 2 77 7 69 5 94 4 160 2 143 12 5 37 4 49 5 37 6 66 4 78 Year 51 1401 40 1029 60 1250 45 2527 47 2658

Air traffic for aircraft maintenance is very stable in recent years. The peaks of aircraft movements occur in March and June. In recent years the month of March is the busiest with up to 10 aircraft operations per month. In general, the average in the last 5 years has been about 4 aircraft operations per month.

Figure 7. Monthly Number of MRO Operations from 2013 to 2017

10 10 10

7 7 7 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 MRO operations MRO 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Months

As regards general aviation, the air traffic of itinerant aircraft (not based in the airport) shows an average growth trend of 2.2% per month has been observed over the last 5 years.

Seasonality is very strong for this kind of traffic. The winter months there is a considerable drop in general aviation traffic, while in the summer months the activity can reach between 354 and 377 operations during the months of June to September, that is, about 10 daily operations on average.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -53-

The increase in general aviation traffic has become more evident in the last two years. The air traffic increased from an average of just over 3 daily operations between 2013 and 2015 to about 7.5 daily operations in 2016 and 2017.

Figure 8. Monthly Number of General Aviation Operations from 2013 to 2017

377 354346 324 332 299 304 287 292295 273 256 260 239 219 192 193 199 194 181 168 166 166 154 160 143 130 129 130131 GA GA operations 118119 111 118 99 88 94 96 94 95 88 77 80 78 69 69 66 67 49 39 42 37 38 43 47 37 31 31 30 25

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Months

4.2.2 Bila Tserkva Catchment Area

4.2.2.1 Accessibility

Analysis of road patterns in the vicinity of UKBC indicates the airport is readily accessible from communities in the service area, near the intersection of E95 and P32.

Unfortunately, the same can be said for the neighbouring airports, which is likely a contributing factor traffic leakage. Zhuliany is an approximate one-hour drive north on highway E95, while Boryspil is approximately 90 minutes’ drive via E95. Highway access alone, however, does not generate traffic leakage. Rather, it is a result of air carrier strategies and service offerings.

4.2.2.2 Catchment Area for Passengers

The catchment area for commercial air traffic is defined as the region that is most likely to use the airport services based on a relative proximity to the airport and easy access to it, as well as the region within which passengers are distributed and attracted. This does not mean that an area of influence is exclusive, but, as seen in Figure 9, the catchment areas of Bila Tserkva, Zhuliany and Boryspil overlap.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -54-

Figure 9. Catchment Area

The catchment area occupies a theoretical area that is measured by the times of travel route, and the actual space distribution of the passengers. It extends, generally, up to a travel time of 1 hour by road; although, other factors are what ultimately determine the catchment area. The Low-Cost market has extended the distance up to 2 hours of route trip. In increasing the catchment area, Bila Tserkva’s potential attraction may reach the provinces of Vinnyt and Cherka.

Bila Tserkva Airport has a potential population volume within the catchment area of 2 hours of, approximately, 3 million people, in half the Oblast of Kyiv, and parts of Zhytomyr and Cherkasy.

4.2.2.3 Catchment Area for Cargo

For origin and destination cargo traffic the catchment area extends from 800km if the truck is driven by one single driver up to 1,500 km when 2 drivers can make the same route.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -55-

Figure 10. Cargo Catchment Area

The peripheral location of UKBC with respect to the European market does not seem to provide the same competitive advantages as other airports already consolidated in the centre of Europe. But, on the other hand, the main consumption destinations can be reached within a day of truck. This fact provides the airport with some business potential to attract freighters from the Middle East and Asia, mostly for perishable goods.

4.3 Multiple Airport System in the Region of Kiev

The degree of competitiveness between airports with overlapping areas of influence, such as the case of Boryspil, Zhuliany and, hypothetically, Bila Tserkva, takes many forms (ACI Europe, 1999), some of which include competitiveness to attract new passengers and air cargo services, such as medium and long haul connection traffic, or between airports within the same area of influence for the provision of services in individual airports, or even between different terminals in the same airport. The competitiveness between the airports of the system can be judged by comparing the attributes of airport capacity, land access and air fares.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -56-

Multiple theoretical investigations have been carried out on the modes of choice of passengers from one airport or another, or the influence of airports on others in multiple systems that serve the same region.

One of the first models that were carried out on the behaviours of choice of departure airports was made in the metropolitan area of Washington DC (Skinner, 1976), whose results highlighted the importance of flight frequencies and accessibility. Later, Windle and Dresner (1995) came up with the same results as Skinner but adding one more factor: the more times a traveller uses an airport, the more likely he or she will choose the same airport.

The access time and cost, the price of the airplane ticket and the frequencies of flights were identified as explanatory variables (Pels, Nijkamp, & Rietvedl, 2003), but an important conclusion is that the cost of access is less important than the access time. According with Başar & Bhat (2004) and Hess & Polak (2005), the factor to take more into account in the choice of the airport was the access time, rather than the frequency of the flights.

From the University of California, a weighted conditioned logit model was used to study how travellers from the San Francisco multi-port area select the options of using a specific airport or airline (Ishii, Van Dender, & Jun, 2009). In this simulation the choice of airport was mainly explained by the time of access to the airport of departure, for the total travel time, including delays, and for the preference for a certain airport and its punctuality, that is, for its congestion; in such a way that together the two mentioned factors produce the main cost not associated with the flight itself. In any case, the model also concluded, obviously, that any alternative airport with cheaper airline tickets, lower access costs, fewer delays, and higher flight frequencies have more options to be chosen than others.

Reducing the access time by 5 minutes increases the market share of an airport by 8%, while reducing the delays of departures by the same time value only produces an increase of 2% in the market share. The effect of the access time and the delays in the market share of a traditional airline dominating a main airport is reflected in an increase of 4.4% of its market share due to the reduction of the time of access to the airport and of the airport. 1.5% due to the decrease in delays. In addition, they measured the effect of a low-cost airline's entry into the main airport, concluding that if the low-cost airline also maintains its operations at a secondary airport its market share increases by 15%, even if the other airlines are they adjust to the competition of the low-cost company, and the airport, therefore, increases its quota up to 25%. Interestingly, if the low-cost carrier cancels its operations at the secondary airport and transfers them to the main airport its market share, in this case, it increases by only 4% if the

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -57- traditional companies do not adjust their rates, and even the low-cost airline cost would reduce the fee by 12% if the traditional ones adjusted their rates to compete.

The main conclusions of those theoretical researches are:

• in a market served by several airports, such as the case of Kiev, a traveller who wants to pay less for his plane ticket or avoid delays in his flight at a congested airport has the opportunity to choose an alternative airport taking into account of major access or flights with a non-preferred airline. • One of the consequences of the deterioration of access by car as a result of increases in traffic congestion will have a significant impact on the choice of airport. Not only does it result in longer access times, but it also reduces reliability and confidence in the forecasts of access times. • A relative change in accessibility from one airport to another can have a major impact on the choice of airport. In areas with several airports in the same area of influence it can mean a substantial change in the market share of the airport.

Other accessibility factors that were extracted as significant were:

• the fast, efficient and cheap parking of the vehicle itself and • quick access from the parking of vehicles to the passenger terminal.

4.4 Key Neighbouring Airports

The degree of competition between or at airports, or perception thereof, can take many forms. Some of these was identified by ACI Europe3 and may include competition:

• To attract new passenger and freight services • Between airports with overlapping catchments • Between airports within the same urban conurbation • The provision of services at individual airports • Between different terminals at an individual airport

3 European Airports: A Competitive Industry, October 22nd, 1999

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -58-

In 2002, a study on airport competition was submitted to the European Commission4 with the objective of providing the information and analysis necessary to update the approach towards the application of State Aid Rules to the public financing of airport infrastructure. The results of the study indicated that airports saw themselves as competing for all the categories of traffic: traffic carried by ‘low cost’ airlines, charter traffic, transfer passenger traffic, and air cargo.

The survey also showed large differences in their perception of other airports competing for origin / destination scheduled traffic. This was sometimes reflected in large distances between the competitor and themselves. This would have been expected for the more price sensitive charter flight, but the longest distance was the 180 miles, the others being much closer together.

In conclusion, the survey claimed for some assumptions:

• The degree to which competition actually takes place between airports for their prime customers, the airlines, must be limited. • The potential for competition is greatest for short-haul charter flights, low cost airlines and cargo. • Low cost airlines tend to use under-utilised airports, which can offer significantly lower charges based on low marginal costs.

Good ground facilities are important, and airport and ground charges are more significant a part of total costs than for the passenger business. Thus, airports can be considered to compete for these operators, especially if they do not have too many environmental constraints.

A large factor influencing passengers to drive to an alternative airport is whether travel is being conducted for business or leisure. Leisure travellers have less resistance to driving as a result of higher sensitivity to price and lower sensitivity to time.

It is important to note, however, that contrary to some ambient thinking, business travellers are sensitive to pricing issues, particularly small businesses.

Focusing on the Bila Tserkva’s case, if we extend the radius to about 2 hours, we find Boryspil, Zhuliany, Uzin/Chepelevka, Svyatoshino and Gostomel. In many ways this can be

4 Cranfield University, SKM Europe, INECO, Gruppo CLAS, & Denton Wilde Sapte: “Study on Competition between Airports and the Application of State Aid Rules. Volume 1”. European Commission – Directorate General Energy and Transport – Directorate F Air Transport. June 2002.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -59- viewed as a single region that is served by more than one airport. Many users have easy access to Zhuliany and Boryspil. Therefore, depending upon where they live Bila Tserkva, Zhuliany and Boryspil can be co-terminals for many users.

Due to the close proximity of UKBC to these other airports, there is a potential for airport service area boundaries to become blurred. There are several factors that can influence a passenger to drive to another airport, including drive time, airline schedules, fares and aircraft type.

Figure 11. Location of Key Airport Competitors

4.4.1 Kiev-Boryspil International Airport

Type: International airport ICAO code UKBB Use: Civil Latitude: N50°20.68' Longitude: E30°53.60' Elevation: 427.0 ft (130 m) Variation: 7° East Runways: 2 (4000 x 60 m / 3500 x 63 m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 110 km Nearby Airports with Kyiv/Zhuliany Airport UKKK Instrument Procedures Kyiv/Antonov-2 International Airport UKKM Cherkasy Airport UKKE Vinnytsia/Gavryshivka International Airport UKWW Kirovohrad National Airport UKKG

Nearby Navigation Aids Boryspil VOR BRP Kyiv Boryspil VOR YHT Koshany VOR KSN Soloveyevka VOR SLV Passengers (2017) 10,554,757 Aircraft movements (2017) 75,280 Kiev-Boryspil International Airport is the main airport of the country, both in passenger and air cargo volumes. It consists of two parallel runways that, by distance between

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -60- them, allow simultaneous approach operations. It is located East to the city of Kiev at a distance of approximately 35 km. It is connected by the E40 / M06 road between 30 to 40 minutes. The Master Plan foresees a considerable growth of passenger air traffic, reaching 52 million passengers in 2045 and an air cargo volume of 50,000 tons. A new and modern air cargo terminal is planned to be built South of the airport.

Picture 29. Aerial View Kiev-Boryspil International Airport

According to the KBP Master Plan, air passenger traffic will get to, approximately, 15 million passengers in 2020 and 28 million passengers in 2030, reaching 52 million passengers in 2045.

In 27 years, KBP will be, in volume of passenger traffic, similar to those enjoyed today by consolidated airports, such as Mumbai, India (47.2 Mpax), Barcelona, Spain (47.2 Mpax), Chengdu-Shuangliu, China (49.8 Mpax), Madrid, Spain (53.4 Mpax), San Francisco, USA (55.8 Mpax), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (58.5 Mpax), New York-JFK, USA (59.3 Mpax), Suvarnabhumi-Bangkok, Thailand (60.8 Mpax), or Istanbul Atatürk, Turkey (63.7 Mpax), in economies that are close to or exceed from USD 500 thousand million to USD 1.5 billion of GDP, compared to the current USD 93.27 thousand million in Ukraine (see Figure 12).

Figure 12. Gross Domestic Product Benchmarking

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -61-

4.4.2 Kiev-Zhuliany International Airport

Type: International airport ICAO code UKBB Use: Civil Latitude: N50°24.12' Longitude: E30°27.12' Elevation: 587.0 ft (179 m) Variation: 7° East Runways: 1 (2310 x 45m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 83 km Nearby Airports with Kyiv/Boryspil Airport UKBB Instrument Procedures Kyiv/Antonov-2 International Airport UKKM Cherkasy Airport UKKE Vinnytsia/Gavryshivka International Airport UKWW Kirovohrad National Airport UKKG Nearby Navigation Aids Boryspil VOR BRP Kyiv Boryspil VOR YHT Koshany VOR KSN Soloveyevka VOR SLV Passengers (2017) 1,851,700 Aircraft movements (2017) 23,257

Zhuliany is the second airport in Ukraine in passenger volume. It has a runway and a passenger terminal building. It accommodates up to 15 airlines. It has established itself as a low-cost airport, although its 2,310-meter-long runway falls short to extend the range of flights. It may make a runway of about 2800 meters.

Picture 30. Aerial View of Kiev-Zhuliany International Airport

In the Kiev region, Zhuliany airport concentrates most of the air traffic with this business model. The main airline is Wizz Air, which handles 62% of the routes served from

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -62-

Kiev. Recently, Ryanair has reached an agreement with Boryspil airport to serve 10 destinations from Kiev, already served by Wizz Air. Competition in this business model and between the two main airports in the country will increase.

Table 6. Actual Low-Cost Airlines that serve Kiev

Airline Destination Origin Aircraft Model

Air Arabia Sharjah Kiev-Boryspil A320 Air Baltic Riga Kiev-Boryspil DHC-8-400 Dash 8Q Flydubai Dubai Kiev- Zhuliany B737-800 Budapest Copenhagen Vilnius Dortmund Hamburg Hannover Cologne Nurnberg Wizz Air Frankfurt-Hahn Kyiv-Zhuliany A320 Warsaw Wroclaw Katowice Lublin Poznan Bratislava Larnaca London Roma-Fiumicino A320-200 Vueling Kiev- Zhuliany Barcelona UP Tel Aviv Kiev-Boryspil B737-800 Buta Airways Baku Kyiv-Zhuliany ERJ190-100 Milan-Bergamo Ernest Airlines Napoli Kyiv-Zhuliany A320 Bologne

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -63-

4.4.3 Gostomel Aerodrome

Type: Aerodrome ICAO code UKKM Use: Civil Latitude: N50°36.02' Longitude: E30°11.62' Elevation: 518.0 ft (158 m) Variation: 7° East Runways: 1 (3500 x 56m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 110 km Kiev 24 km Nearby Airports with Kyiv/Boryspil Airport UKBB Instrument Procedures Kyiv/Antonov-2 International Airport UKKM Cherkasy Airport UKKE Vinnytsia/Gavryshivka International Airport UKWW Homiel Airport UKGG Nearby Navigation Aids Boryspil VOR BRP Kyiv Boryspil VOR YHT Koshany VOR KSN Soloveyevka VOR SLV

Currently, Gostomel Airport is used both for the cargo flights by Antonov Airlines, that specializes in international cargo transportation, as well as for test flights of aircraft produced or maintained by UkrOboronProm. Also, UKKM is base for the AN-225 and AN- 124-100 of Antonov Airlines. Also named as Antonov Airport, it has entered the State Aerodrome Register of Ukraine (The Register Certificate NAP 09-07) and has been certified according to the ICAO meteorological conditions at both runway approaches.

UKKM provides two indoors hangars: one of them is 80x40x28 m and the second one is 96x104x40 m. The hangars let providing maintenance and repair service of any type of the aircraft, such as AN-225, AN-124, Boing-747 and others at any season and round-the-clock. There is a shelter with the area of 132x104m.

Picture 31. Aerial View of Gostomel Airport

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -64-

4.4.4 Svyatoshino Aerodrome

Type: Small airport ICAO code UKKT Use: Civil Latitude: 50°28'44"N Longitude: 30°23'9"E Elevation: 582.0 ft (177 m) Variation: 7.6° East Runways: 1 (1800 x 35m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 90 km Irpin 10 km Kiev 11 km Vyshneve 11 km Vyshhorod 14 km Boyarka 19 km Brovary 27 km Nearby Airports with Kyiv/Boryspil Airport UKBB Instrument Procedures Kyiv/Zhuliany Airport UKKK Kyiv/Antonov-2 International Airport UKKM Cherkasy Airport UKKE Vinnytsia/Gavryshivka International Airport UKWW Kirovohrad National Airport UKKG Nearby Navigation Aids Boryspil VOR BRP Kyiv Boryspil VOR YHT Koshany VOR KSN Soloveyevka VOR SLV

Svyatoshino Airfield is located about 11 km from Kiev, near Gostomel. The airport is part of the Antonov Serial Production Plant complex.

Picture 32. Aerial View of Svyatoshino Airport (UKKT)

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -65-

4.4.5 Vasilkiv Airport

Type: Airfield ICAO code UKKW Use: Military Latitude: N50°14.00' Longitude: E30°17.90' Elevation: 650.0 ft (198 m) Variation: 5° East Runways: 1 (2500 x 42m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 54 km Kiev 30 km Nearby Airports with Kyiv/Boryspil Airport UKBB Instrument Procedures Kyiv/Zhuliany Airport UKKK Kyiv/Antonov-2 International Airport UKKM Cherkasy Airport UKKE Vinnytsia/Gavryshivka International Airport UKWW Kirovohrad National Airport UKKG Nearby Navigation Aids Boryspil VOR BRP Kyiv Boryspil VOR YHT Koshany VOR KSN Soloveyevka VOR SLV It is located 65 km south of Kiev and 7 km from the city of Vasylkiv. It is an air base belonging to the Ministry of Defence.

Picture 33. Aerial View of Vasilkiv Airport

4.4.6 Uzin/Chepelevka Airport

Type: Aerodrome, Airfield ICAO code UKKH Use: Military Latitude: 49°47'24"N (49.790000) Longitude: 30°26'27"E (30.440833) Elevation: 568 ft (173 m) Variation: 7.46°E (WMM2015 magnetic declination) 0.12° annual change Runways: 1 (3500 × 80 m), paved Nearby towns Bila Tserkva 23 km Kiev 95 km

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -66-

4.5 Airline Market

4.5.1 Commercial Airlines

According to the Eurocontrol’s seven-year flights service units forecast (2017-2023), the total IFR flights in Ukraine will grow at an annual rate of 6.1% until 2023 in the base scenario. In the high scenario, that rate may increase up to 8.1% per year.

Also, the low-cost carriers breaking into the aeronautical scenario, especially in Europe, sharing 37% of the total seats, have contributed to the global recovery of passenger traffic, airport income and tourism. The business model launched by Southwest in the United States was copied by Ryanair and Easyjet in Europe and the results have been amazing, extending towards the Asian and Latin-American market. Average airfares have declined in the past 10 years at an average of 0.9 percent per year.

Air transport deregulation in Europe in 1993 caused a significant impact in the European market, which in the last years has experienced the effects of low-cost carriers pushing the market up to 60 % as induced demand over the trend traditionally marked by the routes operated by traditional airlines. In other words, statistics of passenger traffic show that LCCs increase traffic between 40% and 60% with passengers that would not fly to destination if it were not for reduced fares. This evolution has generated a strong increase in traffic, with a growth in low-cost traffic at an accelerated pace since 2005.

One of the features of LCCs is that they can operate from secondary airports, especially due to the fact that it is very hard to find slots at main airports or that the airport charge policy does not match their business model. But, undoubtedly, the success of the LCC’s business model has pushed traditional airlines to reduce their costs and compete hard.

In markets served by several airports, the dominance of an airline at any of the airports does not necessarily prevent other airlines from offering the same flights. For example, the presence of Southwest Airlines at nearby airports punishes other airlines at a major airport in that area, but its effect is much less when Southwest operates at the same airport. In addition, evidence was provided that competitiveness between airports can reduce the impact of a major airport on airline tickets.

Although LCCs flood the market with more competitiveness, the model is also very vulnerable, and most companies go bankrupt within the first year in service.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -67-

More than 90% of the existing LCC capacity relies on short-haul trips. However, as market structures become more complex and consumer behaviours continue to evolve, hybrid and low-cost long-haul (LCLH) business models are emerging. LCCs are meeting passenger demands by extending more affordable travel to long-haul markets. In Ukraine, LCC services have increased.

4.5.2 Cargo Freighters

World dedicated air cargo traffic will expand at an average annual rate of 2.6 percent for the next two decades, doubling current traffic levels. As in the past, the more mature North America and Europe markets reflect slower and thus lower-than-average traffic growth rates, with the exception of those linked to Asia and Southwest Asia.

The air cargo industry is characterized by a high fragmentation in terms of the number of agents involved in the transport chain, making it difficult to distinguish the exact role of each of these agents.

Therefore, the platforms in the airports open a range of opportunities for these agents, in that their positioning leads to a first specialization. Thus, freight forwarders have been increasingly providers of "logistics services", more similar to integrators, offering, in addition to traditional services, door-to-door services, demanded by customers with greater intensity.

The demand for the transportation of goods by air in a specific airport is a function of the production and consumption capacity of goods in the area of influence of the airport. The magnitude of the GDP of the region of influence is the main factor in the generation of cargo. The goods that can be transported by air additionally meet certain characteristics:

• High unit value that justifies the higher cost of air freight compared to other modes of transport. • Volume and unit weight that are compatible with the dimensions of the belly cargo and maximum take-off weight of the aircraft. • Maximum time to market without losing its value.

The intermediaries between the producers / distributors are two groups, the general sales agents (IATA grants a certificate of recognition / authorization to the GSAs that meet certain conditions) and freight forwarders. The general sales agents commercialize the tonnage capacity available on flights to the destinations required by the producer / exporter / importer, either commercial aircraft that cover the regular flights operated at the airport, or

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -68- that of cargo aircraft. The forwarders optimize the transport chain for each type of merchandise by selecting the most efficient mode (air, land or sea).

The cargo market is greatly influenced by exogenous factors, such as economic crises, as well as by endogenous factors, such as the operation of cargo handling facilities and other operational variables.

The growth of cargo at Bila Tserkva requires a number of external and internal factors, such as:

• Economic growth and foreign trade The airports with the greatest development of air cargo are those located near the markets and production centres of the products traditionally transported by air, because air cargo complements other economic activities. So, it is essential to identify the products and markets of Bila Tserkva. According to IATA, the main products that benefit from air cargo transportation are: ▪ perishable goods, ▪ the pharmaceutical industry for its speed and efficiency in transporting high-value, time and temperature sensitive cargo, particularly vaccines, ▪ the live animals, ▪ the electronic devices that were built using a global supply chain, and ▪ the express delivery services made possible by Amazon, Alibaba, eBay and other e-commerce companies. • Economic and commercial aspects Alternatives should be sought to implement rates that competitively align Bila Tserkva in the air cargo market. These alternatives should be sought within a global framework of tariff modification, to ensure that the discounts for the cargo do not imply a decrease in total revenues, which can guarantee the financial stability to meet the investments.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -69-

• Location in the global air commerce flows Ukraine is in the main world flows (North America-Europe- Asia) but peripheral location within the European market, which limits the development of the activity.

4.6 Competence with other Modes of Transport

Only between 2% and 5% of the Ukrainian population use air services in a regular basis. It seems that the disadvantage of the domestic market is that passengers prefer less expensive means of transportation than flying.

As seen in Table 7 compared to Table 4, though the time to connect Bila Tserkva to most of the major cities takes more than eight hours, the income per capita is a critical factor of choice of mode of transportation. By paying about $10, anybody can take a train across the entire country, covering a distance up to 550 km from Kiev.

Table 7. Time, Price and Distance Travel by Train or Car from Bila Tserkva to main National Destinations connected by Air

From Bila Tserkva Train Route to Time Price Distance Time Kharkiv 15:40 500UAH (16€) 550 km 7:07 Lviv 9:49 191UAH (6€) 550 km 7:20 Dnipro 8:02 161UAH (5€) 465 km 7:14 Ivano-Frankivsk 13:43 121UAH (4€) 516 km 8:00 Zaporizhya - - 530 km 8:00 Currently, there are about eleven daily trains (see Table 8) that connects Kiev with Bila Tserkva in its way to/from Mykolayiv or Rotok. These trains between Kiev and Bila Tserkva take about 1 and 40 minutes.

Table 8. Schedule of Suburb Trains between Stations from Bila Tserkva

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -70-

There are only two more daily trains that stop at Bila Tserkva: Truskavets-Dnipro and Lviv-Mariupol. There are more routes that pass through Bila Tserkva, but not on a daily basis.

4.7 SWOT Analysis

Both extrinsic and intrinsic major factors have been identified of more important impact in the air traffic.

Advantages Disadvantages

• The competitiveness potential is much greater for • Losses of economy of scales and increase in the costs short-haul flights, low-cost airlines and air cargo. of the ground infrastructures of the region. • The runway can be extended up to 3,300 m., due to • UKBC must receive appropriate certification to the land availability for maximum airport commence international operations in compliance development. with Airports Certification Rule No. 407, dated 13 • Located at a crossroads of important land transport June 2006. infrastructures and logistic developments: • Appropriate airspace organization and procedures • Next to two very important communication for precision approaches must be designed, corridors (E95 and E40), and approved and implemented before starting • a railway ground access infrastructure. The commercial operations under instrument flight connection of the airport to the main train rules. station at Bila Tservka may be achieved by • The non-existence of adequate facilities for the an additional railway line, connecting the processing of cargo and passengers is a major airport to Kiev in about 45 minutes. negative factor. Satisfactory facilities in operation to • No air navigation procedures constraints. favour the growth of cargo and passengers with • Very attractive for non-aeronautical sources of potential development requires a big investment revenues, because significant industrial parks are and a long construction process. located in the vicinity of the airport. • The profitability of freighter flights and the freight • Very low noise impact. cost is a function of the roundtrip flight. The return • Large catchment area. UKBC may attract passengers flight must guarantee a minimum load transported in low-cost companies from its large catchment area so that the operation is bearable. Some balance of about 3 million people. between the volumes of imported and exported • The presence of a custom and inspection service unit cargo plays an important role. Again, the GDP of the at the existing airport allows the simplification of the region is decisive. procedures and help to minimize the processing • Absence of high-speed rail connection. times of the goods.

• Currently, Bila Tserkva does have an alternative mode of transportation to the automobile by

suburban and public mini-buses at a cost as low as

12 UAH per trip.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -71-

Opportunities Threatens

• Any EU airline is granted the privilege of the ninth • Multiple airport systems with independent freedom of the air under the Common Aviation Area administrations have a high level of uncertainty Agreement. They can operate domestic routes because the success of an airport depends on the within the Ukrainian territory, without the need for attraction and negotiation with airlines. UKBC faces the route to start or end in the EU. a more competitive market and need to develop • To encourage air services development the airport strong to maintain their relevant role in the region. operator may apply reductive coefficients to the • Air freight services are more likely to stay at an marginal rates of the airport charges published by airport with more connectivity, services and Order of the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine No. facilities, such as KBP. 433. • Zhuliany's position on Bila Tserkva is clearly • If the time of access to the airport can be reduced, it unbalanced for commercial air passengers due to the provides better coverage of the area of influence. proximity to the main center of air passenger • The lack of capacity limitations at UKBC, while the attraction and a well-established and regular IEV declines from a degradation of service levels, commercial activity with a tendency to continue provides an opportunity for UKBC to increase air increasing. services in the long term. • Gostomel Airport has obtained the certification from • Low-cost carriers often use underutilized airports SAAU and operational airport with ability to serve that can offer significantly cheaper rates based on commercial aircraft in the short term. However, as low marginal costs and less complexity of land an advantage for UKBC, the airport owner is operations. Antonov, part of the Ministry of Defence. • A more than predictable increase of the aeronautical • Although the airport has enough land for future activity in the domestic market would give UKBC its extensions, it presents a very fragmented cadastral own market niche in its area of influence. property map. There is no doubt about the good • If a low-cost airline serves either KBP or IEV and the coordination between the institutions involved, but same low-cost airline also maintains its operations at due to the experience in many other similar UKBC, UKBC may increase its quota up to 25%. processes, the transfer and use of the land for airport • The rapid development of connected technologies is activities can be complicated and cause delays in the turning to e-commerce. The growth of e-commerce construction and start-up, especially in the has already a profound effect as manufacturers seek construction of the airport access. to reach their customer as quickly and cost- • The airport operator has to take into account the effectively as possible. Business to Business need to establish a fast, safe, efficient, regular and transactions are starting to be expected to function cheap communication between Bila Tserkva and more like Business to Consumer transactions. Kiev and other parts of UKBC’s catchment area. • Growing tourist flow and religious pilgrims.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -72-

5 Scenarios for Airport Development

5.1 Air Traffic Forecast Methodology

Because no empirical data is available to support an estimation to foresee the air traffic growth at Bila Tserkva in the near future, the proposed methodology here faces with the most effective tool: the deep knowledge of air transport dynamics.

In our mental process in the qualitative analysis of the conditions given in an air traffic forecasting study is based on the observation of air transport conditions as a whole as well as the measurement of the particular aeronautical conditions of the airport, at the same time the socioeconomic context is analysed and, if applicable, mentally compared with previous experiences; that is, the conditions examined are compared with similar circumstances in other airports and their evolution is reviewed. Once all the information in mind and sufficiently validated and justified, we proceed to the expert opinion.

A forecasting method for long-term demand in Bila Tserkva is adopted, thus covering the existing gap in this planning area: typically, for long-term forecasts experts’ insights are preferred over other forecasting techniques (quantitative), which usually do not work as well in the long term. This, therefore, leads to the creation of a qualitative forecasting model with solid, proven support, which is based on the analysis of airports of familiar evolution.

The methodology used to study the foreseeable evolution of passenger demand is based on an estimation made through scenario analysis with the aim of improving the quality of the information available for planning and investment decisions. The estimation method is based on the qualitative analysis of the most affecting factors and the market trends. Among the techniques used, the most relevant ones are:

• Value Judgement This technique is based on the expertise of and interviews to qualified personnel. It is used to interpret the possible and existing guidelines for the air traffic period from 2020 to 2030 and to define the scenarios for demand development.

• Time Series Trends The time series curves are used to project air traffic under the assumption that the trend observed from 2020 to 2030 can be projected into 2050. The main thesis is to establish a valid trend as shown by the traffic levels for a long period.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -73-

Therefore, we aim at suggesting the use of this same mental process orderly by applying quantitative methods for the analysis of information and obtaining time series for behaviour ranges by means of the comparison among airport systems that have similar conditions at the same period and at different periods. The evolution of historical data about the air traffic in an airport is compared with the information about air traffic in another similar airport for a given previous period (e.g. ten years).

The aim is to discover whether it is possible to apply a comparative method for estimating the same growth values to an airport with the historical evolution of another airport or market, which five, ten, or fifteen years before presented certain similar general conditions (aeronautical, social, economic, etc.) to the ones presented by the airport under our analysis. If there are certain evolution patterns in air traffic volumes according to the given parameters, then given one airport, which operates with the scenario defined by the measurement parameters and identified another airport or other airports that in some point in time had similar conditions, the growth historical values from the latter can be applied to the former, thus estimating the airport’s growth for the forthcoming years.

In this way, a forecasting model for long-term demand in airports is created, thus covering the existing gap in this planning area: typically, for long-term forecasts experts’ insights are preferred over other forecasting techniques (quantitative), which usually do not work as well in the long term. This, therefore, leads to the creation of a qualitative forecasting model with solid, proven support, which is based on the analysis of airports of familiar evolution.

The model is based on the assumption that if a sufficiently large airport data base is looked into, the current levels of air traffic of the airport under study would have already been recorded in some other moment in one of the airports in the database, whose subsequent evolution is recorded as a historical value. Figure 13 illustrates this assumption.

At present, UKBC has not established a remarkable business portfolio. Rather, there is a believe, based on a qualitative assessment, that Bila Tserkva may build up the opportunities to develop its aeronautical business focused on some business segments:

• low cost passenger traffic, • charter flights, • air cargo, • aircraft maintenance, and

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -74-

• general aviation.

It is clear that the more efficient way to develop UKBC is the specialization of the airport by traffic segments in order to obtain maximum performance.

Figure 13. Forecasting Model

5.2 Potential to Attract Air Traffic

As verified throughout previous sections, there are a series of factors that must be taken into account if one wishes to endow with credibility the expected passenger and aircraft traffic results in the future.

Among the factors that generate or condition the air traffic, it has been observed that those that most may influence the evolution of air traffic in Bila Tserkva are:

• The growth of the national economy, and the purchasing power of the population resident in the catchment area of the airport • The stimulus for the demand through the participation of the low-cost airlines. • The attraction of air traffic demand of the upcoming airport developments in Zhuliany and Boryspil. • The requirement of airport certification and international status to start commercial operations, • The free access and free competition in prices and services to the air transport markets between the European Union and Ukraine, • The optimization of an air service development program management of both commercial and cargo air traffic.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -75-

5.2.1 Economy

One of the traditional factors in the estimation of air traffic demand is based on the economic context of the region where the airport is located and, more particularly, the gross domestic product (GDP), as it is a parameter that brings together several factors of the economy and is representative of the financial health of a region or a country. As a general rule, the growth of air traffic has been linked to variations in the gross domestic product, with an elasticity of around 2 points. It can be said that the economy and the demand for air freight and passenger traffic grow together.

According to the Ukraine's aviation transport strategy for the period up to 2030, air passenger traffic will get to, approximately, 71 million passengers in 2030. In 18 years, Ukraine will be, in volume of passenger traffic, similar to those enjoyed today by consolidated airports in mature markets, such as Australia, Canada, Turkey, South Korea, or Thailand, in economies that are close to or exceed USD 1 billion of GDP, compared to the current USD 93.27 thousand millions in Ukraine (see Figure 14).

Figure 14. Gross Domestic Product Benchmarking of Countries with Similar Total Air Passenger Traffic at Present as the Air Traffic Expected in Ukraine in 2030

1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6

GDP in EU Billions in EU GDP 0.4 0.2 0 Ukraine Thailand Turkey Australia S. Korea Canada

This means that, if the forecast of the Ukraine's aviation transport strategy is met, we can expect, at the same time, a growth of the Ukrainian economy with an increase of the GDP per capita, PPP (current international $), over 20,000 USD or more, in comparison with the actual 8,271 USD. It is obvious that Bila Tserkva would benefit from this scenario by a simple induction of demand.

The relationship between air traffic and the economy is shown in Figure 15 drawn from Eurocontrol sources, where the national GDP of European countries is linked to the specific air traffic records of each country.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -76-

The main arguments to believe that Bila Tserkva can have a profitable future is linked to an increase in the domestic air traffic. As it is known, the national air traffic is considerably low for a country with the dimensions and population present at Ukraine. The growth of the Ukrainian GDP and, as a consequence, the average income per capita. A more than predictable increase of the aeronautical activity in the domestic market would give UKBC its own market niche in its area of influence.

Figure 15. Correlation of per capita GDP records in European countries with respect to air operations in the corresponding countries.

If we introduce the value of GDP per capita of Ukraine (US$ 8,271) in Figure 15 we obtain a theoretical value adjusted to the trend curve of 0.3 trips per capita compared to the current value of 0.28 trips per capita.

If the number of trips per capita increases as the GDP per capita does and is approaching the value of 1 trip per capita, Ukraine would reach a GDP per capita above 20,000 dollars. This growth would be equivalent to a GDP growth of 15%.

5.2.2 Multiple Airport Systems

In Kyiv region, air traffic between the airports of Boryspil, Zhuliany and, hypothetically, Bila Tserkva is distributed following the rules of the market of free competition without regulation by any authority. This scenario implies the greatest uncertainty in terms of air traffic.

The effect of a low-cost airline in the main airports, either KBP or IEV, and the same low-cost airline also operates at Bila Tserkva, the market share of the airline increases by 15%,

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -77- even if the other airlines match the competition of the low-cost company. Therefore, the airport (UKBC) may increase its quota up to 25% of the regional air traffic demand.

Competition between the three airports can be judged by comparing attributes:

• congestion, • surface access and • airport charges.

Congestion Surface access Airport charges KBP Boryspil shows no Time of access is 40 minutes Subject to state regulation and capacity constraints in ministerial approval. the long term IEV As the air traffic grows Time of access from Included in the list of special Zhuliany declines downtown Kiev at peak hour airport charges for aircraft from a degradation of is about 30 minutes and passenger services. service levels UKBC No problem of Time of access from Kiev is Subject to state regulation and capacity. Runway may about 90 minutes ministerial approval. It may extend to 3 300 meters apply decreasing coefficients up to 0.2 to the marginal rates.

The lack of capacity limitations at Bila Tserkva, while Zhuliany declines from a degradation of service levels, provides an opportunity for Bila Tserkva to increase air services in the long term.

If the time of access to the Bila Tserkva airport from Kiev by a fast, safe, efficient and regular mode of transportation can be reduced, it provides better coverage of the area of influence.

The legal nature of all airport tariffs in Ukraine has the character of a fee, which implies the approval of the rates by the Government and reduction of the management capacity of the services by the amount of their tariffs when having to be approved by the Government.

The Board of Directors of the airport proposes to the Government, through the Ministry of Infrastructure, the approval of the fees. Its establishment, modification and regulation of the main elements must be included in the Order No. 433. That is, the change in the airport fees is provided by Ministerial Order.

In summary, Bila Tserkva cannot adjust the airport charges based on its commercial strategy because it is subject to Government regulation and ministerial approval. This means that the influence of air fares on the development strategy of airports is very limited. This data

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -78- must be taken into account due to the influence that the fare structure may have on the distribution of traffic segments.

The airport fees represent significant costs for all airlines. The traditional companies (Ukraine International Airlines) generally have very limited control over them, since UIA operate in KBP to provide high levels of comfort and facilities to their passengers. It requires sophisticated systems and facilities for passengers and baggage handling. Check-in should be able to designate seats, providing passengers on a multi-stage trip with boarding passes until their final destination and labelling their luggage accordingly. This type of companies also seeks high levels of service for their customers.

On the contrary, low cost companies do not require any of this. They do not try to make flight connections because their business are point-to-point routes. This means that low- cost companies look for airports where fares are lower, or where they can benefit from generous grants or incentives.

5.2.3 Ukrainian Regulation

Under the Common Aviation Area Agreement, if signed, any EU airline is granted the privilege of the ninth freedom of the air. They can operate domestic routes within the Ukrainian territory, without the need for the route to start or end in the EU. This scenario stimulates the possibilities of operation of domestic routes by the European airlines potentially operating from Bila Tserka, it is assumed that the prices of domestic routes would be more competitive. Without this agreement, it is expected that the domestic market remains very undeveloped for local operators as at present.

Another important factor of the Ukrainian regulation is the requirement to obtain the status of international airport by the Government. Without this certificate, the airport cannot engage in discussions with the different institutions involved in the operation and design of the airport, such as, for example, customs, air traffic controllers, airspace designers, etc. The procedure is based on a simple request from the Ministry of Infrastructure to the Council of Ministers, which must approve it. The approval criteria are based on the will of the Council and on the arguments presented by the Ministry.

5.2.4 Low Cost Airlines

The main driver of the air traffic demand at Bila Tserkva is the attraction of airline operations of major low-cost airlines.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -79-

According to recent news, a particular LCC announced that it will open 10 new routes to Boryspil Airport: Barcelona, Bratislava, Gdansk, Krakow, London Stansted, Poznan, Stockholm, Vilnius, Warsaw and Wroclaw. The entrance of LCCs into the Ukrainian market is a strong incentive to air traffic for the contribution of international passengers and the reduction of air tickets’ prices. Wizzair operates the same routes that Ryanair plans to do, so the competitiveness between the two airlines will be very strong.

As a remark of the typical business model of LCCs, one reason for a LCC to maintain operations in Boryspil would be the possibility of operating national routes in Ukraine under the directives of the Common Aviation Service Agreement. Otherwise, the competitive advantages of Ryanair are limited by having to share the same financial resources as other traditional airlines in Boryspil, and where the growth potential of that airport is linked to its main international connecting airline.

Bila Tserkva's potential is based on the fact that most successful low-cost companies behave in a similar way. The main characteristics of this typical model are the following:

• They operate with very low costs to offer very low rates. For this, these companies try to maximize the number of seats available on the plane to reduce the cost per seat, the time of assistance to aircraft to thirty minutes or less, passenger services such as meals, beverages, newspapers, etc., as well as reduce the crew to the minimum necessary for security reasons. • They serve secondary airports that are not too saturated to serve important cities. The use of secondary airports generally implies that the airport charges, the costs associated with the stay of the aircraft and other similar expenses are lower. • Using these airports, the average trip times can be reduced in fifteen or twenty minutes thanks to short turnaround times, fewer delays in the boarding gates and less airspace saturation on approach. Likewise, short scales and maximum punctuality are provided. • This type of airport does not usually have restrictions on slots or capacity problems, so that airlines can plan perfectly the most convenient schedule of their flights for which additionally they do not have delays.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -80-

Under these operating conditions, LCC's alternative to operating in Kiev passes through Bila Tserkva, since Wizzair is based in Zhuliany.

An intermediate scenario proposes that LCCs establish part of its operations in Bila Tserkva but maintain other operations in Boryspil and Zhuliany to exploit the domestic market.

5.2.5 Airport Management

As competition for air traffic increases during difficult economic periods, airlines stop operating at an airport because demand is inadequate to cover all aircraft seats at profitable prices, and they are concentrated in the most profitable markets. For that reason, Bila Tserkva District Council and the airport operator needs to understand the fundamental keys of air service and what they can be done to convince commercial airlines and air freighters that Bila Tserkva is a financial opportunity.

The optimization of an air service development program management of both commercial and cargo air traffic to attract airlines is a key factor in the development of scenarios of air traffic growth. The main issue with the incentives to encourage the air traffic demand is that these programs cannot be maintained forever and are expensive for the community if the initial goals are not accomplished.

The responsible department in the BTDC should design strategies to develop new routes in existing and emerging markets; so that it becomes an interface between airlines, the airport, and the community; work with the main businesses and other key economic actors in Bila Tserkva to ensure that transport needs are covered and help airlines to better understand the market opportunities; and, in short, ensure that airports serve as an effective economic engine for the region under a principle of economic and social benefit, activating the mechanisms to measure the benefits of investments that, in a short time, are considered necessary to promote the measures to be applied.

Due to the intense competition between airports (Boryspil, Zhuliany and Bila Tserkva) and limited air resources (air traffic demand), BTDC would need to offer a certain form of financial incentives to attract selected airlines to Bila Tserkva on top of the appropriate airport charges in compliance with the Order No. 408/15099.

The participation of the BTDC and social leaders in air service development initiatives ensures the credibility of the financial incentives offered to the chosen airlines.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -81-

However, because travellers do not want to pay higher rates at the airport of preference, that does not justify the application of incentives. There are multitude of failed attempts to increase demand by incentivizing airlines through stimuli of this type, instead of letting the market flow according to demand, together with a lack of commitment and interest on the part of of the business circle of the region.

There are a variety of financial incentive techniques. Those that are susceptible of application in the case of Bila Tserkva airport system have been selected:

• Minimum Guaranteed Income. The minimum guaranteed income is an agreement for a certain amount of income that an airline receives for a route during a certain period of time. • Purchase of Guaranteed Tickets. Guaranteed ticket purchase programs ensure, in an effective manner, that the chosen airline will have a certain volume of revenue for a certain air passenger traffic, making easier to negotiate the rate reduction. • Subsidies on costs. Subsidies are a broad category of financial incentives that offset some aspect of the costs of operating an airline. • Marketing and advertising. Communities make marketing or advertising on behalf of the airline's new service (for an outbound or inbound market). • In-kind Contributions. In-kind contributions refer to products, merchandise, or services donated by companies, agencies, or other types of actors, that should otherwise be acquired by the airline. • Expert consultants in route promotion. Consultants can provide information on the industry and socioeconomic conditions to airlines.

5.2.6 Tourism

According to the Strategy of Tourism Development by Ministry of Economics, the tourism market in Ukraine and the religious pilgrims flow are expected to grow from the existing 13 million of people visiting Ukraine for leisure and religious matters to the forecasted 36 million expected in 2030.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -82-

5.3 Scenarios of Airport Growth

From the analysis of the factors of greatest impact, three scenarios have been chosen that impact the potential of air traffic demand as a whole at Bila Tserkva Airport based on the probability of occurrence.

From 2020 to 2050, the following three scenarios have been considered. Table 9 shows the factors that are considered the most representative when explaining the demand for predictable air traffic from Bila Tserkva Airport and are classified according to their positive or negative influence, as well as their external character or internal to the airport itself.

From the probability of occurrence of the factors listed below, we will obtain the two possible scenarios (high and low) in which the future evolution of the traffic demand of Bila Tserkva Airport is expected to fluctuate.

Table 9. Matrix of Factors with the highest incidence in the foreseeable development from Bila Tserkva Airport

FACTORS SCENARIOS HIGH LOW

An expected growth of the Ukrainian A slower growth of the Ukrainian Ukrainian GDP economy of about 15% annually in 10 economy by 4% or less per year. years.

The competitiveness between the 3 airports of the system can be assessed by Zhuliany and Boryspil airport Multiple airport comparing the attributes of airport developments use up the demand system capacity, land access and air fares. generated by the region. The population resident in the catchment The travel time by ground modes. area of the airport. If EU Directive 2009/12 on airport charges is not implemented in the short term, UKBC If signed, the Common Aviation Area cannot negotiate airport fees. Ukrainian aviation Agreement may boost the domestic regulation traffic by letting EU LCCs to make Requires the international status to allow domestic flights. commercial operations to airports in foreign countries.

Ryanair may increase in participation in Ryanair is expected to start operations the commercial traffic in UKBC where it from KBP, keeps developing the domestic Low-cost airlines may operate with no restraints and at market under Common Aviation Area lower costs. Agreement and fails to move to UKBC.

Optimization of an air service Airport development program management of Air service development programs cannot management both commercial and cargo air traffic to be maintained forever and are expensive. attract airlines.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -83-

5.3.1 Base Scenario

A well-designed transport infrastructure in relation to demand, well integrated in the territory and meets a consolidated demand in the region, induces an additional demand.

5.3.1.1 Air Passengers - Base

In this baseline scenario, the following three conditions are assumed to have a high probability of occurrence:

1) The Common Aviation Service Agreement is approved so that European airlines can operate domestic flights in Ukraine. In this way, Ryanair could operate domestic routes in Ukraine and provide a considerable competitive advantage in the price of tickets. 2) The Ukrainian economy increases at a rate of 10% per year in the period between 2020 and 2030. This factor produces an increase in the purchasing power of the population in the area of influence of Bila Tserkva. As a result, the profile of the average passenger will clearly show a trend characterized by: • higher purchasing power • more working flexibility and mobility • cheaper and easier-to-get air tickets • a growing demand for long-haul pleasure trips • a positive disposition to short-lasting movements 3) Bila Tserkva manages to attract major LCCs through a reduction in airport tariffs or through incentives. Ryanair continues to operate from Boryspil some routes to develop the domestic market, but the best financial conditions at Bila Tserkva are better suited for its classic business model to operate other international routes.

According to this scenario, the passenger traffic starts at about 97,000 passengers in 2020, reaching about 0.6 million passengers in 2030 at an annual rate of 20%, and hence the trend goes up to 1.62 million passengers by 2050. This growth trend achieves a very positive compound annual growth rate of 9.8% in a period of 30 years.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -84-

Table 10. Base Prognosis of Passengers Volume Horizon Passengers (x1000) 2020 97.81 2030 602.4 2040 1109.9 2050 1617.04 CAGR% 2020-2030 19.9% 2030-2040 6.3% 2020-2050 9.8%

5.3.1.2 Air Cargo - Base

As a general rule, air carriers take advantage of the synergies of the transport of merchandise on commercial passenger aircraft. In Bila Tserkva this scenario is not foreseen, or it is not anticipated to produce a considerable impact.

The scenario that is expected is a development of a specialized cargo centre, where transits and cargo connections can be made under advantageous financial conditions. Some freight companies have expressed their decision to operate a cargo terminal in UKBC. Their decision is taken, apparently, by the will expressed by air freighters of transports to operate in an airport where they are granted better competitive advantages.

The volume of air cargo is obtained, also, by the hypothesis of variation in the number of operations of air cargo aircraft. In terms of air cargo, this scenario of economic growth of Ukraine of an annual rate of about 10%, would be reflected in Bila Tserkva with the presence of up to 4 cargo aircraft per week in 2030.

That is, it is assumed that in 2020 the beginning of cargo activities will be 3 weekly flights with aircraft with a capacity of 50 tons. This hypothesis gives a volume of about 7 650 tons in 2020, while in 2030 it is assumed up to 8 weekly flights with aircraft of the same capacity, which gives some 21,700 tons in 2030, at an annual rate of 20.5% in this period. The trend of the time series gets an annual compound growth of 5.1% to reach 33 650 tons in 2050.

The split between import and export air cargo has considered the national statistics of cargo flow from the State Statistics Service of Ukraine of 51% of imports and 49% of exports.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -85-

Table 11. Base Prognosis of Cargo Activity

Exports Imports Total Cargo Horizon (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) 2020 3 891 3 759 7 650 2030 10 963 10 591 21 554 2040 14 710 14 211 28 921 2050 17 115 16 534 33 649 CAGR% 2020-2030 10.91% 10.91% 10.91% 2030-2040 2.98% 2.98% 2.98% 2020-2050 5.06% 5.06% 5.06%

5.3.1.3 Aircraft Movements – Base

By the same methodology used in the prognosis of passengers and air cargo serves in the estimation of the evolution of aircraft operations.

From the 5 weekly flights of commercial aircraft there are 652 operations per year in 2020 and from the 15 flights in 2030 about 4 000 operations. The long-term time series projection estimates 7 400 operations of commercial aircraft in 2040 and about 4,000 commercial aircraft operations in 2050.

Also, the volume of movements of air cargo aircraft assumes 3 weekly flights in 2020 and 8 weekly flights in 2030, reaching by the time series to almost 14 weekly flights in 2050. From these assumptions annual values are reached of about 150 cargo aircraft operations in 2020, about 430 operations in 2030 and up to 675 operations, approximately, in 2050.

The volume of General Aviation and MRO operations is obtained by a trendline of the historical series. In this way, some 3,875 general aviation operations and 64 MRO operations are obtained in 2020, reaching some 16 350 general aviation operations and some 68 MRO operations in 2050.

Total annual aircraft operations follow an annual growth of 6.1% from some 4,750 operations in 2020 to 27 864 operations in 2050.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -86-

Table 12. Base Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment

Passenger Cargo General TOTAL MRO ATM ATM Aviation ATM

2020 652 153 3872 64 4741 2030 4016 431 8029 66 12542 2040 7399 578 12186 67 20230 2050 10780 673 16343 68 27864 CAGR% 2020-2030 19.9% 10.9% 7.6% 0.3% 10.2% 2020-2050 9.8% 5.1% 4.9% 0.2% 6.1%

5.3.2 High Scenario

5.3.2.1 Air Passengers - High

Conditions for the accomplishment of the high scenario:

1) A major low-cost airline, such as Ryanair, may decide to transfer all its operations to UKBC. In airports where this scenario happened, that is, where Ryanair entered operation, there is usually an increase in air traffic between 15% and 30% in the first five years, but then traffic stabilizes, giving a percentage of total variation around 10% per year in the long term. As it is well known, Ryanair uses to operate from secondary airports where they can operate with no restraints and at lower costs so that they offer minimal services and make their business profitable. In this scenario, traffic at UKBC intend to operate pure point- to-point traffic which do not count on the resources for hub operations and do not need connections with other flights. This group includes origin-destination flights as well as regional traffic, charter flights and operations by low-cost airlines. The quality standards required by low- cost airlines and charter flights may fit the types of operations performed at Bila Tserkva. 2) The Ukrainian economy achieves annual rates of up to 15% until 2030, as the increase in global air traffic in Ukraine reaches 71 million passengers. To achieve that figure, Ukraine will be, in volume of passenger traffic, similar to those enjoyed today by consolidated airports in mature markets.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -87-

3) The Common Aviation Service Agreement is approved so that European airlines can operate domestic flights in Ukraine. Also, a key way to develop the commercial domestic traffic is the use of small regional jet planes (Embraer 145 and Bombardier CRJ) to set connections between domestic cities and Bila Tservka. The infrastructure investments as planned for UKBC will give to any airline a chance to develop a highly efficient airport since it will be able to offer the best connections for trips between Bila Tserkva and other cities in Ukraine that do not have any direct service linking them. 4) Bila Tserkva gets a Government approval of the fare conditions and, at the same time, apply some kind of incentive that motivates Ryanair to operate all its routes from the airport.

In this scenario the percentage of annual variation applied is high rate of 10.8% from a volume of about one thousand passengers in 2020 to about 2.2 million in 2050. The value of 2020 comes from applying about 12 weekly flights, which could be two or three routes, up to almost 0.65 million passengers in 2030 at an annual rate of 20%. In the long term, the annual growth rate slows down at 6.2% in 2050.

Table 13. Prognosis of Passengers Volume in Scenario 3 Horizon Passengers (x1000) 2020 150.34 2030 978.35 2040 1806.36 2050 2634.37 CAGR% 2020-2030 20.6% 2030-2040 6.3% 2020-2050 10.0% 5.3.2.2 Air Cargo - High

The high scenario of air cargo activity is based on the following main drivers:

1) As admitted by the Bila Tserkva airport, two or three air cargo operators will move their operations to Bila Tserkva if the facilities are suitable for air cargo handling. 2) The attraction of cargo companies from Asia to Bila Tserkva represents a great opportunity due to the geographical position of Ukraine. Some

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -88-

market opportunities are flows between Middle East and Europe and between Asia and Europe.

Table 14. Prognosis of Cargo Volume in High Scenario Horizon Exports Imports Cargo (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) 2020 5 188 5 012 10 200 2030 15 742 15 208 30 950 2040 21 235 20 515 41 750 2050 25 430 24 568 49 998 CAGR% 2020-2030 11.74% 11.74% 11.74% 2030-2040 3.04% 3.04% 3.04% 2020-2050 5.44% 5.44% 5.44%

5.3.2.3 Aircraft Movements - High

The high scenario of aircraft operations considers the high scenario for both air passengers and air cargo. The evolution of aircraft operations assumes an aircraft load factor of 150 passengers per commercial aircraft. This leads to 1 002 operations per year in 2020 and about 6522 operations in 2030. The long-term time series projection estimates 12 042 operations of commercial aircraft in 2040 and about 17 562 commercial aircraft operations in 2050.

Also, the volume of movements of air cargo aircraft assumes 4 weekly flights in 2020 and 12 weekly flights in 2030. From these assumptions annual values are reached of about 200 cargo aircraft operations in 2020, about 620 operations in 2030 and up to 1000 operations, approximately, in 2050.

The volume of General Aviation and MRO operations is obtained by a trend of the historical series presented in Section 4.2. In this way, some 4 260 general aviation operations and some 78 MRO operations are obtained in 2020, reaching some 8 832 general aviation operations and some 83 MRO operations in 2050.

Total annual aircraft operations follow an annual growth of 6.5% from some 5543 operations in 2020 to some 36622 operations in 2050.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -89-

Table 15. High Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment

Passenger ATM Cargo ATM General Aviation MRO TOTAL ATM 2018 0 0 2,658 47 2,705 2020 1002 204 4259 78 5543 2030 6522 619 8832 81 16054 2040 12042 835 13405 82 26364 2050 17562 1000 17977 83 36622 CAGR% 20.6% 11.7% 7.6% 0.4% 11.2% 10.0% 5.4% 4.9% 0.2% 6.5%

5.3.3 Low Scenario

5.3.3.1 Air Passengers - Low

In this scenario, Bila Tserkva airport has to face up to a much more competitive market and needs to grow strong in order to keep the relevant role Bila Tserkva will play in the future of Ukraine.

This base scenario includes the following assumptions:

1) A growth of the Ukrainian economy with an increase of the GDP per capita up to about 15,000 USD or more, in comparison with the actual 2,185 USD. 2) Granted the international status to allow commercial operations between Bila Tserkva and other airports in foreign countries. 3) Optimization of an air service development program management of both commercial and cargo air traffic, 4) Provision of adequate and efficient infrastructures and facilities for airlines to operate in UKBC, and 5) Allow aviation operations in an economical and safe way.

Bila Tserkva would benefit from this scenario by a simple induction of demand thanks to the expected growth of the economy anticipated by the estimations of air traffic growth from the Ministry of Infrastructure.

It is assumed that the airport will begin its commercial activities with the operations of 3 weekly flights of a B738 or similar. This aircraft has a capacity of approximately 185 passengers. Also, it is assumed that the occupation factor is 85%. Until 2030, the number of frequencies is increasing to 15 weekly flights, representing 3 aircraft with daily flights to UKBC.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -90-

According to these hypotheses, a scenario of prognosis of passenger traffic is created that starts at 45,000 passengers in 2020, reaching some 226,000 passengers in 2030, and hence the linear trend allows reaching almost 600,000 passengers by 2050. This growth trend achieves a very positive compound annual growth rate of 17.5% in the first 10 years of operation. Table 16. Prognosis of Passengers Volume in Scenario 1 Horizon Passengers (x1000) 2020 45.2 2030 226.4 2040 413.4 2050 599.7 CAGR% 2020-2030 17.5% 2030-2040 6.2% 2020-2050 9.0%

5.3.3.2 Air Cargo - Low

In this scenario 1, air cargo plays a role in the production and consumption of goods in the airport catchment area. Bila Tservka airport may offer some strengths, such as:

• The possibility to apply competitive landings and cargo handling rates. • Customs, Sanitary and Phytosanitary Services with flexible schedules adapted to the needs. • A multimodal logistic platform. Mode mix optimization and modal shift from air to less-expensive road, or perceived more- environmentally friendly, maritime and rail transport has been occurring for some years. • Specialized facilities for the treatment of certain type of cargo, mainly perishable or express delivery services.

This type of airport is usually chosen by freighters, both general cargo and Courier, as hubs of their business by air and ground.

This scenario introduces Bila Tserkva’s ability to function as a regional hub for all- cargo carrier. The economic benefits that accrue to the region of Bila Tserkva chosen to serve as air cargo hub is similar in scope to the economic benefits gained by communities which serve as passenger airline hubs. The essential differences are that most cargo operations are conducted during evening hours, and the ground access and congestion problems associated with many large passenger hubs simply do not exist.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -91-

Table 17. Prognosis of Cargo Volume in Low Scenario Exports Imports Cargo Horizon (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) (x1000 Kg) 2020 2 594 2 506 5 100 2030 6 183 5 974 12 157 2040 8 185 7 907 16 092 2050 8 799 8 501 17 300 CAGR% 2020-2030 9.08% 9.08% 9.08% 2030-2040 2.84% 2.84% 2.84% 2020-2050 4.16% 4.16% 4.16%

5.3.3.3 Aircraft Movements - Low By the same methodology used in the prognosis of passengers and air cargo serves in the estimation of the evolution of aircraft operations.

From the 3 weekly flights of commercial aircraft there are 245 operations per year in 2020 and from the 15 flights in 2030 about 1,200 operations. The long-term time series projection estimates 2,600 operations of commercial aircraft in 2040 and about 4,000 commercial aircraft operations in 2050. Also, the volume of movements of air cargo aircraft assumes 2 weekly flights in 2020 and 5 weekly flights in 2030, reaching by the time series to almost 7 weekly flights in 2050. From these assumptions annual values are reached of about 100 cargo aircraft operations in 2020, about 255 operations in 2030 and up to 350 operations, approximately, in 2050. The volume of General Aviation and MRO operations is obtained by a trend of the historical series presented in Section 4.2. In this way, some 3,500 general aviation operations and some 49 MRO operations are obtained in 2020, reaching some 14 700 general aviation operations and some 52 MRO operations in 2050.

Total annual aircraft operations follow an annual growth of 5.4% from some 4,000 operations in 2020 to some 19 105 operations in 2050.

Table 18. Low Prognosis of Aircraft Traffic Movements by Traffic Segment

Passenger ATM Cargo ATM General Aviation MRO TOTAL ATM 2020 302 102 3 485 49 3 938 2030 1 510 243 7 226 50 9 029 2040 2 756 322 10 967 51 14 096 2050 3 998 346 14 709 52 19 105 CAGR% 2020-2030 17.5% 9.1% 7.6% 0.2% 8.7% 2020-2050 9.0% 4.2% 4.9% 0.2% 5.4% ATM – Aircraft Traffic Movements

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -92-

5.4 Air Traffic Forecast

5.4.1 Air Passenger Forecast

Table 19. Air Passenger Forecast 2020-2050

Year Low Scenario Base Scenario High Scenario 2020 45 288 97 815 150 342 2021 59 534 146 339 233 143 2022 78 161 197 053 315 944 2023 96 788 247 767 398 745 2024 11 ,415 298 481 481 546 2025 134 042 349 195 564 347 2026 152 669 399 909 647 148 2027 171 296 450 623 729 949 2028 189 923 501 337 812 750 2029 208 550 552 051 895 551 2030 226 440 602 396 978 352 2031 245 804 653 479 1 061 153 2032 264 431 704 193 1 143 954 2033 283 058 754 907 1 226 755 2034 301 685 805 621 1 309 556 2035 320 312 856 335 1 392 357 2036 338 939 907 049 1 475 158 2037 357 566 957 763 1 557 959 2038 376 193 1 008 477 1 640 760 2039 394 820 1 059 191 1 723 561 2040 413 447 1 109 905 1 806 362 2041 432 074 1 160 619 1 889 163 2042 450 701 1 211 333 1 971 964 2043 469 328 1 262 047 2 054 765 2044 487 955 1 312 761 2 137 566 2045 506 582 1 363 475 2 220 367 2046 525 209 1 414 189 2 303 168 2047 543 836 1 464 903 2 385 969 2048 562 463 1 515 617 2 468 770 2049 581 090 1 566 331 2 551 571 2050 599 717 1 617 045 2 634 372 CAGR% 2020-2030 17.5% 19.9% 20.6% 2020-2050 9.0% 9.8% 10.0%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -93-

Figure 16. Air Passenger Forecast 2020-2050

3

Base Millions 2.5 Low

High 2

1.5 Passengers

1

0.5

0 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -94-

5.4.2 Cargo Activity Forecast

Table 20. Air Cargo Forecast 2020-2050

Low Scenario Base Scenario High Scenario Year Tons Tons Tons Import Export Total Import Export Total Import Export Total 2020 2 594 2 506 5 100 3 891 3 759 7 650 5 188 5 012 10 200 2021 3 110 3 005 6 115 5 131 4 956 10 087 7 151 6 908 14 059 2022 3 511 3 392 6 903 6 069 5 863 11 932 8 627 8 334 16 961 2023 3 898 3 765 7 663 6 877 6 643 13 520 9 856 9 521 19 377 2024 4 268 4 124 8 392 7 598 7 341 14 939 10 928 10 558 21 486 2025 4 625 4 468 9 093 8 258 7 978 16 236 11 891 11 487 23 378 2026 4 966 4 798 9 764 8 868 8 568 17 436 12 770 12 337 25 107 2027 5 293 5 114 10 407 9 439 9 119 18 558 13 584 13 124 26 708 2028 5 605 5 414 11 019 9 975 9 637 19 612 14 346 13 859 28 205 2029 5 902 5 701 11 603 10 482 10 127 20 609 15 063 14 551 29 614 2030 6 183 5 974 12 157 10 963 10 591 21 554 15 742 15 208 30 950 2031 6 451 6 232 12 683 11 420 11 033 22 453 16 389 15 833 32 222 2032 6 703 6 475 13 178 11 855 11 453 23 308 17 008 16 430 33 438 2033 6 940 6 705 13 645 12 271 11 854 24 125 17 601 17 004 34 605 2034 7 163 6 919 14 082 12 667 12 238 24 905 18 172 17 556 35 728 2035 7 371 7 120 14 491 13 047 12 605 25 652 18 724 18 088 36 812 2036 7 563 7 306 14 869 13 410 12 955 26 365 19 257 18 603 37 860 2037 7 741 7 478 15 219 13 757 13 290 27 047 19 773 19 102 38 875 2038 7 904 7 635 15 539 14 089 13 611 27 700 20 274 19 586 39 860 2039 8 052 7 779 15 831 14 407 13 918 28 325 20 761 20 057 40 818 2040 8 185 7 907 16 092 14 710 14 211 28 921 21 235 20 515 41 750 2041 8 303 8 022 16 325 15 000 14 492 29 492 21 698 20 961 42 659 2042 8 407 8 121 16 528 15 278 14 759 30 037 22 149 21 397 43 546 2043 8 496 8 207 16 703 15 543 15 015 30 558 22 589 21 823 44 412 2044 8 569 8 278 16 847 15 794 15 259 31 053 23 020 22 239 45 259 2045 8 628 8 335 16 963 16 035 15 491 31 526 23 442 22 646 46 088 2046 8 672 8 377 17 049 16 263 15 712 31 975 23 855 23 046 46 901 2047 8 701 8 406 17 107 16 481 15 921 32 402 24 260 23 437 47 697 2048 8 715 8 419 17 134 16 686 16 120 32 806 24 657 23 821 48 478 2049 8 714 8 419 17 133 16 881 16 308 33 189 25 047 24 198 49 245 2050 8 799 8 501 17 300 17 115 16 534 33 649 25 430 24 568 49 998 CAGR% 2020-2030 9.1% 9.1% 9.1% 10.9% 10.9% 10.9% 11.7% 11.7% 11.7% 2020-2050 4.2% 4.2% 4.2% 5.1% 5.1% 5.1% 5.4% 5.4% 5.4%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -95-

Figure 17. Air Cargo Forecast 2020-2050

60000

Low

50000 Base

High

40000

30000 Air cargo Air (Tonnes)

20000

10000

0 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -96-

5.4.3 Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast

Table 21. Base Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050

Year Base Scenario

Cargo General Pax ATM MRO TOTAL ATM Aviation 2020 652 153 3872 64 4741 2021 976 202 4288 65 5531 2022 1314 239 4703 65 6321 2023 1652 270 5119 65 7106 2024 1990 299 5535 65 7889 2025 2328 325 5951 65 8669 2026 2666 349 6366 65 9446 2027 3004 371 6782 66 10223 2028 3342 392 7198 66 10998 2029 3680 412 7613 66 11771 2030 4016 431 8029 66 12542 2031 4357 449 8445 66 13317 2032 4695 466 8860 66 14087 2033 5033 483 9276 66 14858 2034 5371 498 9692 66 15627 2035 5709 513 10108 66 16396 2036 6047 527 10523 66 17163 2037 6385 541 10939 67 17932 2038 6723 554 11355 67 18699 2039 7061 567 11770 67 19465 2040 7399 578 12186 67 20230 2041 7737 590 12602 67 20996 2042 8076 601 13017 67 21761 2043 8414 611 13433 67 22525 2044 8752 621 13849 67 23289 2045 9090 631 14265 67 24053 2046 9428 640 14680 67 24815 2047 9766 648 15096 67 25577 2048 10104 656 15512 68 26340 2049 10442 664 15927 68 27101 2050 10780 673 16343 68 27864 CAGR% 2020-2030 19.9% 10.9% 7.6% 0.3% 10.2% 2020-2050 9.8% 5.1% 4.9% 0.2% 6.1%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -97-

Table 22. Low Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050

Low Scenario Year

Cargo General Pax ATM MRO TOTAL ATM Aviation 2020 302 102 3485 49 3938 2021 397 122 3859 49 4427.2 2022 521 138 4233 49 4940.7 2023 645 153 4607 49 5454.1 2024 769 168 4982 49 5967.5 2025 894 182 5356 50 6481.9 2026 1018 195 5729 50 6992.4 2027 1142 208 6104 50 7503.8 2028 1266 220 6478 50 8014.2 2029 1390 232 6852 50 8523.7 2030 1510 243 7226 50 9029.1 2031 1639 254 7601 50 9543.5 2032 1763 264 7974 50 10051 2033 1887 273 8348 50 10558.4 2034 2011 282 8723 50 11065.8 2035 2135 290 9097 50 11572.2 2036 2260 297 9471 51 12078.7 2037 2384 304 9845 51 12584.1 2038 2508 311 10220 51 13089.5 2039 2632 317 10593 51 13593 2040 2756 322 10967 51 14096.4 2041 2880 327 11342 51 14599.8 2042 3005 331 11715 51 15102.3 2043 3129 334 12090 51 15603.7 2044 3253 337 12464 51 16105.1 2045 3377 339 12839 51 16605.5 2046 3501 341 13212 51 17105 2047 3626 342 13586 52 17606.4 2048 3750 343 13961 52 18105.8 2049 3874 343 14334 52 18603.3 2050 3998 346 14709 52 19104.7 CAGR% 2020-2030 17.5% 9.1% 7.6% 0.2% 8.7% 2020-2050 9.0% 4.2% 4.9% 0.2% 5.4%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -98-

Table 23. High Scenario for Aircraft Movement Traffic Forecast 2020-2050

High Year

Cargo General Pax ATM MRO TOTAL ATM Aviation 2020 1002 204 4259 78 5543 2021 1554 281 4717 80 6632 2022 2106 339 5173 80 7698 2023 2658 388 5631 80 8757 2024 3210 430 6089 80 9809 2025 3762 468 6546 80 10856 2026 4314 502 7003 80 11899 2027 4866 534 7460 81 12941 2028 5418 564 7918 81 13981 2029 5970 592 8374 81 15017 2030 6522 619 8832 81 16054 2031 7074 644 9290 81 17089 2032 7626 669 9746 81 18122 2033 8178 692 10204 81 19155 2034 8730 715 10661 81 20187 2035 9282 736 11119 81 21218 2036 9834 757 11575 81 22247 2037 10386 778 12033 82 23279 2038 10938 797 12491 82 24308 2039 11490 816 12947 82 25335 2040 12042 835 13405 82 26364 2041 12594 853 13862 82 27391 2042 13146 871 14319 82 28418 2043 13698 888 14776 82 29444 2044 14250 905 15234 82 30471 2045 14802 922 15692 82 31498 2046 15354 938 16148 82 32522 2047 15906 954 16606 82 33548 2048 16458 970 17063 83 34574 2049 17010 985 17520 83 35598 2050 17562 1000 17977 83 36622 CAGR% 2020-2030 20.6% 11.7% 7.6% 0.4% 11.2% 2020-2050 10.0% 5.4% 4.9% 0.2% 6.5%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -99-

5.4.4 Passenger Peak Hour Forecast

The estimate passenger peak hour values for each horizon is based on typical standards of space requirements criteria for the design of air terminals based on the relationships from annual figures for standards of space requirements.

Table 24. Passenger Peak Hour Forecast 2020-2050

Year Low Scenario Base Scenario High Scenario 2020 113 174 221 2021 132 218 282 2022 153 257 334 2023 173 292 381 2024 191 324 423 2025 207 354 462 2026 223 381 499 2027 238 408 534 2028 252 433 567 2029 265 457 598 2030 278 479 628 2031 291 502 657 2032 303 523 686 2033 314 544 713 2034 326 564 739 2035 337 583 765 2036 348 602 790 2037 358 621 815 2038 369 639 838 2039 379 657 862 2040 389 674 885 2041 398 691 907 2042 408 708 929 2043 417 724 951 2044 426 740 972 2045 435 756 993 2046 444 772 1013 2047 453 787 1033 2048 461 802 1053 2049 470 817 1073 2050 478 832 1092

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -100-

6 Airport Alternatives In this part of the report, airport alternatives will be established based on the requirements for optimum airport development. The estimates of airport requirements are based on the needs of the existing airport in order to comply with current ICAO standards and criteria, and on the demand and capacity analysis. The airport requirement analysis considers potential key direct commercial flights from Bila Tserkva, using the B737-800/900, and A300-600F for cargo flights.

The estimation of the airport requirements of Bila Tserkva airport is based on the following parameters for one scenario of airport development:

• The critical design aircraft is the A300-600F • One to two commercial aircraft operate at peak hour a B737-800 in 2020 and 4 B737-800 in 2030. • The arrivals passenger peak hour in is about 300 passengers in 2020 and 860 passengers in 2030. • The departs passenger peak hour of passengers is about 300 passengers in 2020 and 860 passengers in 2030. • The total peak hour of passengers is about 400 passengers in 2020 and 1 150 passengers in 2030.

6.1 Aircraft size and model

To determine the airport requirements, it is important to determine the types and sizes of aircraft that will use the airport.

The biggest expected type of aircraft using the airport will be the A300-600F. So, the critical aircraft to determine the strength and length of the runway pavement is the A300- 600F. This aircraft is categorized by the ICAO Aerodrome Design Manual, Part 1- Runways as a code letter “D”. A code letter “D” includes aircraft with wingspans of 36 meters up to but not including 52 meters.

In line with the guidelines marked by the Ministry of Infrastructure with the objective of obtaining the aerodrome certification, the type of aircraft that will remain critical for commercial activities is the B737-800/900.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -101-

Table 25. Critical Aircraft for Commercial Passengers and Cargo

Critical Design Aircraft Aircraft Model Commercial passengers B737-800 Cargo A300-600F

This is particularly important in order to establish separation standards for aerodrome facilities such as runway, taxiway and apron pavement.

6.2 Airport Classification

According to the information presented above for selecting the A300-600F as the critical aircraft to specify the physical characteristics for airport configuration and design, Bila Tserkva Airport should be classified, as a minimum:

• Airport Code Reference 4D • for instrument flight rules, and • precision instrument approaches.

On the other hand, as aircraft at present approaches the airport following visual flight rules, the airport guarantees that the airfield components are in compliance with ICAO safety distance standards based on a non-instrument runway.

In conclusion, the Bila Tserkva Airport must be as a minimum designed for aerodrome reference code 4D for precision runway in conformity with the critical distances of ICAO Annex 14.

6.3 Runway

6.3.1 Runway Length

Considering the following assumptions:

• Average annual maximum temperature = 22ºC • Elevation of the airport = 180 meters • Average slope of runway = 0.3% • Runway length = 2 500 meters

According to the B737-800/900 performance manual, the maximum range at take-off weight required for the B737-800/900 to take-off in a 2,500 meters long runway is 1,400 NM.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -102-

Table 26. Runway Length Requirements for Different Aircraft Models

Full payload 2,500m-long Runway Aircraft Runway Length Flight range Flight range Meters NM NM B738 2,890 2,100 1,400 A320-200 2,200 2,000 2,000 B767-200 2,560 4,000 2,100 B767-F 3,290 4,000 2,700 A300-600F 2,860 3,000 2,500 A310-300F 2,860 4,500 4,000 B747-800F 3,410 4,500 2,800

The existing single runway with a declared distance of 2,500 will not require an extension to meet the future demand based on the runway length requirements at the forecasted flight range obtained for each critical aircraft. The existing runway of 2,500 m is adequate for B737-800/900 aircraft operations.

Figure 18. Flight Distances from Bila Tserkva

6.3.2 Strength of the Runway

The analysis of the existing runway pavement at Bila Tserkva Airport indicates that the existing pavement section of Runway 18/36 appears to have adequate capacity for the large aircraft loads.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -103-

The capacity analysis and the identification of requirements for the runway pavement is based on the ACN-PCN method. This analysis is undertaken with the understanding that this method is used to establish feasibility study requirements but is not intended for detailed pavement design.

The approach used consisted of an analysis and computations of the PCN of the pavement. The ACN (Aircraft Classification Number) for the selected aircraft was then determined based on the design data provided by the aircraft manufacturers. The ACN obtained for the selected aircraft was compared to the PCN previously computed for the pavement structure. A lower PCN would indicate that the existing pavement structure does not have the required capacity and would need to be strengthened.

The comparison of the ACN of the aircraft used for the pavement analysis presented at Figure 19 was based on maximum take-off weight, flexible pavement, and low strength sub-grade category.

Figure 19. ACN/PCN Competitive Comparison

According to the runway length analysis, it is not considered that the B737-800/900 aircraft will be loaded with a maximum take-off weight of 74,000 kg. These weight values provide a PCN of about 53 for maximum Take-off Weight, 49 for 74,000 kg recommended for a 2,500 meters long runway, and 25 for minimum Take-off Weight, respectively.

The PCN reported in the latest version of the Bila Tserkva AIP is 21/R/B/X/U for Runway 18/36 and 34/R/B/X/U for taxiways Main and 4. Based on the ACN computed for

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -104- the B737-800/900 (ACN = 49), the runway 18/36 pavement would certainly need to be strengthened to bear the critical aircraft.

Loads larger than the defined load shortens the design life whilst smaller loads extend it. Except for massive overloading, pavements in their structural behaviour are not subject to a limiting load above which they fail. Behaviour is such that the pavement can sustain the definable load for an expected number of repetitions during its design life.

6.3.3 Runway Width

For geometrical planning purposes (separation requirements, pavement widths, etc.) the design aircraft is typically the aircraft with the largest wingspan.

The design aircraft based on the Ministry of Transportation´s expectations is the B737- 800/900 for near future operations. This aircraft would be the largest aircraft expected to operate at UKBC on a regular basis in support of anticipated development.

The Code number, as listed above is “4E” which is based on standards for instrument runway ICAO parameters.

According to Annex 14´s airport reference code 4E, the runway width should be 45 meters with shoulders of 7.5 meters at each side of the runway. The existing runway meets the requirements for the operations of both the B737-800/900 and B747-800F.

The existing single runway with a declared distance of 42 meters will require replace the surface markings up to 45 meters to meet the future demand based on the runway width requirements at the forecasted flight range obtained for the critical aircraft.

6.3.4 Runway Strip

As seen in Table 27, the strip including the precision approach runway 18/36 shall extend laterally to a distance of at most 150 m; and shall extend before both thresholds and beyond the end of both stopway for a distance of 60 m. The strip shall be prepared to minimize hazards arising from differences in load bearing capacity.

Also, the portion of the runway strip to 30 m before both runway thresholds should be prepared against blast erosion.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -105-

Table 27. Runway Strip Requirements

Runway Strip Characteristics Dimensions Distance beyond the end of the runway or stopway 60 m Runway strip width 300 m Graded area width 150 m Runway blast erosion area 30 m Longitudinal slope in the graded area < 1.5% Transverse slope in the graded area < 2.5% Transverse slope beyond the graded area within the runway strip < 5% upward

6.3.5 Runway End Safety Area

According to Annex 14 standards, a runway end safety area shall be provided at each end of the runway strip where the aerodrome reference code number is 4 and shall extend from the end of the runway strip to a distance of at least 240 m, while the width of the runway end safety area shall be at least twice the runway width or 90 meters.

The runway end safety area should provide a cleared and graded area in the event of an aeroplane undershooting or overrunning the runway. The upward slope of any part of the runway end safety area should not penetrate the approach surface, while the longitudinal downward slope should not exceed a slope of 5% and the transverse slope should not exceed an upward or downward slope of 5% too.

Table 28. Runway End Safety Area Requirements

Runway End Safety Area Characteristics Runway end safety area length 240 m Runway end safety area width 90 m Longitudinal slope < 5% downward Transverse slope < 5% upward < 5% downward

6.3.6 Wild Hazard Management

The airport operator should check for evidence of birds or animals on the runways, taxiways, aprons, and ramps or other signs that wildlife problems may have developed – such as large flocks of birds on or adjacent to the airport.

In addressing wildlife hazards at a certificated airport, one of three types of entries is needed:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -106-

• a statement of negative activity; • a brief statement of the no-hazard findings of a Wildlife Hazard Assessment; or • a Wildlife Hazard Management Plan.

Since birds are the primary hazard to aircraft, reducing the potential for bird strikes at airports involves one or more strategies. In this case, active control includes harassing or frightening techniques and lethal control.

The method proposed can be

• bird distress call tapes, • pyrotechnic devices, • propane cannons, • whistles, • decoys, and • shotgun blasts with screamers shells.

6.4 Taxiway Configuration

The existing configuration of the taxiway system because the airport capacity is not threatened. However, the airfield geometry and distances in compliance with ICAO Annex 14 standards once the airport classification is upgraded to Aerodrome Reference Code 4C for instrument runway.

ICAO states maintaining specific distances between the airfield components and areas free of obstacles for safety reasons based on the Aerodrome Reference Code criterion.

6.4.1 Taxiway Width and Shoulders

Also, for an instrument aerodrome reference code number E, a straight portion of the taxiway should have a width of not less than 23 m and shoulders which extend 10 m symmetrically on each side of the taxiway so that the overall width of the taxiway and its shoulders is not less than 44 m for aerodrome reference code letter E.

According to ICAO Annex 14, Section 3.11., a taxiway, other than an aircraft stand taxilane, should be included in a strip area clear of objects which may endanger taxiing aeroplanes. A taxiway strip should extend symmetrically on each side of the centre line of the taxiway throughout the length of the taxiway to at least 26 m from the centre line.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -107-

Table 29. Taxiway Width and Shoulders Requirements

Dimensions Taxiway Width 23 m Overall Taxiway & Shoulder Width 44 m Overall Taxiway strip 44 m

6.4.2 Critical Distances

Main taxiway is not parallel to runway but diverges from a distance of 260 meters to a maximum distance of 400 meters.

To comply with the aerodrome reference code under instrument runways, Table 30 provides a summary of the critical distances applied in the concept design of the airfield facilities.

Table 30. Summary of Critical Distances for Aerodrome Reference Code for instrument runways

Parameter Distance (m) 4C 4E 4F Distance between the centre lines of the Runway and the Taxiway 168 182.5 190 Taxiway, other than aircraft stand taxilane, centreline to object 26 76 91 Distances between the centre lines of the Taxilanes 40.5 72.5 87.5 Aircraft stand taxilane centreline to object 22.5 40 47.5

The application of the critical distances in conformity with the critical aircraft requires that the taxiway should be located at a minimum distance of 168 meters from the runway centreline to avoid the violation of the transition surface by the aircraft.

The alternative recommended here is to keep the existing taxiway system at the existing location, and provide room for the construction, when necessary, of a parallel taxiway at 182.5 or 190 meters from the runway centreline.

6.4.3 Landing, Safety and Obstacle Free Zones

The following airfield safety requirements have been taken into account in preparing the airfield requirements:

• Runway Width: According to ICAO standards regarding the runway dimensions to serve Code 4E aircraft, the runway width shall be of 45 meters with shoulders of 10 meters each.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -108-

• Runway Strip: ICAO states that the runway strip may be 150 meters wide from runway centreline to both sides of the runway (300 meters wide in total). • Runway End Safety Area: The RESA must extend the distance recommended by ICAO Annex 14 from the end of the runway strip to 240 m. • Taxiway Width: According to Annex 14 standards regarding the taxiway dimensions to serve Code E aircraft, the taxiway width shall be of 23 m with shoulders 10 m wide at both sides. • Taxiway Strip: The taxiway strip should extend 26 meters symmetrically on each side of the centreline of the taxiway.

6.5 Runway safety areas

The runway safety areas include the requirements for runway strip and runway end safety areas.

The graded runway strip should be extended to 150 meters. The implementation of the runway end safety areas at UKBC airport site poses no potential challenges.

In addition, the airport site presents enough land available to develop the runway system with the appropriate safety areas.

6.6 Obstacle Limitation Surfaces

The use of an aerodrome can be restricted by the characteristics of the terrain that surround it as well as by construction activities or structures that are in its proximity, diminishing the declared distances of the runway and increasing the minimum operational requirements.

The purpose of the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) values displayed in Table 31 is to define the sectors of airspace that should remain free of obstacles, in order to minimize dangers that these obstacles present for the aircraft.

With regards to vertical space, the standards recommend that flight paths be obstacle- free for the safe landing and take-off of aircraft, and that the imaginary horizontal surfaces over the airport should also be obstacle free.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -109-

In order to maintain the airspace surrounding the airport free of obstacles, ICAO Annex 14 defines the following OLS for Code 4E airports with precision approach CAT I procedures:

• Conical surface • Inner horizontal surface • Approach surface • Inner approach surface • Transitional surface • Inner transitional surface • Balked landing surface • Take-off climb • DVOR/DME protection surface • ILS localizer antenna protection surface • ILS glide path antenna protection surface

Table 31.Dimensions and Slopes of Obstacle Limitation Surfaces

Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ICAO 4E code Conical Surface Slope 5% Height 100 m Inner Horizontal Surface Height 45 m Radius 4,000 m Inner Approach Width 120 m Distance from THD 60 m Length 900 m Slope 2% Approach Surface Length of inner edge 300 m Distance form THD 60 m Divergence 15% First section – Length 3,000 m First section – Slope 2% Second section – Length 3,600 m Second section – Slope 2.5% Horizontal section – Length 8,400 m Horizontal section – Slope 15,000 m

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -110-

Obstacle Limitation Surfaces ICAO 4E code Transitional Surface Slope 14.3% Inner Transitional Surface Slope 33.3% Balked Landing Surface Length of inner edge 120 m Distance form THD 1,800 m Divergence 10% Slope 3.33% Take-off Climb Surface Length of inner edge 180 m Length of outer edge 1,200 m Divergence 12.5% Slope 2%

Figure 20 provides an illustration of the location and geometry of these surfaces in reference to the runway system.

Figure 20. Obstacle Limitation Surfaces

Source: ICAO Annex 14, Chapter 4, Figure 4-1.

The Inner Approach, Transitional, Inner Transitional, Balked Landing and Take-Off Climb surfaces directly impact the runway requirements at UKBC. The obstacle limitation

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -111- surfaces are designed to be permanent and to ensure their effectiveness the OLS should be incorporated into laws or local decrees regarding land use and construction.

6.6.1 Conical Surface

The conical surface is an ascending 5% sloped surface which extends 100 meters upward from the periphery of the inner horizontal surface.

6.6.2 Inner Horizontal Surface

The inner horizontal surface is located in a horizontal plane on the aerodrome and its environs. The radius or outer limits of the inner horizontal surface is 4,000 m for Code 4 airports measured from the runway thresholds and 45 meters height measured from the airport reference elevation.

6.6.3 Transitional Surface

The purpose of the transitional surface is to serve as the obstacle limitation surface for buildings and fixed objects, including aircraft parked at the apron. The slope of the transitional surface is 14.3% for CAT I Precision Approach runways of Code number 4 and is measured in a perpendicular vertical plane to the runway centreline from the edge of the runway strip and outwards.

6.6.4 Inner Transitional Surface

These surfaces are similar to those of the transitional surfaces but are closer to the runways. Their limits are: a lower edge stretching from the side edge of the inner approach surface to its inner edge and from there all along the strip, running parallel to the runway, to the inner edge of the balked landing surface, moving on along the side edge of such surface to the horizontal surface; and an upper edge that lies in the inner horizontal surface. The slope of this surface is 33.3%.

6.6.5 Approach Surface

The approach surface is a combination of sloped planes preceding the threshold. The approach surface’s divergence required for a Code Number 4 CAT I precision approach runway is 15% with a length of the inner edge of 300 m and a distance from the runway end of 60 m.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -112-

• The first section of the approach surface must have a length of 3,000 m and a slope of 2%. • The second section must have a slope of 2.5% and a length of 3,400 m or extended to the point passing through the top of any object that governs the obstacle clearance limit. • The third section should be a horizontal plane 150 m above the runway threshold elevation, or beyond the point at which the 2.5% slope intersects the horizontal plane passing through the top of any object that governs the obstacle clearance limit.

The approach surface of runway 18 is protruded by a row of small buildings parallel to the runway centreline at a distance to about 175 meters in a residential area and adjacent to the airport on the right side of the approach to runway 18.

This initial analysis indicates a need to address obstacle clearance minimums for aircraft operations. In keeping with the methodology laid out in PANS-OPS (paragraph 1.1.5, Part II, Section 1) for precision approach procedures, the basic ILS surfaces will be analysed for penetrations and possible mitigation.

6.6.6 Inner Approach Surface

The Inner Approach Surface is made up of a rectangular part of the approach surface with the following limits: an inner edge matching the inner edge of the approach surface but 120 m long; two sides stretching out from the inner edge and spread parallel to the vertical plane containing the runway centreline; and an outer edge that runs parallel to the inner edge at 900 m.

The inner approach surface was not found to be affected by any topographic obstacle.

6.6.7 Balked Landing Surface

This surface has the following limits: an inner horizontal edge running perpendicularly and at the level of the runway centreline, located 1,800 m after the threshold; two sides coming out from the inner edge end and diverging by 10% from the vertical plane that contains the runway centreline; and an outer edge at the inner horizontal surface. The slope of this surface is 3.33%. The balked landing surface was not found to be affected by any terrain obstacle.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -113-

6.6.8 DVOR/DME protection surface.

The safety zone is enclosed by a circle with a radius of 300 m centred on the VOR facility. In this area there shall be no trees, fences, wire lines, structures, machinery or buildings. Beyond the safety zone a circle with a radius of 3,000 meters centred on the VOR, the height of structures, buildings, wire lines and fences shall not protrude a vertical angle of more than 3%.

6.6.9 ILS localizer antenna protection surface.

It is a rectangle surface of 600 meters x 200 meters centred on the localizer array. Neither metallic objects higher than 1.2 meters nor non-metallic objects higher than 2.5 meters are allowed within this area. The area originating at the centre of the localizer array covering an arc of 60° in the direction of both the runway and the opposed track terminating 5,000 meters from the localizer array. No trees, metal-walled structure, structural steel work or non-metallic object should subtend a total vertical angle greater than 2%.

6.6.10 ILS glide path antenna protection surface.

The safety zone covers a rectangle with one side parallel to the runway at the other side of the location of the glide path antenna at a distance of 200 meters from the runway centreline and the parallel side at 200 meters from the glide path antenna. The other two perpendicular sides of the rectangle are at 200 meters behind the glide path antenna and 600 meters from the runway threshold. Then, no metallic fences, power lines, telephone lines, buildings, roads or railroads are allowed protruding a vertical slope of 2% originating at the safety zone in the area starting at the glide path antenna covering an arc of 40º and extending 5,000 m in the approach direction from the runway threshold.

6.6.11 PANS-OPS Basic ILS Surfaces

The Basic ILS surfaces are defined in the PANS-OPS and represent the simplest form of protection for the ILS operations. These surfaces are extensions of certain Annex 14 surfaces, with reference to the whole section up to the level of the runway threshold and modified after the latter for protecting the balked landing surface.

Figure 21 provides an illustration of the location and geometry of the Basic ILS surfaces in reference to the runway system.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -114-

Figure 21. Illustration of Basic ILS Surfaces

Source: Procedures for Air Navigation Services - Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS), Volume II, Construction of Visual and Instrument Flight Procedures, Document 8168, ICAO, Part I, Section 1, Chapter 1, Figure II-1-1-6.

The Basic ILS height (z) at each point is calculated by introducing the corresponding distances, in meters, to the runway threshold (x) and to the extended runway centreline (y). The Basic ILS equations provide the values of the Basic ILS height (z) at each point and their infringement, in meters.

6.6.12 Conclusions of the Airport Obstacle Analysis

The proposed airport configuration with orientation 18/36 does not comply with ICAO safety requirements of the obstacle limitation surfaces for both the Annex 14 OLS and Basic ILS surfaces. This is because the Basic ILS Surfaces protect aircraft operations for precision approach procedures. The Basic ILS Surfaces define the typical contours for standard sized aircraft (PANS-OPS Part II, Section 1, Chapter1) within which it is assumed that flight paths of the aircraft carrying out ILS approaches and their potential missed approaches will be contained with a high probability. In other words, objects not penetrating the Basic ILS Surfaces do not represent any danger for the ILS operations and, as a result, no cuts of hills penetrating the OLS or ILS surfaces are necessary to guarantee aircraft precision procedures.

Taking into account the description of each of the surfaces free of obstacles, it is recommended:

• The presence of new objects should not be allowed or existing ones should not be enlarged above the lower levels of the approach surface, except when in the opinion of the competent authority, the object is shielded by another existing object, or it is determined after an aeronautical study, that the object would not compromise safety or significantly affect the regularity of aircraft operations.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -115-

• To guarantee the appropriate airport development, UKBC should be properly protected under an explicit national or local regulation for land uses so as to prohibit the erection of any new construction that exceeds in height the obstacle limitation surfaces established for the runway.

6.7 Airfield Lighting System

The airfield lighting system should comply with Category I requirements and comprise of runway threshold, end, centreline, touch down zone and edge lights, and taxiway centreline and edge lights:

• Threshold lights will be placed on a line perpendicular to the runway centreline and never more than 3 m from the external side of it. Threshold lights will be evenly arranged between the runway side lights at intervals not greater than 3 m. • Runway edge lights will be installed along the runway in two parallel lines equidistant to the border or at a maximum external distance of 3 m. Their longitudinal spacing will be regular and not greater than 60 m. The colour of these lights is variable white except when the threshold is offset; in which case the lights between the beginning of the runway and the threshold will be red in the approach direction. • Runway end lights will be installed on each runway end on a line perpendicular to its centreline, as near the end as possible and never more than 3 m from the external side of it. The system will consist of at least six variable red lights with beam direction based on the approach. • Taxiway edge lighting system will be installed on every taxiway. Its purpose is to delimit the operating width of the taxiways under poor visibility conditions. In straight taxiway sections, taxiway edge lights will be regularly and longitudinally arranged, at most, every 60 m. They will be arranged in shorter intervals in bends, accesses to taxiways from flight runways and aprons. They will be fixed, and their colour will be variable blue. • Signs shall be provided to convey a mandatory instruction, information on a specific location or destination on the movement area or to provide

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -116-

other information. Signs shall be illuminated when intended for use at night in association with instrument runways where the code number is 3.

ICAO states that visual approach slope indicators must be used in order to make approaches to the runway easier, regardless the existence of additional approach aids, either visual or other. The requirements to be fulfilled are taken from Annex 14; fulfilling any of them makes it necessary to build those systems. A PAPI system will be used in each landing runway.

6.8 Radio Navigation Aids

In line with the reasoning on runway approach optimization for the existing runway orientation providing non-precision procedures, GNSS should be used with caution and knowledge when used as the primary steering reference for critical flight applications, such as non-precision approaches. Additional support based on conventional procedures can be recommended. Due to the expected size of the airport, it is proposed to install an ILS CAT I and a VOR / DME to provide lateral orientation to the aircraft.

For this reason, an ILS CAT I is also recommended for Bila Tserkva Airport to provide precision approaches. The VOR/DME is still an important navigation aid and adequate with support for possible GNSS signal failures and because many aircraft have the equipment on board. In addition, it should be noted that all RNAV operations are critically dependent on valid data, and the operator must have in place quality processes that ensure the validity of the data by the VOR / DME signal.

While VOR equipment has the benefit of weather tolerance and accurate mapping, the GNSS RNAV approach is being increasingly used as the main navigational approach because of its greater accuracy and ability to take into account the curvature of the Earth. GNSS also has a lower transmitter cost per customer.

6.9 Commercial Aircraft Parking Apron Capacity

It is proposed to plan the configuration of the positions to angled nose out, introducing a taxilane parallel to the runway centreline at a distance of 190 meters.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -117-

Figure 22. Proposed angled nose out apron configuration

It is also recommendable to have a remote stand apron for cases of technical stops or in-line maintenance, thus preventing the use of a gate stand, which does not bring about any benefit for the aircraft or the passengers on it.

Regarding the minimum area required to accommodate the one aircraft, the dimensions of the B737-800/900 must be considered. A minimum area of about 7 000 m2 is required to accommodate one aircraft.

Table 32. Dimensions to accommodate the required B737-800 aircraft

Components B737-800/900 Fuselage length 39.47 m Wingspan 35.79 m Tail height 12.55 m Turning radii on ground 34.1 m Taxi-out area1 5 200 m2 1 Including area required to accommodate distance between the taxiway centreline and the aircraft. Also, it is worth adding to those cases the flights with specific security conditions, which for some reason it is more convenient not to let it dock next to the terminal building, regardless the isolated gate stand that the airport must have in compliance with 3.13.1 of Annex 14 of the ICAO’s Convention. Finally, it is as useful to add long-staying aircraft to this list.

Table 33. Apron Requirements for Commercial Aircraft Positions

Aircraft Positions Apron area m2 2020 3 16 000 2030 5 26 500 2040 6 31 750 2050 6 31 750

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -118-

It is a current practice to have some aircraft, which can be included in the cases abovementioned, taking a remote stand at a certain point in time, thus leaving the gate stand for use for as long as it is possible.

Figure 23. Proposed commercial apron construction with taxilane

6.10 Passenger Terminal

General standards have been developed for determining the adequacy of passenger terminal space requirements based on the estimated number of passengers to be accommodated during the peak hour.

Basic criteria have been developed to determine the adequate amount of space needed for the terminal using the estimated number of peak hour passengers. For domestic passengers, the criteria developed by IATA for various terminal functions is generally used. A criterion that can be used in initial planning to calculate terminal space requirements is a function of the total building space per passenger during the peak hour.

Gross terminal-area space requirements of between 0.0074 and 0.011 m² per annual enplaned passenger are reasonable, as an average, 0.01 m² per yearly passenger is generally adopted.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -119-

In the case of the parameter area per peak hour passenger, another estimate is obtained by applying the ratio of 14 m² per design-hour passenger recommended by the US FAA, although this range can grow up to 30 m² or higher (also could be lesser than 14 m²), depending on specific characteristics of the country, traveller profile, forecasted traffic, etc.

Compared to the values used in other airport facilities worldwide, the FAA ratio remains short. Among the available data are those of other similar terminals where the value oscillates between 18 and 45 m2/passenger. An average value of 35 m2/passenger is useful for capacity computation purposes.

ICAO also has standards for security inside the terminal building that requires passenger isolation in the waiting areas after having passed through a security control point.

As a result of this capacity analysis based on the most common parameters used in planning and design of airport terminal building at non-hub locations between 14 m2/PHP and 35 m2/PHP, Bila Tserkva Airport would require a gross the terminal area of about 12 000 m2 in 2020 to meet the expected demand during Phase 1, about 16 500 m2 in 2030 for Phase 2 and about 20,000 m2 in 2040 for Phase 3.

Table 34. Minimum and Maximum Terminal Requirements for the period from 2020 to 2050

Horizon Minimum Maximum Average Square Meters Square Meters Square Meters 2030 6 711 16 776 12 000 2040 9 437 23 593 16 500 2050 11 643 29 106 20 000

6.11 Car Parking Capacity

Vehicle parking requirements for different study horizons are estimated taking into account that the percentage of use of each transportation means is 40% of the peak hour passengers for buses, 10% for taxis, and 50% for private cars.

Table 35. Estimate of requirements of number of parking spots

Modes of 2030 2040 2050 transportation Bus 7 10 12 Taxi 12 17 21 Private car 360 507 624

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -120-

To estimate the area needed, it has been considered that a parking stand for a taxi occupies 15 m2, for a car 25 m2 and for a bus 100 m2.

Table 36. Estimate of parking area requirements (m2)

Modes of 2030 2040 2050 transportation

Bus 720 1 013 1 249

Taxi 180 255 315

Private car 9 000 12 675 15 600

TOTAL 9 900 13 943 17 164

Regarding employee stands, the FAA recommends 250-400 stands per million of passengers per year; therefore, the following table shows the number of stands and the area for them estimated as necessary for different demand horizons:

Table 37. Estimate of number of parking stands and area necessary for passengers and employees

Area 2030 2040 2050

Employees 3 750 m2 6 250 m2 10 000 m2

Passengers 9 900 m2 13 943 m2 17 164 m2

TOTAL 13 650 m2 20 193 m2 27 164 m2

6.12 Access road

At lower activity airports, a multilane roadway can serve both the ticketing and baggage claim areas. This roadway should provide lanes at the terminal curb for cars to park while loading or unloading, for the manoeuvring of vehicles, and for through traffic. A capacity per lane of 1,000 vehicles per lane per hour should be provided for at-grade interrupted flow conditions. This value approximates the flow relationship for urban arterial highways with signalized intersections; average speed range of 30 to 35 kilometres per hour. The primary access road should be able to handle peak hour passenger cargo traffic since the peak hour for both this traffic is expected to happen at the time of day. A lane width of 12 feet (3.6 m), with a minimum of one lane in each direction, is recommended.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -121-

Traffic leaving the terminal area will follow the remainder of the loop roadway to the connector road and to the highway intersection.

The Bila Tserkva Urban Plan presents the construction project of a bypass road that will cross the property of the airport, for which a change in access to the airport is proposed, directly from this beltway road.

Picture 34. Planned Belt Highway Crossing the Airport Property

6.13 Air Cargo Facilities

Among the diverse facilities and infrastructure comprising the cargo area, needs for cargo terminal buildings, which are included among first line activities, are estimated.

6.13.1 General recommendations

The following are some of the general recommendations that must be taken into account for designing the cargo terminal building:

• Facility flexibility to serve different types of existing air cargo (packages, voluminous or heavy cargo, in containers or pallets) and adaptability to possible changes which may be needed due to said cargo heterogeneity • Minimisation of processing time • Readiness for future expansions which must be carried out, as far as possible, with minimum changes on the basic concept of facilities, building structure and cargo handling systems.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -122-

6.13.2 Goods flow inside the terminal

Cargo handling depends, to a great extent, on the cargo flow configuration inside the terminal. To illustrate the cargo flows, it is necessary to clarify that international and domestic terminal facilities are physically combined terminals, making landside and airside access easier for both facilities. It is also helpful to define the type and number of activities interacting in the process:

a) Operation: An Operation occurs when a unit of cargo is lifted up or put down or moved during a process. Marking and labelling is considered an operation, as well as when information is given or received or when planning or calculating takes place (e.g. input from data systems). b) Inspection: An Inspection occurs when a unit of cargo is examined to determine proper packaging, acceptability for carriage, weighed, measured, etc. c) Transportation: Transportation occurs when a unit of cargo is moved from one place to another beyond the limited movements which occur during some operations and inspections. d) Delay: A Delay occurs to a unit of cargo when it is prevented from progressing to its next planned activity. e) Storage: Storage occurs when a unit of cargo is staged, prior to assembly, assembled, pending dispatch to aircraft, or held pending breakdown and/or Customs examination and/or delivery.

Figure 24 shows a typical cargo process flow diagram and the different activities, routes and links within the process.

In the case of international cargo, compliance with all government safety and security regulations (particularly customs) must be included in the operations layout and flows to ensure an approved basis of cargo handling in all facilities. Compliance with these standards should be accomplished without hindering cargo handling procedures. Approvals must be obtained from all authorities concerned, particularly from customs officials with respect to cargo processing and combined control and checkpoints on the established customs boundary.

The airport authority, airlines and cargo terminal operators are responsible for security measures to safeguard the airside area, aircraft and the cargo stored and processed in the area.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -123-

The necessary controls and provisions will be incorporated to the cargo flows. Air cargo contains a large percentage of high-value goods and valuables that require special attention during transport, storage and ground handling by airlines/operators. Besides special storage in vaults in the cargo terminal facility, additional escort and guard services to protect against theft and fraud will be considered.

Figure 24. Cargo Process Flow Diagram

Access to the operational section of the cargo terminal facility and to the adjacent airside area shall be controlled by the security services of the operator/airport authority. Entry to this area will be restricted to personnel belonging to the airlines, terminal operator and customs.

Fire prevention and protection for the terminals, the handling systems and the goods stored therein, as well as the staff will be incorporated in compliance with local and international standards and regulations.

Dangerous goods such as flammables, explosives, corrosives and radio-active materials will be handled and stored in accordance with IATA and local national regulations.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -124-

Working conditions and safety provisions for the facilities, systems and equipment used will comply with national standards and industrial practices.

For international cargo and sometimes for domestic cargo, customs control of imports and exports is required. The airlines/operator/shipper will provide customs with the goods and related documents at established check-points.

Efficient handling, with minimum obstruction by government control checks, and short storage time in the cargo terminal facilities will be achieved through facilitation agreements and with the approval by customs authorities.

In the wake of advances in technology and integrated databases, customs clearance is becoming more automated. Connection or integration with systems for airlines/handling operators and agents will significantly improve processing and clearance for cargo.

Other government controls are to be expected, with their separate requirements, such as animal quarantine for live animals, as well as food and plant control for produce shipments. The design of any new terminal facilities will accommodate these additional controls, where required, so they can be implemented to meet requirements which may arise.

6.13.3 Cargo terminal area parameters

To prepare a general estimate of the space required by air cargo at UKBC, the use of factors based on annual air cargo volumes is considered acceptable. There are different ratios to estimate the total surface that turns out necessary for a cargo terminal, which depend on how automated the facilities in question are.

With the aim of getting to a general estimation of the space required for air cargo operations in UKBC, it is acceptable to use ratios based on air cargo annual volumes. IATA suggests different values depending on the kind of cargo and the automation level of the premises, which can be used at planning when no further information is available.

Typical flows of air cargo at UKBC can be classified as follows:

• Cargo Aircraft (Airside Input) to Cargo Terminal to Cargo Distribution (Landside Output) • Cargo Collection (Landside Input) to Cargo Terminal to Cargo Aircraft (Airside Output) • Cargo Aircraft (Cargo Input) to Cargo Aircraft (Cargo Output)

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -125-

As shown in Table 38, cargo terminals are generally subdivided in three main categories.

Table 38. Categories of Cargo Terminals

Type Description Origin/Destination No cargo transfer among different aircraft Specialty Terminal Specially equipped terminals, capable of handling and processing specific requirements (i.e. sort express merchandise for shipping and delivery) Hub Terminal Cargo transfer among different aircraft

Cargo operations at UKBC would be better suited under the classification “origin / destination”, due to the fact that cargo handling operations are primarily based on the transfer from cargo terminal to aircraft and vice versa.

In 1993, the University of Rhine-Westphalia Airport Research Centre in Germany published a Report on Capacity Evaluation and Design Guidelines for Air Cargo Terminals. This document analysed 24 airports around the world, each with different air cargo flow levels, and concluded that air cargo terminal operating capacities are presented in Table 39.

Table 39. Surface parameters for cargo facilities by average airport sample

Category Parameters Tm/m2 Origin/Destination: 5 – 15 Specialty Terminal: 5 – 10 Hub Terminal: 10 – 20 Source: Capacity Evaluation and Design Guidelines for Air Cargo Terminals; University of Rhine-Westphalia Airport Research Centre. 1993

Also, the values proposed by IATA, based on annual volumes and used for planning the cargo facilities of the UKBC, are shown in Table 40.

Table 40. Surface parameters for cargo facilities by IATA

Parameters Automation level Tm/m2 m2/Tm Low 5 0.2 Medium 10 0.1 High 17 0.06

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -126-

The future requirements for the Cargo Building of UKBC should take a 10 T/m2 ratio, as regularly used for planning European airports. As cargo estimation handled at the airport goes from 5,100 Tons in 2020 to 12,750 Tons in 2030, the requirements for the cargo terminal area will be of about 510 m2 in 2020 and an increase to 1,275 m2 in 2030 up to 1,730 m2 in 2050. Table 41. Cargo Terminal Area Requirements

Horizon Cargo terminal area Square Meters 2020 765 2030 2 155 2040 2 892 2050 3 365

6.13.4 Cargo terminal building dimensions

According to IATA recommendations, a typical width of 120 meters and a minimum width of 90 meters should be planned.

• Pier length per vehicle

A 4-meter pier length per vehicle is recommended.

• Parking area for vehicles on piers

The necessary area will depend on the parking arrangement planned for vehicles on piers. IATA suggests 30 m length, if perpendicular. Therefore, the area per vehicle is estimated to be 120m2. The truck ramp, manoeuvring area, and auto parking area are also based upon recognized standards and similar facilities. The proposed layout depicts cargo trucks backing to a standard height dock (1.21 metres), with sufficient area for manoeuvring of both passenger vehicles and larger transports. The truck ramp should allow the parking of the larger transports for extended periods of time. Appropriate drainage, markings and lighting are implied, as are stairs and ramps for access from the truck ramp to the dock level.

A typical cargo terminal building distribution is shown in Figure 25.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -127-

Figure 25. Outline of cargo terminal building arrangement

Source: IATA Airport Development Reference Manual

6.13.5 Cargo Apron

For the design of cargo aprons used by pure cargo aircraft, ICAO suggests that it is convenient to have cargo aircraft separated from passenger aircraft due to the different type of facilities each one requires at the apron and the passenger and cargo terminal buildings.

It is a current regular practice to transport air cargo in passenger aircraft that make use of their holds to carry it together with the passengers’ baggage. This practice currently performed at KBP it is not expected at UKBC and will greatly influence the design and dimensions of the apron for cargo aircraft.

The main reason for this is that the total cargo moving at the airport will come from pure cargo aircraft and, therefore, the docking apron will have to fit the dimension requirements to serve these aircraft.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -128-

For cargo aprons, the calculation is based on the initial estimation of the total surface as starting information and not the calculation of the total number of stands. From these values and an apron configuration like the one below, it is possible to provide the cargo apron with aircraft stands shown in Figure 26.

Figure 26. Typical Cargo Apron

ICAO recommends the convenience of separating cargo and passenger aircraft due to the different types of facilities that each of them needs on the platform and, also, in passenger and cargo terminal buildings.

Only a part of the total cargo will move in the airport will come in freighters. The cargo apron will only have to size to service these aircraft.

The size of the loading platform includes the 1 parking position for A300-600F, taxiways on the apron, service roads, equipment parking areas and loading areas.

Table 42. Cargo Apron Requirements

Horizon Cargo Apron Square Meters 2020 5 000 2030 5 000 2040 5 000 2050 5 000

6.13.6 Aircraft Maintenance Area and Hangar Facilities

The requirements in terms of hangars, workshops and service aircraft facilities will mainly depend on the strategy to be developed by the airport operator. Currently, the area for aircraft service at UKBC is made up of two hangars, workshops and offices. The surface covered by both MRO, including the associated aprons, is not bigger than 8.3 hectares.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -129-

The surface required by the aircraft service area will mainly depend on the industrial activity developed at the airport, which will be larger or smaller in relation to the number of airlines that decide to service their aircraft in UKBC and the size of the aircraft.

Sufficient land will be reserved for the development of at least three (3) major Aircraft Maintenance Facilities. This is a high-volume bay planned to accommodate the finally selected type of aircraft. It is designed for housing, repair and maintenance activities of the aircraft. The height of the interior volume must accommodate one aircraft at a minimum; in a nose-in position and be capable of being raised or jacked for wheel repair. Adequate bay area, length and width are required for access and staging of maintenance equipment beyond the footprint envelope of the aircraft. It is anticipated that the side bay areas will be used for storage and staging of equipment. Equipment pits are required as part of the maintenance operation. This building will be fitted-out by a tenant who will be responsible for supply and fit-out of maintenance equipment and services to suit their specific aircraft maintenance program.

In conclusion, given the construction of a belt highway from P04 to P17 highway as planned in the land use plan of Bila Tserkva, crossing the airport property from North to the Southeast (see Picture 34), the number of aircraft maintenance facilities and surface required, including apron and hangars, is expected that the space requirements in UKBC for these activities will be at least the same as the existing ones, because a relocation of the existing MRO facilities will be necessary in the medium term, plus a potential new MRO that should provide the flexibility of serving up to ICAO Code C (A322/B738) Aircraft (see Figure 27).

Figure 27. Existing MRO Hangars Relocation

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -130-

Under these conditions, the following values in Table 43 are shown for the different horizons under consideration.

A revision of the design information of the aircraft service area from other airports has shown that there is no specific trend that allows for reaching a typical planning value.

Table 43. Number of Aircraft Maintenance Facilities and New Area Required

Horizon Number of Hangars New MRO area Square Meters 2020 2 14 000 2030 3 17 500 2040 3 17 500 2050 3 17 500

Aircraft maintenance areas should be located where there is access to taxiways systems and so as to avoid as much as possible aircrafts having to cross runways.

Aircraft Maintenance Facilities are required to enable appropriate levels of maintenance service standards. Maintenance is comprised of general routine servicing and major overhaul servicing activities.

Servicing of aircraft is usually completed at airports where airlines are based; however, scheduled, routine and emergency maintenance may be provided at other airports. It is also common for a third party to provide contract services to multiple airlines.

The hangars are designed to deal maintenance on aircraft in a ‘nose-in’ orientation with coverage for the entire aircraft. It allows the aircraft’s main components, including the wings, entry doors, landing gear, engines, and empennage to be protected from weather while working on them.

The apron area associated with the maintenance facility will also be constructed of rigid pavement (concrete) and thus be capable of supporting all varieties of aircraft while ensuring the damage caused by potential fluid spills will not deteriorate the paving. ‘High- mast’ overhead lighting, designed to ensure it does not interfere with the aircraft operations or penetrate obstruction clearance surfaces, is provided to ensure adequate lighting of the area for aircraft and vehicle manoeuvring. Mobile “Task” lighting units are typically used to support aircraft servicing.

The support and other ancillary facilities may be constructed as an integral part of the hangar or as standalone buildings. Adequate parking for employees and delivery vehicles

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -131- must be provided, as well as a truck ramp and dock to facilitate delivery of supplies and equipment. The specific location of these facilities will dictate the level of security provided within each building; however, provisions for the inspection of staff, vehicles and parts which will have direct access to the secure airside must be incorporated into the planning of each facility.

6.14 Aircraft Rescue & Fire Fighting Services

6.14.1.1 Aerodrome category

As the A300-600F has a fuselage overall length of 54.08 meters, the ARFF Category should be 8 for near activity at the airport, necessitating the need for 2 ARFF vehicle with capacity for a minimum of 27,300 litres of water and 450 kg. of powder to meet ICAO requirements for Category 8. However, an exemption in Annex 14 (page 9.3 - $ 9.2.3) states that if less than 700 movements per quarter, then the airport can reduce one category.

6.14.1.2 Fire station area

The ARFF facility will require the appropriate space to provide for the vehicle, support equipment and space for minor equipment maintenance. Additionally, the facility should support living quarters for personnel and storage of extinguishing agents.

Utilizing the recommended total facility size recommendation of 310 square meters from ICAO.

6.14.1.3 Fire station location

The facilities needed to render the firefighting service are derived from the response time of the rescue team and the fire extinction in an emergency case. This time allows for setting the maximum distance with respect to runway ends and any point of the movement area at which a station can be sited so that the determined time can be fulfilled, setting the influence area of each station.

The time to the place of the accident can be estimated using the following formula:

dtrav × 3,600 푡푟푒푠 = + 50 vtrav × 1,000

Where,

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -132-

dtrav is the distance to travel to the place of the accident or incident.

vtrav is the acceleration time, or time elapsed from start-up until 90 km/h are reached.

tres is the time of response for the rescue and fire-fighting service to reach the end of each runway or any other part of the movement area

ICAO recommends a two-minute response (2 minutes) as the operating target for the rescue and fire-fighting service, and it must never exceed three minutes (3 minutes), to the end of each runway or to any other part of the movement area, under optimal visibility and surface conditions.

This response time is defined as the period of time elapsed between the first call to the rescue and fire-fighting service and the application of fire foam by the first vehicle or vehicles that may participate, at a pace at least 50% of the discharge rate.

Table 44. Time of response of Fire Fighting Service facilities

Time to THD Radius of area of influence In seconds In meters 120 1,750 180 3,250

Also, a water and emulsifier refuelling tank (DREEM) which allows to minimize the filling time of the tanks after each exercise is recommended.

The proposed location of the ARFF facilities, as shown in Figure 28, will allow a time of response of less than 2 minutes to reach each of the runway thresholds.

Figure 28. Proposed ARFF location

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -133-

6.15 Air Traffic Control Tower

It is recommended to build a new control tower at a new location because of two reasons:

a. to guarantee minimum satisfactory sight angles to all runway thresholds from the air traffic controller position, and b. to update and modernize the ATC equipment and installations at the air traffic control cabin.

The Air Traffic Control Tower is solely responsible for all aircraft and vehicle movement on the movement areas of the airport, as well as all air traffic within 5 nm of and up to 3,000 feet above the airport, and therefore must have unobstructed lines of sight to all runways, taxiways, approaches and other aircraft movement areas designated to be under the control of the ATCT. This requirement dictates the ATCT be placed at an elevation well above both fixed and mobile obstructions, and at a central location which facilitates the controller’s observation of the critical areas mentioned above.

6.15.1 ATCT Location

The location of the control tower and the elevation of the cabin must be such that the controllers have an unobstructed direct view of the runways, taxiway and other areas of controlled aircraft movement at the airport and will depend on several values.

I. In the first place, it will be mandatory to determine the need for separating arrival and take-off control from apron control, and whether –as a result of it– different facilities for air traffic control will be necessary. II. The maximum height must go beyond the obstacle limitation surfaces for the instrument landing operations to be carried out in the runways as well as for the failed approach manoeuvres of each runway; it must not affect the obstacle limitation height of each approach.

Once this was decided, certain parameters will have to be complied with for a certain site to be accepted as appropriate for a control tower. The proposed air traffic control tower is shown in Figure 29.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -134-

Figure 29. Proposed location of the TWR

6.15.2 ATCT Height

For UKBC case, with supposed precision instrument approaches category I, it means that it cannot break the runway obstacle assessment surfaces (OAS).

The control tower must be high enough to guarantee that the ends and the movement areas under control can be seen. It is a compulsory condition that the controller can tell the number and type of aircraft/vehicle and their movement and relative location from the tower’s control area.

So, the sight angle with respect to each runway thresholds must range from an acceptable 1% to a satisfactory 1.6%. Applying one or the other determines the control tower’s minimum height.

It must be located as centrally as possible with respect to runway systems it controls. There is no regulation that sets the maximum distance to the farthest runway end. Expert experience recommends that this distance cannot be over 5,000m.

Thus, the different facilities according to the service rendered and the compliance to all these criteria will help determine the amount of necessary facilities.

6.15.3 ATCT Area

As to the surface requirements for this kind of facilities, the FAA5 recommends surfaces between 0.4 and 1.6 hectares per facility unit.

The ATCT must be accessible from the landside, while also meeting the visual requirements noted above. Care must be given to the location and height of the ATCT so is does not represent an obstruction to navigation. In addition, the ICAO standards state

5 Advisory, Circular AC 150/5300-13, Airport Design, Change 8. 2004

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -135- consideration should be given to the direction controllers must look relative to the rising and setting sun.

6.15.4 Aeronautical Fixed Service

For the transmission of aeronautical messaging between Bila Tserkva with the rest of the airports nationwide will be implemented:

• Workstation computers to implement in the operational offices: OMA and EMA Meteorology, Control Tower, APP Air Traffic, AIS ARO, Communications and Information, • Laptops for airport management and maintenance, and • AFTN / AMHS network with a 16-port switch.

6.15.5 Air Traffic Control Service

• Voice-data communication system (IP-REDCA) router with FSX, E & M and fast-ethernet ports, • Signal gun, • Recording system equipment, • Workstation for aeronautical messaging, • VHF communication equipment for use of a frequency band aeronautical configuration (1 + 1) primary and secondary, • VCCS automated voice and data control system and consoles

6.16 Support Facility Requirements

6.16.1 Fuel Supply

Fuel tank volume has been estimated to be approximately 50 m3, with storage capacity for up to 10 days. Therefore, fuel tank needs are the following:

• 1 Fuel Tanks in the year 2020 • 2 Fuel Tank in the year 2030 • 4 Fuel Tank in the year 2040 • 5 Fuel Tank in the year 2050

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -136-

6.16.2 Emergency Power

As specified in Table 8-1 of ICAO Annex 14, emergency power supply for airfield lighting for a non-instrument approach must have a 15 second switch-over time.

The radio navigational aids, as well as the control tower, should have uninterrupted emergency power (UIP).

The emergency power station will be located near the power house facility. The equipment is:

• Standby Generators, • LV and MV Switchgears, • Synchronizing Panel Board • Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS) and • all necessary devices and auxiliaries.

In case of power failure, the generators will be automatically operated and connected to the switchgear and all Panel Boards of the less essential loads will be off and the necessary Panel boards will immediately energize to supply the essential loads of the Terminal Building including Visual Aids and NAVAIDs System.

Generally, the standby generating plant supplies power to the system upon the failure of the primary power supply, the generators shall be arranged for automatic operation.

6.16.3 Ground Service Equipment (GSE Facilities)

A ground service equipment (GSE) facility of about 220 m2 provides both a staging area and a storage and maintenance facility for the GSE.

The GSE maintenance area is envisioned to be located adjacent to the terminal apron, but not be an integral part of it. It is also recommended the GSE maintenance area be provided landside access.

The GSE maintenance area will require garages, workshops, restrooms, break areas, storage rooms, paint booths, waste disposal, offices and employee parking.

6.16.4 Solid Waste Incinerator for Trash & Airport Waste Management

Airports generate food waste, floor sweepings, garbage, paper waste, seized contraband, medical items, etc.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -137-

Disposal of these at source by an incinerator is important considering that if these are littered or stored, it will attract unwanted visitors, such as rodents, dogs and birds. Incinerators serve to ensure a safe airport.

In general waste from airports can be divided into seven types of waste:

• municipal solid waste, such as product packaging, furniture, clothing, bottles, food scraps, and newspapers • construction and demolition waste • green waste such as tree, shrub and grass clippings, leaves, weeds, small branches, seeds, pods and similar debris generated by landscape maintenance activities • food waste • waste from aircraft flights (deplaned waste) • lavatory waste • spill clean-up and remediation waste • hazardous materials such as solvents, caustic parts washes, heavy metal paint waste and paint chips, wastewater sludges from metal etching and electroplating, unused epoxies and monomers, waste fuels (including sump fuel or tank sludges) and other ignitable, unusable water conditioning chemicals, illegal dumping of containerized chemicals, contaminated sludge in GA aircraft wash rack oil/water separators, nickel cadmium (ni-cad) batteries, waste pesticides.

The principal activities at the airport where solid waste is generated are:

• Terminals, • Airfield, • Aircraft maintenance hangars, • Cargo hangars, • Flight kitchen, • Offices, • Airport construction projects.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -138-

Picture 35. Trailer mounted containerised and mobile incinerator

6.17 Perimeter fence

ICAO recommendations for perimeter fence surveillance and security, perimeter gate security and tenant security are found in ICAO Annex 14, Chapter 8; ICAO Airport Services Manual, Part 8, Airport Operational Services; and Part 1, Chapter 4 of the ICAO Security Manual for Safeguarding Civil Aviation against Acts of Unlawful Interference, includes:

• Perimeter Fence Surveillance and Security

• Perimeter Vehicle Gates

• Airfield Perimeter Access Control

• Cargo Security and Screening

• External Facilities (cargo, and fuel farm, control tower, apron(s), access roads, runway(s), local and remote NAVAIDs)

This requires fencing about 9,000 m of the entire perimeter of the airport property with security gates that stop the traffic when necessary and maintain the required security control of the airside.

Where entry gates are required they are to be staff at all times by trained security personnel and provided with combination pedestrian and vehicle inspection facilities. All entry gates will always be in contact with a central Security Office via radio and telephone. Where the perimeter security passes through a facility, it is incumbent upon the operator or

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -139- concessionaire to ensure that airside security is maintained, and all security breaches are reported.

Figure 30. Proposed perimeter fence

The specific recommendations concerning airport perimeter fencing, contained on page I-4-42 of Chapter 4 of the latter manual, state that the fencing should have a minimum height of 2.13 meters with a total height of 2.44 meters including several strands of barbed wire. The fencing should be metal chain link supported by reinforced concrete posts, steel stanchions or the fence should be steel-rodded. The fencing wire should be not less than US 10 gauge with apertures no larger than 5 centimetres square.

Picture 36. Typical ICAO perimeter fencing

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -140-

7 Summary of Airport Requirements Table 10 shows a summary of requirements estimated throughout the study for B737- 800/900 as the critical aircraft for air passengers and for A300-600 as the critical aircraft for air cargo and airfield design requirements.

Table 45. UKBC airport requirements

Basic Planning Principles Existing 2030 2040 2050

Airfield Safety Requirements Runway Strip Width 420 m 300 m 300 m 300 m Length 3,000 m 2,620 m 2,620 m 2,620 m Runway End Safety Area Width 150 m 90 m 90 m 90 m Length 200 m 240 m 240 m 240 m Taxiway Minimum Separation Distances Between taxiway centrelines and runway 260 m 190 m 190 m 190 m centrelines Between the centreline of an aircraft stand Nil ≥22.5 ≥22.5 ≥22.5 taxilane and an object Runways Runway Length 2,500 m 2,500 m 2,500 m 2,500 m Runway Width 42 m 45 m 45 m 45 m Taxiway System Taxiway Width 18 m 23 m 23 m 23 m Overall Taxiway Width 18 m 38 m 38 m 38 m Overall taxiway strip Nil 74 m 74 m 74 m Aircraft Parking Apron Aircraft Stands Nil 5 6 6 Commercial Aircraft Apron Area Nil 26 500m2 31 750m2 31 750m2 Cargo Aircraft Apron Area Nil 5 000m2 5 000m2 5 000m2 Navaids Visual Approach Slope Indicator Runway 18 No 1 1 1 Runway 36 No 1 1 1 Threshold Lights No Yes Yes Yes Runway Edge Lights No Yes Yes Yes Runway End lights No Yes Yes Yes Apron Floodlights No Yes Yes Yes Wind Direction Indicators Yes Lighted Lighted Lighted VOR/DME No Yes Yes Yes ILS CAT I No Yes Yes Yes Terminal Building Area Passenger terminal overall area Nil 12 000m2 16 500m2 20 000m2 Cargo terminal area Nil 2 155 m2 2 900 m2 3 365 m2 MRO hangar 2 2 3 3 Distance of the airside façade to runway centreline Nil >325 m >325 m >325 m Aircraft Rescue & Fire Fighting Level of Protection Nil 7 7 7

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -141-

Basic Planning Principles Existing 2030 2040 2050

Number of Facilities 0 1 1 1 Number of ARFF vehicles 0 2 2 2 Emergency Power Nil ≤ 10 sec. ≤ 10 sec. ≤ 10 sec. Electrical Power 1 2 power 2 power 2 power sources sources sources Ground Service Equipment Area No Yes Yes Yes Incinerator Nil 1 1 1 Equipment for controlling bird strike Nil 1 1 1 Passenger Parking Passenger Parking Area Nil 9 900 m2 13 943 m2 17 164 m2 Employee parking Area Nil 6 250 m2 12 500 m2 12 500 m2

The planning approach used in the preparation of the investment program is to establish the airside, terminal development and other facility requirements on the basis of airport certification and capacity requirements for established priorities of development.

The requirements for the investment program of Bila Tserkva Airport’s airfield facilities are based on the time frames, or project development priorities as indicated in Table 46.

Table 46. Airport Development Phasing

Priority Term Implementation Year Forecast/Design Year 1 Immediate 2020 2030 2 Short 2030 2040 3 Long 2040 2050

List of airport requirements identified during this mission.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -142-

7.1 Requirements for 2020 - 2030

Figure 31. Airport Layout Plan for 2020

1 Terminal Building 10 Threshold/End Lights 2 Commercial Apron 11 PAPI 3 Cargo Building 12 Illuminated Windsock 4 Car Parking 13 Glide Path Antenna 5 MROs 14 ILS Localizer Antenna 6 Maintenance Apron 15 Runway Edge Lights 7 ATC Tower 16 Taxiway Edge Lights 8 ARFF Building 17 Taxiway Extension & Shoulders 9 Approach Lighting System 18 RESAs

7.1.1 Airfield Improvements

Quantity Length Width Total Area • Runway overlay 1 2500 m 45 m 112,500 m2 • Runway end safety area 2 240 m 90 m 43,200 m2 • Taxiway 3 widening 1 297 m 5 m 1,485 m2 • Taxiway shoulders 2 370 m 7.5 m 2,270 m2 • Taxiway overlay 1 397 m 18 m 7 150 m2 • Apron construction 1 363 m 71.5 m 26 500 m2 • Security road 1 9,500 m 3 m 18,000 m2 • Full normalized perimeter fence 1 9,500 m • Equipment control bird strike 1

7.1.2 Terminal Buildings and MROs

Quantity Area • PTB construction 1 12 000 m2 • X-Ray machine 1 • EDS 1 • MRO hangars 2 14 000 m2

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -143-

7.1.3 Cargo Building and Equipment

Quantity Area • EDS 1 • Cargo terminal construction 1 2 155 m2

7.1.4 Navigation equipment

Quantity • RNAV RNP APCH Procedures 1 • ILS/DME CAT I 1 • DVOR 1 • Installation of runway edge lights 83 • Installation of runway end lights 12 • Installation of runway threshold lights 12 • Installation of taxiway edge lights. 16 • Installation of approach lights 15 • PAPI 1 • Lighted windsock 2 • Airfield signs 2 • New Control Tower 1 • AWOS 1

7.1.5 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting

Quantity • New ARFF building 1 • Great Power Fire Vehicle 2 • Water and emulsifier refuelling tank 1

7.1.6 Support Facilities

Quantity Area • Fuel storage 1 • Ground service equipment facility 1 220 m2 • Incinerator 1 • New, fully equipped power station 1 • Equipment for controlling bird strike 1 • Fuel farm 2

7.1.7 Access road and parking

Quantity Area • Car parking construction 1 13 650 m2 • PTB access road 1 6,900 m2

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -144-

7.2 Requirements for 2030 - 2040

Figure 32. Airport Layout Plan for 2030

1 Terminal Extension 2 Commercial Apron Extension 3 Cargo Extension 4 Car Parking 5 New MRO

7.2.1 Airfield Improvements

Quantity Total Area Length Width • Commercial apron extension 1 5 250 m2 73.5 m 71.5 m

7.2.2 Terminal Buildings and MROs

Quantity Area • PTB extension 1 4 500 m2 • MRO hangars 1 3 500 m2

7.2.3 Cargo Building and Equipment

Quantity Area • Cargo terminal extension 1 745 m2

7.2.4 Access road and parking

Quantity Area • Car parking extension 1 6 543 m2

7.2.5 Support Facilities

Quantity • Fuel storage 1

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -145-

7.3 Requirements for 2040 – 2050

Figure 33. Airport Layout Plan for 2040

7.3.1 Terminal Buildings and MROs

Quantity Area • PTB extension 1 3 500 m2

7.3.2 Cargo Building and Equipment

Quantity Area • Cargo Terminal extension 1 475 m2

7.3.3 Access road and parking

Quantity Area • Car parking extension 1 6 971 m2

7.3.4 Support Facilities

Quantity • Fuel storage 1

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -146-

8 Cost Estimation Based on the development needs described in the previous section, an investment program with cost estimates was prepared to achieve the planned development of the airport.

This investment program with cost estimates gives the Ministry of Transports a tool with which to base urgent, short-, and medium-term business, financial and development strategies to the years 2020, and 2030.

For clarity, the individual development items that comprise the program have been grouped into major categories. These categories are related to major airport facilities as follows:

Table 47. Cost estimation by categories

2020-2030 2030-2040 2040-2050 TOTAL EUR€ EUR€ EUR€ EUR€ Airfield Improvements 13 404 978 630 000 14 034 978 Passenger Terminal and Equipment 18 226 721 6 542 630 5 022 500 29 791 851 Cargo terminal 2 154 300 447 000 285 000 2 886 300 MROs 10 000 000 5 000 000 15 000 000 Support Facilities 1 389 595 408 100 561 220 2 358 915 Navigation systems 10 954 058 10 954 058 Access Road and Parking 789 250 215 919 230 043 1 235 212 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting 1 957 903 1 957 903 TOTAL EUROS (€) 58 876 805 13 243 649 6 098 763 78 219 217

The development of the airport relies heavily on the development of a sound business and financial plan that provides financial resources to complete the implementation of the project. The business and financial plan will require the preparation of reliable capital construction costs.

Cost estimates of the above categories for major airport facilities are as follows:

▪ Table 48 High priority for implementation in 2020 until 2030 ▪ Table 49 Short-term priority for implementation in 2030 to 2040 ▪ Table 50 Long-term priority for implementation in 2040 to 2050

Capital costs are presented in Euros (€) as required in the TOR and include contingencies for design and construction.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -147-

Table 48. Priority 1 – 2020 - Airport improvement base costs

UNIT COST PRICE PRIORITY 1 / 2020 - 2030 QUANTITY EUR€ EUR€ Airfield Improvements Stopways 2700 m2 77 €/m2 207 648 Lateral taxiway extension 18900 m2 102 €/m2 1 927 800 Runway overlay 112500 m2 33 €/m2 3 712 500 RESAs 86400 m2 8 €/m2 691 200 Taxiway extension 1485 m2 102 €/m2 151 470 Earthwork and filling 31500 m2 11 €/m2 346 500 Taxiway 3 shoulders 2270 m2 33 €/m2 74 910 Taxiway overlay 7150 m2 33 €/m2 235 950 Apron construction 26 500 m2 211 €/m2 5 591 500 Perimeter fence 9,500 m 34 €/m 323 000 Security road 9,500 m 15 €/m 142 500 Terminal and Equipment PTB construction 12 000 m2 1 435 €/m2 17 220 000 X-ray machine 1 ud. 85 130 €/ud 85 130 EDS 1 ud. 861 300 €/ud 861 300 Apron flood lights. 3 ud. 20 097 €/ud 60 291 Cargo terminal and Equipment Cargo terminal 2 155 m2 600 €/m2 1 293 000 EDS 1 ud. 861 300 €/ud 861 300 MROs New MROs 2 set 5 000 000 €/set 10 000 000 Access Road and Parking PTB access road 400 m2 847 €/m2 338 800 Parking construction 30 000 m2 33 €/m2 450 450 Navigation systems Runway edge lights 83 ud. 8 613 €/ud 717 750 Runway threshold lights 12 ud. 8 613 €/ud 103 356 Runway end lights 12 ud. 8 613 €/ud 103 356 Runway taxiways lights 16 ud. 1 436 €/ud 45 952 Approach lighting system 1 set 384 714 €/set 384 714 PAPI 2 ud. 153 120 €/ud 306 240 AFL electrical 1 set 287 100 €/set 287 100 ducts primary cables and monitoring system Lighted Guidance Signs 2 ud. 20 097 €/ud 40 194 Lighted windsock 2 ud. 9 570 €/ud 19 140 RNAV RNP APCH procedures 2 set 64 358 €/set 128 716 CAT I ILS 1 ud. 1 421 145 €/ud 1 421 145 AWOS 1 ud. 18 422 €/ud 18 422 VOR/DME. 1 ud. 756 715 €/ud 756 715

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -148-

UNIT COST PRICE PRIORITY 1 / 2020 - 2030 QUANTITY EUR€ EUR€ New TWR 1 set 6 621 258 €/set 6 621 258 Support Facilities Fuel farm 3,058 m3 110 €/m3 336 380 New power station 1 set 957 000 €/set 957 000 Incinerator 1 set 10 766 €/set 10 766 Equipment for controlling bird strike 1 set 4 269 €/set 4 269 New GSE 220 set 369 €/set 81 180 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting Water and emulsifier tank 1 ud. 24 903 €/ud 24 903 New ARFF vehicle 2 ud. 909 150 €/ud 1 818 300 ARFF hangar 700 set 574 €/set 401 800 TOTAL EUR (€) 58 876 805 €

Table 49. Priority 2 – 2030 - Airport improvement base costs

UNIT COST PRICE PRIORITY 2 / 2030 - 2040 QUANTITY EUR€ EUR€ Airfield Improvements Apron extension 5 250 m2 120 €/m2 630 000 Terminal and Equipment PTB extension 4 500 m2 1 435 €/m2 6 457 500 X-ray machine 1 ud. 85 130 €/ud 85 130 Cargo terminal and Equipment Cargo terminal extension 745 m2 600 €/m2 447 000 MROs MRO hangar 1 set 5 000 000 €/set 5 000 000 Access Road and Parking Parking extension 7 540 m2 33 €/m2 215 919 Support Facilities Fuel farm 3710 m3 110 €/m3 408 100 TOTAL EUR (€) 13 243 649 €

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -149-

Table 50. Priority 3 – 2040 - Airport improvement base costs

UNIT COST PRICE PRIORITY 3 / 2040 - 2050 QUANTITY EUR€ EUR€ Terminal and Equipment PTB extension 3 500 m2 1 435 €/m2 5 022 500 Cargo terminal and Equipment Cargo terminal extension 475 m2 600 €/m2 285 000 Access Road and Parking Parking extension 6971 m2 33 €/m2 230 043 Support Facilities Fuel farm 5102 m3 110 €/m3 561 220 TOTAL EUR (€) 6 098 763 €

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -150-

9 Financial Simulation Models

9.1 Introduction

9.1.1 Objective

A low initial investment, including engineering costs and contingencies, of about 80 million euros is required in order to set up such a large facility as an airport. However, throughout its operational lifespan, an airport generates sufficient income to enable such investment to be recuperated, cover operational costs and generate profits that can be used to pay back investors or ploughed back into new airport-related investments.

9.1.2 Scope

The scope of application for this study involves both investors and airport authorities, taking into account the outgoing funds that are needed to make the investment and cover overheads. Furthermore, the study takes into consideration incoming funds arising from the operation of the airport, as well as from the direct or indirect usufruct of commercial areas and services provided to passengers, cargo, airlines and aircraft.

9.1.3 Methodology

This chapter contains the financial analysis of the feasibility for the development and operation of Bila Tserkva Airport. Included in this chapter is a summary of the capital costs of the development program for the airport, a description of the existing and proposed financial structure of the airport, an analysis and projections of airport operating and maintenance costs, an analysis and projections of airport revenues, discussion of a financing plan based on the development and operation of the airport, and a financial and cash flow analysis of various alternatives in terms of investment, revenues and costs with the Net Present Value and the Internal Rate of Return calculated for each alternative.

According to the ACI Economic Survey of 2015, the typical return on capital employed of an airport of the expected size of Bila Tserkva airport may be around 12%.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -151-

Figure 34. Typical Airport Returns and Size Comparison

The values used in the financial analysis are stated in Euros. As standard with this type of analysis, the projections do not incorporate any inflation over the time period of the project, consistent with the exclusion of inflation in the capital cost estimates.

As will be seen at 30 years period (2020-2050) was selected for the cash flow analysis. It was apparent, in view of the amount of investment required at the airport, and based on the air traffic forecasts, that a shorter concession period was not likely to be feasible in terms of developing an adequate rate of return.

The Consultant's financial analysis has been undertaken in several steps, some of which were undertaken in previous phases of the study. These steps can be described as follows:

• Step 1 consisted of aviation activity forecasts, which include passengers, operations and cargo. These forecasts were developed in chapter 5.2 of this Report.

• Step 2 consisted of the development of the facility requirements, plans, and capital cost estimates covering the expansion and improvements of both airside and landside facilities. The requirements were developed in Chapter 6 of the Report.

• Step 3 contained in this Chapter, consists of an analysis of the existing airport financial structure and recommendations for a financial structure, which would fit in with the operation of the airport.

• Step 4, contained in this Chapter, consists of the analysis of existing operational and maintenance costs and the development of projections.

• Step 5, contained in this Chapter, consists of the analysis of existing revenues and the development of revenue projections.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -152-

• Step 6, contained in this Chapter, consists of the development of a finance plan, including the investment and debt service requirements of the concessionaire.

• Step 7, contained in this Chapter, consists of the development of cash flow models, which analyse the financial performance of different investment, revenue and cost alternatives. The financial models combine the inflow and outflow of funds into cash flow projections and calculate the net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR) for each alternative.

The various steps in the Consultant's approach are illustrated in Figure 35.

Figure 35. Financial Analysis Approach

9.1.4 Operational, Macro-Economic and Socio-Economic assumptions

The first operational assumptions refer to a situation where activity in this new project is set to start in the year 2020, the operational period is assumed to be 30 years, i.e. ending in the year 2050, and with the following operations taking place throughout that period.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -153-

Table 51. Operational Assumptions

Total Total Aircraft Total Annual 푷 Year Passengers Movements Cargo MTOW (P) (ATM) 푨푻푴 (C) 2020 97 815 4 741 21 7 650 107 078 2030 602 396 12 542 48 21 554 145 872 2040 1 109 905 20 230 55 28 921 183 559 2050 1 617 045 27 864 58 33 649 220 135

The macro-economic indices on which the estimations are based are:

• CPI = 14%, the study is carried out taking into account 2018 steady Euros as a reference.

• Exchange rate, 0.046047 €/UAH, based on the average exchange rate of the National Bank of Ukraine in the years 2011-2017.

9.2 Capital Costs of Airport Development

The total costs of development for the 30-year period of the airport development alternative designs, including professional engineering costs and contingencies, is about 112 200 000 Euros.

9.3 Operation and Maintenance Costs

This subsection covers the operation and maintenance expenses for the airport, identifying the types of operating and maintenance expenses that would be involved under the proposed airport development, and including projections of these expenses over the proposed 30-year investment period. The operation and maintenance expenses represent outflows in the cash flow analysis presented later in this Chapter.

The historical operation and maintenance expenses were obtained from the balance sheet of UKBC as provided by the airport, including balances for all of the individual accounts. These operations and maintenance expenses were then reclassified into 8 categories that were useful for projecting such expenses into the future.

The projections (2020 through 2050) of operation and maintenance expenses reflect several key assumptions:

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -154-

• The airport would be operated in accordance with international aviation safety and security standards, with certain expenses established to satisfy these requirements. • The commercial airport would be built in 2020 and expanded and improved in 2030 and 2040, with certain expenses increasing as the result of the need to operate and maintain expanded facilities while other expenses would decrease as the result of a more efficient operation and more efficient facilities. • The airport would be operated as a business enterprise, with the airport operator curtailing certain expenses in order to maximize profitability. The operation and maintenance expense projections, which follow, constitute a Base-line Scenario for purposes of the cash flow analysis.

Operation and maintenance expenses are presented in Figure 36. As shown, actual operation and maintenance expenses were 321 770 Euros in 2017 and are projected to increase from 258 124 euros in 2020 to 3 127 676 euros in 2050, the final year of the proposed concession period. The expense components, as well as the basis for the projections, are described below:

• Personnel – In 2017, this component included the costs of salaries, insurance and benefits for the 82 employees of BPC “KP”, which shares 57.9% of the total costs.

• Maintenance – In 2017, this component included the costs of obtaining contract services for the maintenance of buildings, and equipment, as well as the airfield equipment represents only 4.3% of the total costs. Projections reflect the expansion of the buildings, and equipment, with increases occurring when the new apron and terminal open in 2020.

• Commodities – In 2017, this component shares 26.6% of the total costs and includes the costs of purchasing maintenance supplies for the buildings, equipment, as well as the aviation fuel, and electricity and water utilities acquired for resale and/or internal use. Projections of maintenance supplies and electricity and water utilities reflect the expansion of the buildings, buses and equipment, with increases occurring when the new apron and terminal open in 2020. Projections of aviation fuel reflect the increase in aircraft operations throughout the projection period.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -155-

• Services – In 2017, this component shares 2.0% of the total costs and reflects the costs of obtaining services such as advisory and information services, insurance, advertising cost, telephone and certification training services from private entities and police services from government entities. Projections of police services reflect the new apron and terminal building when opened in 2020.

• Finance Charges – In 2017, this component included costs of bank accounts and other fiscal services. Projections assume that this cost will be constant throughout the projections period.

• Taxes - In 2017, this component included costs of municipal taxes, for which the airport was not exempt. Projections assume that this cost will be constant throughout the projections period. Income taxes applicable to the proposed concessionaire are addressed in the cash flow analysis later in this section.

• Depreciation - In 2017, and previously there was a line item for depreciation. It is assumed that depreciation is established for the new construction, which would then become an expense item for the airport operator to be deducted as part of his costs which would in turn reduce the amount of profit subject to tax.

• Other - In 2017, this component included miscellaneous costs, such as contributions, penalties and reserves. Projections assume that this cost will be constant throughout the projection period.

Figure 36. OPEX structure in 2017

Finance charges 00% Services 02% Taxes 02% Other 02% Depreciation 04% Maintenance 04% Commodities 27% Personnel 58%

00% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -156-

The forecasted costs are divided into 8 areas: personnel, maintenance and operation, commodities, services, finance charges, taxes, depreciation, and others. The expenditure assumptions are based on those typically encountered at other airports and are as follows:

Table 52. Expense components’ KPIs for financial projection

Concept Unit price Unit Personnel expenditure 9 Employees/10 000 Airport staff 82 Annual Pax Monthly salary 330 €/500 €/760 € Euros Expenditure on maintenance and operation 5.40 € €/ATM Expenditure on commodities 32.00 € €/ATM Services 2.50 € €/ATM Finance charges 0.5 € €/ATM Taxes 2.49 € €/ATM Depreciation 5.07 € €/ATM Others 2.58 € €/ATM

Table 53. Operation & Maintenance Costs – Baseline Case

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Personnel expenditures 348,613 € 521,552 € 702,297 € 883,042 € 1,063,786 € 1,244,531 € 1,425,276 € 1,606,020 € 1,786,765 € 1,967,510 € 2,146,939 € Maintenance 27,253 € 33,555 € 40,277 € 47,556 € 55,452 € 64,000 € 73,244 € 83,256 € 94,073 € 105,749 € 118,343 € Commodities 161,497 € 188,408 € 215,319 € 242,059 € 268,731 € 295,301 € 321,769 € 348,236 € 374,636 € 400,967 € 427,231 € Services 12,617 € 14,719 € 16,822 € 18,911 € 20,995 € 23,070 € 25,138 € 27,206 € 29,268 € 31,326 € 33,377 € Finance charges 2,523 € 3,107 € 3,729 € 4,403 € 5,134 € 5,926 € 6,782 € 7,709 € 8,710 € 9,792 € 10,958 € Taxes 12,550 € 15,453 € 18,548 € 21,901 € 25,537 € 29,473 € 33,731 € 38,341 € 43,323 € 48,700 € 54,500 € Depreciation 25,576 € 31,490 € 37,799 € 44,630 € 52,040 € 60,062 € 68,737 € 78,133 € 88,284 € 99,242 € 111,061 € Others 13,007 € 16,015 € 19,223 € 22,697 € 26,466 € 30,545 € 34,957 € 39,736 € 44,898 € 50,471 € 56,482 € Total Costs 603,636 € 824,300 € 1,054,013 € 1,285,199 € 1,518,141 € 1,752,909 € 1,989,633 € 2,228,637 € 2,469,958 € 2,713,757 € 2,958,892 €

2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Personnel expenditures 3,528,787 € 3,802,642 € 4,076,498 € 4,350,353 € 4,624,209 € 4,898,065 € 5,171,920 € 5,445,776 € 5,719,631 € 5,993,487 € Maintenance 131,976 € 146,630 € 162,434 € 179,434 € 197,734 € 217,395 € 238,561 € 261,278 € 285,661 € 311,822 € Commodities 453,630 € 479,860 € 506,123 € 532,318 € 558,513 € 584,640 € 610,836 € 636,963 € 663,056 € 689,115 € Services 35,440 € 37,489 € 39,541 € 41,587 € 43,634 € 45,675 € 47,722 € 49,763 € 51,801 € 53,837 € Finance charges 12,220 € 13,577 € 15,040 € 16,614 € 18,309 € 20,129 € 22,089 € 24,192 € 26,450 € 28,872 € Taxes 60,778 € 67,526 € 74,805 € 82,634 € 91,061 € 100,116 € 109,863 € 120,324 € 131,554 € 143,601 € Depreciation 123,856 € 137,607 € 152,439 € 168,393 € 185,567 € 204,018 € 223,881 € 245,200 € 268,084 € 292,634 € Others 62,989 € 69,982 € 77,526 € 85,639 € 94,373 € 103,757 € 113,859 € 124,701 € 136,339 € 148,824 € Total Costs 4,409,676 € 4,755,313 € 5,104,405 € 5,456,974 € 5,813,400 € 6,173,796 € 6,538,730 € 6,908,197 € 7,282,576 € 7,662,193 €

2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Personnel expenditures 9,526,361 € 9,942,621 € 10,358,882 € 10,775,142 € 11,191,403 € 11,607,663 € 12,023,924 € 12,440,184 € 12,856,445 € 13,272,705 € Maintenance 339,907 € 370,012 € 402,268 € 436,832 € 473,856 € 513,458 € 555,845 € 601,220 € 649,705 € 701,597 € Commodities 715,208 € 741,267 € 767,292 € 793,316 € 819,341 € 845,298 € 871,255 € 897,246 € 923,168 € 949,159 € Services 55,876 € 57,911 € 59,945 € 61,978 € 64,011 € 66,039 € 68,067 € 70,097 € 72,123 € 74,153 € Finance charges 31,473 € 34,260 € 37,247 € 40,447 € 43,876 € 47,542 € 51,467 € 55,668 € 60,158 € 64,963 € Taxes 156,535 € 170,399 € 185,254 € 201,171 € 218,222 € 236,459 € 255,979 € 276,876 € 299,204 € 323,102 € Depreciation 318,992 € 347,244 € 377,515 € 409,953 € 444,698 € 481,863 € 521,642 € 564,225 € 609,726 € 658,425 € Others 162,229 € 176,597 € 191,992 € 208,489 € 226,159 € 245,060 € 265,290 € 286,946 € 310,087 € 334,854 € Total Costs 11,306,580 € 11,840,312 € 12,380,394 € 12,927,329 € 13,481,566 € 14,043,383 € 14,613,469 € 15,192,462 € 15,780,616 € 16,378,958 €

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -157-

Figure 37. Operation & Maintenance Costs – Baseline Projections

9.4 Revenues

This subsection analyses the revenues of the airport. The types of revenues that would be involved under the proposed commercial operation arrangement are identified, and projections are made for these revenues over the proposed 30-year period. These revenues represent inflows in the cash flow analysis presented later in this Chapter.

The historical (2017) revenues were analysed from the balance sheet of Bila Tserkva airport. These revenues were then reclassified into 5 categories that were useful for future projection, such as fees, rents, terminal concessions, other concessions and utilities. This data is contained in an appendix at the end of this Chapter of the report.

Revenues are presented in Table 56. According the balance sheet of Bila Tserkva airport, actual revenues increased a 6% from 2016 to 2017. This latter year, 327.75 thousand euros were recorded. As seen in Figure 38, the main source of revenues comes from non- aeronautical incomes, such as rent of non-residential premises, lease of non-aviation, other industrial park income, financial and other operating income, and depreciation (Figure 40), which all together represent 81.8% of the total revenues versus 18.2% of aeronautical revenues.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -158-

Aeronautical income covers aerodrome services (airport charges paid by airlines and private landing planes), apron services (airport charges for airplanes paid by airlines and private aircraft) and F.B.O services (Figure 39).

Figure 38. Aeronautical vs. Non-Aeronautical Revenues (2017)

Aeronautical Revenue, 18%

Non-aeronautical Revenue, 82%

Figure 39. Aeronautical revenues’ components (2017)

80% 70% 70% 60% 50% 40%

30% 21% 20% 09% 10% 00% Aerodrome services Apron services General aviation

Figure 40. Non-Aeronautical revenues’ components (2017)

60% 49% 50%

40% 28% 30% 20% 20%

10% 03% 00% 00% Rent of non- Lease of non- Other industrial Financial and other Depreciation residential premises aviation park income operating income

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -159-

The total revenues are projected to increase from 4 263 462 euros in 2020 to 105 826 993 euros in 2050, the final year of the proposed period. The pricing for each of the KPIs is based on tariffs currently charged in Ukraine and standard values at similar airports.

The projections (2020 through 2050) of revenues reflect several key assumptions. The first assumption is that the airport will be expanded and improved, with certain existing revenues being increased based on the expanded facilities and expanded passenger and cargo traffic. The second assumption was that the airport would be operated more as a business enterprise, and that certain rates and charges could be increase in order to enhance airport profitability and make a concession financially feasible. The revenue projections, which follow constitute a Base-line Scenario for purposes of the cash flow analysis. The income assumptions are as follows:

Table 54. Aeronautical income KPIs used for financial projections

Concept Unit price Unit Aircraft landing/take-off charge 10.63 € €/T MTOW Aviation security charge for Pax aircraft 3.09 € €/enplaned pax Aviation security charge for cargo aircraft 2.03 € €/T MTOW Cargo service charge 0.02 € €/Kg Airport passenger services charge 11.18 € €/Pax

Table 55. Non-Aeronautical income KPIs used for financial projections

Concept Unit price Unit Rents Rent of non-residential premises 27.63 € /GA movement Industrial park 39.14 € /ATM Terminal rent Total square meters 0.20 %/m2 Rent fee 50.00 € €/m2 Concessions Retail 3.00 € €/Depart Pax Catering 5.00 € €/ Depart Pax Parking 8.86 € € /day Operation Handling 2 € €/Pax Fuelling avg. 320 € /ATM Other concessions Advertising 0.15 € €/Pax. Desk Rental 5% / Total Revenues Comunicaciones 3% / Total Revenues Other incomes 1.51 € /ATM

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -160-

The revenue components, as well as the basis for the projections, are described below:

• Fees – In 2017, this component included fees paid by passengers and airlines according to Order No. 433 of April 14, 2008 “On the establishment of airport charges for aircraft and passenger services at the airports of Ukraine”.  Aircraft landing/take-off determined per one tonne of maximum take- off weight of the aircraft specified in the airworthiness certificate depending on the type of traffic and depending on the hour of aircraft landing/take-off (day or night time). • For international flights • $12.06 per 1 tonne of MTOW. • For domestic flights • $ 4.08 per 1 tonne of MTOW.  at airport terminals, applied for use of the passenger terminal prior to check-in. The airport passenger services charge is set on a per passenger basis depending on the type of traffic (domestic or international). • For international flights • $ 12.68 per each departed passenger. • For domestic flights • $ 4.00 per each departed passenger. The passenger service charge is projected to increase over the 30-year period, from its current average of 11.68 euros per passenger in 2018, to 14.76 € from 2020 to 2030 and to 22.14 € until 2050 in order to adjust the tariff to the European standards.  Passenger services Aircraft extra parking determined per each full day or a part thereof in % from the landing/take-off charge at the daytime or per hour of extra parking and per tonne of aircraft MTOW irrespective of the type of traffic. Standard (charge-free) time of parking of passenger aircraft is 3 hours. • $0.23 per each hour of extra parking and per each tonne of the aircraft MTOW.  Aviation security determined for each passenger sent depending on the type of traffic (domestic or international). The aviation security charge for the cargo aircraft shall be determined for each ton of the MTOW depending on the type of traffic. • For international passenger flights • $3.50 per each departed passenger. • For domestic passenger flights • $1.52 per each departed passenger. • For international cargo flights • $2.30 per 1 tonne of MTOW.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -161-

• For domestic cargo flights • $ 1.13 per 1 ton of MTOW. As previously noted, no fees are currently paid to the airport for passenger service or aircraft handling on the apron. Projections also reflect the addition of fees paid by cargo shippers. • Rents – In 2017, this component included rents of non-residential premises from organizations of TOiR and lease of non-aviation for conducting commercial business on the territory of KP BIS "BWAC". Projections reflect the expansion of revenue-producing of both terminal and cargo terminal space, as well as rate increases (from 182 418 euros in 2020 to 2 074 658 in 2050). • Concessions – This component includes percentages of gross revenues for snack bars, restaurants and gift shops in the passenger terminal and automobile parking lot. Projections reflect the addition of a duty free, restaurant concessions and the operation of a car parking, the growth of aviation activity and higher concession yields. • Other Concessions – This component includes the fees of gross revenues for advertising, desk rentals and communications as a percentage of the total revenues. Projections reflect the addition of rental car and catering concessions in the future, the growth of aviation activity and standard yields from these other concession sources. • Other incomes – In 2017, this component included resale of these utilities to airport tenants, storage, vehicle services, medical services, security services and overpass conditions, financial and other operating income. Projections reflect the income per aircraft movement increasing by the annual CPI.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -162-

Table 56. Revenues – Baseline Case

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 1.- Aeronautical Revenues 2,430,972 € 3,449,799 € 4,466,115 € 5,463,690 € 6,453,488 € 7,434,007 € 8,408,002 € 9,376,562 € 10,340,896 € 11,301,787 € 12,253,492 € Aircraft landing/take-off charge 1,138,737 € 1,551,298 € 1,952,086 € 2,341,059 € 2,726,076 € 3,105,158 € 3,480,232 € 3,852,040 € 4,221,233 € 4,588,394 € 4,951,823 € Aviation security charge for Pax aircraft 2,012 € 3,012 € 4,055 € 5,099 € 6,142 € 7,185 € 8,228 € 9,271 € 10,315 € 11,358 € 12,395 € Aviation security charge for cargo aircraft 57,718 € 76,202 € 90,160 € 101,855 € 112,794 € 122,603 € 131,656 € 139,956 € 147,878 € 155,423 € 162,590 € Airport passenger services charge 1,093,706 € 1,636,271 € 2,203,323 € 2,770,375 € 3,337,428 € 3,904,480 € 4,471,532 € 5,038,584 € 5,605,636 € 6,172,688 € 6,735,615 € Cargo service charge 138,799 € 183,016 € 216,491 € 245,303 € 271,049 € 294,581 € 316,354 € 336,711 € 355,834 € 373,924 € 391,069 € 2.- Non-Aeronautical Revenues 1,832,490 € 2,549,980 € 3,335,802 € 4,177,268 € 5,080,137 € 6,048,624 € 7,087,863 € 8,203,423 € 9,400,772 € 10,685,832 € 12,320,706 € Rents 182,419 € 196,200 € 208,984 € 222,061 € 235,751 € 249,983 € 264,858 € 280,396 € 296,720 € 313,867 € 574,493 € Concessions 849,817 € 1,341,828 € 1,897,725 € 2,506,150 € 3,170,981 € 3,896,354 € 4,686,676 € 5,546,646 € 6,481,272 € 7,495,887 € 8,590,912 € Operation 474,712 € 554,466 € 634,375 € 714,001 € 793,660 € 873,266 € 952,835 € 1,032,690 € 1,112,646 € 1,192,724 € 1,272,947 € Other concessions 317,912 € 448,090 € 583,440 € 721,739 € 864,218 € 1,011,102 € 1,162,985 € 1,320,381 € 1,483,794 € 1,653,744 € 1,849,218 € Other incomes 7,631 € 9,395 € 11,278 € 13,316 € 15,527 € 17,920 € 20,508 € 23,312 € 26,340 € 29,610 € 33,136 € 3,-Total Revenues 4,263,462 € 5,999,779 € 7,801,918 € 9,640,958 € 11,533,626 € 13,482,631 € 15,495,865 € 17,579,986 € 19,741,668 € 21,987,618 € 24,574,198 €

2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 1.- Aeronautical Revenues 13,214,794 € 14,166,042 € 15,116,655 € 16,061,885 € 17,006,516 € 17,948,123 € 18,889,858 € 19,828,073 € 20,765,727 € 21,698,198 € Aircraft landing/take-off charge 5,317,793 € 5,679,020 € 6,040,301 € 6,397,625 € 6,754,949 € 7,110,242 € 7,466,226 € 7,819,595 € 8,172,910 € 8,522,322 € Aviation security charge for Pax aircraft 13,447 € 14,490 € 15,534 € 16,577 € 17,620 € 18,663 € 19,706 € 20,749 € 21,793 € 22,836 € Aviation security charge for cargo aircraft 169,380 € 175,793 € 182,206 € 187,865 € 193,524 € 198,805 € 204,086 € 208,990 € 213,895 € 218,044 € Airport passenger services charge 7,306,793 € 7,873,845 € 8,440,897 € 9,007,949 € 9,575,002 € 10,142,054 € 10,709,106 € 11,276,158 € 11,843,210 € 12,410,262 € Cargo service charge 407,380 € 422,893 € 437,717 € 451,869 € 465,422 € 478,359 € 490,733 € 502,580 € 513,920 € 524,734 € 2.- Non-Aeronautical Revenues 13,820,455 € 15,421,964 € 17,140,068 € 18,981,831 € 20,956,705 € 23,073,244 € 25,342,012 € 27,772,418 € 30,375,952 € 33,471,818 € Rents 605,595 € 638,244 € 672,646 € 708,610 € 746,490 € 786,231 € 828,081 € 871,979 € 918,199 € 1,251,922 € Concessions 9,788,186 € 11,078,364 € 12,473,569 € 13,981,103 € 15,608,735 € 17,364,734 € 19,257,895 € 21,297,573 € 23,493,719 € 25,856,912 € Operation 1,353,946 € 1,434,833 € 1,516,245 € 1,597,903 € 1,680,043 € 1,762,491 € 1,845,692 € 1,929,271 € 2,013,371 € 2,098,030 € Other concessions 2,035,775 € 2,229,466 € 2,432,126 € 2,643,973 € 2,866,072 € 3,098,918 € 3,343,548 € 3,600,436 € 3,870,679 € 4,177,645 € Other incomes 36,953 € 41,056 € 45,482 € 50,242 € 55,366 € 60,871 € 66,797 € 73,158 € 79,985 € 87,310 € 3,-Total Revenues 27,035,249 € 29,588,007 € 32,256,722 € 35,043,716 € 37,963,221 € 41,021,366 € 44,231,870 € 47,600,491 € 51,141,679 € 55,170,016 €

2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 1.- Aeronautical Revenues 22,632,570 € 23,564,970 € 24,493,724 € 25,422,007 € 26,349,891 € 27,274,931 € 28,197,269 € 29,119,829 € 30,041,316 € 30,966,608 € Aircraft landing/take-off charge 8,873,712 € 9,223,975 € 9,571,409 € 9,918,843 € 10,266,277 € 10,611,679 € 10,955,157 € 11,299,273 € 11,642,698 € 11,988,154 € Aviation security charge for Pax aircraft 23,879 € 24,925 € 25,968 € 27,012 € 28,055 € 29,098 € 30,141 € 31,184 € 32,228 € 33,271 € Aviation security charge for cargo aircraft 222,571 € 226,721 € 230,493 € 234,265 € 238,038 € 241,433 € 244,451 € 247,469 € 250,487 € 253,882 € Airport passenger services charge 12,977,315 € 13,544,367 € 14,111,419 € 14,678,471 € 15,245,523 € 15,812,575 € 16,379,628 € 16,946,680 € 17,513,732 € 18,080,784 € Cargo service charge 535,094 € 544,982 € 554,435 € 563,416 € 571,998 € 580,145 € 587,892 € 595,222 € 602,171 € 610,517 € 2.- Non-Aeronautical Revenues 36,472,726 € 39,684,487 € 43,120,995 € 46,797,761 € 50,730,661 € 54,935,865 € 59,431,491 € 64,237,153 € 69,372,575 € 74,860,385 € Rents 1,317,295 € 1,385,868 € 1,457,785 € 1,533,431 € 1,612,999 € 1,696,435 € 1,783,915 € 1,875,904 € 1,972,633 € 2,074,659 € Concessions 28,398,401 € 31,130,144 € 34,064,849 € 37,216,024 € 40,598,020 € 44,226,085 € 48,116,416 € 52,286,219 € 56,753,765 € 61,538,458 € Operation 2,183,500 € 2,269,620 € 2,356,438 € 2,444,112 € 2,532,696 € 2,622,040 € 2,712,414 € 2,803,994 € 2,896,529 € 2,990,523 € Other concessions 4,478,356 € 4,795,252 € 5,129,287 € 5,481,881 € 5,854,267 € 6,247,538 € 6,663,109 € 7,102,695 € 7,567,730 € 8,060,299 € Other incomes 95,174 € 103,603 € 112,635 € 122,313 € 132,680 € 143,768 € 155,637 € 168,341 € 181,917 € 196,447 € 3,-Total Revenues 59,105,297 € 63,249,457 € 67,614,719 € 72,219,768 € 77,080,552 € 82,210,796 € 87,628,761 € 93,356,982 € 99,413,891 € 105,826,993 €

Figure 41. Airport Revenues – Baseline Projections

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -163-

9.5 Investments and amortization assumptions

All investments have been considered in accordance with the investment plan drawn up, assuming that the initial investment will be finished by the end of 2019, so that the operation may begin in 2020. Amortization is considered to be linear, and the period varies according to the nature and durability of the assets. The residual book value has been conservatively considered as a residual cash flow value.

9.5.1 Investments

The investments to be made have been reported in Chapter 8 of this Pre-feasibility study. It covers the amount for investments in each of the planned phases of development. The investments broken down in airfield improvements, passenger terminal and equipment, support facilities, navigation systems, access road and parking and airport rescue and firefighting have been estimated according to the anticipated air traffic demand of the airport.

Engineering and contingencies refer to derived engineering production functions and downside risk estimates that make allowance for the unknown risks associated with a project.

Table 57. Capital Development Program

Units of Work 2020 2030 2040 Airfield Improvements 13 404 978 630 000 - Passenger Terminal and Equipment 18 226 721 6 542 630 5 022 500 Cargo Terminal and Equipment 2 154 300 447 000 285 000 MROs 10 000 000 5 000 000 - Support Facilities 1 389 595 408 100 561 220 Navigation systems 10 954 058 - - Access Road and Parking 789 250 215 919 230 043 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting 1 957 903 - - Subtotal 58 876 805 13 243 649 6 098 763 Engineering and Contingencies 8 831 521 1 986 547 914 814 Total 67 708 326 15 230 196 7 013 577

9.5.2 Amortization

Amortized cost is the accumulated portion of the recorded cost of the project investments that will be charged to the expenses through a distribution of expenditures over time to reduce the cost of the infrastructures and equipment.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -164-

Table 58. Amortization

Amortization Total Units of Work Period Amortization VR (Years) (Euros) Airfield Improvements 15 14 034 978 0 Passenger Terminal and Equipment 20 27 280 601 2 511 250 Cargo Terminal and Equipment 20 2 743 800 142 500 MROs 20 15 000 000 0 Support Facilities 20 2 078 305 280 610 Navigation systems 15 10 954 058 0 Access Road and Parking 30 1 009 877 225 335 Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) 15 1 957 903 0 Engineering and Contingencies 10 11 732 883 0 Total 86 792 405 3 159 695

9.6 Debt-Free Financial Performance

This subsection contains a series of cash flow analyses of the financial performance of a 30-year period for the airport, providing the results in net present values and internal rates of return.

As indicated earlier, this analysis focuses on the baseline of the capital development program and operation and maintenance expenses and for revenues.

9.6.1 Debt-Free Cash Flow

The cash flow for the proposed airport development is presented in Table 59, which contains the combined inflows and outflows from the capital development program and from operations. This cash flow analysis focuses on the Baseline Scenarios for aviation activity, operation and maintenance expenses and revenues. The results are summarized below:

• Inflows and Outflows from Capital Development Program – The capital development program for the airport generates exclusively outflows consisting of equity investments of 89 952 100 Euros (see Table 57) by the airport operator. • Inflows from Operations - The operations of the airport generate inflows and outflows. The inflows consist of the revenues of 1 360 861 258 Euros realized by the airport (see Table 56). The outflows include the operation and maintenance airport expenses of 217 449 404 Euros experienced by the airport (see Table 53). The outflows also include corporate taxes, which are assumed to be 18 percent of the operating

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -165-

profit (i.e., corresponding to the difference between revenues and operation and maintenance expenses), amounting to 190 191 501 Euros. • Combined Cash Flow – When these inflows and outflows are combined, the total cash flow over the 2020-2050 period amounts to 869 000 254 Euros. This outcome indicates that the airport operator would generate a cash surplus over the 30-year concession period, but it does not take into consideration the time value of money, which the airport operator would need to determine in order to compare this investment opportunity with other available investment alternatives.

Figure 42. Net Profit and Cash-Flow Projections

9.6.2 Net Present Value

NPV takes into consideration the time value of money, representing one measure of the relative worth of alternative investment options. NPV represents the worth of the investment in terms of its value at the present time, using the cost of capital required for the capital investment program as the discount factor (i = interest rate) and the 30-year period as the time factor (n = number of compound periods).

The main disadvantage is that it implies having to select the discount rate, whose value greatly affects the result obtained (although in theory the opportunity cost of the resources is accepted as an adequate value, in financial analysis it is adjusted by risk factors and, within

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -166- an economic evaluation, it is not easy to evaluate, and it often varies according to the institution for which it is being evaluated).

As shown in Table 59, the NPV of the baseline capital investment program amounts to 17 481 253 Euros.

9.6.3 Internal Rate of Return

The critical end process of the financial analysis is the calculation of the Internal Rate of Return. IRR is defined as the discount rate at which the NPV would equal zero. Despite being a very simple, solid formula, in certain special cases it can provide more than one value, and so it must be interpreted correctly.

IRR also takes into consideration the time value of money, representing another measure of the relative worth of alternative investment options. IRR represents the worth of the investment in terms of its yield over the 30-year concession period. The internal rate of return will be positive if the cash flow is positive, but the NPV will be positive only if the IRR exceeds the cost of capital.

As shown in Table 59, the IRR of the baseline capital investment program is 19.0%.

Table 59. Cash Flow – Baseline Scenario

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Investments -67,708,326 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € -9,783,196 € Operational revenues 4,263,462 € 5,999,779 € 7,801,918 € 9,640,958 € 11,533,626 € 13,482,631 € 15,495,865 € 17,579,986 € 19,741,668 € 21,987,618 € 24,574,198 € Other incomes (Residual value assets) 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -603,636 € -824,300 € -1,054,013 € -1,285,199 € -1,518,141 € -1,752,909 € -1,989,633 € -2,228,637 € -2,469,958 € -2,713,757 € -2,958,892 € Corporate tax -658,769 € -166,144 € -449,181 € -738,595 € -1,037,345 € -1,345,908 € -1,665,680 € -1,997,801 € -2,343,466 € -2,703,853 € -3,125,313 € CASH FLOW (Debt Free) -64,707,269 € 5,009,334 € 6,298,723 € 7,617,164 € 8,978,139 € 10,383,814 € 11,840,552 € 13,353,547 € 14,928,244 € 16,570,008 € 8,706,796 € 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Investments 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € -6,728,577 € Operational revenues 27,035,249 € 29,588,007 € 32,256,722 € 35,043,716 € 37,963,221 € 41,021,366 € 44,231,870 € 47,600,491 € 51,141,679 € 55,170,016 € Other incomes (Residual value assets) 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -4,409,676 € -4,755,313 € -5,104,405 € -5,456,974 € -5,813,400 € -6,173,796 € -6,538,730 € -6,908,197 € -7,282,576 € -7,662,193 € Corporate tax -3,309,936 € -3,707,218 € -4,124,750 € -4,562,946 € -5,024,301 € -5,825,699 € -6,337,901 € -6,877,749 € -7,447,775 € -8,104,544 € CASH FLOW (Debt Free) 19,315,637 € 21,125,476 € 23,027,567 € 25,023,795 € 27,125,521 € 29,021,872 € 31,355,238 € 33,814,545 € 36,411,329 € 32,674,702 €

2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Investments 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational revenues 59,105,297 € 63,249,457 € 67,614,719 € 72,219,768 € 77,080,552 € 82,210,796 € 87,628,761 € 93,356,982 € 99,413,891 € 105,826,993 € Other incomes (Residual value assets) 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -11,306,580 € -11,840,312 € -12,380,394 € -12,927,329 € -13,481,566 € -14,043,383 € -14,613,469 € -15,192,462 € -15,780,616 € -16,378,958 € Corporate tax -8,407,933 € -9,057,810 € -9,746,343 € -10,476,803 € -11,251,981 € -12,081,858 € -12,954,476 € -13,881,338 € -14,865,713 € -15,912,370 € CASH FLOW (Debt Free) 39,390,784 € 42,351,334 € 45,487,983 € 48,815,636 € 52,347,004 € 56,085,554 € 60,060,815 € 64,283,182 € 68,767,561 € 73,535,665 €

NPV (16%) 17,481,253 € IRR 19.0%

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -167-

9.7 Financial Performance with Debt

The financial performance with debt is one of many possible models showing how to partly finance the required investment through debt, sustained by the cash flow from the project in accordance with a Project Finance model.

It should be noted that the conditions for the debt are restrictive, and the interest rate, timescale and the Debt Service Coverage Ratio for the servicing of the debt are conservative and higher than the market conditions.

9.7.1 Assumptions

First, it is assumed that the airport will be managed by a dedicated airport operator, the sole objective of which is to finance, operate and manage this airport.

This company will finance the initial investment through debt and capital; subsequent investments will only be financed through the cash flow generated by the project itself, following the same order and timescale envisaged in the previous non-leveraged, debt-free cash flow.

For the initial investment, the debt and the capital will be provided simultaneously and in equal proportion for as many years as the construction of the initial investment may last.

The debt will be repaid over 15 years, with a Debt Service Coverage Ratio of 1.6 based on the non-leveraged, debt-free cash flow, and a real interest rate of 16%.

These hypotheses and assumptions allow us to see how much debt can be incurred by the project and the 'debt versus investment' ratio it yields in order to finance the initial phase.

9.7.2 Model

The previous non-leveraged cash flow and additional assumptions provide us with the following schema for the financing, underwriting and servicing of the debt.

Table 60. Assumptions of the Debt

Characteristics of the debt Assumptions Real Interest Rate 6% Coverage ratio for the debt 1.6 Period of debt 15 years Percentage of initial Investment covered through debt 80 %

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -168-

Table 61. Term of Debt

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Debt Subscription 54,166,661 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 7,826,557 € Debt service 0 € 3,130,834 € 3,936,702 € 4,760,727 € 5,611,337 € 6,489,884 € 7,400,345 € 8,345,967 € 9,330,153 € 10,356,255 € 5,441,748 € Balance Outstanding 54,166,661 € 54,285,827 € 53,606,274 € 52,061,923 € 49,574,302 € 46,058,876 € 41,422,064 € 35,561,421 € 28,364,953 € 19,710,595 € 23,278,040 € Financial expenses 0 € 3,250,000 € 3,257,150 € 3,216,376 € 3,123,715 € 2,974,458 € 2,763,533 € 2,485,324 € 2,133,685 € 1,701,897 € 1,182,636 € Debt Amortization 0 € 0 € 679,552 € 1,544,351 € 2,487,621 € 3,515,426 € 4,636,812 € 5,860,643 € 7,196,467 € 8,654,358 € 4,259,112 €

2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Debt Subscription 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 5,382,862 € Debt service 12,072,273 € 13,203,422 € 14,392,229 € 15,639,872 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Balance Outstanding 12,602,450 € 155,174 € -14,227,745 € -30,721,282 € -32,564,558 € -34,518,432 € -36,589,538 € -38,784,910 € -41,112,005 € -38,195,863 € Financial expenses 1,396,682 € 756,147 € 9,310 € -853,665 € -1,843,277 € -1,953,874 € -2,071,106 € -2,195,372 € -2,327,095 € -2,466,720 € Debt Amortization 10,675,591 € 12,447,275 € 14,382,919 € 16,493,537 € 1,843,277 € 1,953,874 € 2,071,106 € 2,195,372 € 2,327,095 € 2,466,720 €

2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Debt Subscription 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Debt service 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Balance Outstanding -40,487,615 € -42,916,872 € -45,491,884 € -48,221,397 € -51,114,681 € -54,181,562 € -57,432,456 € -60,878,403 € -64,531,107 € -68,402,973 € Financial expenses -2,291,752 € -2,429,257 € -2,575,012 € -2,729,513 € -2,893,284 € -3,066,881 € -3,250,894 € -3,445,947 € -3,652,704 € -3,871,866 € Debt Amortization 2,291,752 € 2,429,257 € 2,575,012 € 2,729,513 € 2,893,284 € 3,066,881 € 3,250,894 € 3,445,947 € 3,652,704 € 3,871,866 €

Table 60 and Table 61 lead to calculate the new profit and loss account and cash flow of the shareholders or of the capital.

9.7.3 Cash Flow with Debt

The cash flow for the proposed airport development is presented in Table 59, which contains the combined inflows and outflows from the capital development program and from operations. This cash flow analysis focuses on the Baseline Scenarios for aviation activity, operation and maintenance expenses and revenues. The results are summarized below:

• Inflows and Outflows from Capital Development Program – The capital development program for the airport generates exclusively outflows consisting of equity investments of 135 898 219 Euros by the airport operator.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -169-

• Inflows and Outflows from Operations - The operations of the airport generate both inflows and outflows. The inflows consist of the revenues of 1 360 861 258 Euros realized by the airport. The outflows include the operation and maintenance airport expenses and debt repayment amounts to 527 871 819 Euros experienced by the airport.

Figure 43. Debt Cash-Flow Projections

• Combined Cash Flow – When these inflows and outflows are combined, the total cash flow over the 2020-2050 period amounts to 849 833 459 Euros (Table 62). This outcome indicates that the airport operator would generate a cash surplus over the 30-year concession period, but it does not take into consideration the time value of money, which the airport operator would need to determine in order to compare this investment opportunity with other available investment alternatives. The IRR of the baseline capital investment program is 35%.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -170-

Table 62. Cash Flow with Debt

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Investment -67,708,326 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € -9,783,196 € Operational incomes 4,263,462 € 5,999,779 € 7,801,918 € 9,640,958 € 11,533,626 € 13,482,631 € 15,495,865 € 17,579,986 € 19,741,668 € 21,987,618 € 24,574,198 € Other incomes 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -603,636 € -824,300 € -1,054,013 € -1,285,199 € -1,518,141 € -1,752,909 € -1,989,633 € -2,228,637 € -2,469,958 € -2,713,757 € -2,958,892 € Financial expenses 0 € -3,250,000 € -3,257,150 € -3,216,376 € -3,123,715 € -2,974,458 € -2,763,533 € -2,485,324 € -2,133,685 € -1,701,897 € -1,182,636 € Corporate taxes -658,769 € -166,144 € -449,181 € -738,595 € -1,037,345 € -1,345,908 € -1,665,680 € -1,997,801 € -2,343,466 € -2,703,853 € -3,125,313 € Debt subscription 54,166,661 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 7,826,557 € Debt repayment 0 € 0 € -679,552 € -1,544,351 € -2,487,621 € -3,515,426 € -4,636,812 € -5,860,643 € -7,196,467 € -8,654,358 € -4,259,112 € CASH FLOW (with Debt) -10,540,608 € 1,759,334 € 2,362,021 € 2,856,436 € 3,366,802 € 3,893,930 € 4,440,207 € 5,007,580 € 5,598,092 € 6,213,753 € 11,091,606 €

2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Investment 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € -6,728,577 € Operational incomes 27,035,249 € 29,588,007 € 32,256,722 € 35,043,716 € 37,963,221 € 41,021,366 € 44,231,870 € 47,600,491 € 51,141,679 € 55,170,016 € Other incomes 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -4,409,676 € -4,755,313 € -5,104,405 € -5,456,974 € -5,813,400 € -6,173,796 € -6,538,730 € -6,908,197 € -7,282,576 € -7,662,193 € Financial expenses -1,396,682 € -756,147 € -9,310 € 853,665 € 1,843,277 € 1,953,874 € 2,071,106 € 2,195,372 € 2,327,095 € 2,466,720 € Corporate taxes -3,309,936 € -3,707,218 € -4,124,750 € -4,562,946 € -5,024,301 € -5,825,699 € -6,337,901 € -6,877,749 € -7,447,775 € -8,104,544 € Debt subscription 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 5,382,862 € Debt repayment -10,675,591 € -12,447,275 € -14,382,919 € -16,493,537 € -1,843,277 € -1,953,874 € -2,071,106 € -2,195,372 € -2,327,095 € -2,466,720 € CASH FLOW (with Debt) 7,243,364 € 7,922,053 € 8,635,338 € 9,383,923 € 27,125,521 € 29,021,872 € 31,355,238 € 33,814,545 € 36,411,329 € 38,057,564 €

2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 Investment 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational incomes 59,105,297 € 63,249,457 € 67,614,719 € 72,219,768 € 77,080,552 € 82,210,796 € 87,628,761 € 93,356,982 € 99,413,891 € 105,826,993 € Other incomes 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Operational expenses -11,306,580 € -11,840,312 € -12,380,394 € -12,927,329 € -13,481,566 € -14,043,383 € -14,613,469 € -15,192,462 € -15,780,616 € -16,378,958 € Financial expenses 2,291,752 € 2,429,257 € 2,575,012 € 2,729,513 € 2,893,284 € 3,066,881 € 3,250,894 € 3,445,947 € 3,652,704 € 3,871,866 € Corporate taxes -8,407,933 € -9,057,810 € -9,746,343 € -10,476,803 € -11,251,981 € -12,081,858 € -12,954,476 € -13,881,338 € -14,865,713 € -15,912,370 € Debt subscription 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € 0 € Debt repayment -2,291,752 € -2,429,257 € -2,575,012 € -2,729,513 € -2,893,284 € -3,066,881 € -3,250,894 € -3,445,947 € -3,652,704 € -3,871,866 € CASH FLOW (with Debt) 39,390,784 € 42,351,334 € 45,487,983 € 48,815,636 € 52,347,004 € 56,085,554 € 60,060,815 € 64,283,182 € 68,767,561 € 73,535,665 € NPV (16%) 34,572,913 € IRR 35.3%

9.8 Debt-Free vs. Debt Project

This section presents the financial performance of the airport operator under other capital development program, aviation activity, revenue and expense scenarios showing cash flow, NPV and IRR, building a sustainable external debt of 75 535 665 Euros. A matrix is provided, which represents a comparison of the two possibilities.

As indicated earlier, the Baseline Scenario represents the aviation activity, the operation and maintenance expenses and the revenue projections presented earlier. These projections represent the most reasonable expectations of the consultant.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -171-

Table 59 presents the financial performance under the baseline of the capital development program and the Baseline Operational Scenario and Table 62 the project financed with debt charges.

A comparison of financial performance results for an scenario building an external debt to cover the debt servicing is presented in Table 63. As noted earlier, an investor would discard any investment opportunity with a negative NPV, meaning that its average cost of capital exceeded its IRR. In effect, the financial cost of implementing such an investment opportunity would exceed the financial return from it.

Table 63. Sensitivity Analysis – Debt-Free vs. Debt

Baseline Scenario Without Debt With Debt Gross Cash Flow 73 535 665 € 73 535 665 € Net Present Value (NPV) 17 481 253 € 34 572 913 € Internal Rate of Return (IRR) 19% 35%

Based on experience in a number of PPP airport projects, the Consultants believe that achieving an Internal Rate of Return of 20% or better will be necessary if the project is to attract qualified private investor/operators.

A Public Private Partnership may be considered as a form of implementing the project that would enable debt to be incurred without a State guarantee, based on and sustained by the project's own cash flow. To achieve this, it may only be necessary to obtain guarantees from the State or the airport management company to the effect that there will be a minimum level of traffic so that the risks of demand can be cushioned.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -172-

10 Conclusions There is a clear opportunity for Bila Tserkva to locate a modern and efficient airport in its territory. The offer of a quality infrastructure creates a new additional demand unknown at the beginning. The fact that a well-designed transport infrastructure in relation to demand, which is, in addition, well integrated in the territory and meets a consolidated demand in the region, induces, in a more or less spontaneous way, a hidden demand that will inevitably use that infrastructure. It is a source of demand itself.

Preliminary estimates of growth of:

• annual passenger traffic from 0.098 million in 2020 to 1.6 million in 2050, at an average compound growth rate of 9.8% per year. • annual aircraft movement from 4.7 thousand operations in 2020 to 27.8 thousand in 2050, at an average 10.2% per year. • cargo from 7.6 thousand tons in 2020 to 33.6 thousand tons in 2050, at an average 5.1% per year. • The IRR of the baseline capital investment program with debt is 35%.

10.1 Unfavourable Facts

1) UKBC must receive appropriate certification to commence international operations in compliance with Airports Certification Rule No. 407, dated 13 June 2006. 2) Airspace organization and procedures must be designed, approved and implemented. 3) Some balance between the volumes of imported and exported cargo plays an important role. 4) Need to establish a fast, safe, efficient, regular and cheap communication between Bila Tserkva and Kiev. 5) According to Eurocontrol, the probability that some flights through Ukraine will be restored may not take place until 2023, which can make an impact on the development of the air cargo business.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018 -173-

10.2 Favourable Facts

1) The airport does require a low amount of investments for the start of commercial operations. It is estimated that the initial investment is about 59 million euros in equipment and construction of facilities. 2) The runway is long enough to cover most of Europe and Middle East with a B73-800, A320 or wide-body freighters. 3) No air navigation procedures constraints. 4) Very attractive for non-aeronautical sources of revenues. 5) To encourage air services development UKBC may apply reductive coefficients up to 0.2 to the marginal rates of the airport charges. 6) The presence of a custom and inspection service unit at the existing airport allows the simplification of the procedures and help to minimize the processing times of the goods. 7) Bila Tserkva will take advantage of the synergies and grow pure point-to-point traffic based on the following assumptions: • an increase in the purchasing power of Bila Tserkva´s population, • an industrial development of the airport property and the vicinity, • the management style of the airport operator to attract the airlines and • the subsidies or incentives that the District Council is willing to face to make UKBC an attractive and competitive airport. The incentives are focused on letting the airline to operate without financial risk for a certain time. 8) Bila Tserkva may be developed of a specialized cargo centre, where transits and cargo connections can be made under advantageous financial conditions and through a multimodal logistic platform from air to less-expensive road, maritime and rail transport. 9) Located at a crossroads of important land transport infrastructures and logistic developments. 10) The results obtained from the debt cash flow are summarised as follows: • Net Present Value (NPV 16%): 34 572 913 € with debt or 17 481 253 € without debt. These values are clearly positive. • Internal Return Rate (IRR): 35% with debt or 19% without debt. These values can be considered very good for a financial evaluation.

Pre-Feasibility Study for the Bila Tserkva Airport in Ukraine – Final Report– 18/10/2018