Communication from the Commission - First Report on the implementation of the Single Sky Legislation: achievements and the way forward
Date: 2007-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: air traffic, air transport, common transport policy, organisation of transport, trans-European network

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 20.12.2007 
COM(2007) 845 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

First Report on the implementation of the Single Sky Legislation: 
achievements and the way forward 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

First Report on the implementation of the Single Sky Legislation: 
achievements and the way forward 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Single Sky initiative was launched in 2000 following severe delays during 1999. A High 
Level  Group  was  established  and,  building  on  the  recommendations  in  its  report,  the 
Commission  tabled  a  legislative  package  at  the  end  of  2001  which  was  adopted  by  the 
European Parliament and Council in March 2004 and entered into force one month later. 

This  legislative  package  comprised  four  elements:  a  regulation  laying  down  the  framework 
for the creation of the Single European sky (the 'Framework regulation')1; a regulation laying 
down  common  requirements  for  the  provision  of  air  navigation  services  (the  Service 
provision'  regulation)2;  a  regulation  on  the  organisation  and  use  of  airspace  in  the  Single 
European  sky  (the  'airspace  regulation'3;  and  a  regulation  on  the  interoperability  of  the 
European Air Traffic Management network (the ''Interoperability regulation')4. 

Article 12§2 of the Framework regulation requires the Commission to review the application 
of the Single Sky legislation and report periodically to the European Parliament and Council. 
The  reports  should  contain  an  evaluation  of  the  results  achieved  in  implementing  the 
legislation, including information about developments in the sector, in the light of the original 
objectives and with a view to future needs.  

This  is  the  first  report  on  the  progress  of  implementation  and  lays  down  the  Commission's 
views on the need for future development of the Single Sky. 

It also takes up many of the recommendations made by a second High Level Group (HLG) 
which  was  convened  by  Vice-President  Barrot  to  look  at  the  future  European  Aviation 
Regulatory Framework and which reported in July 2007. 

2. 

THE NEED FOR A COMMUNITY ROLE IN AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (ATM)  

2.1. 

Background 

Community policy in aviation is a success story. Liberalisation has reduced ticket prices and 
increased  consumer  choice.  The  enlargement  of  the  European  Union  and  the  active 
neighbourhood  policy  extend  the  European  aviation  market  to  thirty  seven  countries  with 

1 

2 

3 

4 

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, OJ L 96 of 31.3.2004, p 1 
Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the 
provision of air navigation services in the Single European Sky, OJ L 96 of 31.3.2004, p 10 
Regulation (EC) No 551/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the 
organisation and use of airspace in the Single European sky, OJ L 96 of 31.3.2004, p 20 
Regulation (EC) No 552/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 on the 
interoperability of the European Air Traffic Management Network, OJ L 96 of 31.3.2004, p 26 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
500 million  citizens.  But  aviation  must  also  meet  growing  pressure  from  changing  societal 
needs and respond to growing concern over its effect on the environment. A competitive and 
sustainable air transport industry needs a high performance Air Traffic Management (ATM) 
system. 

ATM provides, together with airports, the infrastructure for aviation. This infrastructure will 
be  faced  with  a  very  considerable  increase  in  traffic  by  2020.  Ageing  technologies  and 
systems  will  inevitably  lead  to  a  capacity  crunch  and  an  exacerbation  of  aviation's 
environmental  impact  if  the  industry  is  not  able  to  take  a  technological  quantum  leap. 
Already,  disruption  such  as  aircraft  delay,  incident  caused  by  bad  weather  conditions  or 
accident  has  significant  'knock-on'  effects  on  the  whole  system  and  underlines  the 
'interconnected' nature of air transport in Europe.  

The projected growth of air traffic demands a structural  and  technological  modernisation of 
which the whole European ATM sector must be a part. The dynamics of this process coupled 
with the continued growth in air traffic will maintain ATM as a large and attractive employer. 

2.2. 

The current limitations of ATM 

Only  air  traffic  management  can  ensure  the  safe  separation  at  all  times  between  fast  flying 
aircraft  and  grant  access  to  the  ATM  network.  The  air  traffic  controller  knows  the  choke 
points  and  dangerous  crossings  in  Europe's  airspace  and  the  corresponding  mitigating 
procedures that are needed in a complex route network.  

ATM is a natural monopoly and is, in general, entitled to recover all costs from airspace users, 
whatever  the  quality  of  service  rendered.  This  cost  recovery  principle  does  not  provide 
sufficient incentives to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of service and to modernize 
the system. 

Air transport 'came of age' and grew rapidly during the 1950's and 60's in an environment that 
was  purely  State  controlled  and  regarded  as  a  symbol  of  national  sovereignty.  As  a  general 
trend,  from  the  seventies  onwards,  States  started  to  delegate  non-governmental  aviation 
functions to industry, but they left the regulatory structures of air traffic management under 
intergovernmental arrangements. 

According to the 2007 High Level Group and the Performance Review Commission (PRC) of 
Eurocontrol,  an  intergovernmental  approach  cannot  produce  a  level  playing  field  where  the 
implementation  of  rules  depends  on  the  will  of  States  and  is  not  uniformly  enforced. 
Allocation  of  responsibilities  between  States,  authorities,  airlines  and  air  navigation  service 
providers is blurred. Intergovernmental decision making can be slow and inefficient and has 
difficulties  addressing  the  fragmentation  of  the  system  along  national  borders.  There  is 
consequently a need for the Community to be the driving force in ATM. 

ATM  in  Europe  is  characterised  by  a  high  degree  of  fragmentation  which  results  in  a 
significant additional cost for airspace users; adds unnecessary flight length with a resulting 
environmental impact; slows down the introduction of new technologies and procedures; and 
reduces  the  ensuing  efficiency  improvements.  It  also  prevents  the  ATM  industry  from 
developing economies of scale, leads to suboptimal size of en route centres and unnecessary 
duplication of non-standardised systems with their associated maintenance costs. It estimated 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
that significant cost savings can be achieved by reducing fragmentation in the order of €2bn 
per year5.  

The current European route network is still the amalgamation of national routes which makes 
the route network for intra-European flights some 15% less efficient than for domestic flights 
and  it  is  not  always  well  aligned  with  Europe's  traffic  needs.  Shortest  available  routes  are 
underused  due  to  lack  of  real  time  and  precise  information6.  This  leads  to  an  unnecessary 
additional financial burden on the airlines of around €1.4bn and an environmental burden of 
4.8 million tons of CO2 per annum. 

The  €8bn  air  navigation  service  market  is  clearly  split  along  borders.  While  barriers  are 
falling in other industries, twenty seven national service providers imply an equal number of 
different  procedures,  equipments,  operational  approaches  and  overheads.  Operationally 
speaking,  ten  area  control  centres  could  take  over  from  the  current  fifty. 7  Integration  of 
service provision into bigger entities in the framework of functional airspace blocks would be 
a significant contributor to better cost-efficiency.  

Despite  technological  progress  of  aviation  in  general,  air  traffic  control  (ATC)  remains 
primarily  craftsmanship.  While  cockpits  have  become  automated,  ATC  systems  have  not 
evolved and controller working methods are fundamentally unchanged. Increase in traffic is 
met mainly by opening new 'sectors' with a proportional increase in staffing and hence cost. 
As this approach is reaching its limits, it will lead in the coming 5 to 10 years to a capacity 
wall unless radical action is taken to speed up technological innovation. 

3. 

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SINGLE EUROPEAN SKY 

The  adoption  of  the  Single  European  Sky  (SES)  legislation  brought  air  traffic  management 
under  Community  competence  and  established  a  firm  legal  basis  covering  a  large  range  of 
activities. In the three years since its entry into force, a number of these activities have been 
achieved,  some  are  still  in  progress  and  some  have  shown  little  improvement.  In  addition, 
during  the  implementation  process  and  as  a  result  of  a  changing  environment,  a  number  of 
weaknesses with the current legislation have been identified. 

3.1. 

Achievements 

a) A legal and institutional framework for the Single Sky 

The first priority for SES was the establishment of the institutional framework for Community 
action. The framework provides a structure for the partnership with all interested parties:  

–  the Single Sky Committee provides strategic views from States and assists the Commission 

in adopting the enabling legislation (Implementing rules) through comitology;  

–  the  Industry  Consultation  Body  enables  all  industry  stakeholders  to  give  their  views  on 

implementation;  

5 

6 
7 

Performance  Review  Commission  (PRC),  December  2006,  Evaluation  of  the  impact  of  the  SES  on 
ATM Performance, p. 24 
PRC, 2007, An Assessment of Air Traffic Management in Europe in 2006, Eurocontrol, p. 51 on. 
The US is managing double of traffic with 20 en route centres, which they are planning to reduce. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
–  exploitation  of  the  synergy  with  Eurocontrol  on  technical  support  and  development  of 

implementing rules for the Community.  

The Ministries of Defence are also represented in the Community decision making process.  

b) Separation of service provision from regulation  

As  a  fundamental  cornerstone  of  safety,  separation  of  air  navigation  service  provision  from 
regulation has been achieved, and each State has established a National Supervisory Authority 
(NSA)8.  Since  20  June  2007,  the  air  navigation  service  providers  have  become  subject  to 
certification  by  the  NSAs  against  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  2096/2005  laying  down 
Common Requirements for the provision of air navigation services9. 

c) Progress on safety issues 

Safety  has  not  been  neglected,  with  the  adoption  of  a  Regulation10  establishing  a  safety 
oversight function to be exercised by NSAs to complement the Common Requirements. 

d) Harmonisation in licensing of controllers 

A  harmonised  level  of  competence  and  an  improved  mobility  of  workers  will  be  achieved 
through  adoption  of  Directive  2006/23/EC  on  a  Community  air  traffic  controller  license11, 
which establishes common requirements and training. 

e) Transparency of charges 

Full  transparency  in  the  establishment  of  air  navigation  service  charges,  has  been  ensured 
through  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  1794/2006  laying  down  a  common  charging 
scheme for air navigation services,12 which requires disclosure of the cost base of the service 
provider and consultation of airspace users. 

f) Advances in the efficient use of airspace 

To facilitate efficient use of the airspace, Commission Regulations have been adopted on the 
flexible use of airspace to improve the access to military airspace (2150/2005)13 and airspace 
classification in the upper airspace (730/2006)14. 

g) Speeding up innovation 

Meanwhile, the first steps have been taken to speed up technological innovation to guarantee 
capacity.  The  SESAR  definition  phase  has  been  established  and  is  progressing,  while  the 

8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 

One member state is completing the putting in place of its NSA. 
OJ L 335, 21.12.2005, p 13 
OJ L 291, 9.11.2007, p 16 
OJ L 114, 27.4.2006, p 22  
OJ L 341, 7.12.2006, p.3 
OJ L 342, 24.12.2005, p 20 
OJ L 128, 16.5.2006, p 3 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
SESAR Joint Undertaking development phase15 is ready to implement the Master plan, due in 
Spring 2008. 

h) Towards interoperable equipment  

An  effective  Interoperability  mechanism  has  been  established  to  adopt  implementing  rules 
and to develop Community specifications concerning technical systems and their operational 
use.  This  mechanism  will  be  indispensable  for  the  efficient  implementation  of  SESAR 
outputs. 

3.2. 

Under development  

a) Performance review of service providers 

The Framework Regulation foresees Performance review of Air Navigation Service Providers 
(ANSP).  Data  gathering  will  commence  and  benchmarking  established  in  2008.  This  will 
form a solid basis for future development of the Single Sky initiative. 

b) Peer review of supervisory authorities 

To  ensure  a  uniform  level  of  safety  and  even  application  of  the  Common  Requirements,  a 
Peer review of the National Supervisory Authorities is foreseen. With the completion of the 
first Certification exercise by the NSAs in July 2007, the peer review will be established with 
first visits in early 2008. 

c) Transparency of charging 

The  first  review  under  the  Common  Charging  Scheme  Regulation  to  guarantee  a  greater 
transparency for the determination, imposition and enforcement of charges for air navigation 
services will take place following the delivery of the first financial data in November 2007. 
This  transparency  fits  with  the  overall  commitment  of  the  Commission  to  fair  charging 
principles in aviation demonstrated by the proposed Directive on Airport Charges16 

d) Airspace design 

The  mandate  process  to  Eurocontrol  has  been  initiated  on  a  number  of  draft  Regulations 
related to airspace: the establishment of a European Upper Flight Information Region (EUIR); 
airspace classification in the lower airspace; common principles for route and sector design; 
progress in all three areas is slow and the Commission is studying alternative mechanisms.  

e) Functional Airspace Blocks 

A key element of SES is the establishment of Functional Airspace Blocks (FAB), which were 
foreseen as the mechanisms for ensuring maximum capacity and efficiency of the air traffic 
management network. A number of FAB initiatives are underway but are progressing slowly 
with  varying  levels  of  ambition,  varying  levels  of  maturity  and  varying  benefits.  Most 

15 

16 

Council Regulation (EC) No 219/2007 on the establishment of a joint undertaking to develop the new 
generation European air traffic management system (SESAR) OJ L 64, 2.3.2007, p 1 
COM(2006) 820 final of 24.01.2007. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
initiatives  are  still  at  the  'feasibility  stage'  with  only  one  preparing  to  move  to  the 
implementation phase17.  

3.3. 

Insufficient progress in key areas 

SES  has  not  delivered  the  expected  results  in  some  important  areas.  In  general,  the  FAB 
approach is not producing the benefits hoped for in terms of improved flight efficiency, cost 
reduction and 'defragmentation'.  

Whilst  it  is  recognised  that  the  creation  of  FABs  is  a  new  challenge  and  suffers  from 
significant  technical  and  organisational  difficulties,  sovereignty,  particularly  concerning 
Member States responsibilities and associated liability for their airspace and the involvement 
of  the  military  remains  an  issue.  Instead  of  framing  innovative  mechanisms  to  exercise 
sovereignty, it has been used as a showstopper by those who wish to resist enhanced cross-
border cooperation and integration. 

Whilst the current legislation has powerful tools to improve performance through: designation 
of  service  providers;  unbundling  of  services;  use  of  economic  incentives;  setting  of  user 
charges; changes in route structure; establishment of FABs; rationalisation of infrastructure18 
etc,  Member  States  have  not  made  sufficient  use  of  them  to  improve  cost  or  operational 
efficiency of service provision.  

Little progress is noted in the overall efficiency of the design and use of the European route 
structure, with consequently no improvement in flight efficiency or environmental impact. 

3.4. 

New challenges 

Environment: Present science points to human activity as the main source of climate change. 
While aviation is, with 3%, a modest contributor to the EU's total, greenhouse gas emissions, 
its share is growing. The current Single Sky legislation virtually ignores the contribution that 
ATM can make to this end. An improvement of the network architecture, the more efficient 
use of routes and new operational procedures should significantly reduce flight times, fuel use 
and  costs,  with  the  consequent  reduction  in  impact  on  the  environment  and  climate  change. 
This  reduction  is  estimated  at  4.8M  tonnes  of  CO2  annually.  Apart  from  direct  emissions, 
aircraft  also  affect  cirrus  cloud  coverage  and  ATM  mitigation  measures  might  need  to  be 
considered. 

Delays have receded as the major driver for change, following a slowing of growth post 11 
September 2001 and the increase in 'en-route' airspace capacity by the introduction of reduced 
vertical separations, the level of delays in Europe is currently low and despite record traffic in 
recent  years  has  remained  low.  However,  with  sustained  growth  the  delay  problem  will 
resurface, as already suggested by the delay forecast for 2008. 

Economics:  The  impact  of  global  instability  on  the  energy  market  has  resulted  in  a  huge 
increase in fuel costs; this has led the airline industry in particular to concentrate on increased 
control  over  their  costs  and  improved  economic  and  flight  efficiency.  Consequently  the 

17 
18 

Building the SES through functional airspace blocks: A mid-term status report COM(2007) 101 final 
PRC,  2006,  Evaluation  of  the  Impact  of  the  SES  initiative  on  air  traffic  management  performance, 
Brussels, p. iii 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
economic inefficiency of air navigation service provision and flight inefficiency have become 
the major drivers for change. 

4. 

ACCELERATING THE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY 

Fragmentation is  the major bottleneck in improving performance of the European air traffic 
management system. It can only be overcome if the performance framework, the regulatory 
structures and the timely introduction of new technologies, are addressed at Community level 
(Cf. HLG 1*).  

The  strategy  to  move  forward  is  focusing  on  a  performance  driven  approach  to  address  the 
annual €3bn inefficiencies and the external environmental cost of the current system.  

4.1. 

Focus on improved performance 

4.1.1.  A framework inducing performance 

To achieve the required improvements in safety, efficiency, capacity and cost effectiveness, it 
is  considered  necessary  to  introduce  a  performance  driven  approach  (Cf.  HLG  4*)  with  the 
appropriate incentives and disincentives to drive the change process. Such an approach could 
be based on the setting of SES convergence criteria at the European level and empowering the 
NSAs  to  agree  and  oversee  implementation  of  specific  performance  targets.  The  setting  of 
high  level  convergence  criteria,  the  assessment  of  the  specific  performance  targets  and 
oversight  of  implementation  by  NSAs  would  require  an  independent  'Performance  Review 
Body' at Community level. 

The HLG report suggests that performance of service provision could be improved by using 
market mechanisms for non monopoly services. The business case for such services and the 
associated regulatory oversight measures should be analysed. 

When services are offered under a natural monopoly situation, the Commission is suggesting 
full use of the performance driven approach with oversight at the Community level.  

4.1.2.  A European architecture leads to gain in efficiency 

Performance  of  the  'Trans  European  air  traffic  management  Network'  depends  on  how  well 
scarce resources are managed: runways, airspace and frequency spectrum. The challenge is to 
establish the most efficient network and to allow efficient flows of information to improve its 
operation. 

The adoption of a true network approach would give potential gains of at least 6% or about 
50km  per  flight.  To  bring  about  these  gains,  network  efficiency  should  come  under 
performance  monitoring  and  high  level  target  setting  from  an  independent  performance 
review body at Community level. 

A network manager, representing all aviation stakeholders, including the military, should be 
responsible  for  improving  route  and  sector  design  from  a  network  perspective  and  be  the 
backbone for reinforcing central capacity planning and traffic flow management services and 
optimising the use of airport capacity by providing clear rules on network access and efficient 
use  of  routes.  Charges  based  on  the  shortest  distance  create  strong  incentives  to  meet  the 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
efficiency,  cost  effectiveness  and  environmental  objectives  (Cf.  HLG  9*).  The  potential 
reduction  in  harmful  emissions  through  optimised  routing  is  estimated  at  6  to  12%  of  total 
aviation emissions. 

4.1.3.  Functional airspace blocks 

A  performance  driven  approach  to  reduce  fragmentation  and  increase  system  efficiency 
should  accelerate  integration  of  air  navigation  services  into  FABs,  where  appropriate  and 
beneficial. Whilst the complexity of such integration is recognised, the real hurdle is political. 
The Commission will reflect on the idea of the HLG of an Aviation System Coordinator (Cf. 
HLG 5*) whose mission would be to promote a stronger political commitment among Member 
States and stakeholders. States should  politically commit to the creation  of FABs in 2010 
with  implementation  by  the  end  of  2012.  The  proposed  network  management  and 
performance  regulation  functions  could  also  assist  in  assessing  the  functionality  and  value 
added  of  FAB  initiatives  from  a  network  perspective.  The  possibility  of  exploiting  existing 
bodies to carry out these two functions will be studied. 

4.1.4. 

SESAR - Tackling the capacity crunch 

The capacity crunch can only be addressed through technological innovation from the SESAR 
programme,  closely  coupled  with  measures  to  improve  airport  capacity  (Cf.  HLG  7*). 
Technological  innovation  can  only  achieve  its  full  potential  if  there  is  an  end  to  system 
fragmentation.  Therefore, the synchronisation of deployment and avoidance of overlaps for 
the future system is essential. The rationalisation effects of SESAR in the field of research & 
development  and  should  extend  to  the  whole  process.  Short  term  initiatives  to  improve 
capacity may require Community co-ordination to ensure effective implementation 

4.2. 

A clear regulatory environment 

The  single  market  policy  implies  a  single  legislation.  Overlaps  with  regulations  stemming 
from other structures must be eliminated. Fragmentation in regulation blurs the allocation of 
responsibilities and translates into an unnecessary cost for national administrations.  

The  effective  use  of  the  Community  approach  to  provide  better  regulation  (Cf.  HLG  3*) 
depends  on  the  close  co-operation  between  the  Community  and  Member  States  and  the 
commitment  of  the  States  (Cf.  HLG  10*),  who  are  responsible  for  airspace,  to  the  change 
process, together with a greater responsibility for Industry (Cf. HLG 2*). This partnership also 
covers the military community19 and the participation of non-EU States through appropriate 
mechanisms. A smoothly functioning  aviation area  requires  that  non  EU  Member  States  are 
appropriately involved in the framing of EU legislation 

The  Commission  is  preparing  the  extension  of  the  EASA  competence  to  airports,  air 
navigation services and air traffic management to cover all links in the aviation safety chain 
(Cf. HLG 8*). This competence will include the development and support of safety legislation 
as well as monitoring of its application by the Member States. It will also become the natural 
platform  for  certification  and  safety  oversight  of  European  wide  services  (for  example 
EGNOS/Galileo). 

19 

The Single Sky committee comprises two representatives per MS, 1 civil, 1 military.  

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Economic and Performance Regulation: Performance would be expected to increase if the 
price  setting  mechanism  has  a  direct  involvement  of  airspace  users.  Natural  monopolies 
should  become  subject  to  a  more  thorough  procedure  to  justify  their  investment  policy  and 
cost base. Such a governance structure, initially set up at the regional level, would contribute 
to  fair  charging.  Where  there  is  opportunity  for  more  than  one  provider  of  a  service, 
governance structures should allow for fair competition. 

The  regulation  of  a  performance  driven  approach  will  be  assured  at  the  Community  level. 
This  function  would  consist  of:  setting  the  SES  convergence  targets;  monitoring  that  the 
specific  performance  targets  agreed  between  the  service  providers  and  the  NSA  are 
consistent with the SES convergence targets; and that they are properly implemented. In the 
event  that  the  specific  performance  targets  are  not  considered  to  be  consistent,  or  are  not 
achieved, there would be the need to foresee enforcement measures at EC level. 

Technology: With regard to stepping up technological innovation, it is expected that in 2008 
the SESAR Master Plan will be endorsed and the SESAR Joint Undertaking will become fully 
operational.  However,  the  deployment  of  the  SESAR  system  will  require  a  different 
organisation (Cf. HLG 5*). If the current fragmented air traffic management system is allowed 
to continue it could choke the potential of new technologies to improve system performance 
and  would  unnecessarily  increase  the  financial  burden.  The  benefits  of  separating 
infrastructure from service provision will also be analysed. 

Eurocontrol:  The  Commission  supports  the  HLG  report  recommendations  concerning  the 
reform  of  Eurocontrol  (Cf.  HLG  6*)  with  respect  to:  separation  of  selected  functions;  the 
transfer  of  safety  regulation  to  EASA;  greater  transparency  and  performance  review  of  all 
Eurocontrol functions and a reinforced role for industry in the governance. The ratification of 
the  revised  Eurocontrol  Convention  should  only  take  place  after  the  necessary  internal 
reforms of Eurocontrol are achieved and an appropriate institutional framework is established 
which  clarifies  its  role  in  the  SES  architecture,  including  the  possibility  for  Eurocontrol  to 
carry out certain tasks for the Community in the achievement of the SES. 

5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Air  transport  is  confronted  with  significant  challenges  and  success  in  addressing  them  will 
only  be  achieved  with  collective  efforts  of  Industry,  the  Member  States,  the  military,  third 
countries  and  the  social  partners,  through  full  use  of  the  existing  SES  consultation 
mechanisms. The Commission will play its role fully in this process. 

On the basis of this review of the implementation of the SES and in line with the conclusions 
of the Performance Review Commission and the HLG, the Commission will come forward, in 
the  second  quarter  of  2008,  with  concrete  proposals  for  a  second  Single  Sky  package,  the 
extension of EASA competencies and the SESAR Master plan.  

* See Annex 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
ANNEX  

High Level Group Report 

To  facilitate  cross-reference  between  the  Commission  recommendations  in  Section  4 
(Accelerating the Implementation Strategy) and the High Level Group recommendations, the 
corresponding  HLG  Recommendation  (HLG  1,  2  ..  etc)  has  been  identified  in  the 
Communication 

HLG Recommendation 

Subject 

HLG 1 

HLG 2 

HLG 3 

HLG4 

HLG5 

HLG 6 

HLG 7 

HLG 8 

HLG 9 

EU as driving force in aviation regulation in Europe 

Greater responsibilities for industry 

Better regulation 

Drive improved performance 

Deliver the Single European Sky 

Empower and focus Eurocontrol 

Address airport capacity 

Deliver continuously improving safety 

Deliver environmental benefits 

HLG 10 

Commit member states to deliver 

The Executive Summary (below) of the High Level Group Report gives more information 

Executive Summary  

Vice  President  Barrot  appointed  the  High  Level  Group  for  the  Future  European  Aviation 
Regulatory  Framework  in  November  2006 in response to  strong demand from  industry, EU 
member  states  and  other  stakeholders  to  simplify  and  increase  the  effectiveness  of  the 
regulatory  framework  for  aviation  in  Europe.  Vice  President  Barrot  asked  the  High  Level 
Group to present a vision for the development of the aviation regulatory framework - with a 
particular  focus  on  Air  Traffic  Management  -  and  to  provide  a  roadmap  with  practical  next 
steps.  

The  High  Level  Group  underlines  the  need  for,  and  indeed  urgency  of,  change  in  the 
regulatory framework for aviation in Europe. This is necessary to ensure alignment across the 
aviation system towards achieving shared objectives. 

The  High  Level  Group  has  faced  a  set  of  complex  and  occasionally  conflicting  objectives 
when considering the performance improvement objectives: 

•  Aviation has a key role to play in achieving the objectives of the Lisbon agenda, in terms 
of reducing the internal and external cost of mobility within Europe and between Europe 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
and the rest of the world. Like other transport modes, aviation is an important enabler of 
economic growth. The aviation sector itself is also a significant source of employment and 
technological innovation. 

•  At  the  same  time  capacity  in  the  air  and  on  the  ground  is  increasingly  scarce,  the 
environmental  impact  a  growing  source  of  concern  at  the  local  and  international  levels, 
while improving safety becomes ever more challenging with increasing traffic levels. 

•  Additionally, aviation in Europe faces growing competition from other parts of the world 
for the market in Europe and the global aviation market. This emphasises the importance 
of finding cost-effective solutions. 

To determine the priorities for change, the High Level Group has reviewed ongoing initiatives 
to  improve  the  European  aviation  system  such as  the  Single  European  Sky  (SES)  initiative, 
the inclusion of aviation in the emissions trading scheme, and the Clean Sky programme. It 
has concluded that the challenge for Europe is not to embark on new system changes but 
to focus on accelerating the effective delivery of the existing initiatives and to strengthen 
the capabilities of the key players to deliver them. The High Level Group has focused on 
the SES initiative in particular. Improved ATM can play a vital role in increasing capacity 
and reducing the environmental impact of aviation. 

The  High  Level  Group  has  therefore  concentrated  on  two  main  themes:  performance  and 
governance.  This  leads  to  proposals  for  clear  roles  for  the  European  Commission,  the 
member  states  and  the  Eurocontrol  and  EASA  organisations,  and  proposals  for  concrete 
actions  to  address  the  current  and  expected  bottlenecks  in  performance.  It  also  leads  to 
proposals  to  rebalance  the  governance  of  the  aviation  system  in  Europe  to  enable  industry 
(airlines,  air  navigation  services  providers  (ANSPs),  airports  and  manufacturers)  to  play  an 
appropriate role in influencing decisions that affect them. This focus has been validated by a 
process  of  stakeholder  (industry,  the  military,  professional  staff  associations  and  non-EU 
member states) consultation.  

The High Level Group has followed the European Commission in taking 2020 as the target 
date for completing the major changes already initiated within Europe, in particular the Single 
European  Sky.  However,  the  High  Level  Group  has  targeted  2014  as  the  date  by  which  its 
proposals  must  be  implemented  to  ensure  that  the  European  aviation  system  remains  safe, 
competitive and environmentally responsible. 2013 is the date when the SESAR deployment 
phase is due to start.  

To  facilitate  the  next  steps,  the  High  Level  Group  has  outlined  a  roadmap  for  change.  The 
roadmap  provides  for  actions  that  can  be  started  immediately  and  for  putting  in  place  a 
process of continuous change to respond to market developments. Because 2013 is a critical 
date, the High Level Group proposes a timely evaluation of its recommendations in 2011 to 
ensure that the necessary additional actions are taken.  

The  High  Level  Group  recognises  that  its  proposals  represent  a  major  change  process 
challenge.  This  challenge  can  only  be  met  if  it  fully  involves  the  people  working  in  the 
organisations  involved  in  the  change  process.  The  High  Level  Group  therefore  urges  the 
European  Commission  to  continue  the  process  of  extensive  consultation  with  stakeholders 
during  the  decision-making  process  following  on  from  the  High  Level  Group  work.  In 
particular,  the  High  Level  Group  points  to  the  valuable  contribution  that  can  be  made  by 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
representatives  from  professional  staff  organisations  and  the  need  for  inclusive  social 
dialogue.  

The  proposals  of  the  High  Level  Group  can  be  summarised  in  the  following  10 
recommendations: 

HLG 1  EU  as  driving  force  in  aviation  regulation  in  Europe:  Fragmentation  is  a  major 
bottleneck  in  improving  the  performance  of  the  European  aviation  system.  As  this 
can  only  be  addressed  at  the  European  level,  strengthen  the  role  of  the  European 
Community  and  the  Community  method  as  the  sole  vehicle  to  set  the  regulation 
agenda  for  European  aviation  by  eliminating  overlaps  between  EU  and  other 
regulatory  processes,  ensuring  independent  structures  for  regulation  and  service 
provision, and ensuring that safety regulatory activities are conducted independently 
from other forms of regulation. Drive change forward at the strategic level through 
regular  meetings  of  the  European  Directors  General  of  Civil  Aviation  working 
together with the European Commission, coordinating across the governing bodies of 
Eurocontrol, EASA and ECAC and creating a more structured dialogue between the 
EU  and  non-EU  member  states.  Appoint  a  senior  figure  as  an  ‘Aviation  System 
Coordinator’ to drive forward the necessary actions. 

HLG 2  Greater responsibilities for industry: Give more responsibility to industry in line 
with the liberalisation of the internal market. Involve industry more systematically in 
the  rulemaking  process  for  the  aviation  system.  Realign  the  governance  of  service 
provision  functions  to  give  industry  greater  responsibilities  within  a  harmonised 
regulatory  framework.  Make  possible  competition  for  contestable  activities  which 
can be executed by industry. 

HLG 3  Better  regulation:  Apply  the  principles  of  Better  Regulation,  avoiding  over-
regulation,  and  undertaking  full  impact  assessments  and  consultation.  Apply 
consistent definitions and rationalise existing legislation.  

HLG 4  Drive 

intervention  should 

improved  performance:  Every  regulatory 

target 
improving performance within overriding safety objectives. As general principles, set 
performance  improvement  objectives,  maximise  the  use  of  performance  incentives 
and  require  independent  performance  reporting.  For  ATM,  adapt  the  regulatory 
framework and governance structures to stimulate management to deliver improved 
performance.  Where  possible,  facilitate  the  application  of  market  principles  by  the 
unbundling  and  liberalisation  of  ANSP  services.  Introduce  economic  regulation  to 
drive performance improvement in the monopoly elements of ANSP activities. 

HLG 5  Deliver the Single  European Sky: Accelerate the delivery of the Single European 
Sky  (SES)  and  SESAR  through  proactive  management  and  annual  progress 
monitoring and reporting by the European Commission. Translate the SES ambitions 
into  an  implementation  strategy  and  plan.  Introduce  economic  regulation  for  ATM 
services  to  ensure  that  ANSPs  are  incentivised  to  achieve  converging  objectives  in 
Europe  and  to  regulate  the  monopoly  elements  of  ANSP  activities.  Address  the 
hurdles to implementing FABs and task the Aviation System Coordinator to facilitate 
their  progress.  Strengthen  the  orientation  of  the  SESAR  programme  on  results, 
including quick wins, and develop proposals for the pan-European ATM governance 
structure  post  the  SESAR  JU  in  2013.  Increase  the  political  support  for  SES  and 
SESAR, including the military stakeholders in European ATM.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
HLG 6  Empower  and  focus  Eurocontrol:  Empower  Eurocontrol  to  play  a  key  role  in 
delivering  the Single European Sky and SESAR objectives within the strategic and 
regulatory framework set by the EU. Focus its activities on excellent pan European 
functions  and  ATM  network  design,  and  support  to  regulation  as  requested  by  the 
European  Commission  and  member  states.  Transfer  the  responsibility  for  safety 
regulatory  activities  to  EASA.  Invite  the  Eurocontrol  governing  bodies  to  give 
industry  an  appropriate  role  in  the  governance  of  the  pan-European  functions  and 
facilitate  the  unbundling  of  activities  through  corporate  structures  or  undertakings 
where  appropriate  to  allow  the  Eurocontrol  organisation  to  evolve  in  line  with 
industry developments while ensuring that the interests of employees are considered. 
Prepare  for  the  appropriate  pan-European  ATM  governance  and  operational 
structures for the post 2013 SESAR deployment phase. 

HLG 7  Address  airport  capacity:  Address  the  forthcoming  airport  capacity  crunch  by 
asking the European Commission to raise the profile of this emerging bottleneck in 
the  European  aviation  system  and  point  the  way  forward  in  terms  of  reconciling 
growth  and  environment  goals.  Request  member  states  to  provide  strategies  for 
addressing the airport capacity issue while demanding that airports themselves take 
greater  responsibility  for  securing  the  local ‘licence  to  grow’.  Enable  the  European 
Commission  to  facilitate  progress  through  the  ‘Aviation  System  Coordinator’. 
Integrate airports more systematically into the total system approach. 

HLG 8  Deliver continuously improving safety: Require states to apply safety management 
principles  consistently  and,  in  particular,  facilitate  the  uniform  application  of  ‘just 
culture’ principles. Empower EASA as the single EU instrument for aviation safety 
regulation  including  airports  and  ATM,  and  ensure  that  EASA  is  funded  and 
resourced  accordingly.  Prepare  for  the  SESAR  challenge  by  timely  certification 
processes.  Ensure  that  states’  safety  oversight  is  harmonised  and  that  cooperation 
between  national  authorities  is  stimulated  to  achieve  overall  higher  levels  of 
performance. 

HLG 9  Deliver environmental benefits: Building on the three pillars of improved gate-to-
gate  ATM,  cleaner  and  quieter  aircraft,  and  market  oriented  solutions,  ask  the 
European  Commission  to  develop  an  integrated  environment  strategy.  Incorporate 
ambitions from the transport and environment perspectives, enabling Europe to play 
a leading role in balancing economic, environmental, safety and social impacts. 

HLG 10 Commit  member  states  to  deliver:  Require  more  systematic  implementation  of 
existing  commitments  by  EU  member  states,  in  particular  the  defragmentation 
targeted  by  the  Single  European  Sky  initiative.  States  should  address  inconsistent 
guidelines  for  ANSPs,  performance  shortfalls  in  oversight,  bottlenecks  in  airport 
capacity and safety management, and the new challenges of mitigating and adapting 
to  climate  change.  Encourage  regulatory  authorities  to  exchange  best  practices  and 
develop common approaches. 

The  High  Level  Group  thanks  Vice  President  Barrot  for  the  opportunity  to  develop  these 
recommendations and hopes that they will be acted upon without delay.  

The  High  Level  Group  commends  its  report  to  the  Vice  President,  to  the  European 
Parliament, to Eurocontrol’s Provisional Council and to the member states. 

EN 

14 

   EN