COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Accelerating the implementation of the Single European Sky
Date: 2013-06-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Eurocontrol, European Aviation Safety Agency, air safety, air space, air traffic, air traffic control, common transport policy, single market

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Strasbourg, 11.6.2013  
COM(2013) 408 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Accelerating the implementation of the Single European Sky 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Accelerating the implementation of the Single European Sky 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1. 

Reaffirming the objectives of the Single European Sky 

The  European  aviation  industry  plays  a  vital  role  in  the  European  economy,  by  promoting 
trade and tourism and acting as a vehicle for employment growth. Air traffic control is a key 
factor  in  the  value  chain  of  the  aviation  industry.  It  should  ensure  the  safe,  expeditious  and 
cost-efficient  flow  of  air  traffic  thereby  minimising  fuel  usage,  carbon  emissions  and  flying 
times. 

However, European air navigation services have historically evolved primarily within national 
borders, with each Member State establishing its own Air Traffic Management (ATM) system 
leading  to  costly  and  inefficient  structural  fragmentation  of  the  Europe's  airspace  and  a 
persistent  lack  of  responsiveness  to  the  requirements  of  its  customers  –  the  airlines,  and 
ultimately, the paying customers. 
In  20041,  the  EU  launched  the  Single  European  Sky  (SES)  initiative  with  a  threefold 
objective:  "to  enhance  current  air  traffic  safety  standards,  to  contribute  to  the  sustainable 
development  of  the  air  transport  system  and  to  improve  the  overall  performance  of  the 
European  ATM  system  and  air  navigation  services  "2.  The  commitment  to  these  objectives 
was further enforced by formulating high level goals to be achieved by 20203. A major project 
to  modernise  the  technology  behind  the  European  ATM  system  was  launched  in  2007  (the 
SESAR4 project). 2009 saw the addition of additional concrete tools to drive performance and 
steer  the  reform  of  the  European  ATM  system5:  a  revised  approach  to  stimulate  integrated 
service provision, a process of target-setting for performance objectives and the establishment 
of  the  Network  Manager  to  coordinate  action  at  the  European  network  level.  A  five-tier 
approach  was  finally  devised  to  cover  the  various  aspects  of  SES:  safety,  performance, 
technology, airports and human factor 

The achievement of the SES is one of the key priorities of the European Commission's overall 
transport  policy6.  But  although  all  Member  States  remain  committed  to  the  SES, 
implementation still falls well below the original expectations, and accelerating the process of 
reform  of  the  European  ATM  system  through  a  new  package  of  measures  was  identified  in 

1 

2 
3 

4 
5 
6 

Regulations  (EC)  Nos  549,  550,  551,  552/2004  of  10  March  2004  (OJ  L  96,  31.3.2004,  p.  1)  as 
amended by Regulation No 1070/2009 of 21 October 2009 (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009) 
Regulation (EC) No 549, Article 1(1) 
A three-fold increase of capacity, an improvement in safety by a factor of 10, a 10% reduction in the 
effects flights have on the environment and a reduction of the cost of ATM services to airspace users by 
at least 50% 
Single European Sky ATM Research 
Regulation (EC) No 1070/2009 of 21 October 2009 (OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 34) 
Refer to Annex I of COM(2011) 144 final 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
2012 as a key action for the development of the Single Market7. Air traffic delays have been 
reduced  (partly  as  a  consequence  of  the  financial  crisis  which  has  reduced  air  traffic  in 
Europe).But  while  safety  levels  have  been  constantly  maintained,  cost-efficiency  has  not 
improved  quickly  enough,  and  the  environmental  impact  of  sub-optimal  flight  profiles 
remains significant. At a time when European airlines are facing tough competition globally 
and aviation growth is shifting towards the Middle East and Asia-Pacific regions, it is hard to 
ignore the untapped potential gains of the SES, amounting to €5 billion per year 8. The faster 
the Single European Sky is implemented, the quicker the expected returns will materialise. 
The latest forecast indicates there will be 14.4 million flights by 2035 in Europe, 50% more 
than  in  2012.  Air  traffic  growth  will  put  a  strain  on  ATM  capacity  and  exacerbate  the 
misalignment between ATM capacity and airport throughput9 where nearly two million flights 
would not be accommodated because of airport capacity shortfalls10. 

The implementation of the SES and associated reform of the European ATM system must be 
accelerated,  helping  our  airspace  users  in  a  tough  global  competitive  environment,  and 
facilitating  future  economic  growth.  So  the  Commission,  building  on  the  experience  of  the 
SES  so  far,  is  proposing  a  carefully  targeted  further  legislative  proposal  to  facilitate  early 
implementation  of  the  SES,  a  legislative  package  consisting  of  the  recast  of  the  four 
regulations  creating  the  Single  European  Sky  and  the  amendment  of  the  regulation 
establishing the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA11). 

1.2. 

Evolution of the performance of air navigation services 

At  the  end  of  the  1990s,  Europe  faced  major  delay  and  inefficiency  in  the  provision  of  air 
traffic  control  services.  More  than  a  decade  later,  fragmentation  of  the  European  airspace 
remains  high,  with  50  air  traffic  control  centres  in  the  29  different  Air  Navigation  Service 
Providers (ANSPs)12. 

In 2011, the total direct and indirect costs for air traffic control in Europe amounted to some 
€14 billion . The direct costs alone (levied in the  form of user charges) account for more than 
20%  of  the  total  operating  costs,  excluding  fuel,  of  the  most  efficient  airlines.  Generally 
speaking,  direct  air  traffic  control  costs  are  the  third  largest  item  (after  fuel  and  airport 
charges) for airlines.  

Productivity (measured in air traffic controller-hours) has increased by some 18% in the last 
decade, but the overall employment costs for air traffic controllers have risen faster (by almost 
40%).  Total  air  traffic  control  costs  rose  by  10%,  and  the  number  of  European  air  traffic 
controllers  has  risen  to  around  14500.  These  however  remain  only  a  third  of  total  staff 
employed by ANSPs, indicating a very high number of support staff (around 30000 in 2011). 

7 
8 

9 

10 
11 

12 

COM(2012) 573 final 
Based  on  estimates  documented  in  reports  by  the  Performance  Review  Body  of  the  Single  European 
Sky and the Performance Review Commission. 
Refer  to  paragraph  11  of  COM(2011)823  final.  "Increasing  capacity  in  the  air  will  be  pointless  if 
airport capacity does not remain aligned with ATM capacity". 
Challenges of Growth 2013, EUROCONTROL – June 2013. 
Whereas  the  Commission  Roadmap  on  implementation  of  the  Joint  Statement  of  the  European 
Parliament,  the  Council  of  the  EU  and  the  European  Commission  on  decentralised  agencies,  of  July 
2012, requires the standardisation of the names of all EU Agencies to conform to the same format, for 
reasons  of  clarity,  this  Communication  uses  the  currently  existing  name  of  the  European  Aviation 
Safety Agency (EASA) throughout the text. The texts of the legislative proposals themselves have been 
adapted  in  accordance  with  the  new  Joint  Statement  and  Roadmap  to  use  the  standardised  name 
"European Union Agency for Aviation (EAA)". 
The geographical scope of the SES extends over non-EU Member States, like Switzerland and Norway, 
that have committed to implement it through bilateral and multilateral agreements 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Even  with  the  observed  decrease  in  air  traffic,  which  has  eased  the  pressure  on  the  system, 
capacity  has been  stagnant: the  average total air traffic  control delay  per flight was  roughly 
the same in 2011 as 2003. Environmental performance depends on flight efficiency, i.e.  the 
opportunity given to airspace users to fly along the more direct routings. Full success in this 
field is still to come and costs of gate-to gate insufficiencies due to additional fuel and flying 
times are estimated at €3.8 billion in 2011. ATC shows a good safety record and work is in 
progress  to  strengthen  the  implementation  of  safety  programmes,  management  systems  and 
analysis methods. 

2. 

ENFORCING AND IMPROVING EXISTING RULES 

In the last revision of the SES legal framework in 2009, the Commission focused on the need 
for a radical improvement of the performance of the air traffic control system. The delivery of 
the  performance  objectives  should  indeed  be  seen  as  a  primary  ambition  in  setting  up  the 
Functional  Airspace  Blocks  (FABs),  the  management  of  network  functions  (Network 
Manager), and the SESAR project. 

All have advanced over the last two years. Targets for the first reference period (2012-14) of 
the performance scheme were decided upon in 2011 and the scheme itself entered into force 
in 2012; the Network Manager13 became operational in 2011; and the deadline for shifting to 
a more integrated operating airspace, based on FABs, arrived in December 2012. The SESAR 
Joint Undertaking, whose task is to oversee the development of SESAR, has started to deliver 
the  elements  of  the  new  ATM  system.  Finally,  the  deadlines  for  some  other  key  measures 
(such  as  datalink  and  aeronautical  data  quality)  have  also  been  reached  but  in  a  number  of 
cases, implementation lags behind schedule. 

The activity level coupled with the implementation of SES has been high in the last two years, 
but  the  delivery  of  the  expected  benefits  can  be  generally  considered  insufficient.  The 
performance plans agreed at the EU level for 2012-14 would generate savings of €2.4 billion 
over  the  three  years.  Planned  contributions  from  Member  States  have  however  not  matched 
this overall target, leaving a shortfall of €189  million. Furthermore airspace users dispute the 
validity  of  these  figures,  arguing  that  inflation,  carry-overs  and  risk-sharing  resulting  from 
previous years will in fact lead to a substantial increase of their costs in 2014. The Network 
Manager has performed well, but its functions remain limited, in particular with regard to the 
adoption of concrete remedial actions. Finally, while the Member States have agreed to set up 
nine FABs, they remain essentially institutional and administrative endeavours and do not yet 
provide concrete operational gains. 

Existing  legislation  already  goes  some  way  in  addressing  these  issues with  powers  given  to 
the  Commission  to  define  and  enforce  implementing  measures.  The  performance  and 
charging schemes have recently been revised to modernise them in the light of the experience 
of  their  first  application.  The  Commission  must  set  performance  targets  based  on  existing 
legislation  for  the  next  reference  period  (2015-2019)  by  the  end  of  2013.  Governance 
mechanisms for SESAR deployment have been introduced paving the way for the selection of 
a deployment manager and the launch of the deployment process in 2014. 

The Commission  is determined to  ensure  implementation of the SES in all aspects, and has 
therefore  taken  preparatory  steps  to  launch  infringement  procedures  against  Member  States 
who  have  thus  far  failed  to  comply  with  the  requirements  for  the  establishment  of  FABs. 

13 

Eurocontrol was nominated Network Manager through COMMISSION DECISION of 7.7.2011 on the 
nomination  of  the  Network  Manager  for  the  air  traffic  management  (ATM)  network  functions  of  the 
single European sky (C(2011) 4130 final) 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Similarly  it  will  not  hesitate  to  take  further  actions  if  the  lack  of  implementation  of  some 
interoperability measures is confirmed, e.g., datalink services. 

But  most  essential  of  all,  accelerating  the  implementation  of  SES  requires  that  ambitious 
performance  targets,  in  particular  in  the  capacity  and  cost-efficiency  areas,  are  set  in  the 
second and third reference periods of the performance scheme. In this context, more attention 
will be paid to performance from a gate-to-gate perspective. It will be increasingly difficult to 
deliver the required level of performance in a network characterized by a higher number of 
air traffic control centres and airports facing serious congestion issues.  

The Commission will therefore continue to closely monitor the evolution of air traffic and its 
impact on ATM and airport capacity in Europe to ensure that the required capacity gains are 
timely delivered. 

3. 

ENHANCING THE EFFICIENCY OF SES 

3.1. 

Focussing ANSPs on customer needs: delivering on performance  

The  performance  scheme  is  the  key  enabler  for  measuring  the  achievements  of  the  Single 
European Sky. Based on a system of target setting, planning, monitoring and reporting in the 
four  key  performance  areas  of  safety,  environment,  capacity  and  cost-efficiency,  the 
performance scheme establishes the framework under which service providers are compelled 
to  change  in  order  to  provide  better  services  at  lower  costs.  For  example  the  cost  targets 
effectively set a price cap on the services, above which the service providers may not charge 
users, thus forcing them to be more cost-effective. 

The implementation of the scheme in the first reference period from 2012-2014 will lead to 
some  tangible  results  in  form  of  efficiency  gains.  Together  with  environment  and  capacity 
targets, flights will be more direct and delays reduced. At the same time it is also clear that 
more  could  have  been  achieved:  the  initial  targets  proposed  by  the  Commission  and  the 
Performance Review Body for the first reference period were reduced in the approval process 
in the Single Sky Committee where Member States vetoed more ambitious targets; and,- see 
above-  the  final  performance  plans  fall  short  by  a  small  but  significant  amount,  further, 
reducing, the overall level of ambition. 

Experience  also  shows  that  Member  States,  which  are  either  sole  or  majority  owners  of 
service  providers,  have  a  strong  tendency  to  focus  on  healthy  revenue  streams  of  the  user-
financed  system  of  air  traffic  control  services,  and  can  be  therefore  reluctant  to  endorse 
fundamental  change  towards  a  more  integrated  operating  airspace  which  brings  risks  of 
strikes or possible repercussions for cash-strapped national budgets. 

Against  this  background,  the  performance  scheme  needs  to  be  strengthened  to  increase 
transparency  and  become  more  enforceable;  to  make  target  setting  more  technical  and 
evidence  based;  to  increase  the  independence  of  the  Performance  Review  Body  as  the  key 
technical  adviser,  and  finally  to  reinforce  control  by  the  Commission  and  enable  sanctions 
when  targets  are  not  met.  In  parallel  airspace  users  should  be  given  a  stronger  role  in  the 
process. 

Under the current system, Member States in the Single Sky Committee have the ultimate say 
on  targets,  the  adoption  of  performance  plans  and  the  acceptance  of  corrective  measure  in 
case  targets  are  not  reached.  In  its  legislative  package,  the  Commission  is  proposing  to 
strengthen  control  and  sanction  mechanisms.  Furthermore,  members  of  the  Performance 
Review  Body  should  henceforth  be  directly  nominated  by  the  Commission,  to  ensure 
impartiality. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
3.2. 

Increasing the efficiency of support services 

The  first  SES  package  of  2004  aimed  to  introduce  market  mechanisms  for  the  provision  of 
support  services,  in  order  to  improve  their  efficiency14.  Little  in  practice  has  been  achieved 
although in the two cases15 where such measures have been taken- in Sweden and the UK - 
the  results  have  been  positive  (one  of  the  ANSPs  estimated  the  saving  to  be  around  50% 
compared to internalised provision of support services). So more could and should be done to 
delegate the provision of support services to specialised providers.  

Introducing  market  mechanisms,  where  possible,  is  fully  in  line  with  what  is  being  done 
elsewhere  in  European  infrastructure  industries,  either  by  competition  within  the  market  or 
competition  for  the  market  under  tender  procedures  providing  time  limited  concessions.  A 
progressive  opening  of  support  services  to  competition  will  not  only  provide  new  business 
opportunities  to  the  ATM  industry  and  beyond  but  also  allow  a  quicker  and  less  expensive 
implementation  of  new  technologies.  On  the  most  conservative  estimate  based  on  recent 
experience , roughly 20% savings can be expected in respect of support services. 

Clearly  introducing  competition  in,  all  ATM  services  would  not  be  appropriate.  The 
Commission's  analysis  indicates  that  the  core  air  traffic  control  services  are  natural 
monopolies at least under current technology: it is not feasible e.g. to have two control towers 
at  a  single  airport  or  two  controllers  in  the  same  sector  competing  for  business.  In  theory, 
tender  procedures  offering  concessions  for  limited  periods  of  time  could  be  considered  for 
these core services, but these would require strong economic regulation and oversight.  

However,  support  services,  such  as  meteorology,  aeronautical  information,  communication, 
navigation  or  surveillance  services  are  more  practical  propositions.  There  are  many 
companies inside and outside the ATM world who could offer such services, which could be 
divided  between  several  providers  to  maximise  competition,  or  –  as  recently  suggested  by 
Eurocontrol  in  its  analysis  of  the  concept  of  "centralised  services",  attributed  to  a  single 
provider or a grouping of service providers that could support several core providers.  

The Commission is of the opinion that market mechanisms should be introduced to increase 
efficiency  in  the  provision  of  support  services.  In  this  legislative  package  the  Commission 
proposes  to  pursue  the  separation  and  market  opening  of  certain  of  these  support  services 
mentioned above. 

3.3. 

Strengthening  the  independence  of  National  Supervisory  Authorities'  (NSA) 
independence  

NSAs  have  a  major  role  to  play  in  the  implementation  of  SES.  Their  tasks  have  gradually 
increased  since  their  establishment  in  2004  and  most  are  still  developing  their  organisation 
and capabilities to match. Their primary responsibilities cover verifications of compliance of 
the  ANSPs,  which  involves  the  supervision  of  safe  and  efficient  service  provision, 
organisation of proper inspections and the conclusion and implementation of agreements on 
the supervision of ANSPs within FABs. NSAs also cooperate to ensure supervision of ANSPs 
providing  services  in  another  State.  Finally,  they  prepare,  oversee  and  monitor  the  ANSP 
performance plans, this new task becoming more and more important. 

A number of difficulties in the implementation of SES can be attributed to NSA difficulties – 
to  inadequate  resources,  to  a  lack  of  expertise  and  a  lack  of  independence  from  both 

14 
15 

Regulation (EC) 550/2004, recital 13 
Swedish  air  navigation  service  provider  LFV  and  Highlands  and  Islands  Airports  (HIAL)  outsource 
many of their support services  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
governments and ANSPs. This has affected both the processes of certification and oversight 
of  ANSPs,  as  well  as  in  the  preparation  and  implementation  of  the  performance  scheme. 
Failing to address these shortcomings will significantly risk the implementation of the SES.  

The problem of inadequate resources has a direct impact on technical skills and weakens the 
independence  of  the  regulatory  body  vis-à-vis  the  ANSP,  and  should  be  resolved  by 
strengthening  mutual  co-operation  between  NSAs  (for  example  at  FAB  level),  by  more 
intensive coordination between  NSAs at EU  level allowing  them to exchange best  practices 
and  participate  in  training  programmes  and  by  the  pooling  of  experts  for  example  under 
EASA auspices. Greater financial autonomy will make it possible to tackle the existing staff 
shortages. 

NSAs  have  to  perform  their  duties  with  impartiality  and  independence.  While  existing 
legislation requires that "this independence shall be achieved through adequate separation at 
the functional level at least"16 between NSAs and ANSPs, most of the States have opted for a 
structural  separation.  Nevertheless,  even  this  has  not  always  delivered,  especially  when  the 
resources  and  expertise  remain  inadequate,  resulting  in  a  stronger  influence  by  the  ANSPs. 
The  Commission  therefore  proposes  a  set  of  binding  criteria  in  order  to  ensure  the 
autonomous and effective operation of NSAs.  

In  this  context,  the  Commission  believes  that  the  regulatory  framework  dealing  with  the 
efficiency  and  independence  of  NSAs  should  be  reinforced  as  a  matter  of  priority  and  will 
propose specifically binding criteria relating to the independence and capacity of NSAs. 

4. 

REMOVING THE FRAGMENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN ATM SYSTEM 

4.1. 

Enabling industrial partnerships 

Functional Airspace Blocks (FABs), are intended to combat fragmentation of the airspace by 
establishing  co-operation  between  ANSPs,  optimising  the  organisation  and  use  of  airspace 
through  design  of  optimal  control  sectors  and  routes  over  larger  areas  and  hence  achieving 
overall synergies through economies of scale. In 2009, a binding deadline of December 2012 
was set for Member States to establish FABs including a series of detailed and binding criteria 
related to improved performance in service provision. 

Whilst a lot of work by the Member States and their ANSPs has been done to create FABs, 
progress has been disappointing. Nine FABs have been announced, but in fact none of them 
are  fully  operational,  and  most  seem  intended  to  fulfil  formal  requirements,  rather  than 
developing synergies or economies of scale. 

Real  -  as  opposed  to  merely  institutional  -  FAB  developments  have  often  been  blocked, 
because of fears that the revenue stream from air navigation charges would fall, in some cases 
by  over  30  %,  if  these  FAB  developments  were  to  be  implemented  and  services  would  be 
rationalised  by  e.g.  shortening  routes.  Strong  opposition  from  staff,  defending  their  current 
staffing levels has been an additional issue for States to confront in that respect.  

Furthermore,  claims  of  national  sovereignty  problems  have  been  made  to  protect  existing 
monopolies, in the name of protection of military infrastructure, objectives, and operations in 
European  airspace.  While  genuine  military  needs  are  justifiably  protected  under  the  Single 
European  Sky,  the  precise  line  between  those  valid  needs  and  undue  protection  of  national 
interests has often become blurred. Finally, the treatment of existing long-term amortisation 
and  investment  plans  on  technical  infrastructure  has  also  proved  too  sensitive  for  States  to 

16 

Article 4(2) of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
handle,  despite  the  existing  regulatory  requirement  to  achieve  optimum  use  of  resources  in 
FABs.  

The Commission will continue to pursue infringement cases against Member States in relation 
to the FABs, particularly those where progress towards reform is not demonstrated clearly in 
the coming months, and remains committed to the adoption by FABs of organisational models 
suitable  for  a  more  integrated  operating  airspace.  FABs  may  now  actually  need  more 
flexibility  by  making  it  legally  clearer  that  they  can  pursue  more  variable  co-operation 
arrangements  between  ANSPs  to  exploit  synergies  and  team  up  with  different  partners  for 
different  projects  to  improve  performance.  These  arrangements  could  cover  common 
procurement, training, support services or delegation of services. The Commission proposes 
to modify the rules to enable FABs to pursue such projects. The precise manner of improving 
performance should be left to the choice of the industry participants, as long as performance 
improvements are realised. 

The Commission is proposing in this legislative package to further develop the FAB concept 
so  that  it  becomes  a  more  performance  driven  and  flexible  tool  for  ANSPs,  based  on 
industrial partnerships, to achieve the targets set by the SES performance scheme.  

More emphasis will also be put on the central Network Manager as regards overall airspace 
management (see section 4.2)  

4.2. 

Reinforcing the role of the Network Manager  

The Network Manager for the EU ATM network, which has been operational since 2011, is a 
major player in the implementation of SES. A growing number of functions and services in 
the  European  ATM  system  could  in  fact  be  performed  in  a  more  centralised  manner. 
Eurocontrol has been designated by the Commission as Network Manager, and has performed 
well17; in its capacity as Network Manager, it has as a key remit the prevention of bottlenecks 
in the airspace and system overloads on a day-to-day basis, as well as the facilitation of direct 
routings of aircraft. These functions thereby directly support ANSPs in meeting performance 
targets related to capacity and flight efficiency. The Network Manager's role is recognised by 
all stakeholders as essential. 

Promoting  the  network  dimension  in  strategic  and  operational  terms  requires  very  close 
cooperation across all operational stakeholders. However, whilst the original intention was to 
create  strong  industry-led  governance  with  clear  executive  powers,  in  practice  the  Network 
Manager  tends  to  decide  by  consensus,  which  often  results  in  weak  compromises.  The 
concept  of  an  industrial  partnership  for  improved  service  provision  should  be  taken  as  an 
objective  which  would  also  fit  with  the  further  reform  of  Eurocontrol  (see  section  5.2). 
Thereby  the  air  navigation  service  providers  and  airspace  users  would  participate  in  the 
Network  Manager  as  a  kind  of  joint  venture.  This  model  ensures  the  separation  from 
regulatory  bodies  as 
the  role  of  an 
intergovernmental  organisation  and  towards  a  normal  air  navigation  service  provider. 
Furthermore  it  favours  investments  in  the  Network  Manager  consistent  with  the  business 
plans of operational stakeholders, as the industry partners will see the organisation as part of 
their own business and will hence be more prepared to invest in its operation. 

the  Network  Manager  away  from 

turns 

it 

17 

The  Network  Management  Function  (NMF)  was  established  under  Commission  Implementing 
Regulation (EU) No 677/2011, and Eurocontrol was nominated as the Network Manager (NM) through 
a Commission Decision of July 2011 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Furthermore,  the  current  Network  Manager  operations  cover  only  a  subset  of  functions  and 
services needed for the optimisation of the performance of the network. A gradual extension 
of the NM initial operating scope of action is therefore needed.  

The  Commission  therefore  proposes  in  this  legislative  package  to  reinforce  the  role  of  the 
Network Manager based on streamlined governance that gives a more prominent role to the 
industry  (ANSPs,  airspace  users  and  airports).  This  will  allow  the  enlarging  of  its  scope  to 
include new functions (including aspects of airspace design) and services related to network 
operations to be performed at the central level by the Network Manager. 

5. 

BUILDING A MORE CONSISTENT INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK 

5.1. 

Role of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) in ATM 

EASA has been pivotal in EU aviation policy since 2002, with its objective both to achieve a 
high  and  uniform  level  of  safety  and  to  further  the  traditional  EU  goals  of  a  level  playing 
field,  free  movement,  environmental  protection,  avoidance  of  regulatory  duplication, 
promotion  of  ICAO  rules  etc.  In  200918,  EASA's  responsibilities  expanded  to  cover  in 
addition safety aspects relating to ATM and aerodromes. The 2009 extension to ATM created 
duplication in that as a result some tasks are covered by both SES legislation and the EASA 
basic  regulation.  This  was  deliberate  to  avoid  a  possible  gap  in  the  regulatory  framework 
during the transition phase. But the legislation invites the Commission to propose changes to 
remove  the  overlap  once  the  corresponding  EASA  implementing  rules  have  been 
established19.  

In  areas  such  as  air  crew  licensing  or  airworthiness,  EASA  ensures  the  drafting  of  all 
technical rules, but ATM was different in that a distinction was made between "safety" and 
"non-safety" rules, given the strong residual role played by Eurocontrol in non-safety issues. 
The problem is that all technical ATM rules contain both safety elements and elements related 
to  capacity,  cost  and  efficiency,  so  implementation  is  difficult,  particularly  as  an  increasing 
number  of  ATM  rules  have  impacts  also  on  the  airborne  side  and  hence  airworthiness,  air 
operations,  training  etc.  With  the  SESAR  project  now  getting  close  to  deployment,  the 
problem of aligning different technical rules risks getting worse as all related technologies and 
concepts  must  be  facilitated  or  mandated  by  the  regulatory  system.  We  need  to  move  to  a 
single regulatory strategy, rule structure and consultation process under the EASA umbrella, 
also  with  a  view  to  ensuring  the  proper  involvement  of  all  affected  parties,  such  as  the 
airspace users, airports, service providers and the military community.  

The  Commission  proposes  in  this  legislative  package  to  eradicate  the  overlap  between  SES 
and  EASA  regulations  and  share  work  between  the  different  institutions  accordingly.  The 
Commission should therefore focus on the key questions of economic regulation, whilst EASA 
ensures co-ordinated drafting and oversight of all technical rules, drawing on expertise from 
Eurocontrol,  Member  States,  and  industry  stakeholders.  The  proposal  also  takes  the 
opportunity to update the EASA regulation both to include up to date references to comitology 
in  line  with  the  Lisbon  treaty,  and  to  the  governance  of  EASA  in  line  with  the  Common 
Approach  of  the  EP,  Council  and  Commission  on  EU  decentralised  agencies  in  July  2012. 
The latter agreement includes also standardisation of the names of EU Agencies, so that the 
name of EASA shall be modified to "European Union Agency for Aviation (EAA). 

18 
19 

Regulation (EC) No 1108/2009 of 21 October 2009 (OJ L 309, 24.11.2009, p. 51) 
Refer to Article 65a of Regulation (EC) 216/2008 of 20 February 2008 (OJ L 79, 19.3.2008, p. 1) as 
amended 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
5.2. 

Focussing  Eurocontrol  on  the  management  and  operation  of  the  European 
ATM network 

Eurocontrol  is  a  major  player  in  the  implementation  of  the  SES.  Originally  established  to 
provide a collective air traffic control system in six European states20, it took on a broad set of 
ATM  related  tasks  over  the  years  and  has  become  a  major  centre  of  ATM  expertise. 
Following the extension of EU competence to ATM matters, Eurocontrol started a process of 
reorganisation to align itself with SES policy: firstly to respect the principle of separation of 
regulatory  activities  from  service  provision;  and  secondly  to  avoid  duplication  with  the 
increasing roles of the Commission and EASA in policy-making, regulatory, certification and 
oversight activities. The EU became a provisional member of this organisation in 2003. The 
on-going process of reform of Eurocontrol facilitated its appointment as Performance Review 
Body (PRB) in 2010 and NM in 2011 and, starting from 2007, its participation in the SESAR 
Joint Undertaking as a founding member. 

Furthermore, in an effort to better coordinate their activities, the EU and Eurocontrol signed 
an  High  level  Agreement  in  2012  which  recognises  the  contribution  that  Eurocontrol  can 
make  to  the  establishment  of  an  efficient  European  ATM  system  by  assisting  the  EU  in 
playing  its  role  as  single  European  regulator.  In  this  respect  Eurocontrol  will  continue  to 
support the Commission and EASA in drafting of rules and regulations. 

Significant steps have already been taken, and the final part of the  process  of  the  reform  of 
Eurocontrol  has  begun  in  2013.  It  remains  an  intergovernmental  organisation  and  its 
Constitution  and  its  decision-making  bodies  (such  as  the  Provisional  Council)  do  not  yet 
reflect the outcome of recent reform changes. The Commission supports the on-going reform 
of  Eurocontrol  that  will  focus  on  the  management  and  operation  of  the  European  ATM 
network.  The  particular  importance  of  this  role  has  already  been  recognised  by  the  EU 
through a mandate to Eurocontrol to deliver the Network Management functions set up under 
SES  legislation.  These  functions  could  be  further  enhanced  –  and  the  efficiency  of  the 
network further improved – if the NM were to be charged with additional network functions 
or centralised services to be contracted out to industry that ANSPs could make use of. This 
development  should  be  promoted  in  full  consistency  with  the  SES  legal  framework  and 
SESAR deployment. Moreover it cannot materialise without a shift in the governance of this 
organisation towards a more industry-led environment (see section 4.2). 

The provisional governing bodies of Eurocontrol have started the discussion on the reform of 
the organisation in May 2013. The Commission intends to contribute to this discussion by co-
ordinating  the  position  of  Member  States  to  ensure  a  swift  revision  of  the  Eurocontrol 
Convention starting from 2014 and focusing Eurocontrol on operational tasks in which it has 
greatest expertise.  

6. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Achieving the Single European Sky remains a key priority in European aviation policy with 
the as yet unrealised potential to deliver major savings for the aviation sector and indeed the 
European  Economy  as  a  whole.  Based  on  analysis  contained  in  the  present  Communication 
and  the  associated  impact  assessment,  the  Commission  proposes  a  legislative  package 
(SES2+)  to  consolidate  and  where  possible  accelerate  the  process  of  reform  of  ATM  in 
Europe, by further addressing the inefficiencies in the provision of air navigation services and 

20 

Belgium,  France,  the  Federal  Republic  of  Germany,  Luxembourg,  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
                                                 
by  continuing  to  drive  towards  the  defragmentation  of  the  European  ATM  system.  The 
legislative  proposals  represent  evolution,  not  revolution,  and  build  on,  and  do  not  supplant, 
previous reforms. But they should significantly contribute to turn the European ATM system 
into  a  more  efficient  integrated  operating  airspace  in  the  coming  years,  building  upon  the 
results already achieved since 2004.  

EN 

11 

   EN