Home Über uns Sitemap Login Registrieren
Commission Decision (EU) 2025/1050 of 19 May 2025 on the consistency of the perfo... (32025D1050)
EU - Rechtsakte: 07 Transport policy
2025/1050
28.5.2025

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2025/1050

of 19 May 2025

on the consistency of the performance targets included in the draft performance plan submitted by Hungary pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period of the Single European Sky performance and charging scheme

(notified under document C(2025) 2919)

(Only the Hungarian text is authentic)

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to 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 (the framework Regulation) (1), and in particular Article 11(3) point (c) thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/2803 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on the implementation of the Single European Sky (2), and in particular Article 58(3) thereof,
Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 of 11 February 2019 laying down a performance and charging scheme in the single European sky and repealing Implementing Regulations (EU) No 390/2013 and (EU) No 391/2013 (3), and in particular Article 14(2) thereof,
Whereas:
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
(1) Pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, Member States are to draw up plans, either at national level or at the level of functional airspace blocks (‘FABs’), including performance targets, for each reference period of the performance and charging scheme for air navigation services and network functions. Those plans are to include local performance targets which are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the reference period concerned.
(2) The Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period (‘RP4’, 2025-2029) were set out in Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688 (4).
(3) All Member States have drawn up and adopted draft performance plans for RP4, which were submitted to the Commission for assessment by 1 October 2024. Following the verification of completeness of those draft performance plans, the Commission requested Member States to submit updated draft performance plans by 15 November 2024.
(4) The Commission’s assessment presented in this Decision is based on the updated draft performance plan for RP4 submitted by Hungary (‘the draft performance plan’).
(5) The Performance Review Body (‘PRB’), assisting the Commission in the implementation of the performance scheme, has submitted to the Commission a report containing its advice on the assessment of the draft performance plans.
(6) In accordance with Article 14(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has assessed the consistency of the local performance targets included in the draft performance plan on the basis of the criteria laid down in point 1 of Annex IV to that Implementing Regulation, and taking account of local circumstances where relevant.
(7) The Commission has complemented its assessment of the draft performance plan with a review of the elements set out in point 2 of Annex IV to that Implementing Regulation. In respect of point 2.1(d)(vii) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission notes that it has not conducted, as part of that review, a detailed analysis of the methodology used by Hungary for the allocation of costs between
en route
and terminal services in RP4. Therefore, the Commission has not drawn any conclusions, at this stage, in respect of the compliance of that cost allocation methodology with points (e) and (f) of Article 15(2) Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (5) and Article 22(5) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.
COMMISSION ASSESSMENT
Assessment of the safety targets
(8) As regards the key performance area of safety, the consistency of the targets included in the draft performance plan has been assessed in accordance with point 1.1 of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.
(9) The performance targets in the key performance area of safety proposed by Hungary in respect of the effectiveness of safety management, broken down per safety management objective and expressed as a level of implementation, are as follows:

Hungary

Targets on the effectiveness of safety management, expressed as a level of implementation, ranging from EASA level A to D

Air navigation service provider

Safety management objective

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

HungaroControl

Safety policy and objectives

C

C

C

C

C

Safety risk management

C

C

C

D

D

Safety assurance

C

C

C

C

C

Safety promotion

C

C

C

C

C

Safety culture

C

C

C

C

C

(10) The Commission has found that the safety performance targets proposed by Hungary for the air navigation service provider ‘HungaroControl’ are equal to the Union-wide safety targets from 2028 for the ‘safety risk management’ objective, while for the remaining four ‘safety management objectives’ the performance targets are equal to the Union-wide safety targets in respect of calendar years 2025 to 2029.
(11) The Commission notes that the draft performance plan sets out measures for HungaroControl for the achievement of the local safety targets, which relate to the implementation of its safety management system and to cybersecurity.
(12) On the basis of the findings set out in recitals (9), (10) and (11), and considering that the Union-wide safety performance targets set in Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688 are to be achieved by the final year of RP4, that is, 2029, the local safety performance targets included in the draft performance plan should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets.
Assessment of the environment targets
(13) As regards the key performance area of environment, the consistency of the targets included in the draft performance plan regarding the average horizontal
en route
flight efficiency of the actual trajectory has been assessed based on the criterion laid down in point 1.2 of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. Accordingly, the environment targets of Hungary have been compared to the relevant
en route
horizontal flight efficiency reference values set out in the European Route Network Improvement Plan (‘ERNIP’), drawn up in accordance with Annex I to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/123 (6) and available at the time of adopting the Union-wide performance targets for RP4, that is on 2 July 2024.
(14) The environment performance targets proposed by Hungary for RP4 and the corresponding national reference values from the ERNIP, expressed as the average horizontal
en route
flight efficiency of the actual trajectory, are as follows:

Hungary

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets in the key performance area of environment, expressed as the average horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory

2,10  %

2,09  %

2,08  %

2,07  %

2,06  %

Reference values

2,10  %

2,09  %

2,08  %

2,07  %

2,06  %
(15) The Commission observes that the environment targets proposed by Hungary are equal to the corresponding national reference values for each calendar year of RP4.
(16) The Commission notes that Hungary has presented in the draft performance plan measures for the achievement of the local environment targets, which include the implementation and further expansion of cross-border free route airspace by the end of RP4. Having regard to the findings of the PRB, the Commission considers that Hungary should commit to the implementation of all the operational measures set out in the ERNIP of 2 July 2024 in order to support the achievement of its environment performance targets for RP4.
(17) On the basis of the findings set out in recitals (14), (15) and (16), the targets in the key performance area of environment included in the draft performance plan should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4.
Assessment of the capacity targets
(18) As regards the key performance area of capacity, the consistency of the targets included in the draft performance plan regarding the average
en route
air traffic flow management (‘ATFM’) delay per flight has been assessed based on the criterion laid down in point 1.3 of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. Accordingly, the proposed
en route
capacity targets of Hungary have been compared to the relevant reference values set out in the Network Operations Plan drawn up in accordance with Article 9 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/123 and available at the time of adopting the Union-wide performance targets for RP4, that is on 2 July 2024.
(19) The
en route
capacity targets proposed by Hungary for RP4, expressed in minutes of ATFM delay per flight, and the corresponding reference values from the Network Operations Plan, are as follows:

Hungary

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets in the key performance area of capacity, expressed in minutes of en route ATFM delay per flight

0,85

0,55

0,20

0,20

0,14

Reference values

0,29

0,21

0,18

0,14

0,14

(20) The Commission observes that the
en route
capacity targets proposed by Hungary are significantly higher than the corresponding national reference values for each year of RP4, except in 2029, where they are equal.
(21) Hungary justifies the observed difference of its capacity targets with the reference values referred to in recital (20) by invoking the significant increase in overflight traffic recorded as a consequence of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Hungary has provided detailed information, in its draft performance plan, demonstrating the resulting changes in air traffic volumes, density, and complexity. It is therefore necessary to take those circumstances into account when assessing the proposed capacity performance targets of Hungary for RP4 in respect of their consistency with the Union-wide capacity performance targets.
(22) Having regard to the detailed analysis made by the PRB, the Commission concludes that the gap between the national targets and the reference values is duly justified by the exceptional circumstances resulting from the war in Ukraine and referred to in recital (21). The Commission further notes that Hungary has put in place a range of measures for the achievements of its capacity targets, including a significant increase of the number of air traffic controllers (‘ATCOs’) in operations at the area control centre, improvements of the air traffic management system, and extended sector opening hours.
(23) On the basis of the findings set out in recitals (19) to (22), the targets in the key performance area of capacity included in the draft performance plan of Hungary should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4.
Review of the capacity targets for terminal air navigation services
(24) In accordance with point 2.1(b) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has complemented its assessment of the draft performance plan by reviewing the capacity performance targets for the terminal air navigation services set in respect of the airports referred to in Articles 1(3) and (4) of that Implementing Regulation. It was found that those targets give rise to concerns.
(25) The Commission notes that the proposed terminal capacity targets for RP4 lead to a significant deterioration of the average arrival ATFM delay per year compared to the third reference period (‘RP3’). Indeed, the proposed RP4 targets are set at 0,10 minute per flight, whereas the actual performance recorded in 2024 was 0,00 minute per flight.
(26) Therefore, the Commission considers that, in connection with the adoption of its final performance plan in accordance with Article 16, point (a) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, Hungary should further justify the terminal capacity targets for RP4 in light of the observations set out in recital (25), or should revise downwards those targets.
Assessment of the cost-efficiency targets
(27) As regards the key performance area of cost-efficiency, the consistency of the targets included in the draft performance plan regarding the determined unit cost (‘DUC’) for
en route
air navigation services has been assessed based on the criteria laid down in points 1.4(a), (b) and (c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317. Those criteria consist of the DUC trend over RP4, the long-term DUC trend over RP3 and RP4 (2020-2029), and the baseline value for the DUC at charging zone level compared with the average value of the charging zones where air navigation service providers have a similar operational and economic environment.
(28) The
en route
cost-efficiency targets proposed by Hungary for RP4, and the related baseline values, are as follows:

En route charging zone of the Hungary

2019 baseline value

2024 baseline value

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets and baseline values in the key performance area of cost-efficiency, expressed as determined unit cost (in real terms at 2022 prices)

HUF 12 585

HUF 11 373

HUF 12 029

HUF 11 984

HUF 12 078

HUF 12 002

HUF 12 651

EUR 32,24

EUR 29,13

EUR 30,81

EUR 30,70

EUR 30,94

EUR 30,74

EUR 32,41

(29) Concerning the assessment criterion set out in point 1.4(a) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that Hungary’s DUC trend at charging zone level of +2,2 % over RP4 underperforms the Union-wide trend of -1,2 % over the same period.
(30) Concerning the assessment criterion set out in point 1.4(b) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that Hungary’s long-term DUC trend at charging zone level over RP3 and RP4 of +0,1 % underperforms the long-term Union-wide trend of -1,0 % over the same period.
(31) Concerning the assessment criterion set out in point 1.4(c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that Hungary’s baseline value for the DUC of EUR 29,13 in real terms at 2022 prices (‘EUR2022’) is 28,1 % lower than the average baseline value of EUR 40,51 in EUR2022 of the relevant comparator group set out in Article 7 Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688.
(32) The Commission has further examined whether the deviations observed in recitals (29) and (30) could be deemed necessary and proportionate under point 1.4(d) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, provided that the observed deviations from the Union-wide DUC trend over RP4 and from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend are exclusively due to additional determined costs related to measures necessary to achieve the performance targets in the key performance area of capacity or to restructuring measures within the meaning of Article 2(18) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.
(33) In respect of the criterion specified under point 1.4(d)(i) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission notes that Hungary refers in the draft performance plan to the additional determined costs incurred over RP4 by the air navigation service provider Hungarocontrol in relation to measures needed for the achievement of the local capacity targets (‘capacity measures’). The presented capacity measures comprise the following main elements:
— The training and employment of additional ATCOs in operations in order to handle the expected traffic increase during RP4. This is planned to result over RP4 into an overall increase of over 30 % of the number of ATCOs in operations at the area control centre of Budapest.
— The upgrade of the air traffic management (‘ATM’) system.
— Other investments in infrastructure, equipment, and radars.
(34) The PRB has analysed in detail the capacity measures invoked by Hungary. Based on its analysis, the PRB considered that the capacity measures related to the increase of the number of ATCOs in operations and the upgrade of the ATM system are necessary and proportionate for the achievement of Hungary’s capacity targets. Those capacity measures were found by the PRB to result in a structural increase of the available capacity in Hungary’s airspace for RP4. Furthermore, the PRB concluded that the additional costs of those capacity measures are larger than the deviation from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend referred to in recital (30).
(35) In light of the considerations in recitals (33) and (34), the Commission therefore finds that the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(i) is fulfilled in respect of Hungary with regard to the deviation from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend referred to in recital (30).
(36) Hungary has not presented in the draft performance plan any restructuring measures pursuant to the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(ii) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 which would justify the remaining deviation from the Union-wide DUC trend observed in recital (29).
(37) The Commission notes, however, that Hungary has demonstrated a good level of cost-efficiency in relative terms, given that the baseline value for 2024 is significantly below the average of the relevant comparator group, as outlined in recital (31). The Commission further observes that Hungary’s DUC remains stable over time, when comparing the baseline value for 2019 with the planned DUC for 2029. Furthermore, Hungary’s deviation from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend was found to be justified by the additional costs induced by capacity measures, as concluded in recital (35). Therefore, the Commission considers, on balance, that the remaining deviation from the Union-wide DUC trend observed in recital (29) does not preclude Hungary’s cost-efficiency performance targets from being consistent with the Union-wide cost-efficiency performance targets.
(38) On the basis of the findings set out in recitals (28) to (37), the targets in the key performance area of cost-efficiency included in the draft performance plan should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4.
Review of the cost-efficiency targets for terminal air navigation services
(39) In accordance with point 2.1(c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has complemented its assessment of the draft performance plan by reviewing the cost-efficiency performance targets for terminal air navigation services set in respect of the airports referred to in Articles 1(3) and (4) of that Implementing Regulation. It was found that those targets do not give rise to concerns.
CONCLUSIONS
(40) In the light of the foregoing, the performance targets included in the draft performance plan of Hungary should be considered consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The performance targets included in the draft performance plan submitted by Hungary for the fourth reference period (‘RP4’), listed in the Annex to this Decision, are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4 set out in Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to Hungary.
Done at Brussels, 19 May 2025,
For the Commission
Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS
Member of the Commission
(1)  
OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 1
, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/549/oj
.
(2)  
OJ L, 2024/2803, 11.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2803/oj
.
(3)  
OJ L 56, 25.2.2019, p. 1
, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/317/oj
.
(4)  Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688 of 12 June 2024 setting Union-wide performance targets for the air traffic management network for the fourth reference period from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2029 (
OJ L, 2024/1688, 17.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/1688/oj
).
(5)  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 (the service provision Regulation) (
OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 10
, ELI:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/550/oj
).
(6)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/123 of 24 January 2019 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of air traffic management (ATM) network functions and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) No 677/2011 (
OJ L 28, 31.1.2019, p. 1
, ELI: 
http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/123/oj
).

ANNEX

Performance targets included in the draft performance plan of Hungary, found to be consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF SAFETY

Hungary

Targets on the effectiveness of safety management, expressed as a level of implementation, ranging from European Aviation Safety Agency (‘EASA’) level A to D

Air navigation service provider

Safety management objective

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

HungaroControl

Safety policy and objectives

C

C

C

C

C

Safety risk management

C

C

C

D

D

Safety assurance

C

C

C

C

C

Safety promotion

C

C

C

C

C

Safety culture

C

C

C

C

C

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF ENVIRONMENT

Hungary

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets in the key performance area of environment, expressed as the average horizontal en route flight efficiency of the actual trajectory

2,10 %

2,09 %

2,08 %

2,07 %

2,06 %

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF CAPACITY

Hungary

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets in the key performance area of capacity, expressed in minutes of en route ATFM delay per flight

0,85

0,55

0,20

0,20

0,14

KEY PERFORMANCE AREA OF COST-EFFICIENCY

En route charging zone of Hungary

2019 baseline value

2024 baseline value

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

Targets and baseline values in the key performance area of cost-efficiency, expressed as determined unit cost (in real terms at 2022 prices)

HUF 12 585

HUF 11 373

HUF 12 029

HUF 11 984

HUF 12 078

HUF 12 002

HUF 12 651

EUR 32,24

EUR 29,13

EUR 30,81

EUR 30,70

EUR 30,94

EUR 30,74

EUR 32,41

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2025/1050/oj
ISSN 1977-0677 (electronic edition)
Markierungen
Leseansicht