Single European Sky Conference: Performance Scheme Viewed from NSA France

1. Limassol – October 11th, 2012 Single European Sky Conference Performance scheme Viewed from NSA France by Paul SCHWACH, Deputy director general of civil aviation Director for Air Transport

2. 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

3. Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008 Steering 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

4. DGCA (BE) BFS (DE) DTA (FR) DGCA (LU) DGCA (NL) FOCA (CH) Performance at National and FABEC level Belgocontrol (BE) Joint Regulation Regulation DFS (DE) DSNA (FR) DSNA (FR) Accountability MUAC Joint Accountability LVNL (NL) National Performance Plan 2012-2014: • En route target: • Cost-Efficiency • Terminal: • SAF, CAP, Cost-efficiency (DUR) • Additional Indicators (SAF, CAP) skyguide (CH) FABEC Performance Plan 2012-2014 : • En route targets: SAF, CAP, ENV Addit'l Indicators: CAP, ENV, Consolidated DUR , MME (Complementing)

5. 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 quantifiedsafety targets • Cost Efficiency : En route unit costs : -7% (2014 / 2011) in real terms • Capacity: Additional en-route indicators

6. Baisse significative du trafic depuis fin 2008 Some 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 ?

7. 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

8. 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

9. Thank you for your attention