Performance Plan Slovakia - NSATletectvo.nsat.sk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/... · 1.1 The...

Performance Plan

Slovakia

Third Reference Period (2020-2024)

Status:

Date of issue:

Draft performance plan (Article 12)

4.37E+04

Table of Content

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE SITUATION

1.2 TRAFFIC FORECASTS

1.3 STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

1.4 LIST OF AIRPORTS SUBJECT TO THE PERFORMANCE AND CHARGING REGULATION

1.5 SERVICES UNDER MARKET CONDITIONS

1.6 FAB PROCESS

1.7 SIMPLIFIED CHARGING SCHEME

2 INVESTMENTS

3 PERFORMANCE TARGETS AT LOCAL LEVEL

3.1 SAFETY TARGETS

3.1.1 Safety KPI #1: Level of Effectiveness of Safety Management achieved by ANSPs

3.2 ENVIRONMENT TARGETS

3.2.1 Environment KPI #1: Horizontal en route flight efficiency (KEA)

3.3 CAPACITY TARGETS

3.3.1 Capacity KPI #1: En route ATFM delay per flight

3.3.2 Capacity KPI #2: Terminal and airport ANS ATFM arrival delay per flight

3.4 COST-EFFICIENCY TARGETS

3.4.1 Cost efficiency KPI #1: Determined unit cost (DUC) for en route ANS

3.4.2 Cost efficiency KPI #2: Determined unit cost (DUC) for terminal ANS

3.4.3 Pension assumptions

3.4.4 Interest rate assumptions for loans financing the provision of air navigation services

3.4.5 Restructuring costs

3.5 ADDITIONAL KPIS / TARGETS

3.6 INTERDEPENDENCIES AND TRADE-OFFS

4 CROSS-BORDER INITIATIVES AND SESAR IMPLEMENTATION

4.1 CROSS-BORDER INITIATIVES AND SYNERGIES

4.1.1 Planned or implemented cross-border initiatives at the level of ANSPs

4.1.2 Investment synergies achieved at FAB level or through other cross-border initiatives

4.2 DEPLOYMENT OF SESAR COMMON PROJECT

4.3 CHANGE MANAGEMENT

5 TRAFFIC RISK SHARING ARRANGEMENTS AND INCENTIVE SCHEMES

5.1 TRAFFIC RISK SHARING PARAMETERS

5.2 CAPACITY INCENTIVE SCHEMES

5.2.1 Capacity incentive scheme - Enroute

5.2.2 Capacity incentive scheme - Terminal

5.3 OPTIONAL INCENTIVES

6 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PERFORMANCE PLAN

6.1 MONITORING OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

6.2 NON-COMPLIANCE WITH TARGETS DURING THE REFERENCE PERIOD

7 ANNEXES

ANNEX A. REPORTING TABLES & ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (EN-ROUTE)

ANNEX B. REPORTING TABLES & ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TERMINAL)

ANNEX C. CONSULTATION

ANNEX D. LOCAL TRAFFIC FORECASTS

ANNEX E. INVESTMENTS

ANNEX F. BASELINE VALUES (COST-EFFICIENCY)

ANNEX G. PARAMETERS FOR THE TRAFFIC RISK SHARING

ANNEX H. RESTRUCTURING MEASURES AND COSTS

ANNEX I. PARAMETERS FOR THE MANDATORY CAPACITY INCENTIVES

ANNEX J. OPTIONAL KPIs AND TARGETS

ANNEX K. OPTIONAL INCENTIVE SCHEMES

ANNEX L. JUSTIFICATION FOR SIMPLIFIED CHARGING SCHEME

ANNEX M. COST ALLOCATION

ANNEX N. CROSS-BORDER INITIATIVES

ANNEX O. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE LOCAL SAFETY TARGETS

ANNEX P. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT TARGETS

ANNEX Q. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE LOCAL CAPACITY TARGETS

ANNEX R. JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THE LOCAL COST-EFFICIENCY TARGETS

ANNEX S. INTERDEPENDENCIES

ANNEX T. OTHER MATERIAL

ANNEX Z. CORRECTIVE MEASURES*

* Only as per Article 15(6) of the Regulation

3

State name

Status of the Performance Plan

Date of issue

Date of adoption of Draft

Performance Plan

Date of adoption of Final

Performance Plan

Peter Pellegrini, Prime Minister of

Slovakia

Additional comments

Version Date Reason for change

v1.0 16/07/2019 Draft for the stakeholder consultation

There are no additional comments.

Document change record

Signatories

Performance plan details

Slovakia

Draft performance plan (Article 12)

16/07/2019

16/07/2019

We hereby confirm that the present performance plan is consistent with the scope of Regulation (EU) No 2019/317 pursuant to Article 1 of

Regulation (EU) No 2019/317 and Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004.

Name, title and signature of representative

4

1.1 The situation

1.1.1 - List of ANSPs and geographical coverage of services

1.1.2 - Other entities in the scope of the Performance and Charging Regulation as per Article 1(2) last para.

1.1.3 - Charging zones (see also 1.4-List of Airports)

1.1.4 - Other general information relevant to the plan

1.2 - Traffic Forecasts

1.2.1 - En route

1.2.2 - Terminal

1.3 - Stakeholder consultation

1.3.1 - Overall outcome of the consultation of stakeholders on the performance plan

1.3.2 - Specific consultation requirements of ANSPs and airspace users on the performance plan

1.3.3 - Consultation of stakeholder groups on the performance plan

1.4 - List of airports subject to the performance and charging Regulation

1.4.1 - Airports as per Article 1(3) (IFR movements ≥ 80 000)

1.4.2 Other airports added on a voluntary basis as per Article 1(4)

1.5 - Services under market conditions

1.6 - Process followed to develop and adopt a FAB Performance Plan

1.7 - Establishment and application of a simplified charging scheme

1.7.1 - Scope of the simplified charging scheme

1.7.2 - Conditions for the application of the simplified charging scheme

Annexes of relevance to this section




SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

5

1 - INTRODUCTION

NSA(s) responsible for drawing up the

Performance Plan

1.1.1 - List of ANSPs and geographical coverage and services

Number of ANSPs

ANSP name Services

LPS SR ASM, ATFM, ATC,

FIS, Alerting Services,

AIS, SAR, CNS

SHMUMET

Cross-border arrangements for the provision of ANS services

1

ANSP Name

LPS SR

1

ANSP Name

HungaroControl

1.1.2 - Other entities in the scope of the Performance and Charging Regulation as per Article 1(2) last para.

Number of other entities

Entity name Domain of activity

Transport AuthorityNational Supervisory

Authority

EUROCONTROL NM, CRCO

1.1.3 - Charging zones (see also 1.4-List of Airports)

En-route 1

En-route charging zone 1

Terminal 0

1.1.4 - Other general information relevant to the plan

1.1 - The situation

Transport Authority, Slovak Republic

Geographical scope

Letové prevádzkové služby Slovenskej republiky, štátny podnik (LPS SR) is responsible

for the provision of en-route services to civil air traffic within FIR Bratislava and

terminal services at the airports LZIB, LZKZ, LZTT, LZPP and LZZI.

The area of the Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute (SHMU) responsibility includes

FIR Bratislava and airports LZIB, LZKZ, LZTT, LZPP and LZZI.

Description and scope of the cross-border arrangement

ANSPs established in another Member State providing services in one or more of the State's FIRs

Description and scope of the cross-border arrangement

Number CB arrangements where ANSPs from another State provide services in the State

ATS within Kosice TMA 2 are provided by Kosice APP, as described in the AIP SR, ENR 2.

2

ANSPs providing services in the FIR of another State

Number CB arrangements where ANSPs provide services in an other State

Number of terminal charging zones

2

Number of en-route charging zones

Slovakia

Rationale for inclusion in the Performance Plan

Determined costs of this entity are included in the cost base chargeable to AUs. NSA is

responsible for Performance plan development, target setting, oversight of ANSPs,

other functions as required by applicable legislation.

Determined costs of this entity are included in the cost base chargeable to AUs.

ATS within RUTOL AREA are provided by Budapest ATCC, as described in the AIP SR, ENR 2. Search and rescue

coordination and operations provided by appropriate authorities of the Slovak Republic.

6


Additional comments

7

En route Charging zone 1

En route traffic forecast

STATFOR Base forecast FEB 2019 (Flight Plan 2017-19, Actual Route 2020-

2024) 2017A 2018A 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

CAGR

2019-2024

IFR movements (thousands) 515 567 605 633 647 664 680 696 2.8%

IFR movements (yearly variation in %) 10.1% 6.7% 4.6% 2.3% 2.6% 2.3% 2.4%

En route service units (thousands) 1,189 1,296 1,375 1,452 1,491 1,535 1,577 1,620 3.3%

En route service units (yearly variation in %) 9.0% 6.1% 5.5% 2.7% 3.0% 2.7% 2.7%

Not applicable.

1.2 - Traffic Forecasts

STATFOR Base forecast FEB 2019 (Flight Plan 2017-19, Actual Route 2020-2024)

Slovakia

1.2.1 - En route

1.2.2 - Terminal

8

1.3.1 - Overall outcome of the consultation of stakeholders on the performance plan

1.3.2 - Specific consultation requirements of ANSPs and airspace users on the performance plan

Topic of consultation Applicable Results of consultation

No

Charging policy Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

1.3.3 - Consultation of stakeholder groups on the performance plan

Stakeholder group composition

Dates of main meetings /

correspondence

Main issues discussed

Actions agreed upon

Points of disagreement and reasons

Final outcome of the consultation



correspondence


Actions agreed upon



Symmetric range ("dead band") for the purpose of the mandatory

incentive scheme on capacity

Establishment or modification of charging zones

Where applicable, values of the modulated parameters for the

traffic risk sharing mechanism

Where applicable, decision to apply the simplified charging scheme

#1 - ANSPs

Additional comments

New and existing investments, and in particular new major

investments, including their expected benefits

1.3 - Stakeholder consultation

Establishment of determined costs included in the cost base for

charges

Maximum financial advantages and disadvantages for the

mandatory incentive scheme on capacity

Where applicable, decision to diverge from the STATFOR base

forecast

Not applicable in this version. Will be described after the consultation(s).

Description of main points raised by stakeholders and explanation of how they were taken into account in developing the performance plan

Where applicable, decision to modulate performance targets for

the purpose of pivot values to be used for the mandatory incentive

scheme on capacity

#2 - Airspace Users

Additional comments

9



correspondence


Actions agreed upon





correspondence


Actions agreed upon





correspondence


Actions agreed upon





correspondence


Actions agreed upon



#3 - Professional staff representative bodies

Additional comments

#4 - Airport operators

Additional comments

#5 - Airport coordinator

Additional comments

#6 - Other (specify)

Additional comments

10

1.4 - List of airports subject to the performance and charging Regulation

1.4.1 - Airports as per Article 1(3) (IFR movements ≥ 80 000)

ICAO code Airport name Charging Zone 2016 2017 2018 Average

1.4.2 Other airports added on a voluntary basis as per Article 1(4)

Number of airports

ICAO code Airport name Charging Zone

Additional comments

Slovakia has no airport with at least 80.000 IFR movements per year where the Performance and Charging Regulation (Implementing Regulation

2019/317) applies to terminal ANS by default. In addition, Slovakia decided to not apply the provisions of the Regulation to terminal ANS at any

airport within the country with fewer than 80.000 IFR movements per year.

IFR air transport movements

0

Additional information

11

1.5 - Services under market conditions

Number of services under market conditions 0

12

1.6 - Process followed to develop and adopt a FAB Performance Plan

Not applicable

Description of the process

13

1.7 - Establishment and application of a simplified charging scheme

Is the State intending to establish and apply a simplified charging scheme for any charging zone/ANSP?No

14

2.1 - Investments - LPS SR

2.1.1 - Summary of investments

2.1.2 - Detail of new major investments

2.1.3 - Other new and existing investments

2.2 - Investments - SHMU






NOTE: The requirements as per Annex II, 2.2.(c) are addressed in item 4.1.2

SECTION 2: INVESTMENTS

15

2.1 - Investments - LPS SR


2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Enroute Terminal

1 Data Link Service Implementation 5,869,600 5,869,600 0 8,698 175,432 732,526 732,526 8 92% 8% 31/12/2022

5,869,600 5,869,600 0 8,698 175,432 732,526 732,526

14,864,431 14,864,431 381,635 1,317,333 2,395,164 2,334,782 2,357,660

19,503,272 19,503,272 7,300,311 7,134,735 6,688,849 7,492,480 7,281,562

40,237,303 40,237,303 7,681,946 8,460,766 9,259,446 10,559,788 10,371,748


Yes

No

Yes

Replacement

investment

Master Plan (non-

PCP)

Allocation (%)*

* The total % enroute+terminal should be equal to 100%.

Value of the

assets allocated to

ANS in the scope

of the PP

#

Sub-total of new major investments

above (1)

Sub-total other new investments (2)

Sub-total existing investments (3)

Total new and existing investments (1)

+ (2) + (3)

If investment in ATM system, type?

Description of the asset

Benefits for airspace users and results of the consultation of

airspace users' representatives

NOTE: Section 1.3 (Stakeholder Consultation) should include details on the consultation with airspace users' representatives on new major investments.

Data Link Service Implementation in the ATM system

Name of new major investment 1 Data Link Service Implementation Total value of the asset 5,869,600 €

Joint investment / partnership

Investment in ATM systems

The investment is mandated by a SES Regulation (i.e.

PCP/Interoperability)? Ref. to the Regulation and, if funded

through Union assistance programmes, ref. to the relevant

grant agreement.)

1Number of new major investments

Planned date of

entry into

operation

Name of new major investment

(i.e. above 5 M€)

Total value of the asset

(capex or contractual

leasing value)

Determined costs of investment (i.e. depreciation, cost of capital and cost of leasing) (in

national currency)Lifecycle

(Amortisation

period in years)

If investment in ATM system, Reference to European

ATM Master Plan / PCP

16


Maintaining the high-quality level in provision of air navigation services during the third reference period (2020 – 2024) in terms of the European ATM Master Plan and SES

legislation will be supported by investment projects including:

- Enhancement of the Free Route Airspace concept;

- Establishment of technological infrastructure for essential System Wide Information Management applications;

- Improvement services and procedures related to cybersecurity in ATM;

- Enhancement of ADS-B / MLAT coverage;

- Improvement of VoIP deployment;

- Further support of GNSS implementation.

Together with activities in the above-mentioned domains of development, some projects started in RP2 are going to be concluded in coming years. Particularly, the DLS

service implementation is currently at appropriate level of development, however intended real usage still requires certain effort. Deployment of VoIP, due to numerous

complex requirements on its interoperability and communication performance, will need more practical solutions of which operational availability depends on cooperation

among manufactures of voice communication switch technology, radio ground stations and recording systems. Their impact on the related projects is significantly higher

than was estimated when these projects had been started. Based on test results of the VoIP pilot platform operation the original project on VoIP implementation and VCSs

upgrade has been revised.

Another group of projects is planned on gradual upgrade of the communication infrastructure and information technology to be capable to accommodate both technical

and operation measures of the cybersecurity and requirements of the SWIM applications and services. Some infrastructural systems and their components will be

replaced due to reaching the end of their operational lives.

The 2020-2024 New Investments Summary can be found in Annex E. Investments.

Description and justification of the costs nature and benefits of

other new and existing investments in fixed assets planned over

the reference period

17

2.2 - Investments - SHMU


2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Enroute Terminal

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1,269,400 1,269,400 364,000 316,700 250,700 288,000 50,000

0 0 0 0 0

1,269,400 1,269,400 364,000 316,700 250,700 288,000 50,000



Description and justification of the costs nature and benefits of

other new and existing investments in fixed assets planned over

the reference period

Other and new investments of SHMU will be focused on:

• The modernization of existing AWOS MET equipment (transmissometers/forwardscattermeters, ceilometers, anemometers, HD cameras for weather monitoring,

electronic barometers, etc.).

• The purchase and installation of wind profiler (to cover the rest of the input costs for LZTT).

Additional notes:

• The value of investment costs is estimated and will depend on the result of public procurement.

• The investment costs will be divided (into operating costs) proportionally to each year of the RP3 (this will prevent significant year-on-year differences, except for the

year 2024).

• Due to the fact that SHMU, and its division AMS, is government subsidized organization, it is not eligible to draw a bank loan or other external form of financing.

Therefore, when there is a need to acquire new equipment (e.g. in year 2020 for 100,000 euro), only way how to finance it is directly through ANS fees (thus cash amount

of 100,000 euro needs to be obtained in 2020). From this reason, any acquisition of new equipment is presented in item “Other operating cost” in 2020 in amount 100,000

euro as opposed to presenting depreciation relating to that asset in the item “Depreciation” (i.e. if depreciation period is 4 years, depreciation in 2020-2023 would be

annually 25,000 euro, but SHMU presents and claims annually zero). Such presentation of costs is practically on cash basis as opposed to accrual basis; however, as the

purchases of equipment are evenly spread over the upcoming years, final effect of both methods in long term basis will arrive in the same result. Note that SHMU do not

claim the cost of capital.

#Name of new major investment

(i.e. above 5 M€)

Total value of the asset

(capex or contractual

leasing value)

Value of the

assets allocated to

ANS in the scope

of the PP

Sub-total existing investments (3)

Total new and existing investments (1)

+ (2) + (3)

* The total % enroute+terminal should be equal to 100%.

NOTE: Section 1.3 (Stakeholder Consultation) should include details on the consultation with airspace users' representatives on new major investments.

Determined costs of investment (i.e. depreciation, cost of capital and cost of leasing) (in

national currency)Lifecycle

(Amortisation

period in years)

Allocation (%)*

There are no new major investments planned for RP3.

Planned date of

entry into

operation

Sub-total of new major investments

above (1)

Sub-total other new investments (2)

18

3.1 - Safety targets

3.1.1 - Safety KPI #1: Level of Effectiveness of Safety Management achieved by ANSPs

3.2 - Environment targets

3.2.1 - Environment KPI #1: Horizontal en route flight efficiency (KEA)

3.3 - Capacity targets

3.3.1 - Capacity KPI #1: En route ATFM delay per flight

3.3.2 - Capacity KPI #2: Terminal and airport ANS ATFM arrival delay per flight

3.4 - Cost efficiency targets

3.4.1 - Cost efficiency KPI #1: Determined unit cost (DUC) for en route ANS

En Route Charging Zone #x

3.4.2 - Cost efficiency KPI #2: Determined unit cost (DUC) for terminal ANS

Terminal Charging Zone #x

3.4.3 - Pension assumptions

3.4.4 - Interest rate assumptions for loans financing the provision of air navigation services

3.4.5 - Restructuring costs

3.5 - Additional KPIs / Targets

3.6 - Description of KPAs interdependencies and trade-offs including the assumptions used to assess those trade-offs

3.6.1 - Interdependencies and trade-offs between safety and other KPAs

3.6.2 - Interdependencies and trade-offs between capacity and environment

3.6.3 - Interdependencies and trade-offs between cost-efficiency and capacity

3.6.4 - Other interdependencies and trade-offs












SECTION 3: PERFORMANCE TARGETS AND MEASURES FOR THEIR ACHIEVEMENT

19



a) Safety national performance targets

b) Detailed justifications in case of inconsistency between local and Union-wide safety targets

c) Main measures put in place to achieve the safety performance targets



SECTION 3.1: SAFETY KPA

20

3 - PERFORMANCE TARGETS AT LOCAL LEVEL



a) Safety performance targets

Number of Air Traffic Service Providers

Safety policy and objectives N/A N/A N/A N/A C

Safety risk management N/A N/A N/A N/A D

Safety assurance N/A N/A N/A N/A C

Safety promotion N/A N/A N/A N/A C

Safety culture N/A N/A N/A N/A C

Additional comments

b) Detailed justifications in case of inconsistency between local and Union-wide safety targets

c) Main measures put in place to achieve the safety performance targets

1

Slovakia has either met or exceeded the safety targets during RP2. The safety processes meet the high standards and it is expected that Slovakia will be able to

meet the European targets in the safety domain without difficulties. The processes will continue to develop to enable meeting and exceeding the expectations.

Slovakia has already achieved a very good level of mandatory and voluntary reports and will maintain set trend. There are three entities involved in occurrence

reporting - LPS SR, the Transport Authority (TA) and the Aviation and Maritime Investigation Authority (AIB). LPS SR has an internal procedure whereby all

occurrences are sent to the AIB. The AIB then assigns an identification number in the ECCAIRS 5 system and forwards it to the TA, where a competent employee

enters data into ECCAIRS 5. The TA uses the EASTER system to generate AST from ECCAIRS 5. This procedure has been in place for five years. Within Just Culture in

Slovakia, a system of voluntary reports has been established via the web portal of the TA. KPI occurrences are evaluated by RAT methodology. Trends are

monitored by AST and evaluated on a half yearly basis. Slovakia also uses the ALS/TLS system for occurrences.

LPS SRThe targets in 2024 have been set in accordance with the COMMISSION

IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2019/903 of 29 May 2019. The data for the years

2020-2023 are not available and the targets will be published once the expected

AMC and guidance is available.

There is no inconsistency between local and Union-wide safety targets. Local safety performance targets respect the COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU)

2019/903 of 29 May 2019.

21



a) Environment national performance targets

b) Detailed justifications in case of inconsistency between national targets and national reference values

c) Main measures put in place to achieve the environment performance targets



SECTION 3.2: ENVIRONMENT KPA

22



a) National environment performance targets

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Target Target Target Target Target

2.10% 2.05% 1.99% 1.99% 1.99%

2.10% 2.05% 1.99% 1.99% 1.99%


c) Main measures put in place to achieve the environment performance targets

Slovakia has been a part of the SEEN FRA area enabling the airspace users to plan their flights freely across the airspace of 4 states - Bulgaria, Hungary,

Romania and Slovakia, from 6 December 2018. From April 2019, 24-hour FRA (BRAFRA) has been implemented within Slovakian airspace, which is

mentioned as one of the major improvement projects in the European Network Operations Plan 2019-2024 implemented during the Winter of 2018/19.

LPS SR plans to extend the SEEN FRA availability for longer periods of day (from 00:00-06:00 to 21:00-07:00). From 7 November 2019 the three countries

initiating the SEEN FRA programme (Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania) will extend the availability of cross-border FRA operations across the entire day with

the introduction of the South East Europe Free Route Airspace (SEE FRA) project. Slovakia is expected to join the 24-hour cross-border FRA environment in

2021/2022, subject to evaluation of the experience gained from SEEN FRA.

On FAB CE level, enhanced sectorisation is planned to be implemented in accordance with the FAB CE Airspace Plan. Particularly, LPS SR experts and the

NM are involved in a FAB CE airspace redesign task force, which has been set up recently to address the Central/South East Europe airspace restructuring

project which is expected to impact both capacity and environment.

There is no inconsistency between national targets and national reference values. National environment performance targets respect the "Reference

values for the average horizontal flight efficiency on the actual trajectory (KEA) for the third reference period (RP3)" published on 5 July 2019.

However, it needs to be noted that in the current environment and with respect to the plan to achieve the 24-hour cross-border FRA within the RP3, LPS

SR will have limited scope for additional significant improvement of the horizontal en route flight efficiency. This will mostly depend on other factors

outside of the ANSP's control such as airspace users' decision making and route choices, weather or NM measures. The experience from RP2 shows a

strong correlation between the observed weather phenomena (especially CBs during summer period) and the actual trajectories flown, thus deviating

significantly from the originally filed flight planned routes. Moreover, the impact of the geopolitical developments and the resulting variety of traffic

flows led to unfavourable trajectories.

The KEP indicator, although not RP2 monitored, shows a continues improvement in Slovakia from 4.01% in 2014 to 3.72% in 2018. This doubtlessly proves

the positive effect of permanent Airspace Design improvements like SEEN FRA and other regional initiatives, such as SECSI FRA, in the FAB CE region and

beyond. For various reasons, this offer has not been adequately used by all airspace users. LPS SR will continue investing significant effort into improving

its services and ensuring the airspace users can plan their preferred routes without any significant limitations.

National reference values

National targets

23



a) Capacity national performance targets


c) Main measures put in place to achieve the target for en-route ATFM delay per flight

d) ATCO planning


a) Capacity national performance targets

b) Contribution to the improvement of the European ATM network performance

c) Main measures put in place to achieve the target for terminal and airport ANS ATFM arrival delay per flight



SECTION 3.3: CAPACITY KPA

24



a) National capacity performance targets

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024


National reference values 0.18 0.19 0.16 0.09 0.10

National targets 0.60 0.60 0.50 0.30 0.10


There is currently a capacity gap in the Bratislava ACC which is mentioned in the latest European Network Operation Plan 2019-2024 published in June

2019 as one of the 19 ACCs expected to generate delays at higher levels than the network capacity requirements. The ENOP foresees that due to the

unforeseen increase of traffic over the past years, particularly in summer 2018, structural lack of capacity might be anticipated for Bratislava ACC for

the period of 2019-2024, especially based on the current routes scenario. The forecasted delay is between 0.71-0.80 min/flight in 2019-2020

(compared to the reference values of 0.10 min/flight in 2019 and 0.18 min/flight in 2020) and around 0.92-1.54 min/flight in 2021-2024 (compared to

the reference values of 0.19-0.10 min/flight). Main reasons for the expected lack of capacity are continuous high traffic demand and lack of available

ATCOs. The lack of ATCOs is a consequence of the focus on improving cost efficiency during RP1 and early years of RP2 when there was a significant

capacity surplus in the ACC. LPS SR strived to identify potential market opportunities that would generate additional revenues and contribute to

reducing the chargeable cost base for users. With the accelerated growth of traffic, LPS SR has revisited its strategy and made changes in the ATCO

selection and recruitment process, as well as changes to the training processes as its highest priority in order to ensure the needed capacity. To

address the structural lack of capacity and ATCO shortage, LPS SR has initiated a number of improvement measures and intensified the recruitment

process (these measures are further described in the following sections). Implementation of these changes however took longer time and the

recruitment and training capacity was overtaken by the very high traffic growth, notably in 2018 when Bratislava ACC experienced an increase of

11.7% in traffic during the Summer period. This resulted in a widening of the capacity gap and increase of delays beyond the expectations. The

proposed changes in the recruitment and training process are expected to bring the benefits, however, the capacity gap is expected to start reducing

around in 2022. Due to these facts and the expected capacity gap in the coming period, Slovakia decided to deviate the national targets from the

national reference values, especially for the first two years of the RP3 which will be followed by continuous descent to meet the national reference

value at the end of RP3.

Slovakia understands that the inconsistency between national targets and national reference values will not be appreciated by the airspace users,

however, the reference values are considered as highly unrealistic. In order to support this case and prove that this step is not aimed at generating

any bonuses for lack of performance, Slovakia decided to apply a "penalty-only" capacity incentive scheme for en-route, which is further described in

Section 5.2.1.

Over the first four years of RP2 (2015 – 2018) the cumulative traffic growth in Slovakia was 30.0% (even above the STATFOR High scenario for the

given period). Yet, Slovakia has had an excellent track record in terms of handling the strong traffic growths for most of the RP2 so far. In 2015, the

actual en-route delay was 0.08 min/flight compared to the target value of 0.1 min/flight, in 2016 it was 0.03 min/flight compared to the target of 0.1

min/flight, while in 2017 there was a 0.03 min/flight delay compared to the planned 0.1 min/flight. The excellent track record, recognized also by PRB

in its Advice to the Commission on Union-wide Targets from September 2018, has to be viewed also in the light of the virtually overnight change in

traffic caused by the closure of the Ukrainian airspace following the MH17 flight incident in July 2014.

Year 2018 again saw a continuous significant traffic growth of approximately 10.1% (11.7% during Summer 2018) in Slovakia, when the delay target

was not met for the first time in RP2. The annual target delay for 2018 was planned at 0.1 min/flight, while the actual delay was at 0.21 min/flight. The

worsened performance in 2018 can be attributed to several external factors. Certainly, the most important contributor was almost the double actual

traffic growth (10.1%) compared to the planned increase of 5.4% for 2018 (which was already the high scenario value). Another major factor, which

saw an unprecedented increase, was the weather which constituted 36% of the delay in Slovakia in 2018. These two major factors combined in turn

placed a huge demand on the available capacity, which was planned, provided and available according to the levels planned in the Performance Plan

for RP2. The available capacity could thus not be further stretched in a short-term manner in such a way that accommodating the additional traffic

and peak periods would not generate delays above the target.

25

In any case, it needs to be emphasized that meeting the expected performance and national targets for en-route ATFM delay per flight also depends

on other factors which are not under direct control of the local ANSP(s). These are mainly:

• Continuous traffic growth: in terms of volume (cumulative growth of 30.0% between 2015 and 2018; more recently also the effects of the NM

measures (while minor for Slovakia in 2018, the impact is expected to be higher in 2019 and beyond)) but also in terms of complexity;

• Nature of the traffic: both in terms of high traffic volatility (seasonally, but also from the week/day/hour distribution perspective) and high

unpredictability (long-term predictability issues with flights from Russia and the various airspace closures (e.g. Eastern Ukraine, Syria, Libya); short-

term predictability issues with airspace users not adhering to their flight plans which causes high complexity in planning of the sector opening

scheme; additional impacts of actions by the NM and upstream ANSPs);

• Weather: it is expected that recent trend of increasingly frequent disruptive weather will continue to further impact the performance and

consequently the capacity in a noteworthy way; disruptions in surrounding FIRs need to be considered due to unpredictable re-routing of traffic

through the Slovak airspace.

• Outcomes of the FAB CE Airspace Task Force: possible changes to the most optimum airspace structure and associated uncertainties might stem

also from the application of recommendations from European Airspace Architecture Study, especially, from the Airspace Structural Bottlenecks

project led by NM (Central-South East Europe airspace - Project 3).

26

c) Main measures put in place to achieve the target for en-route ATFM delay per flight

d) ATCO planning

Actual

Bratislava (LZBB ACC) 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Number of additional ATCOs in OPS planned to start

working in the OPS room (FTEs)- 10.6 6.3 2.0 0.7 6.0

Number of ATCOs in OPS planned to stop working in the

OPS room (FTEs)0.7 1.7 - 1.3 - -

Number of ATCOs in OPS planned to be operational at

year-end (FTEs)54.3 53.6 62.6 68.8 69.5 70.2 76.2

In the long-term:

• Intensive ATCO recruitment and training will continue to ensure both the necessary ATCO retention along with adding additional ATCOs necessary

to handle the increased capacity demands and decrease the ATCO overtimes (which increased in average from 49 hrs/ATCO in 2015 to 137 hrs/ATCO

in 2018).

• Following the ATM system hardware upgrade, Air/Ground DataLink (AGDL) functionality will be fully operational in 2021. Following the AGDL

implementation outcome and experience gained from another ANSPs, a revaluation and increase of physical sector capacity is expected in 2022.

• LPS SR will continue implementing improved ATFCM techniques, including STAM throughout the RP3. DAM/STAM project has been concluded in

cooperation with FAB CE partners in 2019.

• Procedure designers will continue improving route network and sectorisation of Slovak airspace in coordination with the NM. Assuming the planned

increase in the number of ATCOs by 2021, it will be possible to increase the number of available sectors in the peak periods to 7 in 2022 (after AGDL

training and implementation in 2021), with a goal of 8 sectors available in the end of RP3 (currently, max 5 sectors are opened in the peak periods).

• On FAB CE level, enhanced sectorisation will continue being implemented in accordance with the FAB CE Airspace Plan. Particularly, a FAB CE

airspace redesign task force, with involvement of LPS SR experts, has been set up recently to address the Central/South East Europe airspace

restructuring project. The results of these activities are however not known at the time of preparation of this Performance Plan.

• LPS SR will continue with FRA implementation according to PCP.

In addition to the measures above, LPS SR will remain engaged in every initiative, be it on national, regional or European level that would meaningfully

contribute to providing sufficient capacity to its customers.

Planning

A number of measures is planned to be put in place to achieve the national targets for en-route ATFM delay per flight within the third reference

period. In the short-term:

• Sufficient level of ATCO staff is a crucial precondition for provision of sufficient capacity to customers. In the RP3, LPS SR will take all the steps

necessary to reach optimal number of ATCO staff – addressing current insufficiency as well as training additional ATCO personnel in order to meet the

increased demand for capacity (see the following section for more details).

• In 2020, horizontal East/West sector configuration will be introduced in order to better accommodate the change in flight patterns and divide the

busiest sector in 2017 and 2018. This way needs of LPS SR’s customers will be better served.

• LPS SR has also been investing significant effort in optimization of sectors opening times so that increased capacity can be provided in a more

flexible manner respecting the current needs reassessed on a weekly basis. More sectors can then be opened at certain times to better handle the

peak periods and expected demand.

• In the first year of the RP3, ATM system hardware upgrade will be finalized, having positive impact on capacity by reducing the ATCO workload.

• LPS SR connection to SEENFRA has been already implemented along with the launch of BRAFRA. LPS SR will consider extending SEEN FRA availability

for longer periods of the day according to the common decision making process with the partners involved in SEEN FRA. The other X-border FRA

options will be considered if the proposal arises.

Additional comments

As described in the above sections, the lack of available ATCOs is one of the main reasons affecting the current capacity gap within the Slovak

airspace. There are currently 53.6 ATCOs in FTE. By 2024, the goal number of ATCOs with ACS qualification category at ACC Bratislava is 76.2 in FTE

(taking into account the natural loss of employees due to retirement).

Changes to the ATCO selection and training process were already initiated in 2017/2018 and are continually adjusted. The whole training was slightly

reduced timewise, while approach to the selection process and methodology was changed. The selection process consists of 7 qualitative and

selective stages, instead of 5 in the past. Due to these changes, the selection process for ATCO training success rate is now at 1% (compared to 11%

before), but less ATCO students are now expected to drop out in the later stages of the training compared to the past. The changes to the selection

process are accompanied with continuous recruitment, publicly advertised in the media, brining 4 times more applicants than before. From 1/2018

until 3/2019 LPS SR registered 1700 applicants for the ATCO training. In 2018, 9 applicants were admitted to training (7 continuing in the training),

while 10 have been admitted so far in 2019 (6 continuing in the training). There are currently 6 students in OJT training at ACC Bratislava.

27

In addition, LPS SR actively participates in dedicated working groups within ICAO and EU that deal with the issue of "Next Generation of Aviation

Professionals". This is bringing new knowledge and best practices from other partners and experts in the field and allows a continuous improvement

of both recruitment and training processes.

In order to make the training more effective, there were changes made in the training structure as well. Due to the need to increase the success rate

of new ATCOs at ACC Bratislava, PRE-INITIO training was included in the overall training process from April 2018. The aim of this training is to verify

the abilities of candidates selected for ATCO position at ACC Bratislava (to confirm the selection procedure). Successful completion of PRE-INITIO

training is a prerequisite for the inclusion of candidates selected for ACC Bratislava in Initial Training. During this training, the instructors from ACC

Bratislava assess the students in areas such as the ability to maintain a situational awareness, identify conflicts in a timely manner, manage stress,

become aware of responsibility and cooperate in team. At the same time, during this training, the candidates are better exploring details of the work

of an ATCO, which leads to a better understanding of the topics in Basic Training.

The assessment of the practical exercises changed as well with the purpose to increase the success rate. The system is newly set up so that the

students complete a block of unrated exercises during which the instructor teaches them and leads to the achievement of the set goals. Each block of

unrated exercises is followed by a summary evaluation during which the evaluator evaluates whether the individual student achieves the desired

goals. Until this change came into effect, the system was set up so that every one of the exercises that the students completed were assessed by the

instructor through the so-called "Formative assessment".

The change also occurred in on-site training, where the various phases of training (pre-OJT and OJT) were integrated to speed up the training process

and streamline performance objectives in training.

28


a) National capacity performance targets

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024


N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

National capacity performance targets are not applicable in case of Slovakia which has no airport with at least 80.000 IFR movements per year where the

Performance and Charging Regulation (Implementing Regulation 2019/317) applies to terminal ANS by default. In addition, Slovakia decided to not apply the

provisions of the Regulation to terminal ANS at any airport within the country with fewer than 80.000 IFR movements per year.

National targets

Additional commentsNot applicable as no airport within Slovakia is included in the Performance Plan.

29



En Route Charging Zone #x


Terminal Charging Zone #x


3.4.3.1 Total pension costs

3.4.3.2 Assumptions for the "State" pension scheme

3.4.3.3 Assumptions for the occupational "Defined contributions" pension scheme

3.4.3.4 Assumptions for the occupational "Defined benefits" pension scheme



3.4.5.1 Restructuring costs from previous reference periods to be recovered in RP3

3.4.5.2 Restructuring costs planned for RP3








NOTE: The following requirements as per Annex II, 3.3 are addressed in the Annexes A and B:

SECTION 3.4: COST-EFFICIENCY KPA

a) Baseline value for the determined costs and the determined unit costs (in real terms and in national currency)

b) Cost-efficiency performance targets

c) Description and justification of the methodology used to estimate the baseline values

d) Justification for the level of the baseline value for the determined costs in comparison with the latest available actual costs

e) Description and justification of the consistency between local and Union-wide cost-efficiency targets

f) Main measures put in place to achieve the targets for determined unit cost (DUC) for en route ANS




Point 3.3 (f) on assumptions for pension costs and interest on debt for other entities, inflation forecast and adjustments beyong IFRS;

Point 3.3 (g) on adjustments to the unit rates carried over from previous reference periods;

Point 3.3 (h) on costs exempt from cost-sharing;

Point 3.3 (k) reporting tables and additional informations.


e) Description and justification of the contribution of the the local targets to the performance of the European ATM network

f) Main measures put in place to achieve the targets for determined unit cost (DUC) for terminal ANS

Point 3.3 (d) on cost-allocation;

Point 3.3 (e) on the return on equity and cost of capital;

30



En Route Charging Zone #1 - Slovakia


2019 baseline value for the determined costs (in real terms and in national currency) 65,054,305

2019 latest available service units forecast (actual route flown, see point 1.2 of Annex VIII) 1,381,651

2019 baseline value for the determined unit costs (in real terms and in national currency) 47.08


En route charging zone Baseline 2014 Baseline 2019 RP3 Performance Plan (determined 2020-2024) CAGR CAGR

Slovakia 2014B 2019 B 2020 D 2021 D 2022 D 2023 D 2024 D 2014A-2024D 2019B-2024D

Total en route costs in nominal terms (in national currency) 69,447,524 71,215,861 73,088,951 74,942,879 76,955,454

Total en route costs in real terms (in national currency at 2017 prices) 59,768,483 65,054,305 65,619,365 66,188,126 66,803,500 67,337,627 68,023,904 1.3% 0.9%

YoY variation 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 1.0%

Total en route Service Units (TSU) 1,049,058 1,381,651 1,451,523 1,490,699 1,534,898 1,577,088 1,620,282 4.4% 3.2%

YoY variation 5.1% 2.7% 3.0% 2.7% 2.7%

Real en route unit costs (in national currency at 2017 prices) 56.97 47.08 45.21 44.40 43.52 42.70 41.98 -3.0% -2.3%

YoY variation -4.0% -1.8% -2.0% -1.9% -1.7%

Real en route unit costs (in EUR2017) 1 56.97 47.08 45.21 44.40 43.52 42.70 41.98 -3.0% -2.3%

YoY variation -4.0% -1.8% -2.0% -1.9% -1.7%

National currency EUR

1 Average exchange rate 2017 (1 EUR=) 1.00

31


* Refer to Annex F, if necessary.


* Refer to Annex F, if necessary.

e) Description and justification of the consistency between local and Union-wide cost-efficiency targets

* Refer to Annex R, if necessary.

f) Main measures put in place to achieve the targets for determined unit cost (DUC) for en route ANS

* Refer to Annex R, if necessary.

Please, refer to ANNEX F. BASELINE VALUES (COST-EFFICIENCY).

Please, refer to ANNEX F. BASELINE VALUES (COST-EFFICIENCY).

There is no inconsistency between local and Union-wide cost-efficiency targets. Although, the year-on-year change of the Real en route unit costs (in national currency at 2017 prices) does not meet the target of -1,9%, this is only due to

the significant drop of unit cost in 2020 (-4.0%). The Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) over 2019B-2024D is -2.3% and CAGR over 2014A-2024D is -3.0% which is even above the Union-wide performance targets in the key

performance area of cost-efficiency specified in the COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) 2019/903 of 29 May 2019.

Not applicable. The targets for determined unit cost (DUC) for en route ANS will be achieved.

32


Not applicable.

33


3.4.3.1 Total pension costs (in nominal terms in '000 national currency)

2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

6,431 6,735 6,993 7,276 7,579

En-route activity

Terminal activity

3.4.3.2 Assumptions for the "State" pension scheme (in nominal terms in '000 national currency)

2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

30,700 31,912 32,898 33,972 34,875

17% 17% 17% 17% 17%

4,149 4,377 4,572 4,787 5,032

490 495 500 503 505

3.4.3.3 Assumptions for the occupational "Defined contributions" pension scheme (in nominal terms in '000 national currency)

2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

30,700 31,912 32,898 33,972 34,875

6% 6% 6% 6% 6%

1,842 1,914 1,974 2,038 2,092

490 495 500 503 505

Other activities

Pension costs

Description of the assumptions underlying the calculations of pension costs comprised in the determined costs

The method of calculation is given by legislation. The amount of contribution is set by collective agreement at a rate of 6% of employee‘s gross wage. Planned

amounts are based on the staff number plan and their planned salary assessment.

Total pension costs


The method of calculation and the amount of contributions are given by legislation. Planned amounts are based on the staff number plan and their planned

salary assessment.

LPS SR

Number of employees the employer contributes for in this scheme

The method of calculation and the amount of contributions are given by legislation. From this perspective, the associated costs are beyond the control of the

ANSP. Planned amounts are based on the staff number plan and their planned salary assessment. With regard to these parameters actual figures may differ from

the plan, while the ANSP‘s influence remains limited.

Employer % contribution rate to this scheme

Total pension costs in respect of this scheme

<Staff category name>

Total pensionable payroll to which this scheme applies


Description on the relevant national pension regulations and pension accounting regulations on which the assumptions are based, as well as information whether

changes of those regulations are to be expected during RP3



This item includes pension contributions related to the so-called I. and II. Pension Pillars which are compulsory for employees by law. They are regulated by §128

to §147 of the Act No. 461/2003 Coll. on Social Insurance. Contributions are paid by employer at certain percentage on top of gross wage subject to maximum

contribution base defined as a given number (currently 7) of average wages in Slovak Republic for two preceding years as published by the Statistical Office.

Determined pension costs were calculated per each employee (existing or assumed position) and per each month based on assumed wage and using legislation

valid at the time of elaboration of this Performance plan. An annual social insurance settlement is to be introduced from 2022, but its impact cannot be

quantified yet.

NoAre there different contribution rates for different staff categories? If yes, how many?

Are there different contribution rates for different staff categories? If yes, how many? No

<Staff category name>




Describe the actions taken ex-ante to manage the cost-risk (cost increase) associated with this item, as well as the actions taken to limit the impact of the

unforeseen change on the costs to be passed on to airspace users

This item includes pension contributions related to the so-called III. Pension Pillar which are optional except for employees in the 3rd risk group (ATCO), whose

participation is mandatory. Contributions are regulated by the Act No. 650/2004 Coll. on Supplementary Pension Savings. There are four asset management

companies in Slovakia and employees can voluntarily choose one of them. This option is used by all employees.

34

3.4.3.4 Assumptions for the occupational "Defined benefits" pension scheme (in nominal terms in '000 national currency)

2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

440 444 447 451 455


The method of calculation is given by legislation. The amount of contribution is set both by the legislation and collective agreement. Planned costs are based on

the staff number plan, their planned salary assessment and specific social and economic parameters (e.g. average life expectancy, inflation).

The method of calculation and the amount of contributions are given both by legislation and collective agreement. From this perspective, the associated costs are

controllable by the ANSP only in part. Planned amounts are based on the staff number plan, their planned salary assessment and specific social and economic

parameters expected at the time of assessment. With regard to these parameters actual figures may differ from the plan, while the ANSP‘s influence remains

limited.

Is the occupational "Defined benefits" pension scheme funded? No

Does the ANSP assume liability for meeting future obligations for the occupational "Defined benefits" scheme? Yes



The method of calculation and the amount of contributions are given both by legislation and collective agreement. From this perspective, the associated costs are

controllable by the ANSP only in part. Planned amounts are based on the staff number plan and their planned salary assessment. With regard to these

parameters actual figures may differ from the plan, while the ANSP‘s influence remains limited.



Where, in the Reporting Tables, some occupational "defined benefits" costs (e.g. interest expense related to pensions) are reported in other cost item(s) than

staff costs, the cost item(s) should be indicated here below along with corresponding explanations.

Not applicable.







This item includes both short-term and long-term retirement provision, which is paid to employees as a single payment on their retirement. Related costs are

partly determined by legislation (Act. No. 311/2001 Coll. Labour Code) and partly by the collective agreement.

35


2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

- - - - -

2020D 2021D 2022D 2023D 2024D

0 0 0 0 0

- - - - -

0 0 0 0 0

LPS SR

Select number of loans Select

Interest rate assumptions for loans financing the provision of air navigation services

(Amounts in nominal terms in '000 national currency)

Total remaining balance

Average weighted interest rate %

Interest amount

Total loans

Other loans

Description

Not applicable as no loan is currently planned for RP3. This decision might be revisited once

there is a need for more resources to fund the closure of the capacity gap and/or meet the

regulatory requirements stemming from SESAR and other European initiatives, such as the

European Airspace Architecture Study.

Remaining balance

Average weighted interest rate %

Interest amount

36


3.4.5.1 Restructuring costs from previous reference periods to be recovered in RP3

3.4.5.2 Restructuring costs planned for RP3

Restructuring costs foreseen for RP3? No

NoRestructuring costs from previous reference periods approved by the European Commission?

Additional comments


37

3.5 Additional KPIs / Targets



SECTION 3.5: ADDITIONAL KPIS / TARGETS

38

3.6 - Description of KPAs interdependencies and trade-offs including the assumptions used to assess those trade-offs





SECTION 3.6: DESCRIPTION OF KPAS INTERDEPENDENCIES AND TRADE-OFFS INCLUDING THE

ASSUMPTIONS USED TO ASSESS THOSE TRADE-OFFS

39

3.6 - Description of KPAs interdependencies and trade-offs including the assumptions used to assess those trade-

offs


a) Do the measures to reach the targets in the different KPAs require changes in the ANSP functional system that have safety implications? If

yes, which mitigation measures are put in place?

The planned changes to reach the targets in the different KPAs do not require changes of the functional system that would have any negative

safety implications. LPS SR has developed robust procedures for assessing the impact of any change on safety and will consistently apply these

processes, as well as maintain and further develop them in accordance with the latest requirements.

b) What are the main assumptions used to assess the interdependencies between safety and other KPAs?

Safety KPA is the key element and has the highest priority. Slovakia is fully aware that safety shall not be by any circumstance compromised.

c) What metrics, other than those indicators described in the Regulation, are you monitoring during RP3 to ensure targets in the KPAs of

capacity , environment, and cost-efficiency are not degrading safety?

Not applicable.

d) Do targets allow trade-offs in operational decision making to managing resource shortfalls in order to preserve safety performance? Do

targets restrict the release of staff for safety activities, such as training?

The trade-offs in operational decision making are sometimes necessary; however, the safety KPA is the key element and has always the highest

priority. Therefore, the staff training for safety activities is never part of organisational restrictions.

e) Has the State reviewed the ANSP financial and personnel resources that are needed to support safe ATC service provision through safety

promotion, safety improvement, safety assurance and safety risk management after changes introduced to achieve targets in other KPAs?

Please, explain.

The TA inspectors regularly supervise and review the ANSP financial and personnel resources in accordance with relevant regulatory

requirements (Reg. (EU) No. 1035/2011). The requirements of a new Reg. (EU) 2017/373 are being prepared currently. The Slovak Republic is

also regularly supervised by EASA inspectors within their standardisation inspections. In addition, the TA conducts the NSA HR assessment in

accordance with EU reg. 1034/2011 every two year as a common FAB CE NSAs HR Assessment. The last assessment was conducted in 2018.


The recent shifts of traffic flows in Central and Eastern Europe, mainly caused by the Ukrainian/Syrian crisis clearly reveal that actual

trajectories flown do not always follow the required optimized great circle routings, as foreseen for the KPI. There is a strong, unswayable

effect, where actually flown trajectories distort the required KEA indicator. In addition, following the capacity shortfalls in Western Europe

(Karlsruhe, a.o), traffic flows were shifted to avoid these congested areas to minimize delays, creating new bottlenecks as a consequence and

impacting the KEA indicator.

In addition, the developments strongly depend on the eNM measures. Possible changes might stem also from the application of

recommendations from European Airspace Architecture Study, especially, from the Airspace Structural Bottlenecks project led by NM (Central-

South East Europe airspace - Project 3). The improvements proposed by NM are expected to follow a stepped implementation over RP3 or

slightly beyond converging towards the target concept. Slovakia is a part of FAB CE which has established the FAB CE Airspace Task Force

working alongside NM on proposing the most optimum airspace structure for the FAB CE region, contributing to the NM's Central-South East

Europe Airspace project. The results of these activities are however not known at the time of preparation of this Performance Plan.

40


Currently, the ATCO shortage is one of the main factors affecting the ability to offer the required capacity to cope with the demand and current

capacity gap in the Slovak airspace. In the RP3, LPS SR will take all the steps necessary to reach optimal number of ATCO staff – addressing

current insufficiency as well as training additional ATCO personnel in order to meet the increased demand for capacity and decrease the ATCO

overtimes (which increased in average from 49 hrs/ATCO in 2015 to 137 hrs/ATCO in 2018). Overtime has a significant impact on staff costs and

it is expected that significantly less overtime hours will be required after the implementation of proposed changes in the recruitment and

training process, followed by expected reduction of the capacity gap.


There is also a strong correlation between the observed weather phenomena (especially CBs during summer period) and the actual trajectories

flown, thus deviating significantly from the originally filed flight planned routes and impacting the KEA indicator. Additionally, it was confirmed

by the NM that there is about 24% of traffic not following the shortest routes available.

Other factors with the possible impact on performance are currently unclear requirements of the military element due, among others, to the

following:

• acquisition of new long-range artillery howitzers: these systems are expected to be used in the busiest airspace areas over the SR.

• acquisition of new F-16 fighter jets arriving in 2023: dramatic increase in requirements for airspace utilization above FL245 is expected.

If the Slovak Republic decides to prefer the military requirements above FL245, or without the limits of real time utilization / planning, it is

necessary to expect a negative impact on the throughput of the Slovak airspace.

41

4.1 - Cross-border initiatives and synergies

4.1.1 - Planned or implemented cross-border initiatives at the level of ANSPs

4.1.2 - Investment synergies achieved at FAB level or through other cross-border initiatives

4.2 - Deployment of SESAR Common Projects

4.3 - Change management



SECTION 4: CROSS-BORDER INITIATIVES AND SESAR IMPLEMENTATION

42

4.1.1 - Planned or implemented cross-border initiatives at the level of ANSPs

Number of cross-border initiatives 2

Name South East Europe Night Free Route Airspace (SEEN FRA)

Description

On the 30th March 2017, the DANUBE FAB (Romania and Bulgaria) and Hungary introduced SEEN FRA by

bridging the airspace between the two Functional Airspace Blocks of the DANUBE FAB and FAB CE during the

time period 2300-0500 (2200 - 0400) UTC. At the end of 2018, the initiative was expanded by the airspace of

Slovakia. From the 6th December 2018, aircraft operators are thus able to plan their flights freely across the

airspace of four States covering parts of two FABs without having to take into account the limitations

imposed by geographical borders.

The new flight planning rules significantly optimize flight trajectories to provide the shortest possible

connections and the most effective routings when changes to the flight plan – to avoid adverse weather, for

example – are required. Further improvements to Central and South-Eastern European airspace

configurations is taking place in 2019. From April 2019, 24-hour FRA has been implemented within Slovak

airspace and during summer 2019 LPS SR will consider extending SEEN FRA availability for longer periods of

the day. From 7 November 2019 the three countries initiating the SEEN FRA programme (Bulgaria, Hungary

and Romania) will extend the availability of cross-border FRA operations across the entire day with the

introduction of the South East Europe Free Route Airspace (SEE FRA) project. Slovakia is expected to join the

24-hour cross-border FRA environment in 2021/2022, subject to evaluation of the experience gained from

SEEN FRA.

Expected performance benefits

The SEEN FRA simulations of the airspace change the synergistic effect of all improvements could reduce

trajectories by a daily average of 3.200 NM, which equates to 15 tonnes of fuel and 49 tonnes of CO2

emissions. Slovakia's participation in the initiative will significantly contribute to delivering these expected

benefits.

Name FAB CE

Description Functional Airspace Block Central Europe

Expected performance benefitsCapacity, flight efficiency, cost-efficiency

4.1 - Cross-border initiatives and synergies

Initiative #1

Initiative #2

Additional comments

Slovakia is a member of FAB CE. FAB CE fully adheres to the requirements for a functional airspace block defined in the Article 2(25) of the Regulation

(EC) No 549/2004. The provision of air navigation services and related functions in FAB CE is performance-driven and as a priority, the FAB invests a

significant effort into coordination of airspace planning and network development activities, in accordance with the requirements under the Article

9a(1) and (2)(b) of the Regulation (EC) No 550/2004. FAB CE focuses on enhanced cooperation among air navigation service providers and activities that

bring added value as required by the Article 9a of the Regulation (EC) No 550/2004 and the Article 2(25) of the Regulation (EC) No 549/2004. The

activities are driven by the FAB CE Strategy which is currently under a review and the new version is expected in the autumn of 2019.

One of the most important activities focusing on network benefits to users is related to the recommendations of the European Airspace Architecture

Study, particularly the Airspace Structural Bottlenecks project led by the NM (Central-South East Europe airspace - Project 3). The improvements

proposed by the NM are expected to follow a stepped implementation process over RP3 or slightly beyond converging towards the target concept. FAB

CE has established the FAB CE Airspace Task Force working alongside the NM on proposing the most optimum airspace structure for the FAB CE region,

contributing to the NM's Central-South East Europe Airspace project. The results of these activities are however not known at the time of preparation

of this Performance Plan.

43

4.1.2 - Investment synergies achieved at FAB level or through other cross-border initiatives

There are a number of activities at the FAB CE level that positively impact on synergies in the region. The activities are driven by the FAB CE Strategy

which is currently under a review and the new version is expected in the autumn of 2019.

FAB CE coordinate their planning with respect to implementation of the PCP and the Deployment Programme. Other recent and ongoing projects

include the following activities:

A pilot project for common procurement of FAB CE CNS covering an upgrade of the cross-border telecommunications network (X-bone) hardware was

successfully completed in 2018. The procurement was managed by FAB CE ANSPs’ joint venture FABCE Aviation Services, Ltd., which is used as a FAB CE

outsourcing platform for ATM/CNS infrastructure. Six air navigation service providers (ANSPs) purchased CISCO routers based on a common

specification and tender to benefit from lower procurement costs and economies of scale. Following the successful conclusion of this project, the FAB

CE CEO Committee has agreed to apply these same procedures for future smart procurement initiatives. A common approach to procurement of spare

parts for technical systems is currently under development.

FAB CE ANSPs have also made a significant progress in terms of developing processes for planning and operations of the surveillance infrastructure. The

‘Surveillance infrastructure optimisation’ project was successfully completed in 2018. The processes for surveillance infrastructure planning, surveillance

maintenance planning, maintenance of SUR database and sharing the specifications were developed and are now in the process of implementation. The

project also proposed a number of overall SUR service quality improvements and developed a feasibility study for the regional tracker. Due to the

negative CBA, the regional tracker project will be not further pursued.

The NAVAID optimisation project which will improve interoperability and data-sharing through the optimisation of navigational aid (NAVAID)

infrastructure, reducing duplication and unnecessary complexity was launched in 2018. This project will meet the accuracy, integrity and continuity

requirements for proposed operations in FAB CE airspace by aligning NAVAID operating and purchasing policies among the seven FABEC ANSPs,

reducing purchasing, implementation, operational and maintenance costs. The project group will first develop a process for coordinated NAVAID

infrastructure and preventive maintenance planning and information-sharing where operational dependencies are evident. The second part of the

project is focusing on an analysis of NAVAID infrastructure and coverage - including those of neighbouring countries. The team will identify potential

areas for improvement, including operational interdependencies and requirements. The third part is focusing on solving operational issues – namely,

assessing vulnerabilities within the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) network. This will require addressing signal monitoring and interference

issues while assessing how free route airspace will influence the requirements for ground-based NAVAIDs in this new era of area navigation operations.

FAB CE agreed on a common approach to a number of technical services and recently initiated a number of new activities, including:

- SSR monitoring;

- Coordinated ADS-B deployment;

- Datalink monitoring;

- VoIP coordinated testing and implementation.

Details of synergies in terms of common infrastructure and common procurement

44

PCP ATM Functionality (AF) / Sub

functionality (s-AF)Recent and expected progress

s-AF1.1 AMAN extended to en-route

airspace

Not applicable to the Slovak Republic nor any airport located on its territory.

Nevertheless, due to the geographical proximity of the Vienna Schwechat airport, since 2015 LPS SR has

been involved in a CEF-co-funded project AMAN LOWW initial (2015_234_AF1_B) in cooperation with

implementing partners AustroControl, HungaroControl and ANS CR. Activity is coordinated via ongoing

local ‘some-in’ FAB project led by ACG.

Software interconnection of AMAN LOWW in the ATM system of LPS SR was completed and became

operational on 6 December 2018.

s-AF1.2 Enhanced TMA using RNP-

based operations

Not applicable to the Slovak Republic nor any airport located on its territory.

Nevertheless, implementation of RNP approach procedures with vertical guidance has been ongoing;

RNP approaches have been implemented at LZIB, LZKZ, LZPP, LZZI and LZTT and RNP approaches at

airports where LPS SR provides ATS were published.

Implementation of Electronic Terrain and Obstacle Data (eTOD) is near completion and full operational

capability is expected by 31 December 2019. Measures to ensure Quality of Aeronautical Data and

Aeronautical Information have been implemented and full completion is expected by 31 December

2019 as well.

s-AF2.1 DMAN synchronised with

predeparture sequencing

Not applicable.

s-AF2.2 DMAN integrating surface

management constraints

Not applicable.

s-AF2.3 Time-based separation for

final approach

Not applicable.

s-AF2.4 Automated assistance to

controller for surface movement

planning and routing

Not applicable.

s-AF2.5 Airport safety nets

Not applicable.

4.2 - Deployment of SESAR Common Projects

AF1 - Extended AMAN and PBN in high density TMA

AF2 - Airport Integration and Throughput

AF3 - Flexible Airspace Management and Free Route

45

s-AF3.1 Airspace management and

advanced flexible use of airspace

3.1.1 ASM Tool to support AFUA is fully implemented.

CIAM is the current operational ASM tool interoperable with the NM. LARA B2B integrated on NM test

platform. LARA as operational ASM system with B2B connection to NM OPS server is expected by 31

December 2019.

3.1.2 ASM Management of real time airspace data is on-going and is planned for completion by 31

December 2021.

The integration of ASM tools with ATM system is planned. This functionality is covered by LARA at LPS

SR. It is only being tested at this time, however, and has not been deployed in real operations yet. LARA

as operational ASM system with B2B connection to NM OPS server is expected by the end of 2019.

3.1.3 Full rolling ASM/ATFCM process and ASM information sharing is fully implemented.

CIAM is operational while LARA is pre-operational/testing. AUP/UUPs contains routes, areas and FUA

Restrictions. FBZs have not been implemented in Slovakia yet.

3.1.4 Management of Dynamic Airspace Configurations is on-going and is expected to be fully

implemented by 31 December 2021.

So far Dynamic Sectorisation and Management of pre-defined Airspace Configuration (predefined

airspace configurations based on pre-defined airspace structures and sectorisation planning are

implemented at the network level and at the level of all Operational Stakeholders) have been

implemented, with VoIP communication to be yet implemented (VoIP pilot project has been in progress

at LPS SR and is expected to be concluded in 2019).

The functionality is partially covered by a CEF-co-funded project FAB CE-wide Study of Dynamic

Airspace Management (DAM) and STAM (2016_075_AF3_B).

s-AF3.2 Free route

3.2.1 Upgrade of ATM systems tu support DCT and FRA is on-going and planned for complete

implementation by 31 December 2021.

MONA, Basic OLDI, including the management of reference COP, and Pre-caution tool (Extended STCA)

and Separation tool as TCT functions have been implemented so far, while transfer of coordination

messages are planned for 2019. Full implementation of MTCD, TCT as well as Transfer Dialogue is

expected in RP3 as a part of a major planned ATM system upgrade.

3.2.3 Implementation published Direct Routings (DCTs) is fully implemented.

3.2.4 Implement Free Route Airspace is ongoing.

Functionality is planned for full implementation by 31 December 2021 with H24/7 FRA above FL245 in

cooperation with all neighbouring ANSPs. As of now, night, cross-border SEENFRA implemented since 6

December 2018 within the time period 2300-0500 (2200-0400), while as of 28 March 2019 BRAFRA

became available in Bratislava CTA from FL 245 to FL 660 within the time period 0500-2300 (0400-

2200).

s-AF4.1 Enhanced short-term ATFCM

measures

4.1.1 STAM Phase 1 is fully implemented.

Different STAM features as occupancy counts, ATFM scenarios, Mandatory cherry picking and ATFM

measures are deployed as required in accordance with NM OPS procedures.

4.1.2 STAM Phase 2 is on-going.

Initial actions have started as a part of the CEF-co-funded project FAB CE-wide Study of Dynamic

Airspace Management (DAM) and STAM (2016_075_AF3_B). STAM Phase 2 will be implemented with

the availability of this function in the N-connect Tool, with planned completion by 31 December 2021.

s-AF4.2 Collaborative NOP

4.2.2 Interactive Rolling NOP is planned.

Functionality is planned for complete implementation by 31 December 2021 through upgrade of the

automated ASM support system with the capability of AIXM 5.1 B2B data exchange with the NM and

Perform an integration of the automated ASM support systems with the Network. All these projects will

be fulfilled in accordance with the NM support, the guidance and the relevant provisions of the NM B2B

Reference Manuals. ATFM procedures and staff training to be done when NM platform (N-Connect) is

available.

4.2.3 Interface ATM systems to NM systems is planned.

Implementation is planned by 31 December 2021, only implementation of the sub-functionality Deliver

flight plan message processing in ADEXP format is not planned. Related upgrade of the local ATM

system has been initiated.

s-AF4.3 Calculated take-offtTime to

target times for ATFCM purposes

4.3.2 Reconciled target times for ATFCM and arrival sequencing is not planned.

No relevant CEF project. Functionality considered not applicable to LPS SR given operational and

geographical reasons.

AF4 - Network Collaborative Management

46

s-AF4.4 Automated support for

traffic complexity assessment

4.4.2 Traffic complexity tools is planned by 31 December 2021.

For the time being only use of the NM systems is planned; in the future development of local tools

possibly to be considered. Treat and assimilate ETFMS Flight Data (EFD) is currently considered not

applicable, EFD is needed when local complexity tools are planned. Partial coverage by the CEF-co-

funded project FAB CE-wide Study of Dynamic Airspace Management (DAM) and STAM

(2016_075_AF3_B), although not the primary gap of the project.

s-AF5.1 Common infrastructure

components

5.1.1 PENS 1 is fully implemented.

5.1.2 NewPENS is on-going.

Functionality is planned to be completed by 31 December 2020 through a CEF-co-funded project

2015_174_AF5.

s-AF5.2 SWIM technical

infrastructure and profiles

5.2.1 Stakeholder Internet Protocol Compliance is on-going and implementation is expected by 31

December 2022.

Internet Protocol based Network supporting Yellow Profile already implemented; enabling specification

for Blue Profile implementation has not been published yet, though.

5.2.2 Stakeholder SWIM Infrastructure components is planned by 31 December 2023.

Implementation of Yellow Profile is planned, while planning of the Blue Profile implementation will start

in 2020 when the specification is published.

5.2.3 Stakeholders SWIM KPI and cybersecurity is planned.

The planning process is currently under initiation and deployment is expected by 31 December 2024.

LPS SR is involved in CEF-co-funded project SWIM Common PKI and policies & procedures for

establishing a Trust framework (2017-EU-TM-0076-M).

s-AF5.3 Aeronautical information

exchange

5.3.1 Upgrade/Implement Aeronautical Information Exchange System/Service is not planned.

Slovak Republic, among a few other EU member states, is exempted from deployment of the ATM

Functionalities 4 (Network Collaborative Management) and 5 (Initial System Wide Information

Management).

Given the current lack of legal obligation of the Slovak Republic to deploy the two Families, there are,

legalistically speaking, no implementation plans to deploy the particular ATM Functionalities 5.3.1

(Upgrade/Implement Aeronautical Information Exchange System /Service) and 5.4.1

(Upgrade/Implement Meteorological Information Exchange System/ Service) specifically based on the

detailed requirements mandated by the PCP or further detailed in the SDM Deployment Programme.

Nevertheless, both LPS SR as well as SHMÚ already started analysing available EUROCONTROL

specifications and based on that plans are being prepared for inclusion in RP3 planning for all four areas

of interest: Implement Technical Infrastructure - Yellow Profile, Implement updated services related to

Aeronautical Information exchanges, Meteorological Information exchanges, Implement Cooperative

Network Information exchanges and Implement Flight Information exchanges. Full operational

capability for Information Exchanges using the SWIM Yellow TI Profile is planned for 31/12/2024.

s-AF5.4 Meteorological information

exchange

5.4.1 Upgrade/Implement Meteorological Information Exchange System/Service is not planned.

Slovak Republic, among a few other EU member states, is exempted from deployment of the ATM

Functionalities 4 (Network Collaborative Management) and 5 (Initial System Wide Information

Management).

Given the current lack of legal obligation of the Slovak Republic to deploy the two Families, there are,

legalistically speaking, no implementation plans to deploy the particular ATM Functionalities 5.3.1

(Upgrade/Implement Aeronautical Information Exchange System /Service) and 5.4.1

(Upgrade/Implement Meteorological Information Exchange System/ Service) specifically based on the

detailed requirements mandated by the PCP or further detailed in the SDM Deployment Programme.

Nevertheless, both LPS SR as well as SHMÚ already started analysing available EUROCONTROL

specifications and based on that plans are being prepared for inclusion in RP3 planning for all four areas

of interest: Implement Technical Infrastructure - Yellow Profile, Implement updated services related to

Aeronautical Information exchanges, Meteorological Information exchanges, Implement Cooperative

Network Information exchanges and Implement Flight Information exchanges. Full operational

capability for Information Exchanges using the SWIM Yellow TI Profile is planned for 31/12/2024.

s-AF5.5 Cooperative network

information exchange

5.5.1 Upgrade/Implement Cooperative Network Information Exchange System/Service is not

planned.

AF5 - Initial SWIM

47

s-AF5.6 Flight information exchange

5.6.1 Upgrade/Implement Flight Information Exchange System/Service supported by Yellow Profile is

planned for implementation by 31 December 2023.

5.6.2 Upgrade/Implement Flight Information Exchange System/Service supported by Blue Profile is

not planned.

Blue Profile specification to be published in 2020.

AF6 - Initial Trajectory Information

Sharing

LPS IS has been involved in the CEF-co-funded project DLS Implementation Project - Path 2 (2016-EU-

TM-0117-M).

48

4.3 - Change management

Change management practices and transition plans for the entry into service of major airspace changes or for ATM system improvements, aimed

at minimising any negative impact on the network performance

Not applicable. There are no significant changes currently foreseen in the LPS SR.

Overall oversight of changes in the field of ATM/ANS is being done by CAA following Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/373 and

Commission Regulation (EU) 2015/340 and with clearly defined environment for implementing both technical and operational changes, including

changes in the training of licensed personnel and ATSEP.

49

5.1 - Traffic risk sharing parameters

5.1.1 Traffic risk sharing - En route charging zones

5.1.2 Traffic risk sharing - Terminal charging zones

5.2 - Capacity incentive schemes

5.2.1 - Capacity incentive scheme - Enroute

5.2.1.1 Parameters for the calculation of financial advantages or disadvantages - Enroute

5.2.1.2 Rationale and justification - Enroute

5.2.2 - Capacity incentive scheme - Terminal

5.2.2.1 Parameters for the calculation of financial advantages or disadvantages - Terminal

5.2.2.2 Rationale and justification - Terminal

5.3 - Optional incentives





SECTION 5: TRAFFIC RISK SHARING ARRANGEMENTS AND INCENTIVE SCHEMES

50

5.1 - Traffic risk sharing

5.1.1 Traffic risk sharing - En route charging zones

Slovakia no

Dead band Risk sharing band% loss to be

recovered

Max. charged if

SUs 10% < plan

% additional

revenue returned

Min. returned if

SUs 10% > plan

Standard parameters ±2.00% ±10.0% 70.0% 5.6% 70.0% 5.6%

5.1.2 Traffic risk sharing - Terminal charging zones

Traffic risk-sharing parameters adapted?

Service units lower than plan Service units higher than plan

51

5.2.1 - Capacity incentive scheme - Enroute

5.2.1.1 Parameters for the calculation of financial advantages or disadvantages - Enroute

Enroute Expressed in

fraction of min

% of DC

% of DC

modulated

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

0.18 0.19 0.16 0.09 0.10

±0.050 ±0.050 ±0.050 ±0.050 ±0.050

0.60 0.60 0.50 0.30 0.10

0.60 0.60 0.50 0.30 0.10

[0.59-0.61] [0.59-0.61] [0.49-0.51] [0.29-0.31] [0.09-0.11]

[0.55-0.59] [0.55-0.59] [0.45-0.49] [0.25-0.29] [0.05-0.09]

[0.61-0.65] [0.61-0.65] [0.51-0.55] [0.31-0.35] [0.11-0.15]

5.2.1.2 Rationale and justification - Enroute

No

No

Yes

5.2 - Capacity incentive schemes

LPS SR

NOP reference values (mins of ATFM delay per flight)

Performance Plan targets (mins of ATFM delay per flight)

Bonus range

Value

±0.010 min

N/A

0.50%

Dead band Δ

Max bonus (≤2%)

Max penalty (≥ Max bonus)

The pivot values for RP3 are

a.1) The pivot value for year n IS the reference value from the November release of year n-1 of the NOP.

Pivot values for RP3 (mins of ATFM delay per flight)*

Alert threshold (Δ Ref. value in fraction of min)

A number of states in the Central-Eastern European region continued to face weather phenomena in the recent years (especially CB thunderstorms during the summer period)

which resulted in high delays due to weather reasons (around 45% of the delay in FAB CE was caused by weather in 2018). In Slovakia, over 36% of the delay caused in 2018 was

attributable to weather. NM acknowledged in the Network Operations Report 2018 that there was a higher impact of disturbances within the network (e.g. adverse weather) due

to saturation of sector capacities compared to former years. Trajectory prediction decreased due to added traffic flows, deviations due to weather, intruding aircraft from adjacent

ATC units due to weather/CBs. It can be expected that with climate changes the weather will become even more unpredictable.

Slovakia therefore proposes a scheme in which it would not be penalised for effects beyond LPS SR's control. Slovakia will only apply the C, R, S, T, M, P codes in the incentive

scheme. The pivot values above will be amended for the calculation by the weight representing the proportion of delay caused due to C, R, S, T, M, P causes on total delay

experienced in the previous three years. According to data on ANS performance dashboard (https://ansperformance.eu/data/), this proportion was 63.5% in the period of 2016-

2018.

Not applicable.

b) The scope of the incentives is limited to delay causes related to ATC capacity, ATC routing, ATC staffing, ATC equipment, airspace management and special

events with the codes C, R, S, T, M and P of the ATFCM user manual. If yes, provide below a justification for this decision and an explanation of how the pivot

values are calculated.

a.2) The pivot value for year n is informed by the November release of the year n-1 of the NOP and calculated according to the following principles and

formulas:**

Financial advantages / disadvantages

Dead band range

Penalty range

* When modulation applies, these figures are only indicative as they will be updated annually on the basis of the November n-1 NOP and the methodology described in 5.2.1.2.a2

below. The pivot values for year n have to be notified to the EC by 1 January n.

Indicate which of the principles below will be applied for the modulation of the pivot values for the whole RP3:

a) In order to enable significant and unforeseen changes in traffic to be taken into account:

* The pivot values will be further refined using the mechanism described in Section 5.2.1.2 below

+0.00% Max. Bonus

-0.50% Max. Penalty

0.6500.550 0.590 0.610

Pivot: 0.600y = -0.125x+0.076

-

→ Dead band ←

Δ of determined costs in year 2020

Enroute ATFM

Application of the en route incentive scheme in year 2020(before any revision of the NOP reference values)

*Only C, R, S, T, M, P causes

52

5.2.2 - Capacity incentive scheme - Terminal

5.2.2.1 Parameters for the calculation of financial advantages or disadvantages - Terminal

Terminal Expressed in

Select

%

% of DC

% of DC

Select

5.2.2.2 Rationale and justification - Terminal

Value

Dead band Δ N/A

Bonus/penalty range (% of pivot value) ±50%

Max bonus 0.00%

Max penalty 0.00%

The pivot values for RP3 are N/A

Explain how the bonus and penalties are going to be apportioned between the different terminal charging zones and ANSPs providing services in each of them**

Capacity incentive scheme for Terminal services is not applicable as no airport within the Slovak Republic is included in the RP3 Performance Plan and under the scope of the

Performance and Charging Regulation (Implementing Regulation 2019/317).

53

6.1 Monitoring of the implementation plan

6.2 Non-compliance with targets during the reference period

SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PERFORMANCE PLAN

54

6 - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PERFORMANCE PLAN

6.1 Monitoring of the implementation plan

6.2 Non-compliance with targets during the reference period

Description of the processes put in place by the NSA to monitor the implementation of the Performance Plan including the yearly monitoring

of all KPIs and PIs defined in Annex I of the Regulation and a description of the data sources

Description of the processes put in place and measures to be applied by the NSA to address the situation where targets are not reached

during the reference period

Annual monitoring report serves as a tool for monitoring the current situation and progress achieved. As inputs, following information are

processed: SAF KPA (from NSAs), CEF KPA (from ANSP) and CAP and ENV KPA (in cooperation with Network Manager). The report is after its

approval submitted via PRB to the European Commission until 1 June at latest.

In case that some target is not met, NSA identifies the problem, applies corrective measures to solve it and informs the European Commission,

following Art. 37, Reg. (EU) 2019/317.

The Transport Authority, Slovak Republic is the authority responsible for the implementation of the Performance Plan including the yearly

monitoring of all KPIs and PIs defined in Annex I of the Regulation.

The Transport Authority, Slovak Republic shall establish processes for continuous oversight of all areas within the scope of the Performance

plan for RP3. These processes contain procedures for data collection, data assessment and data validation. The monitoring at national level

includes ANSP's business and annual plans, uncontrollable costs, reaching of alert thresholds (in accordance with Article 18, Reg. (EU)

2019/317) and other obligatory requirements determined within Annex VI, Reg. (EU) 2019/317 and other relevant legislation (especially Reg.

(EU) 2017/373).

The monitoring of progress in achieving performance targets set in Reg. (EU) 2019/317 shall be performed by dedicated NSA inspectors. The

monitoring itself will be performed on regular basis, the mechanisms and procedures shall be established, some of them are partially based on

monitoring procedures from RP2. The cooperation with FAB CE and neighbouring NSAs is already established and will be used accordingly if

needed.

55

7 - ANNEXES


ANNEX A.x - En route Charging Zone #x


ANNEX B.x - Terminal Charging Zone #x

















ANNEX S. INTERDEPENDENCIES

ANNEX T. OTHER MATERIAL

ANNEX Z. CORRECTIVE MEASURES*

* Only as per Article 15(6) of the Regulation

56

Annex E. Investments

2020-2024 New Investments Summary

Domain

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total RP3

COM - SACON 43 258 652 727 783 2,463

of that already raised in RP2 371

COM - VCS 186 428 446 464 536 2,061


SUR 34 126 126 183 206 675


ATM 326 495 706 1,384 1,113 4,024

of that already raised in RP2 1,511

INF 35 86 411 573 666 1,772


NAV 34 34 303 887 966 2,225

of that already raised in RP2 1,795

Other 336 750 862 1,007 976 3,930


Total 995 2,177 3,505 5,225 5,247 17,150

Sum not claimed in RP3 5,123

Depreciation costs (in ‘000 €)

Several significant investments have been postponed not only due to administrative complexity of

the national procurement laws and procedures, which are beyond ANSP’s control, but also due to the

lack of sufficiently exact inputs available prior to the forecast of second reference period

performance plan. One of the most significant variables influencing fulfilment of the foreseen

investment plan is development of the traffic from both complexity and volume points of view.

Above being pointed out, LPS SR is making sure that no double charging to airspace users occurs in

third reference period by firstly in terms of depreciation and cost of capital, the costs related to

investment actions included in costs for RP2 are not part of RP3’s costs, and secondly, the costs

associated with investment actions that have not been carried out in RP2 are deducted from costs for

RP3 and thus effectively returned to Users.

57

Performance Plan Slovakia - NSATletectvo.nsat.sk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/... · 1.1 The...

Documents

Transcript of Performance Plan Slovakia - NSATletectvo.nsat.sk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/... · 1.1 The...