# L_2016230EN.01004501.xml

| 25.8.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 230/45 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 230/45

---

EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY DECISION

No 83/15/COL

of 18 March 2015

concerning the consistency of certain targets included in the national or functional airspace block plans submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the Union-wide performance targets for the second reference period [2016/1418]

THE EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY,

Having regard to the Act mentioned at point 66t of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement (Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 laying down the framework for the creation of the single European sky (‘the Framework Regulation’) (1)) as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, and in particular Article 11(3)(c) thereof, and

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to the Framework Regulation, the Kingdom of Norway (‘Norway’) is to adopt national or functional airspace block (‘FAB’) plans, including binding national targets or targets at the level of FABs, ensuring consistency with the Union-wide performance targets. That Regulation also provides that the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘the Authority’) is to assess the consistency of those targets on the basis of the assessment criteria referred to in point (d) of its Article 11(6) and that the Authority may decide to issue recommendations in case it identifies that those criteria have not been met. Detailed rules in this regard have been set out in the act mentioned at point 66xf of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 390/2013 (2)) (‘the Performance Regulation’) as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to the Framework Regulation, the Kingdom of Norway (‘Norway’) is to adopt national or functional airspace block (‘FAB’) plans, including binding national targets or targets at the level of FABs, ensuring consistency with the Union-wide performance targets. That Regulation also provides that the EFTA Surveillance Authority (‘the Authority’) is to assess the consistency of those targets on the basis of the assessment criteria referred to in point (d) of its Article 11(6) and that the Authority may decide to issue recommendations in case it identifies that those criteria have not been met. Detailed rules in this regard have been set out in the act mentioned at point 66xf of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 390/2013 (2)) (‘the Performance Regulation’) as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto.

| (2) | Union-wide performance targets in the key performance areas of safety, environment, capacity and cost-efficiency for the second reference period (2015-2019) were adopted by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/132/EU (3) and incorporated under point 66xe of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Union-wide performance targets in the key performance areas of safety, environment, capacity and cost-efficiency for the second reference period (2015-2019) were adopted by Commission Implementing Decision 2014/132/EU (3) and incorporated under point 66xe of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement.

| (3) | Norway submitted to the Authority the performance plans at FAB level, along with the other States which are part of the North European Functional Airspace Block (‘NEFAB’), by letter dated 17 July 2014 (Document No 716241). The plan was subsequently modified by corrigenda, the latest one dated 14 November 2014. For its assessment, the Authority has based itself on the most recent information submitted. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Norway submitted to the Authority the performance plans at FAB level, along with the other States which are part of the North European Functional Airspace Block (‘NEFAB’), by letter dated 17 July 2014 (Document No 716241). The plan was subsequently modified by corrigenda, the latest one dated 14 November 2014. For its assessment, the Authority has based itself on the most recent information submitted.

| (4) | The Performance Review Body, which has assisted the Authority in assessing the implementation of the performance scheme pursuant to Article 3 of the Performance Regulation, submitted an initial assessment report to the Authority on 7 October 2014 and an updated version of that report on 15 December 2014. The Authority further received from the Performance Review Body reports based on information from national supervisory authorities on the monitoring of the performance plans and targets submitted in accordance with Article 18(4) of Performance Regulation. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

The Performance Review Body, which has assisted the Authority in assessing the implementation of the performance scheme pursuant to Article 3 of the Performance Regulation, submitted an initial assessment report to the Authority on 7 October 2014 and an updated version of that report on 15 December 2014. The Authority further received from the Performance Review Body reports based on information from national supervisory authorities on the monitoring of the performance plans and targets submitted in accordance with Article 18(4) of Performance Regulation.

| (5) | Concerning the key performance area of safety, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, regarding the effectiveness of safety management and the application of severity classification on the basis of the Risk Analysis Tool (‘RAT’) methodology has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 2 of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Concerning the key performance area of safety, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, regarding the effectiveness of safety management and the application of severity classification on the basis of the Risk Analysis Tool (‘RAT’) methodology has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 2 of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target.

| (6) | Concerning the key performance area of environment, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 3 of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation. The assessment uses the respective FAB reference values for horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory that, when applied, ensure at Union level that the Union-wide performance target is met, calculated by the Network Manager and set out in the Network Operations Plan (2014-2018/2019) in its most recent version of June 2014 (‘Network Operations Plan’). That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Concerning the key performance area of environment, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 3 of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation. The assessment uses the respective FAB reference values for horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory that, when applied, ensure at Union level that the Union-wide performance target is met, calculated by the Network Manager and set out in the Network Operations Plan (2014-2018/2019) in its most recent version of June 2014 (‘Network Operations Plan’). That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target.

| (7) | Concerning the key performance area of capacity, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, for en route Air Traffic Flow Management (‘ATFM’) delay has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 4 of Annex IV to the Performance Scheme Regulation, by using the respective FAB reference values for capacity that, when applied, ensure at Union level that the Union-wide performance target is met, calculated by the Network Manager and set out in the Network Operations Plan. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Concerning the key performance area of capacity, the consistency of the targets submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, for en route Air Traffic Flow Management (‘ATFM’) delay has been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 4 of Annex IV to the Performance Scheme Regulation, by using the respective FAB reference values for capacity that, when applied, ensure at Union level that the Union-wide performance target is met, calculated by the Network Manager and set out in the Network Operations Plan. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target.

| (8) | Concerning the key performance area of cost-efficiency, the targets expressed in en route determined unit costs submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, have been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 5, in conjunction with point 1, of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation, by taking account of the trend of en route determined unit costs over the second reference period and the combined period of the first and the second reference period (2012-2019), the number of service units (traffic forecast) and the level of en route determined unit costs in comparison to States having a similar operational and economic environment. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

Concerning the key performance area of cost-efficiency, the targets expressed in en route determined unit costs submitted by Norway, as regards the NEFAB States, have been assessed, in accordance with the principles laid down in point 5, in conjunction with point 1, of Annex IV to the Performance Regulation, by taking account of the trend of en route determined unit costs over the second reference period and the combined period of the first and the second reference period (2012-2019), the number of service units (traffic forecast) and the level of en route determined unit costs in comparison to States having a similar operational and economic environment. That assessment has demonstrated that the targets submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the relevant Union-wide performance target.

| (9) | Therefore, the Authority considers that the targets included in the performance plans drawn up by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets in all four key performance areas, |
| --- | --- |

(9)

Therefore, the Authority considers that the targets included in the performance plans drawn up by Norway, as regards NEFAB, are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets in all four key performance areas,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The targets included in the performance plans submitted by Norway, as regards NEFAB, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, listed in the Annex, are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the second reference period set out in Implementing Decision 2014/132/EU.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to Norway.

Done at Brussels, 18 March 2015.

For the EFTA Surveillance Authority

Oda Helen SLETNES

President

Helga JÓNSDÓTTIR

College Member

---

(1)  
  OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 1.

1

(2)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 390/2013 of 3 May 2013 laying down a performance scheme for air navigation services and network functions (OJ L 128, 9.5.2013, p. 1).

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Decision 2014/132/EU of 11 March 2014 setting the Union-wide performance targets for the air traffic management network and alert thresholds for the second reference period 2015-19 (OJ L 71, 12.3.2014, p. 20).

3

---

ANNEX

Performance targets in the key performance areas of safety, environment, capacity and cost-efficiency included in the national or functional airspace block plans submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 found to be consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the second reference period

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF SAFETY

Effectiveness of Safety Management (EOSM) and the application of the severity classification based on the Risk Analysis Tool (RAT) methodology

| EFTA State | FAB | EOSM | RAT Ground STATE Level % | RAT Overall ANSP Level % |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | State level | ANSP level | 2017 | 2019 | 2017 | 2019 |
| | | | SC | Other MO | SMI | RI | ATMS | SMI | RI's | ATMS | SMI | RI's | ATMS | SMI | RI's | ATMS |
| Norway | NEFAB | C | C | D | 90 | 90 | 80 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 95 | 95 | 85 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| [Finland] |
| [Latvia] |
| [Estonia] |

EFTA State

FAB

EOSM

RAT Ground STATE Level %

RAT Overall ANSP Level %

State level

ANSP level

2017

2019

2017

2019

SC

Other MO

SMI

RI

ATMS

SMI

RI's

ATMS

SMI

RI's

ATMS

SMI

RI's

ATMS

Norway

NEFAB

C

C

D

90

90

80

100

100

100

95

95

85

100

100

100

[Finland]

[Latvia]

[Estonia]

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF ENVIRONMENT

Horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory

| EFTA State | FAB | FAB Target Environment |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2019 |
| Norway | NEFAB | 1,22 % |
| [Finland] |
| [Latvia] |
| [Estonia] |

EFTA State

FAB

FAB Target Environment

2019

Norway

NEFAB

1,22 %

[Finland]

[Latvia]

[Estonia]

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF CAPACITY

En route Air Traffic Flow Management (ATFM) delay in min/flight

| EFTA State | FAB | FAB Target En-Route Capacity |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 |
| Norway | NEFAB | 0,12 | 0,12 | 0,13 | 0,13 | 0,13 |
| [Finland] |
| [Latvia] |
| [Estonia] |
| |

EFTA State

FAB

FAB Target En-Route Capacity

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

Norway

NEFAB

0,12

0,12

0,13

0,13

0,13

[Finland]

[Latvia]

[Estonia]

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF COST-EFFICIENCY

Legend:

| Key | Item | Units |
| --- | --- | --- |
| (A) | Total En-route Determined Costs | (in nominal terms and in national currency) |
| (B) | Inflation rate | (%) |
| (C) | Inflation index | (100 = 2009) |
| (D) | Total En-route Determined Costs | (in real 2009 prices and in national currency) |
| (E) | Total En-route Services Units | (TSUs) |
| (F) | En-route Determined Unit Cost (DUC) | (in real 2009 prices and in national currency) |

Key

Item

Units

(A)

Total En-route Determined Costs

(in nominal terms and in national currency)

(B)

Inflation rate

(%)

(C)

Inflation index

(100 = 2009)

(D)

Total En-route Determined Costs

(in real 2009 prices and in national currency)

(E)

Total En-route Services Units

(TSUs)

(F)

En-route Determined Unit Cost (DUC)

(in real 2009 prices and in national currency)

NEFAB

Charging Zone: Norway — Currency: NOK

| | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| (A) | 1 006 927 248 | 1 032 667 449 | 1 051 204 724 | 1 064 624 439 | 1 073 048 403 |
| (B) | 1,6 % | 1,7 % | 2,1 % | 2,5 % | 2,5 % |
| (C) | 109,5 | 111,4 | 113,7 | 116,6 | 119,5 |
| (D) | 919 164 836 | 926 904 186 | 924 136 061 | 913 105 964 | 897 883 922 |
| (E) | 2 287 878 | 2 367 954 | 2 438 992 | 2 499 967 | 2 549 966 |
| (F) | 401,75 | 391,44 | 378,90 | 365,25 | 352,12 |

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

(A)

1 006 927 248

1 032 667 449

1 051 204 724

1 064 624 439

1 073 048 403

(B)

1,6 %

1,7 %

2,1 %

2,5 %

2,5 %

(C)

109,5

111,4

113,7

116,6

119,5

(D)

919 164 836

926 904 186

924 136 061

913 105 964

897 883 922

(E)

2 287 878

2 367 954

2 438 992

2 499 967

2 549 966

(F)

401,75

391,44

378,90

365,25

352,12

---