Notification of the traffic distribution rules for Lelystad Airport and Schiphol, the Netherlands 1. INTRODUCTION Having regard to article 19 (3) of Regulation (EC) no. 1008/2008 (‘the Regulation’), the Netherlands’ Minister of Infrastructure and Water Management hereby notifies the European Commission of her intention to distribute air traffic between Lelystad Airport and Schiphol. Serious consideration has been given to market players’ opinions on the traffic distribution rules. This consultation made a significant contribution to what is a balanced final result. This notification first explains the need for the proposed traffic distribution rules. It then considers the substantive aspects of the measures and looks at their main features. An explanation is then provided of the rules’ compliance with article 19 of the Regulation. Finally, in accordance with article 19 (3) of the Regulation, the European Commission is requested to examine and approve the proposed measure. The European Commission is alternatively requested, in keeping with its decision of 14 March 1995, to approve the proposed measure subject to conditions.1 2. NEED FOR TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION RULES A. EU hubs The presence of several major hubs on EU territory is of great economic and strategic importance. The European Commission (‘the Commission’) recognises their importance in its external aviation policy,2 partly in view of the competition from Istanbul, Dubai and other rapidly growing hubs. Brexit will probably only increase the importance of strong EU hubs. The Commission states the following regarding its external aviation policy: ‘The economic benefits of hubs are well known, enabling "thinner" routes to be operated profitably with the support of connecting traffic. Investments in airport infrastructure and development of hubs, where justified by a strong and sustainable demand, are crucial for allowing 1 In its decision of 14 March 1995 (95/259/EC), L 162/25, the Commission approved the French traffic distribution rules on condition that part of the proposed French measure was amended. 2 The EU's External Aviation Policy - Addressing Future Challenges, COM (2012) 556 final of 27.09.2012. AVT18/IW126397A 1 European hubs to compete with those developing in other parts of the world. It is therefore important to identify bottlenecks to growth at an early stage and to remove them or at least limit their negative impact by using all means available to use scarce airport capacity more efficiently.’3 The Commission therefore accepts that measures are both necessary and admissible under the current legal frameworks in order to make the most efficient use of scarce capacity at hub airports. The present traffic distribution rules are such a measure to make the most efficient use of capacity at Schiphol, the Netherlands’ only hub airport. B. Schiphol Schiphol is one of the biggest hub airports in the EU and provides both the Netherlands and northwest Europe with access to a highly sophisticated continental and intercontinental route network that is a pillar of the Dutch and the regional economy. This is illustrated by the following statistics. Schiphol operates direct connections to 195 cities and 39 countries in Europe. Some 48.6 million passengers from European cities flew to or from Schiphol in 2017, and 31% of them transferred to another flight at Schiphol. More than 70% of all passengers at Schiphol are from Europe. A further 19.7 million non- European passengers fly to or from Schiphol. About 60% of these passengers were transfer passengers. These figures illustrate the importance of Schiphol as a hub. Schiphol performs a transnational function and is an important pillar of the EU’s continental and intercontinental accessibility. Schiphol’s extensive continental and intercontinental route network underpins the national economy, creates jobs and attracts international enterprises to the Netherlands. The annual added value of Schiphol’s mainport function to the Netherlands alone has been calculated at approximately €9 billion, and 114,000 jobs are directly or indirectly related to the airport.4 The Commission stated in its Aviation Strategy for Europe that aviation was a strong driver of growth, jobs, trade and the economy. A 10% increase in air connectivity adds 1% to gross domestic product; a 10% increase in the supply of intercontinental flights results in a 4% increase in the number of headquarters of large firms, and one euro of added value in the aviation industry creates nearly three euros of added value in the economy as a whole. Finally, a job in the aviation industry generates more than three jobs in other sectors.5 A European route network from Schiphol serving continental and intercontinental destinations is essential to retain and develop this strong EU hub. Schiphol’s hub function is a vital public interest that must be maintained and strengthened.6 3 The EU’s External Aviation Policy (2012). 4 Directly and indirectly upstream; the downstream impact or the wider economic impact is not taken into account. Economic Importance of Mainport Schiphol. Analysis of direct and indirect relations, Decisio (2015). 5 The Aviation Strategy of the European Union (speech by DG Mobility and Transport, European Commission, 2016). 6 Schiphol Action Agenda (2016). AVT18/IW126397A 2 Doing so is important given the hub’s vulnerability to a decline in the continental and intercontinental route network. This vulnerability is due more specifically to: a. the Netherlands’ small domestic market for intercontinental and transfer traffic; b. this traffic’s reliance on Schiphol’s physical and logistical infrastructure, for which there is no alternative in the Netherlands; and c. its very limited ability powers of recovery; if an airport loses its hub function, the negative impact on seat capacity and frequencies is felt for many years. a. Small domestic market The need for a European and intercontinental route network is particularly important to Schiphol on account of its small domestic market. The two functions, serving intercontinental destinations and operating a European network for transfer passengers, together form Schiphol’s continental and intercontinental hub function. If there is insufficient capacity for the transfer traffic, the lion’s share of the intercontinental flights (which consist largely of transfer passengers) cannot be operated profitably, which could lead to the loss of these connections. b. Specific infrastructure Air carriers that serve intercontinental destinations – or the associated transfer traffic – are reliant on specific airport infrastructure – both physical (e.g. runway length) and logistical (e.g. the terminal and baggage handling system) – that can be provided in the Netherlands only at Schiphol. Intercontinental and transfer traffic relies on Schiphol as there is no reasonable alternative airport in the Netherlands. Other air carriers are not reliant or far less reliant on Schiphol. In any decision to distribute traffic, transfer traffic will therefore have to remain at Schiphol. c. Limited powers of recovery The scarce capacity and limited potential for expansion at Schiphol – due to both physical and social restrictions – are putting the retention and further development of the route network under pressure. A study by SEO Amsterdam Economics (2015) found that the loss of Schiphol’s hub function would lead to the loss of a large part of the route network.7 Other airports have lost their hub operation in the past.8 A worldwide analysis of airports that have ‘dehubbed’ found that five years after they lost their hub function, their seat capacity was on average still 20% lower than before the dehubbing.9 Schiphol’s hub function should not be taken for granted. Schiphol is one of the most important hubs in Europe; in view of its extensive route network, pressure on the development of the hub operation can have a negative impact not only on the Netherlands’ worldwide connectivity but also on the European Union’s as a whole. C. Scarcity and pressure on the network Schiphol has experienced strong growth in recent years. The agreed environmental ceiling of 500,000 flight movements until 2020 has nearly been reached. The airport’s design and traffic management system are complex and 7 The Economic Importance of Schiphol’s Hub Function, SEO report 2015-22, SEO (2015). 8 Capacity demand at Schiphol Airport in 2023 (SEO, 2018). 9 The Economic Importance of Schiphol’s Hub Function, SEO report 2015-22, SEO (2015). AVT18/IW126397A 3 the growth has brought the limits of safe traffic management into view.10 Runway use is regulated by a preferential runway use system. Different runway combinations need to be used depending on the circumstances, chiefly wind speed and direction, but also cloud cover and visibility. The increase in the number of flight movements at Schiphol is making it harder to manage the traffic in all circumstances and change runway combinations ‘smoothly’, and there is less capacity to mitigate disruptions. Furthermore, there are limits on the airspace and substantial investments must be made in the airport infrastructure to handle the increase in traffic and passenger numbers responsibly and safely. The scarcity at Schiphol is also being driven by the government’s ambition of making air traffic more sustainable, partly to fulfil the Paris climate agreement. In practice, this will probably lead to any additional capacity at Schiphol falling short of the overall demand for flights. In this light, traffic at Schiphol must be developed selectively, with available capacity being used wherever possible by the traffic that contributes the most to Schiphol’s hub operation in order to retain the Netherlands’ and the EU’s global connectivity. These handling and operational limits, together with the environmental limits, mean that Schiphol cannot grow beyond 500,000 flight movements per year until the end of 2020. This ceiling has already nearly been reached. As a consequence, the scope to retain and develop Schiphol’s continental and intercontinental hub function is coming under enormous pressure. D.