Session 1Performance Scheme : are we on the right track ?

Moderator : Peter GriffithsChairman of the Performance Review Body

Session 1

Keynote speakers

• Paul Schwach, Deputy DGCA, France• Kay Kratky, Lufthansa Board Member

Round table panelists

• Matthew Baldwin, Director Aviation and International Transport Affairs, EC• Frank Brenner, DFS, Member of the PRB• John Hanlon, ELFAA Secretary General• Jacek Krawczyk, Member of the European Economic and Social Committee• Tom Regan, Irish CAA, NSA Coordination Platform Performance WB Chairman

Session 1

Overall Context

• Will the EU-wide targets for Reference Period 2012-2014 and the related national/FAB targets be challenging enough to change ATM?

• The target setting for the Reference Period 2015-2019 should make the system stronger. How far should it go?

• How to better link the performance scheme with other SES initiatives such as FABs and SESAR deployment?

• What about human factors? How could they be addressed?

Session 1

Summary of Discussion points

• Will the EU-wide targets for Reference Period 2012-2014 and the related national/FAB targets be challenging enough to change ATM?

• The target setting for the Reference Period 2015-2019 should make the system stronger. How far should it go?

• How to better link the performance scheme with other SES initiatives such as FABs and SESAR deployment?

• What about human factors? How could they be addressed?

Performance Context

Original Proposals from PRB Sept 2010

SafetyDuring RP1, States to monitor and publish the followingSafety KPIs:1) Effectiveness of safety management;2) Application of severity classification;2.1) Separation minima infringements;2.2) Runway incursions;2.3) ATM special technical events;3) Implementation of Just Culture.PRB to work closely with EASA in developing SafetyKPIs and arrangements for the monitoring of safety.

0,0

0,3

0,5

0,8

1,0

1,3

1,5

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0.5 min.

Current capacity planning

Current EUROCONTROL target

En route ATFM delay per flight (min.)

Actual baseline

EU-wide target

3,0%

3,5%

4,0%

4,5%

5,0%

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

-0.75% points

vs. 2009

Actual baseline

Current enhancement plans (-0.6% points vs. 2009)

EU-wide target

% of horizontal en route extension

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014€ 51

States' submissions to June 2010 Enlarged Committee

EU-wide target

€ per service unit (€ 2009)

Actual baseline

Original Proposals from PRB Sept 2010

€59

€64 €62 €61€59

€58€56

€26

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Euro

per

serv

ice u

nit (

2009 p

rices)

Determined unit rate (State plans June 2010) -3.0% annual decrease in determined unit rate 2009-2014

High level political objective for 2020

expressed in en-route costs per SU

RP1

If a -3.0% annual decrease in determined unit rate is achieved between

2009 and 2014 then a -11.6% annual decrease would be required to achieve the high level political objective in 2020

Proposed target vs. political objective

Key Note SpeakersPaul SchwachDirecteur du Transport AérienAdjoint au Directeur général de l'aviation civileKay KratkyMember of the Lufthansa German Airlines BoardFrankfurt & Flight Operations

Direction générale de l’Aviation civile

Limassol – October 11th, 2012Single European Sky Conference

Performance schemeViewed from NSA France

by Paul SCHWACH,Deputy director general of civil aviation

Director for Air Transport

1111Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201211

Where did we come from

Until 2009 air navigation charges were set on a pure cost-recovery principle Criticized for not providing incentives for performance Featuring a corrective mechanism that was contra-

cyclic No « quality » targets

As early as end of 2009, in anticipation of EU regulation SES2, the Government adopted a decree which created a NSA for performance: DTA installed a performance scheme stopped the corrective mechanisms

1212Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201212

Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008Steering air navigation performance

DTA was already regulator for airport charges: the performance scheme for DSNA looked like the « Contrat de regulation Economique » for ADP

DTA is not in charge of setting the targets, but to guarantee that performance is correctly planned and assessed, and that the consultation process is achieved

Two more specific interventions:

• Setting the traffic forecast

• Finding a compromise on return of equity

Coordinated performance plans on national and FABEC level

A discussion on capacity at FABEC level

1313Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 2012

DGCA (BE)

BFS (DE)

DTA (FR)

DGCA (LU)

DGCA (NL)

FOCA (CH)

Belgocontrol (BE)

DFS (DE)

DSNA (FR)

MUAC

LVNL (NL)

skyguide (CH)

DSNA (FR)

Regulation

AccountabilityJoint

Accountability

Joint Regulation

National Performance Plan 2012-2014:- En route target:

- Cost-Efficiency

- Terminal:

- SAF, CAP, Cost-efficiency (DUR)

- Additional Indicators (SAF, CAP)

FABEC Performance Plan 2012-2014 :- En route targets:

SAF, CAP, ENV

Addit'l Indicators: CAP, ENV, Consolidated DUR , MME

(Complementing)

Performance at National and FABEC level

1414Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201214

What should be achieved in RP1 (en-route)

FABEC Performance plan Capacity :

0.5 minute / « en-route » flight delay in year 2014

Environment :Route extension down 5% (2014 / 2011)

National Performance plan Safety:

Additional quantified safety targets

Cost Efficiency :En route unit costs : -7% (2014 / 2011) in real

terms

Capacity:Additional en-route indicators

1515Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201215

Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008Some thoughts about cost-efficiency

Cost efficiency measured by determined unit rates depends on costs and traffic: UR=COSTS/TRAFFIC

When traffic is weak, cost-efficiency is difficult to improve because staff charges cannot react to traffic variations in the short term

The public status of DSNA puts a lot on pressure on cost-efficiency when the State Budget is under tension

The risk to cut investments

Are the EU targets an aspirational goal or a collective commitment ?

1616Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201216

Some suggestions for drawing the way forward 

A real assessment of RP1 before setting RP2

If EU targets are not just aspirational goals, but must become a collective commitment, make them realistic, based on achievable actions by ANSPs

Take into account investment separately

Rethink of incentives (bonus/malus) for some KPIs

EU guidance on RoE

Terminal charges could be a priority for delivering cost-efficiency in the short term, with airlines cooperation

1717Direction généralede l'Aviation civile

Single European Sky Conference – Limassol October 11th, 201217

Conclusion

The SES2 regulation on performance has been implemented

The ANSPs are under tension

The performance needs a cooperation between ANSPs et Air carriers, but also with staff

The current performance trend is achievable in a long term period, with also periods of highly increasing traffic

A gap above this trend should be expected from FAB and SESAR

Direction générale de l’Aviation civile

Thank you for your attention

Where are we today

Environment

3,86%

3,33%

4,08%

Examples - Flight Efficiency challenge

Reduction in route length:

City pair Brussels - Milano Malpensa

New route in green (march 2012)

Reduction in difference between flight

planned route and best available

route

Difference between red and green or

blue/green

CP EBBR_LIMC Real planning

(Sunday 8th April 2012)

IFPU2 Away Day

Capacity

0,680,7 0,6 0,5

Capacity Target(Actual vs. Plan)

(January - August 2012)

1,11

0,37

0,12

0,04

0,00

-0,0

2

-0,0

2

-0,0

3

-0,0

4

-0,0

7

-0,1

1

-0,1

4

-0,1

4

-0,1

4

-0,1

6

-0,2

1

-0,2

9

-0,3

0

-0,3

0

-0,3

1

-0,4

2

-0,7

0

-0,9

9

-1,50

-1,00

-0,50

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

Cyp

rus

No

rway

Po

rtu

gal

Co

nti

nen

tal

Est

on

ia

Ro

man

ia

Lat

via

Mal

ta

Fin

lan

d

Lit

hu

ania

Irel

and

Bu

lgar

ia

Ital

y

FA

BE

C

Cze

ch R

epu

bli

c

DK

-SE

FA

B

Un

ited

Kin

gd

om

Sp

ain

Hu

ng

ary

Slo

vak

Rep

ub

lic

Slo

ven

ia

Po

lan

d

Au

stri

a

Gre

ece

Debate PanelistsMatthew. Baldwin, Director Aviation and International Transport Affairs, ECFrank. Brenner, DFS, Member of the PRB John. Hanlon, ELFAA Secretary General Jacek. Krawczyk, Member of the European Economic and Social Committee Tom. Regan, Irish CAA, NSA Coordination Platform Performance WG Chairman

Debate