Twenty-first Meeting of the U.S.-EU Joint Committee
Record of Meeting
1. The 21st meeting of the U.S.-EU Joint Committee took place on 25 April 2018 in The Hague. The list of participants is included in Attachment 1, and the approved agenda in Attachment 2.
Adoption of the Record of the Previous Joint Committee Meeting
2. The delegations adopted the record of the 20th meeting of the U.S.-EU Joint Committee, held on 11 July 2017, in Washington, DC.
Implementation of the Agreement
3. The EU delegation stated that the EU has completed all procedures necessary to bring into force the 2007 U.S.-EU Air Transport Agreement (ATA) and accordingly notified the U.S. via diplomatic note. The ATA would enter into force one month after the date of receipt of the corresponding diplomatic note from the U.S. The U.S. delegation confirmed the receipt of the EU diplomatic note.
4. The U.S. delegation enquired about the progress for the entry into force of the Protocol to amend the ATA, signed on 24 June 2010 (the “2010 Protocol”). The EU delegation informed that the ratification by two EU Member States remains outstanding.
5. The EU delegation informed that concerning the Croatia protocol, the EU side is advancing internal preparations of diplomatic notes to be sent to the U.S.
Article 21 – Annual Review
6. The EU delegation emphasised the importance of Article 21 as a mechanism for further deepening the EU-U.S. aviation relationship by, inter alia, liberalising ownership and control restrictions, as foreseen at the time by the negotiators of both sides. Recalling previous exchanges and discussions at meetings of the Joint Committee, the EU delegation underlined its continued view that the conditions of Article 21, Paragraph 4 of the ATA are met with the adoption of Regulation 598/2014. The EU delegation referenced the letter sent by the United States on 11 April 2018, and stated that the Commission had the necessary authority under the Regulation to take appropriate legal action. It further informed the U.S. delegation that the Commission had not received any complaint on this matter. The U.S. delegation stated its position remains the same as what was stated in the April letter and, while welcoming the adoption of the EU noise Regulation, informed that it remains unconvinced that it triggers Article 21, Paragraph 4. The EU delegation expressed its regrets about these diverging views, took note of the letter and reserved all options available under the ATA.
7. The delegations took note of the progress made towards an EU-U.S. agreement on the provision of aircraft with crew (aka wet leasing) and welcomed that the discussions on the text of the agreement had been finalised. The delegations further reaffirmed their commitment to swiftly resolve the outstanding linguistic issue and conclude the negotiations.
Legislation & Rule Making Updates
EU Aviation Strategy
8. The EU delegation provided a brief update on the state of play to implement the EU Aviation Strategy. In aviation safety, the co-legislators have successfully completed the negotiations on the new Basic Regulation. This Regulation, which is expected to enter into force in mid-2018, will modernise the EU’s safety rules, introduce a more risk-based approach, enable the pooling and sharing of resources and anticipate new developments such as unmanned aircraft or cybersecurity issues. In air traffic management, the Commission is currently reflecting on how to unblock and modernize the SES 2+ proposal and will renew the appointment of the Network Manager. Other items currently under evaluation are the EU’s code of conduct on Computer Reservation Systems, the EU safety list, the EU’s Airport Charges Directive, and the EU’s Air Services Regulations. The U.S. delegation expressed its appreciation for the explanations.
Legislative proposal to safeguard competition (replacing Regulation 868/2004)
9. On the legislative proposal to replace Regulation 868/2004, the EU delegation reported on good progress in the Council and the European Parliament, which will be followed by discussions between both institutions and the Commission to finalise the text of the draft Regulation. The objective is to create a balanced and proportionate trade defence instrument with clear criteria, procedures, and rules.
10. The EU delegation informed that the Commission is currently in the process of evaluating the Regulation. Aspects to be considered in the forthcoming impact assessment in particular are: provisions relating to the operating license, the functioning of the reference to the principal place of business, leasing, public service obligations, price transparency, airline ownership and control, social impacts of internal market developments. and further innovation of the internal market. The EU delegation invited the U.S. delegation and stakeholders to participate in the online public consultation.
Passenger Name Record (PNR)
11. The EU delegation acknowledged the importance of PNR as a tool to fight terrorism, and underlined the corresponding need for strong safeguards to protect privacy and personal data. The EU delegation provided information on the European Court of Justice (ECJ) opinion on the compatibility of the EU-Canada PNR agreement with provisions of EU law concerning the protection of personal data, and emphasised that the transfer of PNR data remains a sensitive issue in Europe for both legal and political reasons. Following the ECJ opinion, the Commission is working with Canada to address the Court’s concerns and, in parallel, is assessing the broader implications for other existing PNR agreements. The U.S. delegation stressed the importance of the issue, including the need to address privacy issues, but stated that the U.S.-EU PNR agreement is working well and already strikes the appropriate balance between privacy protection and PNR data exchange.
EU Package Travel Directive
12. The EU delegation reported that the Directive would become applicable on 1 July 2018, which signifies the date by which all EU Member States would have to transpose the Directive into their respective national law. The U.S. referred to a letter by U.S. airlines sent to the Commission on 14 March 2018, and informed that it is not clear whether U.S. airlines would need to have insurance coverage across all EU Member States even if they do not provide services to all EU Member States. The EU delegation replied that the national authorities of EU Member States should be the first points of contact, and that the Commission will follow-up on any alleged incorrect transposition of the Directive.
13. The U.S. delegation presented an update on preclearance and security measures that have been rolled out over the past year. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) staff is currently in place in 15 countries, allowing for the preclearance of 18 million passengers. U.S. authorities are currently in negotiations concerning additional facilities at Milan, Rome, Reykjavik, Amsterdam, Brussels, Oslo, Madrid, Edinburgh, and Manchester, and have signed an agreement with Sweden for Stockholm Arlanda Airport. While welcoming the objective of facilitating passengers’ travelling experiences, the EU delegation noted that moving controls would not necessarily be the best solution, underlined the cost involved for the EU side, and encouraged facilitation, simplification and innovation. Recalling the good example of cargo screening, the EU delegation invited the U.S. delegation to consider a mutual recognition of EU security controls to avoid duplication.
EU Slot Regulation
14. The EU delegation described the current state of play following the proposed amendment to the Slot Regulation, which was presented in 2011. Currently, internal reflections are ongoing on whether the rules are still fit for purpose today and going forward. The U.S. delegation welcomed the explanation and noted its concerns that some elements of the proposal, for instance the revision to the use-or-lose provision, may have an impact on competition. In response, the EU delegation recalled the growing congestion at EU airports and underlined that the Regulation needs to ensure the best possible use of scarce capacity.
SEC 530 (“LoBiondo”)
15. The EU delegation expressed its serious concerns about Sec. 530, the so–called “LoBiondo Amendment,” included in HR 4, the “FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018,” and that its concerns have increased since the issue was raised at the 20th Joint Committee. The EU delegation stressed its position that the amendment would place obstacles to market access and to undermine the current processes provided for granting foreign air carrier permits under the ATA, and that it would place new requirements on the U.S. Department of Transportation in issuing foreign air carrier permits to European carriers. The EU delegation emphasised that adding a public interest test as proposed by Sec. 530 would disregard U.S. obligations under the ATA, and underlined that by concluding the ATA, both parties have considered services to be in the public interest. The EU delegation further recalled its position in the context of the Norwegian Air International proceedings, which was confirmed unanimously by the U.S. Departments of State, Transportation, and Justice in those proceedings. The EU delegation underlined that the definition of “flag of convenience” carrier contained within Sec. 530 would constitute a direct attack on the EU internal market, which was fully recognised by the ATA. The EU delegation further stressed that Sec. 530 is a serious matter that would put into question the basic principles underpinning the ATA, and as such disrespect its very essence. Recalling the celebration in July 2017 of the successful 10 years of the ATA and the significant benefits it has brought to all parties and stakeholders, the EU delegation expressed its disappointment to see such developments, which are diametrically opposed to the close transatlantic aviation relationship that the EU wants to maintain. In light of these strong concerns, the EU delegation enquired about the U.S. administration’s assessment of the implication of Sec. 530, and whether it intends to express its position on the matter. The EU delegation underlined its expectations that the U.S. administration will intervene, voice its views, and ensure that the rights and obligations under the ATA are being upheld. The EU delegation stated that it would continue to closely monitor the legislation and reserved any action under the ATA. In response, the U.S. delegation informed that there is no official position at this time on the legislation, but offered to convey EU views, as appropriate.
HR 5000 (“Free to Fly Act”)
16. The EU delegation referred to the U.S. legislative proposal for a “Free to Fly Act” introduced in February 2018, for which the purpose is to liberalise foreign ownership restrictions in U.S. air carriers. The EU delegation expressed its views that this initiative, which is in line with the objective of the ATA to liberalise ownership and control, shows that there is support for such a discussion in the U.S. Congress and enquired about the U.S. delegation’s views on the matter. The EU delegation recalled that the current rules date back to the infancy of commercial aviation and that the world has changed considerably since, and underlined its interest in having a discussion on the topic as the EU is currently reviewing its own rules on ownership and control. In response, the U.S. delegation informed that there is no indication that this initiative, which would indeed bring about a fundamental change of U.S. law, has a realistic chance of being adopted.
Drug and Alcohol Testing
17. The EU delegation informed about the unanimous view among the EU Member States that rules on drug and alcohol testing are needed. In the spirit of the new safety regulation, and its risk-based approach, the Commission will continue to work closely with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to develop the necessary operational rules and establish a priority list. The EU delegation further informed that inspections would take into account the existence of similar rules in other jurisdictions which would reduce the frequency of inspections. While not being in a position to exempt the U.S. from the application of the rules on drug and alcohol testing, the EU delegation emphasised its close cooperation with the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The U.S. delegation expressed its disappointment with the rules and that FAA was not exempt, as the U.S. has a long record of drug and alcohol testing. The U.S. delegation further informed about its concerns that the measure may distract flight crew, and asked how and when the criteria will be developed, the process and timing of EASA, how the Commission and EASA can ensure standardisation, how transparency can be ensured, and how FAA and other stakeholders can provide input on the matter. The EU delegation took note of the position, reassured that common rules would be implemented by EU Member States’ authorities in a uniform manner which would be monitored by EASA, and agreed to share FAA’s concerns related to implementation with EASA.
18. The EU delegation underlined that the EU and the United States share a common agenda and a strong commitment to deliver when it comes to ensuring air transport is protected by a robust aviation security regime. EU-U.S. bilateral dialogue and cooperation in aviation security has never been so strong and promising, which is a positive sign for the future. The existing excellent co-operation allows for mutual trust in each other’s system and to pioneer bilateral initiatives such as One Stop Security for flights arriving from the United States in Europe and mutual recognition arrangements for the security of air cargo. These initiatives are hailed by the air transport industry as saving them time, cost, and operational complexity, whilst continuing to deliver robust aviation security. The EU delegation stated that both the EU and the United States are fully aware of the political importance of vigilance and the expectations of the public when it comes to providing reassurance with regard to level of preparedness to address the current threat situation. The close cooperation between the EU and the United States delivers effective, coordinated security solutions and allows scarce resources to be deployed efficiently. The EU delegation welcomed the common vision in respect to raising the global bar on aviation security, and expressed its hope that both sides will jointly exercise their leadership in ensuring that ICAO delivers on the mandate given by the UNSC Resolution 2309 of 2016. While applauding the adoption of the ICAO Global Aviation Security Plan (GASeP), the EU delegation informed of the need to remain vigilant in its implementation and referred to further discussions at ICAO that will take place in the future. The U.S. delegation welcomed and concurred with the statements. The delegations took note of the Joint Statement on Aviation Security included in Attachment 3.
Air Transport Regulatory Panel (ATRP)
19. The EU delegation noted the advantages of global solutions instead of a patchwork of diverging bilateral air services agreements and emphasised the need for a baseline of common rules. The EU delegation further underlined that the EU and the United States are well placed to lead such efforts at ICAO. Referring to the area of facilitating overseas investments, which is currently one of the areas gaining traction in the works of the ICAO ATRP, the EU delegation stressed the need to treat investments in airlines in the same way as investments in any other economic sector. The EU delegation underlined that it is keen to proceed with the draft Convention currently being prepared by the ATRP, which does not impose changes to a State’s ownership and control rules, but seeks to facilitate the acceptance of other States’ liberalisation of foreign investment – thereby addressing concerns currently holding back such investments. The EU delegation enquired about the views of the U.S. delegation on this matter. In response, the U.S. delegation reiterated its position that ICAO should focus its limited resources on safety and security matters as a priority, and pointed to its interest in assessing ownership and control requirements and its preference for handling the matter bilaterally. The U.S. delegation noted that it does not intend to interfere with any State’s policy choices but informed that a potential blind acceptance of ownership and control assessments would raise concerns.
Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA)
20. The EU delegation recalled the good cooperation between the United States and the EU, which was instrumental to support the ICAO resolution on the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), and underlined the need to focus on translating the resolution into a practical mechanism. In particular, the EU delegation noted, it is important to adopt related ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) at the ICAO Council meeting in June 2018 without re-opening discussions on the content. Concerning the question of the definition of alternative fuels, the EU delegation informed that a finding that fossil fuels could be sustainable fuels would be potentially harmful. Instead, it encouraged sticking to the approach with the basket of measures, including the promotion of alternative and sustainable fuels from clean and renewable energy sources. The EU delegation further suggested enhancing the contact of experts on sustainability criteria. The U.S. delegation concurred that our respective technical experts should continue to work the issues. The EU delegation informed that it does not oppose the inclusion of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) credits and underlined its willingness to work with the United States to address its concerns. The U.S. delegation confirmed that adopting the SARPs is critical, stated that it is looking forward to continue working with the EU on CORSIA, and noted the EU’s concern regarding the sustainability criteria.
21. The U.S. delegation raised the issue of environmental taxes in several EU Member States, which, in its view, could risk eroding the environmental efforts achieved at ICAO level. Following discussions at prior Joint Committee meetings, the United States had approached the governments of the respective EU Member States. As to the measure pending in Sweden, the U.S. delegation welcomed the open consultation process ahead of adopting the measures, which allowed US carriers to file their concerns, but noted that it has not received a response to a demarche from September 2017. In reply, the Swedish representative informed that the tax in question is in the remit of the Swedish Ministry of Finance, came into effect on 1 April 2018, and that the demarche has never arrived at the Ministry of Transport. The U.S. delegation explained that the demarche was addressed to the Ministry of Finance and undertook to follow up. In response to the U.S. delegation request for an update, the Norwegian representative informed that the Norwegian Parliament has requested the government to give an environmental profile to the existing passenger tax. Currently, the government’s internal works on the matter are at a too early stage to give any details. The Norwegian representative confirmed that Norway is in contact with the U.S. Embassy, and underlined the readiness to respond to any additional request for information. In response to the U.S. delegation request for an update, the representative of the Netherlands informed that as of October 2017, the new government has an objective to obtain an EU-wide environmental aviation tax from 2021 to enhance the sustainability of air transport. The country’s strong preference for an EU approach is reflected by several actions at EU level. The representative of the Netherlands further informed that stakeholders are already involved in the process, and that a public consultation would be launched in summer 2018. The U.S. delegation noted that individual taxes in EU Member States could destabilise the environmental taxation regime. In the absence of a Polish representative, the U.S. delegation asked the Commission to convey its concerns about a Polish environmental tax to the Polish authorities and announced that the United States would also reach out to them. In response, the EU delegation informed that there have been no new developments in Poland, and explained that the Polish tax in question is a general taxation measure relating to the emission of gases in the atmosphere and applies horizontally across all sectors.
22. The U.S. delegation noted both sides’ commitment to applying the Balanced Approach in addressing aircraft noise issues, but raised concerns with individual Member States on noise issues. The U.S. delegation underlined its concerns about the Italian Regional Tax on Civil Aircraft Noise Emissions (IRESA) and informed that the matter had been raised with various Italian government agencies. The representative of Italy responded that the U.S. Embassy in Italy is active in the matter, and informed that the Italian Ministry of Finance is responsible for the uniform application of IRESA, and some delays must be expected due to the current transition time ahead of the formation of a new government. The representative from Italy further stated that the tax had been lowered and modulated following discussions of the matter in previous Joint Committees. The U.S. delegation concurred that the matter has been raised in several previous Joint Committees. The U.S. delegation further noted difficulties with engaging with the Belgian authorities on noise issues. In response, the EU delegation informed that many stakeholders consider the current rules as unsatisfactory and that discussions on the matter are currently ongoing.
Public consultation on London Heathrow environmental charges
23. Responding to a question from the U.S. delegation on the process involved for stakeholder input into changes to airport charges at London Heathrow airport, the representative of the United Kingdom presented an update and underlined that any measure would fully respect the Balanced Approach.
24. The U.S. delegation raised issues regarding supersonic civil aircraft, noting its commitment to advance technology and its safe integration into the airspace. The U.S. delegation informed that FAA is working through CAEP to develop noise certification standards for supersonic aircraft, and invited the EU to work on outstanding issues within CAEP. In response, the EU delegation underlined that public acceptability is a key issue in Europe, that technical data will be necessary for this public dialogue, and further underlined the EU’s commitment to fulfil the CAEP work programme. In response to a question from the EU delegation, the U.S. delegation confirmed that the ban of overland flights in the United States remains in effect.
Custom and Border Protection
25. The EU delegation raised concerns about Customs and Border Protection staff shortages at certain airports. Referring to the commercial implications, the EU delegation underlined secondary effects that result from understaffed airports, and asked the U.S. delegation to pass the message to the responsible U.S. agency. The U.S. delegation took note of the concerns and informed that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection is currently in the process of hiring additional staff.
26. The U.S. delegation raised Brexit, noting that the March 2019 date was quickly approaching. The U.S. delegation underlined the need for the earliest possible information on the future relationship between the EU and the United Kingdom, and asked for any update on the matter. In response, the EU delegation informed that the United Kingdom will become a third country on 30 March 2019, and that the EU has pursued a phased approach to ensure an orderly withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU. The EU delegation also recalled the slides published in January 2018, and the series of notices to stakeholders. On the basis of the guidelines adopted at the March 2018 European Council, the EU’s aim is to jointly adopt with the United Kingdom a political declaration in the autumn of 2018 to clarify the precise terms of the future relationship. The EU delegation underlined the importance for all stakeholders to prepare in parallel for the practical consequences of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal, taking into account all possible outcomes. The U.S. delegation reiterated its belief that continuity of commercial aviation is important for stakeholders and consumers across the transatlantic market.
Italy no show policy
27. The U.S. delegation raised the Italian no-show policy, which it believes is not in line with the pricing freedom provisions of the ATA, and requested an update concerning a letter sent to the Italian authorities in November 2017. The representative of Italy informed about the decision of the Italian Council of State, which clarified the application of the rule and offered to reply to the United States after consulting the relevant experts. The EU delegation added that the Commission guidelines on Regulation 261/2004 (passenger rights) clarified, that the denial of boarding as part of a no-show policy does not constitute denied boarding for the purposes of the Regulation but that it also stated that no-show policies might be prohibited by the national laws of EU Member States.
28. The U.S. delegation raised prefunding, notably in relation to London Heathrow airport, stated that the issue is of importance for U.S. carriers, and invited the EU delegation to clarify the Commission’s position. In response, the EU delegation noted that other fora are better placed to discuss specific cases and informed that the Commission is currently evaluating the overall rules on prefunding, including with a public consultation to which U.S. stakeholders are invited to contribute. The representative of the United Kingdom added that the issue of London Heathrow should be discussed bilaterally. In response, the U.S. delegation stated that the issue is relevant to the Joint Committee, as the issue affects all Member States, and is relevant now as well while the United Kingdom remains part of the EU, and underlined its position that current users should not finance future competition.
29. The U.S. delegation emphasised the existing strong cooperation between the United States and the EU and informed about its areas of priority for the forthcoming Air Navigation Conference (ANC). The EU delegation welcomed the statement and echoed the intention to work closely with the U.S. delegation in the preparation of the ANC.
Next meeting of the Joint Committee
30. The delegations agreed to hold the next meeting in 2019 in the United States.
|For the U.S. delegation: Hugo Yon
Date: September 11, 2019
|For the European delegation: Filip Cornelis
Date: 2 September, 2019
1 – List of Participants
2 – Agenda
1. Mr Filip Cornelis, DG MOVE, Director E- International Transport Affairs
2. Mr Carlos Bermejo Acosta, DG MOVE, Head of Unit International Transport Affairs
3. Mr Georg Hasslinger, DG MOVE, Policy Officer, International Transport Affairs
4. Mr Knut Simonsson, Legal Service
European External Action Service
EU Member States
1. Mr Maximilian Sagmüller, Air Services Agreements, Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology
2. Mr Tomas Vokaty, Civil Aviation Dpt, Ministry of Transport, Czech Republic
3. Ms Païvi Jamsa, Chief Specialist, Air Transport Markets unit, Services Dpt, Ministry of Transport and Communications Finland
4. Ms Sylvia Bielefeld, Assistant Head of Division, Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, Germany
5. Ms Kristin Helga Markusdottir, Head of Legal Section, Icelandic Transport Authority
6. Mr Liam Keogh, Deputy Director General of Aviation, Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Aviation Services Division, Ireland
7. Ms Maria Teresa Lioi, Senior Officer, Focal point for EU External Relations and Economic Regulation Matters, ENAC (Italian Civil Aviation Authority)
8. Mr Mark Reiter, Ministère du Développement durable et des Infrastructures, Département des transports, Grand-Duché du Luxembourg
9. Mr Oyvind Thorstein Ek, Deputy Director General, Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications
10. Ms Ann-Kristin Hanssen, Senior Adviser, Norwegian Ministry of Transport and Communications
11. Ms Ana Cristina Pais, Portugal
12. Mr Lars Osterberg, Senior Adviser, Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation, Division for Transport, Sweden
13. Mr Mark Bosly, Senior Air Services Negotiator, Department for Transport, UK
14. Mr James Gilderoy, Senior Air Services Negotiator, Department for Transport, UK
1. Mr Gérard Borel, General Counsel, ACI EUROPE
2. Mr Arnaud Camus, Assistant VP International Affairs, Air France
3. Mr Michiel Laumans, Coordinator International Affairs, Air France/KLM
4. Ms Annette Groeneveld, President, European Cabin Crew Association, EurECCA
5. Mr Jonathan Horne, Deputy Secretary General, European Cockpit Association
6. Mr Vegard Petter Einan, Vice president, European Transport Workers Federation ETF
7. Mr Sami Lahdensuo, Manager, International Market Access & Aeropolitics, Finnair Plc
8. Mr Lauri Tierala, Manager, Market Access and Aeropolitics, Finnair Plc
9. Mr Alan Campbell, Group Manager International Relations, IAG
11. Mr Jorg Meinke, head of EU Liaison Office, Lufthansa Group
12. Mr John Hanlon, Head of International Government and Industry Relations, Norwegian
U.S. Department of State
1. Mr. Hugo Yon, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Transportation Affairs (EB/TRA)
2. Ms. Terri Robl, Senior Advisor, EB/TRA
3. Mr. Aaron Forsberg, Director, Office of Aviation Negotiations, EB/TRA
4. Mr. Landry Carr, Deputy Director, Office of Transportation Policy, EB/TRA
5. Ms. Gabrielle Moseley, International Civil Aviation Officer, Office of Aviation Negotiations, EB/TRA
6. Mr. Jesse Tampio, Senior Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser
7. Ms. Elizabeth Wewerka, Economic Officer, Office of the European Union and Regional Affairs
8. Ms. Nadine Farouq, Economic Officer, United States Mission to the European Union
9. Mr. David A. Swalley, Economic Officer, U.S. Embassy The Hague
U.S. Department of Transportation
10. Mr. Brian Hedberg, Director of International Aviation, Office of the Secretary (OST)
11. Ms. Jennifer Thibodeau, Senior Attorney
U.S. Department of Commerce
12. Mr. Eugene Alford, International Transportation Specialist, International Trade Administration
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
13. Ms. Catherine M. Lang, Director, Europe, Africa, and Middle East Region, Office of International Affairs
14. Mr. Russell Bailey, Senior Regulatory Counsel, Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA)
15. Ms. Cecilia Bethke, Managing Director, International Affairs, Airlines for America (A4A)
16. Mr. Matthew Cornelius, Vice President, Air Policy, Airports Council International-North America
17. Mr. Shawn Gray, Chairman, Government Affairs Committee, Allied Pilots Association
18. Mr. Robert A. Wirick, Managing Director – Regulatory and International Affairs, American Airlines
19. Mr. Russell E. Pommer, Associate General Counsel and Vice President, Global Regulatory Affairs, Atlas Air, Inc.
20. Ms. Julie E. Oettinger, Managing Director, International Regulatory and Policy Affairs, Delta Air Lines
21. Ms. Nancy Sparks, Managing Director, Regulatory Affairs, FedEx Express
22. Mr. Conor McAuliffe, Managing Director, European and Industry Affairs, United Airlines
21st U.S.-EU Joint Committee Meeting
25 April 2018
09.00 Venue: Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management
Room: “Van Kleffenszaal”
Address: Rijnstraat 8, 2515 XP The Hague
Introduction and Adoption of Agenda
Adoption and Signature of the Record of Meeting of the 20th Joint Committee Meeting
Implementation of Agreement
- Entry into force of the 2007 Air Transport Agreement
- Croatia Protocol
Article 21 – Annual Review
Wet Leasing Update
Legislation & Rule Making Updates
- Update on EU Aviation Strategy
- Update on EC 868/2004
- Update on EC 1008/2008
- PNR – status of mandates/discussions
- Update on EU Travel Package Directive
- Update on U.S. Preclearance
- Update on EU Slot regulations
- Update on Sec 530
- Update on HR 5000
- Implementation of the EC Regulation on Drug & Alcohol Testing
14.00 Joint Committee Meeting Resumes
Aviation Security Update
- Environmental taxes (Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden)
- Noise measures (Italy, Belgium, UK)
- Supersonic Technologies
Aeropolitical issues (government-to-government session)