# L_2022323EN.01009901.xml

| 19.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 323/99 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 323/99

---

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2022/2494

of 9 December 2022

on the approval of the request submitted by Lithuania for the revision of its performance targets for the third reference period

(notified under document C(2022) 8985)

(Only the Lithuanian text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to 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), and in particular Article 11(3), point (c), thereof,

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 of 11 February 2019 laying down a performance and charging scheme in the single European sky and repealing Implementing Regulations (EU) No 390/2013 and (EU) No 391/2013 (2), and in particular Article 18(1) thereof,

Whereas:

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, a performance scheme for air navigation services (‘ANS’) is to be set up, including national performance plans setting out binding performance targets consistent with the Union-wide targets adopted by the Commission for the reference period concerned. The detailed rules concerning those performance plans are set out in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. In accordance with Article 11(3), point (c), of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, the Commission assesses the performance targets established by the Member States for consistency with the corresponding Union-wide performance targets. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, a performance scheme for air navigation services (‘ANS’) is to be set up, including national performance plans setting out binding performance targets consistent with the Union-wide targets adopted by the Commission for the reference period concerned. The detailed rules concerning those performance plans are set out in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. In accordance with Article 11(3), point (c), of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, the Commission assesses the performance targets established by the Member States for consistency with the corresponding Union-wide performance targets.

| (2) | On 13 April 2022, the Commission adopted Decision (EU) 2022/769 (3), in which it concluded that the performance targets included in the draft performance plan for the third reference period (‘RP3’) submitted by the Republic of Lithuania (‘Lithuania’) were consistent with the Union-wide performance targets. On the basis of Decision (EU) 2022/769, Lithuania formally adopted its RP3 performance plan in accordance with Article 16, point (a), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

On 13 April 2022, the Commission adopted Decision (EU) 2022/769 (3), in which it concluded that the performance targets included in the draft performance plan for the third reference period (‘RP3’) submitted by the Republic of Lithuania (‘Lithuania’) were consistent with the Union-wide performance targets. On the basis of Decision (EU) 2022/769, Lithuania formally adopted its RP3 performance plan in accordance with Article 16, point (a), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

3

| (3) | On 26 August 2022, Lithuania submitted to the Commission a request for the revision of its en route capacity and en route cost-efficiency performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, on the basis of Article 18(1), point (a)(ii), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 26 August 2022, Lithuania submitted to the Commission a request for the revision of its en route capacity and en route cost-efficiency performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, on the basis of Article 18(1), point (a)(ii), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

en route

en route

| (4) | In accordance with Article 18(1)(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has verified whether the request for revision submitted by Lithuania is necessary and proportionate in light of the provided justifications, and has assessed the consistency of the intended revised performance targets with the Union-wide performance targets by using the assessment criteria set out in Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

In accordance with Article 18(1)(b) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has verified whether the request for revision submitted by Lithuania is necessary and proportionate in light of the provided justifications, and has assessed the consistency of the intended revised performance targets with the Union-wide performance targets by using the assessment criteria set out in Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

| (5) | The performance review body, assisting the Commission in the implementation of the performance scheme pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, submitted a report to the Commission including its advice on the assessment of the request for revision submitted by Lithuania. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The performance review body, assisting the Commission in the implementation of the performance scheme pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, submitted a report to the Commission including its advice on the assessment of the request for revision submitted by Lithuania.

GROUNDS FOR THE REVISION OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS

GROUNDS FOR THE REVISION OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS

| (6) | Lithuania considers the request for revision of its RP3 performance targets to be justified by the occurrence of the unforeseeable circumstances stemming from Russia’s war against Ukraine, which started on 24 February 2022. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

Lithuania considers the request for revision of its RP3 performance targets to be justified by the occurrence of the unforeseeable circumstances stemming from Russia’s war against Ukraine, which started on 24 February 2022.

| (7) | Lithuania considers that the initial assumptions on the basis of which its performance targets were set, are no longer valid due to the significant reduction in the number of overflights in the airspace of Lithuania, which is the consequence of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the resulting sanctions imposed by the Union and the counter-measures taken by Russia. Lithuania specifies that the flight movements in its airspace operated under instrument flight rules (‘IFR’) and the number of en route service units recorded for those flights are both expected to significantly decrease in comparison with the traffic assumptions set in the performance plan. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

Lithuania considers that the initial assumptions on the basis of which its performance targets were set, are no longer valid due to the significant reduction in the number of overflights in the airspace of Lithuania, which is the consequence of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the resulting sanctions imposed by the Union and the counter-measures taken by Russia. Lithuania specifies that the flight movements in its airspace operated under instrument flight rules (‘IFR’) and the number of en route service units recorded for those flights are both expected to significantly decrease in comparison with the traffic assumptions set in the performance plan.

en route

| (8) | The IFR movements forecasted in the request for revision by Lithuania for its en route charging zone for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, in comparison with the figures included in the performance plan, are presented in the following table:









  Lithuania


  IFR movements per year | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of IFR movements | 220 | 255 | 291 |
| Updated traffic forecast, expressed in thousands of IFR movements | 186 | 213 | 217 |
| Difference | -15,5  % | -16,5  % | -25,4  % |

(8)

The IFR movements forecasted in the request for revision by Lithuania for its en route charging zone for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, in comparison with the figures included in the performance plan, are presented in the following table:

en route

Lithuania

Lithuania

IFR movements per year

IFR movements per year

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of IFR movements

Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of IFR movements

220

220

255

255

291

291

Updated traffic forecast, expressed in thousands of IFR movements

Updated traffic forecast

186

186

213

213

217

217

Difference

Difference

-15,5  %

-15,5  %

-16,5  %

-16,5  %

-25,4  %

-25,4  %

| (9) | The service units forecasted by Lithuania for its en route charging zone for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, in comparison with the figures included in the draft performance plan, are presented in the following table:









  Lithuania



  En route service units per year | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of service units | 506 | 611 | 673 |
| Updated traffic forecast, expressed in thousands of en route service units | 372 | 416 | 435 |
| Difference | -26,4  % | -32,0  % | -35,4  % |

(9)

The service units forecasted by Lithuania for its en route charging zone for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, in comparison with the figures included in the draft performance plan, are presented in the following table:

en route

Lithuania

Lithuania

En route service units per year

En route

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of service units

Traffic forecast set in the performance plan, expressed in thousands of service units

506

506

611

611

673

673

Updated traffic forecast, expressed in thousands of en route service units

Updated traffic forecast

en route

372

372

416

416

435

435

Difference

Difference

-26,4  %

-26,4  %

-32,0  %

-32,0  %

-35,4  %

-35,4  %

| (10) | The Commission notes that, in its request for revision, Lithuania has used a local traffic forecast for IFR movements and service units which is higher than the Eurocontrol’s Statistics and Forecast Service (‘STATFOR’) base traffic forecast published in June 2022. Lithuania’s local traffic projections are more optimistic than the STATFOR forecast. Lithuania explains that the difference is due to the use of more recent data on traffic evolution, which shows that the heavy traffic losses recorded in March and April 2022 have been partly reversed in the subsequent months. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The Commission notes that, in its request for revision, Lithuania has used a local traffic forecast for IFR movements and service units which is higher than the Eurocontrol’s Statistics and Forecast Service (‘STATFOR’) base traffic forecast published in June 2022. Lithuania’s local traffic projections are more optimistic than the STATFOR forecast. Lithuania explains that the difference is due to the use of more recent data on traffic evolution, which shows that the heavy traffic losses recorded in March and April 2022 have been partly reversed in the subsequent months.

| (11) | Compared to the performance plan, the annual reductions in the number of service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years are in the approximate range of -26 % to -35 %. The number of flight movements in Lithuanian airspace operated under IFR is however not foreseen to decrease at the same rate as the en route service units. That discrepancy is due to the significant reduction of overflights, which on average generate proportionally higher numbers of en route service units than flights landing and departing from airports in Lithuania. The Commission hence notes that the workload of the air navigation service provider (‘ANSP’), which is driven by the controlled flight movements, is not expected to diminish in correlation with the revenue reduction which stems from the lower number of en route service units. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

Compared to the performance plan, the annual reductions in the number of service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years are in the approximate range of -26 % to -35 %. The number of flight movements in Lithuanian airspace operated under IFR is however not foreseen to decrease at the same rate as the en route service units. That discrepancy is due to the significant reduction of overflights, which on average generate proportionally higher numbers of en route service units than flights landing and departing from airports in Lithuania. The Commission hence notes that the workload of the air navigation service provider (‘ANSP’), which is driven by the controlled flight movements, is not expected to diminish in correlation with the revenue reduction which stems from the lower number of en route service units.

en route

en route

en route

| (12) | Lithuania explains that the shortfall of revenue from air navigation charges caused by lower traffic levels, combined with high inflation and labour market pressure on wages, severely impacts the capability of the ANSP to meet future financial obligations and implement the planned investments. Lithuania therefore states that the revision of the performance targets is essential in order to guarantee the financial strength of the ANSP and adequate resources for the national supervisory authority which is funded through ANS charges revenue. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

Lithuania explains that the shortfall of revenue from air navigation charges caused by lower traffic levels, combined with high inflation and labour market pressure on wages, severely impacts the capability of the ANSP to meet future financial obligations and implement the planned investments. Lithuania therefore states that the revision of the performance targets is essential in order to guarantee the financial strength of the ANSP and adequate resources for the national supervisory authority which is funded through ANS charges revenue.

| (13) | The Commission acknowledges that the initial assumptions underpinning Lithuania’s performance plan are no longer valid due to the significant reduction of air traffic resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine. Furthermore, the Commission agrees that the revision of the performance targets is necessary and proportionate in order to ensure the operational and financial viability of the ANSP and to remedy the liquidity shortage which it faces as a consequence of the change in circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The Commission acknowledges that the initial assumptions underpinning Lithuania’s performance plan are no longer valid due to the significant reduction of air traffic resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine. Furthermore, the Commission agrees that the revision of the performance targets is necessary and proportionate in order to ensure the operational and financial viability of the ANSP and to remedy the liquidity shortage which it faces as a consequence of the change in circumstances.

| (14) | The Commission therefore considers that the request for revision submitted by Lithuania fulfils the conditions for the revision of local performance targets set out in Article 18(1), point (a)(ii), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

The Commission therefore considers that the request for revision submitted by Lithuania fulfils the conditions for the revision of local performance targets set out in Article 18(1), point (a)(ii), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

ASSESSMENT OF THE INTENDED REVISED PERFORMANCE TARGETS

ASSESSMENT OF THE INTENDED REVISED PERFORMANCE TARGETS

Capacity performance targets

Capacity performance targets

| (15) | Lithuania requests a revision of its en route capacity targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in response to the change in circumstances outlined in recitals 6 to 13, in particular the reduced number of IFR movements forecasted for those calendar years and its impact on the capacity provision. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

Lithuania requests a revision of its en route capacity targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in response to the change in circumstances outlined in recitals 6 to 13, in particular the reduced number of IFR movements forecasted for those calendar years and its impact on the capacity provision.

en route

| (16) | The following table presents the RP3 en route capacity performance targets of Lithuania, as included in the performance plan, and the intended revised performance targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision. The table also outlines the corresponding reference values from the Network Operations Plan available on 2 June 2021, the time of adopting the revised Union-wide performance targets for RP3, which have been used by the Commission for the purpose of assessing the consistency of the local capacity targets with the Union-wide performance targets, on the basis of point 1.3 of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.









  Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| En route capacity targets included in the performance plan, expressed in minutes of air traffic flow management (‘ATFM’) delay per flight | 0,03 | 0,03 | 0,03 |
| Intended revised en route capacity targets, expressed in minutes of ATFM delay per flight | 0,02 | 0,02 | 0,02 |
| Reference values | 0,03 | 0,03 | 0,03 |

(16)

The following table presents the RP3 en route capacity performance targets of Lithuania, as included in the performance plan, and the intended revised performance targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision. The table also outlines the corresponding reference values from the Network Operations Plan available on 2 June 2021, the time of adopting the revised Union-wide performance targets for RP3, which have been used by the Commission for the purpose of assessing the consistency of the local capacity targets with the Union-wide performance targets, on the basis of point 1.3 of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

en route

Lithuania

Lithuania

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

En route capacity targets included in the performance plan, expressed in minutes of air traffic flow management (‘ATFM’) delay per flight

En route capacity targets included in the performance plan, expressed in minutes of air traffic flow management

TFM’) delay per flight

0,03

0,03

0,03

Intended revised en route capacity targets, expressed in minutes of ATFM delay per flight

Intended revised en route

0,02

0,02

0,02

0,02

0,02

0,02

Reference values

0,03

0,03

0,03

| (17) | The Commission observes that the intended revised capacity targets proposed by Lithuania are lower, and thus more ambitious, than the corresponding national reference values for each of the calendar years. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

The Commission observes that the intended revised capacity targets proposed by Lithuania are lower, and thus more ambitious, than the corresponding national reference values for each of the calendar years.

| (18) | The Commission further notes that Lithuania has adjusted the measures set out in the performance plan for the achievement of the local en route capacity targets in order to take account of the change in circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

The Commission further notes that Lithuania has adjusted the measures set out in the performance plan for the achievement of the local en route capacity targets in order to take account of the change in circumstances.

en route

| (19) | Therefore, in the light of recitals 16, 17 and 18, the en route capacity targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets.

  Cost-efficiency performance targets |
| --- | --- |

(19)

Therefore, in the light of recitals 16, 17 and 18, the en route capacity targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets.

en route

Cost-efficiency performance targets

Cost-efficiency performance targets

| (20) | Lithuania requests a revision of its en route cost-efficiency targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in response to the change in circumstances outlined in recitals 6 to 13, in particular the reduced service unit forecast for those calendar years and its impact on the revenue and financial strength of the ANSP. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

Lithuania requests a revision of its en route cost-efficiency targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in response to the change in circumstances outlined in recitals 6 to 13, in particular the reduced service unit forecast for those calendar years and its impact on the revenue and financial strength of the ANSP.

en route

| (21) | The following table sets out the RP3 en route cost-efficiency performance targets for the charging zone of Lithuania, as included in the performance plan, and the intended revised performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision. The 2014 and 2019 baseline values and the performance targets for 2020 and 2021 remain unchanged.










  En route charging zone of Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| En route cost-efficiency targets included in the performance plan, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices) | 44,40 EUR | 41,02 EUR | 37,52 EUR |
| Intended revised en route cost-efficiency targets, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices) | 48,87 EUR | 46,90 EUR | 45,96 EUR |

(21)

The following table sets out the RP3 en route cost-efficiency performance targets for the charging zone of Lithuania, as included in the performance plan, and the intended revised performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision. The 2014 and 2019 baseline values and the performance targets for 2020 and 2021 remain unchanged.

en route

En route charging zone of Lithuania

En route

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

En route cost-efficiency targets included in the performance plan, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices)

En route cost-efficiency targets included in the performance plan, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices)

44,40 EUR

44,40 EUR

41,02 EUR

41,02 EUR

37,52 EUR

37,52 EUR

Intended revised en route cost-efficiency targets, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices)

Intended revised en route

en route

48,87 EUR

48,87 EUR

46,90 EUR

46,90 EUR

45,96 EUR

45,96 EUR

| (22) | The Commission observes that Lithuania’s intended revision of its local cost-efficiency targets for 2022, 2023 and 2024, results, in comparison with the performance plan, in an overall determined unit cost (‘DUC’) 16,0 % higher over those three calendar years and 11,1 % higher over RP3 as a whole. Those DUC increases are entirely due to the significant deterioration in the service unit forecast set out in recital 9, which is a consequence of Russia’s war against Ukraine. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

The Commission observes that Lithuania’s intended revision of its local cost-efficiency targets for 2022, 2023 and 2024, results, in comparison with the performance plan, in an overall determined unit cost (‘DUC’) 16,0 % higher over those three calendar years and 11,1 % higher over RP3 as a whole. Those DUC increases are entirely due to the significant deterioration in the service unit forecast set out in recital 9, which is a consequence of Russia’s war against Ukraine.

| (23) | The lower number of forecasted service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years is partly offset by Lithuania through a reduction of determined costs. The Commission notes that Lithuania proposes to revise downwards the determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices for each of those years, as laid down in the following table:










  En route charging zone of Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Initial determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices (included in the performance plan) | 22,5 M EUR | 25,1 M EUR | 25,3 M EUR |
| Intended revised determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices | 18,2 M EUR | 19,5 M EUR | 20,0 M EUR |
| Difference | -19,0  % | -22,2  % | -20,8  % |

(23)

The lower number of forecasted service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years is partly offset by Lithuania through a reduction of determined costs. The Commission notes that Lithuania proposes to revise downwards the determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices for each of those years, as laid down in the following table:

En route charging zone of Lithuania

En route

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

Initial determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices (included in the performance plan)

Initial determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices (included in the performance plan)

22,5 M EUR

22,5 M EUR

25,1 M EUR

25,1 M EUR

25,3 M EUR

25,3 M EUR

Intended revised determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices

Intended revised determined costs in real terms in 2017 prices

18,2 M EUR

18,2 M EUR

19,5 M EUR

19,5 M EUR

20,0 M EUR

20,0 M EUR

Difference

Difference

-19,0  %

-19,0  %

-22,2  %

-22,2  %

-20,8  %

-20,8  %

| (24) | The request for revision comprises an updated inflation forecast for Lithuania for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, as outlined in the following table:










  En route charging zone of Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Initial inflation index, with forecasted year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis (data included in the performance plan) | 112,4


  (2,8  %) | 115,4


  (2,7  %) | 117,8


  (2,1  %) |
| Revised inflation index, with year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis | 130,6


  (17,9  %) | 141,7


  (8,5  %) | 146,0


  (3,0  %) |

(24)

The request for revision comprises an updated inflation forecast for Lithuania for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, as outlined in the following table:

En route charging zone of Lithuania

En route

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

Initial inflation index, with forecasted year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis (data included in the performance plan)

Initial inflation index, with forecasted year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis (data included in the performance plan)

112,4

112,4

(2,8  %)

(2,8  %)

115,4

115,4

(2,7  %)

(2,7  %)

117,8

117,8

(2,1  %)

(2,1  %)

Revised inflation index, with year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis

Revised inflation index, with year-on-year change in inflation in parenthesis

130,6

130,6

(17,9  %)

(17,9  %)

141,7

141,7

(8,5  %)

(8,5  %)

146,0

146,0

(3,0  %)

(3,0  %)

| (25) | The following table displays the determined costs in nominal terms for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years:










  En route charging zone of Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Initial determined costs in nominal terms (included in the performance plan) | 24,5 M EUR | 27,9 M EUR | 28,6 M EUR |
| Intended revised determined costs in nominal terms | 21,9 M EUR | 24,9 M EUR | 26,1 M EUR |
| Difference | -10,4  % | -10,9  % | -8,9  % |

(25)

The following table displays the determined costs in nominal terms for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years:

En route charging zone of Lithuania

En route

2022

2022

2023

2023

2024

2024

Initial determined costs in nominal terms (included in the performance plan)

Initial determined costs in nominal terms (included in the performance plan)

24,5 M EUR

24,5 M EUR

27,9 M EUR

27,9 M EUR

28,6 M EUR

28,6 M EUR

Intended revised determined costs in nominal terms

Intended revised determined costs in nominal terms

21,9 M EUR

21,9 M EUR

24,9 M EUR

24,9 M EUR

26,1 M EUR

26,1 M EUR

Difference

Difference

-10,4  %

-10,4  %

-10,9  %

-10,9  %

-8,9  %

-8,9  %

| (26) | The Commission observes that Lithuania revised downwards the nominal determined costs for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, despite the upwards revision of the inflation forecast. The Commission notes that the cost containment measures put in place by Lithuania not only neutralize the effect of the forecasted higher inflation on the cost base, but also lead to a significant further reduction of the determined costs charged to airspace users. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

The Commission observes that Lithuania revised downwards the nominal determined costs for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, despite the upwards revision of the inflation forecast. The Commission notes that the cost containment measures put in place by Lithuania not only neutralize the effect of the forecasted higher inflation on the cost base, but also lead to a significant further reduction of the determined costs charged to airspace users.

| (27) | The Commission has assessed the consistency of the intended revised cost-efficiency targets proposed by Lithuania on the basis of points 1.4(a), (b) and (c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

The Commission has assessed the consistency of the intended revised cost-efficiency targets proposed by Lithuania on the basis of points 1.4(a), (b) and (c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

| (28) | As regards point 1.4(a) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the en route DUC trend at charging zone level of +5,1 % over RP3 underperforms the Union-wide trend of +1,0 % over the same period. |
| --- | --- |

(28)

As regards point 1.4(a) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the en route DUC trend at charging zone level of +5,1 % over RP3 underperforms the Union-wide trend of +1,0 % over the same period.

en route

| (29) | As regards point 1.4(b) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the long-term en route DUC trend at charging zone level over the second reference period (‘RP2’) and RP3 of +0,2 % underperforms the long-term Union-wide trend of -1,3 % over the same period. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

As regards point 1.4(b) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the long-term en route DUC trend at charging zone level over the second reference period (‘RP2’) and RP3 of +0,2 % underperforms the long-term Union-wide trend of -1,3 % over the same period.

en route

| (30) | As noted in recitals 8 and 9, the Commission recalls that the traffic changes resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine have led to a severe deterioration of Lithuania’s traffic outlook for RP3, which is reflected in a substantially reduced number of forecasted service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years. For the purpose of the assessment criteria examined in recitals 28 and 29, it is therefore necessary and appropriate to examine whether Lithuania would meet the Union-wide cost-efficiency trends in the absence of the severe traffic reduction for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, which is due to the changed circumstances. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

As noted in recitals 8 and 9, the Commission recalls that the traffic changes resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine have led to a severe deterioration of Lithuania’s traffic outlook for RP3, which is reflected in a substantially reduced number of forecasted service units for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years. For the purpose of the assessment criteria examined in recitals 28 and 29, it is therefore necessary and appropriate to examine whether Lithuania would meet the Union-wide cost-efficiency trends in the absence of the severe traffic reduction for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, which is due to the changed circumstances.

| (31) | To that end, the Commission has recalculated Lithuania’s DUC trend over RP3 and Lithuania’s long-term DUC trend over RP2 and RP3 by making use of the Eurocontrol STATFOR base traffic forecast of October 2021. That recalculation resulted in an adjusted DUC trend for Lithuania of -7,9 % over RP3 and in an adjusted long-term en route DUC trend for Lithuania of -5,5 % over RP2 and RP3. Both those adjusted trends are significantly below the corresponding Union-wide DUC trends of +1,0 % and -1,3 % respectively. Hence, in the absence of the changes in traffic caused by Russia’s war against Ukraine, Lithuania fulfills the assessment criteria referred to in recitals 28 and 29. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

To that end, the Commission has recalculated Lithuania’s DUC trend over RP3 and Lithuania’s long-term DUC trend over RP2 and RP3 by making use of the Eurocontrol STATFOR base traffic forecast of October 2021. That recalculation resulted in an adjusted DUC trend for Lithuania of -7,9 % over RP3 and in an adjusted long-term en route DUC trend for Lithuania of -5,5 % over RP2 and RP3. Both those adjusted trends are significantly below the corresponding Union-wide DUC trends of +1,0 % and -1,3 % respectively. Hence, in the absence of the changes in traffic caused by Russia’s war against Ukraine, Lithuania fulfills the assessment criteria referred to in recitals 28 and 29.

en route

| (32) | As regards point 1.4(c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the EUR 37,64 baseline value for the DUC at the level of the charging zone of Lithuania (expressed in 2017 prices) is 46,4 % higher than the EUR 25,71 average baseline value (expressed in 2017 prices) of the relevant comparator group. |
| --- | --- |

(32)

As regards point 1.4(c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the EUR 37,64 baseline value for the DUC at the level of the charging zone of Lithuania (expressed in 2017 prices) is 46,4 % higher than the EUR 25,71 average baseline value (expressed in 2017 prices) of the relevant comparator group.

| (33) | The Commission acknowledges that the intended revised cost-efficiency targets for the charging zone of Lithuania are higher than the initial targets included in the performance plan adopted in 2022. However, that deterioration is entirely due to the significantly lower traffic assumptions. When excluding the negative impact of the traffic changes resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine, it is clear that Lithuania meets both the Union-wide DUC trend and the Union-wide long-term DUC trend. Irrespective of the difference between Lithuania’s baseline value and the comparator group average referred to in recital 32, the Commission considers that there is sufficient ground for the intended revised cost-efficiency targets of Lithuania to be considered consistent with the Union-wide cost-efficiency performance targets for RP3. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

The Commission acknowledges that the intended revised cost-efficiency targets for the charging zone of Lithuania are higher than the initial targets included in the performance plan adopted in 2022. However, that deterioration is entirely due to the significantly lower traffic assumptions. When excluding the negative impact of the traffic changes resulting from Russia’s war against Ukraine, it is clear that Lithuania meets both the Union-wide DUC trend and the Union-wide long-term DUC trend. Irrespective of the difference between Lithuania’s baseline value and the comparator group average referred to in recital 32, the Commission considers that there is sufficient ground for the intended revised cost-efficiency targets of Lithuania to be considered consistent with the Union-wide cost-efficiency performance targets for RP3.

| (34) | Furthermore, in the light of what has been set out in recitals 23 to 26, the Commission notes that Lithuania has taken cost containment measures to mitigate those exceptional circumstances by considerably reducing its determined costs, in both real and nominal terms, for the remainder of RP3. The related measures set out in Lithuania’s request for revision include the postponement of recruitments for certain vacant positions and a reduction in the planned number of air traffic controllers in operations for the remainder of RP3. The Commission considers that those cost containment measures are, overall, commensurate with the reduction of IFR movements which is forecasted for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, as outlined in recital 8. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

Furthermore, in the light of what has been set out in recitals 23 to 26, the Commission notes that Lithuania has taken cost containment measures to mitigate those exceptional circumstances by considerably reducing its determined costs, in both real and nominal terms, for the remainder of RP3. The related measures set out in Lithuania’s request for revision include the postponement of recruitments for certain vacant positions and a reduction in the planned number of air traffic controllers in operations for the remainder of RP3. The Commission considers that those cost containment measures are, overall, commensurate with the reduction of IFR movements which is forecasted for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years, as outlined in recital 8.

| (35) | Therefore, in the light of what has been set out in recitals 20 to 34, the revised en route cost-efficiency targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets. |
| --- | --- |

(35)

Therefore, in the light of what has been set out in recitals 20 to 34, the revised en route cost-efficiency targets proposed by Lithuania in its request for revision should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets.

en route

CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSIONS

| (36) | Therefore, in the light of recitals 6 to 35, Lithuania should be authorized to revise its capacity and cost-efficiency performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in accordance with the request for revision submitted on 26 August 2022, |
| --- | --- |

(36)

Therefore, in the light of recitals 6 to 35, Lithuania should be authorized to revise its capacity and cost-efficiency performance targets for the 2022, 2023 and 2024 calendar years in accordance with the request for revision submitted on 26 August 2022,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The request for revision submitted by Lithuania on 26 August 2022, in respect of its performance targets for the third reference period in the key performance areas of capacity and cost-efficiency, is approved.

Lithuania is authorized to adopt a revised performance plan including the proposed performance targets, listed in the Annex, which are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the third reference period.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Lithuania.

Done at Brussels, 9 December 2022.

For the Commission

Adina-Ioana VĂLEAN

Member of the Commission

---

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

1

(2)  
  OJ L 56, 25.2.2019, p. 1.

2

(3)  Commission Decision (EU) 2022/769 of 13 April 2022 on the consistency of the performance targets contained in the draft performance plan submitted by Lithuania pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the Union-wide performance targets for the third reference period (OJ L 139, 18.5.2022, p. 116).

3

---

ANNEX

Performance targets included in the request submitted by Lithuania for the revision of its performance targets for the third reference period, found to be consistent with the Union-wide performance targets

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF CAPACITY

En route ATFM delay in minutes per flight

| Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Intended revised en route capacity targets, expressed in minutes of ATFM delay per flight | 0,02 | 0,02 | 0,02 |

Lithuania

2022

2023

2024

Intended revised en route capacity targets, expressed in minutes of ATFM delay per flight

0,02

0,02

0,02

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF COST-EFFICIENCY

Determined unit cost for en route air navigation services

| En route charging zone of Lithuania | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Intended revised en route cost-efficiency targets, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices) | 48,87 EUR | 46,90 EUR | 45,96 EUR |

En route charging zone of Lithuania

2022

2023

2024

Intended revised en route cost-efficiency targets, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices)

48,87 EUR

46,90 EUR

45,96 EUR

---