Commission Decision (EU) 2022/2255 of 24 October 2022 on the initiation of the detailed examination of certain performance targets contained in the revised draft performance plan for the third reference period submitted at functional airspace block level by Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2022) 7438) (Only the Dutch, French and German texts are authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)
Commission Decision (EU) 2022/2255 of 24 October 2022 on the initiation of the detailed examination of certain performance targets contained in the revised draft performance plan for the third reference period submitted at functional airspace block level by Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2022) 7438) (Only the Dutch, French and German texts are authentic) (Text with EEA relevance)
Decision (EU) 2022/2255 · Decision · 4 articles
Data as of 2026-07-04 · Compiled from an official source version. Later amendments or repeals may not be reflected; the official text prevails. · Read the official text ↗
The following cost-efficiency performance targets proposed for the Belgium-Luxembourg en route charging zone, contained in the revised draft RP3 performance plan established at functional airspace block level by Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands give rise to doubts in respect of their consistency with the Union-wide performance targets:
KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF COST-EFFICIENCY
Determined unit cost of en route air navigation services
En route charging zone of Belgium-Luxembourg
2014 baseline value
2019 baseline value
2020 -2021
2022
2023
2024
Revised draft en route cost-efficiency targets, expressed as determined en route unit cost (in real terms in 2017 prices)
81,78 EUR
83,26 EUR
189,52 EUR
104,47 EUR
94,18 EUR
89,87 EUR
1. The detailed examination procedure set out in Article 15(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 is hereby initiated with regard to the cost-efficiency performance targets referred to in Article 1.
2. In order to support the further assessment of the performance targets referred to in Article 1, Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands shall provide, upon request by the Commission, relevant additional data and information with regard to the elements set out in the Annex to this Decision.
This Decision is addressed to the Kingdom of Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, the French Republic, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Supplementary provisions
NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ELEMENTS FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS IN RESPECT OF THE COST-EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR THE BELGIUM-LUXEMBOURG EN ROUTE CHARGING ZONE
ANNEX
NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ELEMENTS FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS IN RESPECT OF THE COST-EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR THE BELGIUM-LUXEMBOURG EN ROUTE CHARGING ZONE
(1)
Measures invoked by Belgium and Luxembourg in order to justify the observed deviations from Union-wide cost-efficiency trends on the grounds of additional costs for the achievement of capacity targets;
(2)
Complexity of the provision of air navigation services in the charging zone, and its evolution over time;
(3)
Detailed assumptions and parameters underlying the determined costs of skeyes and MUAC, for each year of RP3 and broken down per cost category and service;
(4)
Service units recorded and forecasted in the charging zone, broken down per ANSP;
(5)
Distribution of the MUAC costs and service units between the Brussels sector and the other sectors within the MUAC area of responsibility;
(6)
Capacity planning of skeyes and MUAC including with regard to the planned number of ATCOs, ATCO training, and planned investments in fixed assets;
(7)
Cost allocation between en route and terminal services, and between services in the scope of the performance plan and other services;
(8)
‘DISPO’ pre-retirement scheme for air traffic controllers in Belgium;
(9)
Cross-border service provision arrangements with neighbouring countries, and their operational and financial impact;
(10)
Costs charged to airspace users in RP2 in respect of postponed or delayed investments in fixed assets.
