Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07ROME2147
2007-10-10 09:12:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Rome
Cable title:  

U.S. AIR CARRIERS BALK AT PROPOSED TERMINAL

Tags:  EAIR ETRD IT 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0012
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHRO #2147/01 2830912
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 100912Z OCT 07
FM AMEMBASSY ROME
TO RULSDMK/DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 9210
RHMFISS/TSA HQ WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHMCSUU/FAA NATIONAL HQ WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
INFO RUCNMEU/EU INTEREST COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS PRIORITY 1729
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON PRIORITY 1417
RUEHMO/AMEMBASSY MOSCOW PRIORITY 4386
RUEHTV/AMEMBASSY TEL AVIV PRIORITY 0952
RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS PRIORITY 4566
C O N F I D E N T I A L ROME 002147 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE PASS FOR EB/TRA/EN: M FINSTON
BRUSSELS PASS FOR FAA: K EDWARDS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/09/2017
TAGS: EAIR ETRD IT
SUBJECT: U.S. AIR CARRIERS BALK AT PROPOSED TERMINAL
RELOCATION AT ROME-FIUMICINO


C O N F I D E N T I A L ROME 002147

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

STATE PASS FOR EB/TRA/EN: M FINSTON
BRUSSELS PASS FOR FAA: K EDWARDS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/09/2017
TAGS: EAIR ETRD IT
SUBJECT: U.S. AIR CARRIERS BALK AT PROPOSED TERMINAL
RELOCATION AT ROME-FIUMICINO



1. THIS IS AN ACTION REQUEST. SEE PARA 10.

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


2. (SBU) Italian civil aviation authorities at Rome's
Fiumicino airport are mandating that U.S. air carriers
transfer their check-in operations from their current
location to a more distant and inconvenient terminal at the
airport. U.S. carriers claim the move is onerous and
discriminatory, and have sought Post's assistance in blocking
the move. Post believes the new terminal location will
address several serious and long-standing security problems
for U.S. carriers, and thus we do not believe we should help
the carriers block the move. Italian airport authorities
have indicated a willingness to work with U.S. carriers to
resolve their commercial concerns; Post is prepared to use
its good offices to minimize airlines' commercial concerns.
END SUMMARY.


3. (SBU) The GOI recently released a revised National Civil
Aviation Security Program (NCASP),which calls for moving
passenger check-in operations for U.S. air carriers and
Israeli flag carrier El Al from Fiumicino's terminal C to
terminal 5 by May 2008. Terminal 5 is a former cargo
building, currently under reconstruction, located a
significant distance from the main terminal area. ENAC
maintains that the move will alleviate security and
congestion problems related to the high volume of U.S.
passengers departing Fiumicino.

--------------
U.S. Carrier Concerns
--------------


4. (SBU) Representatives of United Airlines, Delta Airlines,
U.S. Airways, American Airlines, and Continental Airlines,
and Israeli flag carrier El Al recently met EmbOffs and
Embassy Rome's Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
Representative to discuss their problems with the proposed
move. The carriers told us the move would endanger passenger
security, adversely affect passenger convenience, and put the
carriers at a competitive disadvantage with other
international carriers. The U.S. carriers contend that they
are being moved from terminal C to create space for more
Alitalia flights to be transferred to Fiumicino from Milan's

Malpensa airport. None of the other carriers that use
terminal C and fly to at-risk destinations (Alitalia, British
Airways, and Aeroflot) will have to move from their current
spaces in terminal C. The U.S. carriers also fear they would
incur significant costs for the move, which their rivals
would not.

--------------
SECURITY ISSUES AT TERMINAL C
--------------


5. (C) TSA has had security concerns with terminal C for
several years. The agency notes that the high volume of
passengers on U.S. carriers creates long lines and
bottlenecks during peak check-in times, creating potentially
critical vulnerabilities. The vehicle setback from terminal
C is so close to the terminal that a car bomb detonated in
the passenger drop off area during peak travel times could
potentially wreak terrible damage within the terminal.

--------------
MEETING WITH ENAC
--------------


6. (SBU) After the meeting with U.S. carriers, EconOffs and
TSA subsequently discussed the proposed relocation with

SIPDIS
Vitaliano Turra', Director of Fiumicino Airport for ENAC.
Turra' outlined a plan for terminal 5 in a document developed
by ENAC and AdR. The plan responded to and addressed the
most pressing security, convenience, and safety problems
identified by TSA and the U.S. carriers. Turra' also offered
to meet and work with U.S. carriers, TSA, and Post to find

solutions to all of TSA's and the carriers' concerns. NOTE:
TSA has not had a chance to physically inspect terminal 5,

SIPDIS
and the conclusion above is only provisional. END NOTE.


7. (SBU) AdR believes that terminal 5 will be ready by
spring 2008, and that the move is temporary, pending an
overhaul of the entire Fiumicino airport area within 5 years.
NOTE: Post considers the proposed May 2008 move date
unrealistic, as well as the completion of the Fiumicino
overhaul within 5 years. END NOTE.

--------------
PROPOSED USG REACTION TO AIRLINES
--------------


8. (SBU) Assuming that ENAC, AdR, and the GOI uphold their
commitments to enhance terminal 5 security, safety, and
convenience, Post thinks that the proposed move would
significantly improve security at Fiumicino for U.S.
carriers. We believe this potential improvement in security
should outweigh carriers' claims of inconvenience and
competitiveness. Good faith negotiations between ENAC, AdR,
and U.S. carriers could alleviate most of the remaining
competitive concerns of the airlines; the Embassy would be
prepared to use its good offices to help the carriers make
the move to terminal 5 as smooth as possible.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


9. (SBU) In light of TSA's long-standing security issues
with the current terminal, Post believes it would be
irresponsible for USG to support carrier efforts to block a
GOI initiative that would address these issues. The TSA
Representative at Post points out that an airline terminal
has recently been targeted by a vehicle bomb (Glasgow) and
that the vulnerabilities at the current terminal raise the
possibility of a mass casualty attack on air passengers here.
TSA notes further that Americans have been killed at
Fiumicino before (1985). END COMMENT.

--------------
ACTION REQUEST
--------------


10. (SBU) Post requests Washington's concurrence with the
following response to U.S. carriers' request for help in
blocking the terminal transfer.

-- USG has carefully considered airline requests for Embassy
assistance in blocking the proposed move from terminal C to
terminal 5 at Fiumicino airport.
-- We have for some time had security concerns about
terminal C, particularly about the way in which the
configuration of the terminal causes large numbers of waiting
Americans to be concentrated close to the street.
-- Because of these security concerns we cannot attempt to
block an Italian initiative that has the potential of
significantly improving the security of U.S. travelers.
--We realize that U.S. carriers have concerns about the
details of the proposed move--we are prepared to use the
Embassy's good offices to try to minimize disruption and
negative commercial impact on U.S. carriers.

For more information, contact Joseph Farrelly at
FarrellyJT@state.gov, or John Halinski at
HalinskiJ@state.gov. END ACTION REQUEST.
BORG