Capacity - Spain

Download Report

PRB monitoring

▪ Spain registered 1.02 minutes of average en route ATFM delay per flight during 2024, which remained 1.02 after the post-ops adjustment process, thus not achieving the local target value of 0.19. Delays in Spain increased by 0.55 minutes per flight year-on-year.

▪ Most of the delays accumulated between June and November, mostly driven by ATC Capacity issues.

▪The share of delayed flights with delays longer than 15 minutes in Spain increased by 3 percentage points compared to 2023 and was higher than 2019 values.

▪ The average number of IFR movements was 10% above 2019 levels in Spain in 2024.

▪ The number of ATCOs in OPS is 353, being over the 2024 plan in Barcelona by 15 FTEs. The number of ATCOs in OPS is 430, being over the 2024 plan in Madrid by 32 FTEs. The number of ATCOs in OPS is 134, being over the 2024 plan in Palma by 13 FTEs. The number of ATCOs in OPS is 161, being over the 2024 plan in Sevilla by 28 FTEs. The number of ATCOs in OPS is 176, being over the 2024 plan in Canarias by 14 FTEs

▪ The yearly total of sector opening hours in Sevilla ACC was 43,649, showing a 8.9% increase compared to 2023. Sector opening hours are 6.7% above 2019 levels. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Barcelona ACC was 65,819, showing a 6.6% increase compared to 2023. Sector opening hours are 9.0% above 2019 levels. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Madrid ACC was 96,591, showing a 0.8% increase compared to 2023. Sector opening hours are 6.4% below 2019 levels. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Palma ACC was 35,603, showing a 2.4% decrease compared to 2023. Sector opening hours are 8.1% below 2019 levels. The yearly total of sector opening hours in Canarias ACC was 29,562, showing a 3.3% increase compared to 2023. Sector opening hours are 5.6% above 2019 levels.

▪ Madrid ACC registered 13.15 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2024, being 15.2% above 2019 levels. Barcelona ACC registered 16.09 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2024, being 3.4% above 2019 levels. Palma ACC registered 10.32 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2024, being 23.6% above 2019 levels. Sevilla ACC registered 12.26 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2024, being 17.3% above 2019 levels. Canarias ACC registered 13.99 IFR movements per one sector opening hour in 2024, being 9.5% above 2019 levels

▪ There was a significant deterioration in capacity performance in 2024 in Spain compared to 2023, mostly due to ATC capacity problems. Spain should ensure that additional capacity improvement measures are defined and implemented in order to prevent further deterioration of the performance and to close the capacity gap. Actual 2025 figures up to August indicate that issues are still present.

▪ Spain registered an average airport arrival ATFM delay of 1.10 minutes per flight in 2024, thus not achieving the local target of 0.57 minutes.

▪ Compared to 2023, average arrival ATFM delays in Spain were 56% higher in 2024, while the number of IFR arrivals increased by 8%.

▪ The main drivers of delays were weather, accounting for 65% of delays, and other, non-ATC related causes, responsible for 21%.

En route performance

En route ATFM delay (KPI#1)

Summary of capacity performance

Spain experienced an increase in traffic from 2 194k flights in 2023, with 1 029k minutes of en route ATFM delay, to 2 362k flights in 2024 with 2 404k minutes of en route ATFM delay.

There were an additional 6k minutes of en route ATFM delay originating in the Spanish ACCs that were re-attributed to other ANSPs via the NM post operations delay attribution process:4k minutes of en route ATFM delay were re-attributed to DSNA and a further 2k minutes of en route ATFM delay were re-attributed to the DFS as part of the eNM/S24 measures.

NSA’s assessment of capacity performance

Regarding the Canary en-route area, it was expected to reach 353 thousands of flights in line with the scenario base of STATFOR forecast October 2021. However the actual figure in 2024 amounts to 414 thousands of flights, what means an increase of 17,2% above forecasted.

Regarding the Continental Spain en-route area, it was expected to reach 2.006 thousands of flights in line with the scenario base of STATFOR forecast October 2021. However the actual figure in 2024 amounts to 2.221 thousands of flights, what means an increase of 10,7% above forecasted.

Both KPIs, ERD and TAD has been above the 2024 target, as previously informed to the Commission according to Regulation (EU) 2019/317 Article 37(1).

Although the en-route traffic increase in Spain has been very significant, the proportion of increase in ERD indicators has been higher in some regions and since June, targets set for both Spain and each of the 5 ACCs were exceeded. En-route delay minutes in 2024 were double that of 2023, while traffic growth was 7,6%. The main cause of en-route delay continues to be C-ATC Capacity both at national level and in each ACC.

The evolution in the implementation of the capacity plan projects both en route and in arrivals has resulted in delays in the implementation of some projects, nevertheless, a similar number of new projects have been developed to try to address the new challenges identified with the aim of improving capacity and operational management. The improvements that were expected as a result of the implementation of the planned projects identified in the capacity plan and the performance plan (ESPP3), do not seem to have had the optimal result expected. This, together with the consequences of not being able to incorporate sufficient personnel at short term in the collapsed areas and the effects of bad weather, have led to the non-compliance of the targets.

Monitoring process for capacity performance

The AESA Monitoring Process continues to monitor this indicator on a monthly basis taking into account the different causes of delay, since the incentive system implemented for RP3 considers a mechanism modulated by causes of delay. The evolution of the attributable and non-attributable delay causes is monitored in order to apply the incentive mechanism and to identify the reasons in the event of non-compliance.

By 2024 the minutes reallocated by network measures (eNM/24) and the information related to the Post-Operations Performance (approved Post-Ops cases) distributed by Eurocontrol throught the Post-operations performance adjustment process, have been taken into account. Throughout the year, recorded air traffic was higher than in 2019 and 2023. All regions have recovered pre-pandemic air traffic levels, with notable increases in Seville (+25%) and the Canary Islands (+16%) compared to 2019. Since the beginning of the year, higher delay values were already observed, which was reflected in a high indicator, but with the summer season, all values increased significantly. The most notable increases in delay have occurred in LECS (3,4 times more delay than in 2023), LECP (6,3 times more delay than in 2023) and LECB (2,5 times more delay than in 2023) and this has led to a significant increase in their respective en-route delay indicators.

Delays were mainly caused by C-ATC Capacity (74% of the 2024 total, compared to 65% in 2023 and 69% in 2022), focused on LECB (41% of the minutes due to this cause), LECS (32% of the minutes) and LECM (16% of the minutes). The minutes for this cause in 2024 are 2,7 times those of 2023. The second leading cause of delay is W-Weather (21% of the 2024 total, compared to 24% in 2023 and 25% in 2022), focused on LECB (63% of the minutes due to this cause). The minutes for this cause in 2024 are double those of 2023. The third cause of delay is S-Staffing (2% of the 2024 total, compared to 3% in 2023 and 0,4% in 2022), focused on LECS (47% of the minutes due to this cause) and LECM (31% of the minutes). The minutes for this cause in 2024, which is present every month, are 1,6 times those of 2023. The cause of delay O-Other accounts for 2% of the delay for 2024, mainly due to the July 19 computer failure and various military exercises in other countries.
In GCCC, the delay minutes are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (71%) and W-Weather (25%), with March and November values standing out.
In LECB the delay minutes are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (67%) and W-Weather (29%), highlighting the values from June to October. There are almost 22 k min due to O-Other due to various events.
In LECM the delay minutes are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (78%) and W-Weather (11%), highlighting the increase in S-Staffing and minutes due to various events such as Spanish military exercises (P-Special Event causes), French military exercises (O-Other event causes), etc. .
In LECP, delay minutes are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (68%) and W-Weather (25%), mainly concentrated from June to September.
In LECS, delay minutes are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (85%) and W-Weather (11%), with a significant increase in minutes due to both causes compared to the previous year. The presence of S-Staffing occurs every month but the accumulated minutes are similar to those of the previous year.

The alert mechanism continues to be active to warn, months before the end of the year, of possible non-compliance. In 2024 this mechanism was activated to report to the Commission the expected non-compliance of this indicator, which finally ocurred.

Capacity planning

Every week Enaire updated data to the NOP Rolling Seasonal Plan (planned sector openings, maximum possible sector openings, sector capacity reductions if any, availability of support to operations staff, additional information -e.g. other constraints to be highlighted- and special events and major projects), covering an outlook of eight weeks. The plan is a living document regularly updated and published by NM in order to be adapted to the changed conditions of the Air Navigation Service. Also a NOP for the 2025-2029 period was elaborated.

Regarding the current status of the main projects planned for 2024:
-Capacity and Quality of Service & Airspace
• LECB ACC:
3 of the 11 projects planned in RP3 for LECB could not be completed on time. FRA, Marseille interface and SACTA iTEC 4.1 are delayed. Nevertheless, 5 new projects have been developed, some of them already completed, such as new weather procedures in LECBCCC sector, Flow reorganization trial, New tools for accurate study and implementation of ATFM measures, IMPACT 2 Complexity manager and Bordeaux interface.
• LECM ACC:
4 of the 12 projects planned in RP3 for LECM could not be completed on time. Cross border Free Route with Lisboa, High sectors, SACTA iTEC 4.1 and Improved coordination & data analysis are delayed. Nevertheless, 4 new projects have been developed, some of them already completed, such as LECMSAN/LECMSAO sectors, Flow reorganization trial, New tools for accurate study and implementation of ATFM measures and IMPACT 2 Complexity manager.
• LECS ACC:
2 of the 10 projects planned in RP3 for LECS could not be completed on time. FRA and SACTA iTEC 4.1. Nevertheless, 3 new projects have been developed, some of them already completed, such as Splitting LECSSUR sector, Flow reorganization trial and New tools for accurate study and implementation of ATFM measures.
• LECP ACC:
3 of the 8 projects planned in RP3 for LECP could not be completed on time. TMA redesign, SACTA iTEC 4.1 and Improved coordination & data analysis are delayed. Nevertheless, 1 new project have been developed, but not yet completed, New tools for accurate study and implementation of ATFM measures.
• GCCC ACC:
4 of the 11 projects planned in RP3 for GCCC could not be completed on time. FRA, Interface with Morocco, SACTA iTEC 4.1 and Improved coordination & data analysis are delayed. Nevertheless, 2 new projects have been developed, some of them already completed, such as New tools for accurate study and implementation of ATFM measures and IMPACT 2 Complexity manager.

Application of Corrective Measures for Capacity (if applicable)

Since June, the targets set for both Spain and each of the 5 ACCs have been exceeded. Although the en-route traffic increase in Spain is very significant, 9,5% compared to 2023, the proportion of increase in ERD indicators has been higher in LECS, LECP and LECB.

In all ACCs the main cause of delay is C-ATC Capacity, representing from 67% in LECB to 85% in LECS. The minutes for this cause in 2024 are 2,7 times those of 2023 and account for 74% of the total minutes of delay. The ERD ATT indicator of attributable causes of delay (CRSTMP) has also not met its target at national level, as well as by region, since June. Just by counting the minutes per C-ATC Capacity, an ERD indicator greater than 0,75 would have been obtained, far exceeding the national target and those of each ACC. The W-Weather delay is not a determining factor, although it contributes to complex situations in some sectors.

The non-compliance of ERD was anticipated before the end of the year and was informed to the Commission according to Regulation (EU) 2019/317 Article 37 (1), concluding that the main reasons that have led to this situation are the increase in traffic over the STATFOR forecast set in 2021 and the inability to accommodate new personnel in the short term. Demand to and from Morocco has increased significantly, causing more saturation in LECS and LECB sectors. Demand drift during the day into the night shift has also led to delays at the end of the day. Most of the delay is originated by collapsed sectors and could have been prevented if additional personnel were available in the OPS room.

As a result of the monitoring of the capacity plan and the evolution of the en-route capacity related projects, both of those initially set out in ESPP3 and the new ones considered in NOP, it was observed that about 30% of the planned projects had not been completed but there were a similar number of new projects, not initially planned, already implemented or under development. Nevertheless, the improvements in capacity obtained after the implementation of the completed projects plus the new projects have not been sufficient to meet the volume of traffic managed as well as the current characteristics of the delay in the different regions, resulting in the non-compliance with the targets.

In the report to the Commission, some of the additional measures planned by ENAIRE were explained. Incorporation of new ATCOs and some of the planned projects such as IMPACT 2 Complexity Manager, improvements of the interfaces with neighboring ACCs, redesign of approach sectors and procedures to improve capacity in Palma and Menorca areas (in LECP) will contribute to the objetive of meeting the targets.

Endorse ENAIRE to continue implementing the capacity plan in order to achieve the objectives of delays and better air traffic management, focusing on projects that have an impact on the increase of available capacity, as well as on the implementation of projects that improve operations to manage traffic increases. Consider possible improvements in the management of the number of ATCOs available and the time required for the incorporation of new personnel.

Eight remedial measrues have been identified to rectify the situation:
- Continued effort to increase staffing levels and/or availability in all ACCs - ongoing;
- IMPACT 2 Complexity Manager at Barcelona, Canarias and Madrid ACCs- achieved in 2024;
- Improvement of interfaces with neighbouring ACCs - Canarias with Morocco, Madrid with Lisbon and France - continuous;
- Redesign of approach sectors and procedures - improtve capacity in the Palma and Menorca areas - 2027 - 2028:
- Split of the GXX sector in Palma ACC - being studied for implementation - due in 2026;
- Split of LECSSUR (LECS) sector - split already made and division level raised to FL355 - in 2024;
- Cross-border FRA - Madrid & Canarias to implement FRA with Lisbon ACC - due in 2025;
- Significant use of scenarios in Madrdi, Barcelona and Sevilla ACCs - to manage overloads in upper sectors. Some re-routings to avoid congested areas - achieved in 2024.

En route Capacity Incentive Scheme

ENAIRE: Spain uses an incentive scheme based only on delays attributed to C,R,S,T,M & P delay codes. The CRSTMP target was set at 0.15 minutes per flight and the actual performance is reported as 0.79 minutes per flight (CRSTMP only). This results in a reported penalty of €3 052 565
In accordance with Article 3(3)(a) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1627: The incentive scheme shall cover only the calendar years 2022 to 2024.

Other indicators

Number of additional ATCOs in OPS planned to start working in the OPS room (FTEs): it’s been considered all the operative ATCOs (C4) who started working for all reasons: CMCD, transfer, secondment, article 88 (II ATCOs collective bargaining agreement), new recruitments, unpaid leave return (voluntary or without job post reservation), change of designation, etc.

Number of ATCOs in OPS planned to stop working in the OPS room (FTEs): it’s been considered all the operative ATCOs (C4) who stopped working for all reasons: retirements, RAE or RA concessions, dismissals, CMCD, transfer, end of a secondment, end of article 88 application, voluntary unpaid leave,change of designation, etc.

Terminal performance

Arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)

Spain includes seven airports under RP3 monitoring. However in accordance with IR (EU) 2019/317 and the traffic figures, Ibiza is not monitored for pre-departure delays. The Airport Operator Data Flow, necessary for the monitoring of these pre-departure delays, is correctly implemented where required. Nevertheless, the quality of the reporting from 4 of the 6 the Spanish airports does not allow for the calculation of the ATC pre-departure delay, with more than 60% of the reported delay not allocated to any cause.

Traffic at the ensemble of Spanish airports under monitoring in 2024 was 6% higher than in 2019, with an increase of 8% with respect to 2023. Average arrival ATFM delays in 2024 was 1.10 min/arr, compared to 0.70 min/arr in 2023. The national target was not met. ATFM slot adherence remained very high (2023: 98%; 2024: 98.1%).

The national average arrival ATFM delay at Spanish airports in 2024 was 1.10 min/arr., an increase with respect to the 2023 value (0.70 min/arr) and also higher than the 2019 value (1.02 min/arr) and than the SES average for 2024 (0.93 min/arr).
The highest increases were observed at Barcelona (LEBL: 2023: 0.65 min/arr; 2024: 1.61 min/arr), Gran Canaria (GCLP: 2023: 0.52 min/arr; 2024: 1.51 min/arr) and Palma (LEPA: 2023: 1.32 min/arr; 2024: 2.07 min/arr)
65% of the delays at Spanish airports were attributed to Weather followed by 16% to Aerodrome Capacity and 13% to ATC Capacity.

According to the Spanish monitoring report: The AESA Monitoring Process continues to monitor this indicator on a monthly basis taking into account the different causes of delay, since the incentive system implemented for RP3 considers a mechanism modulated by causes of delay. The evolution of the attributable and non-attributable delay causes is monitored in order to apply the incentive mechanism and to identify the reasons in the event of non-compliance.

By 2024 the information related to the Post-Operations Performance (approved Post-Ops cases) distributed by Eurocontrol through the Post-operations performance adjustment process, have been taken into account. By June, 5 of the 7 airports were already failing to meet their target, as well as the national target (SPA7), and by September, all of them were already non-compliant. The largest increases in delay have occurred at GCLP and LEBL (3 times more delay than in 2024) and this has led to a significant increase in their respective arrival delay indicators.

Delays were mainly caused by W-Weather (65% of the 2024 total, compared to 53% in 2023 and 54% in 2022), focused on LEBL (47% of the minutes due to this cause) and LEPA (37% of the minutes due to this cause). The minutes for this cause in 2024 are double those of 2023. Weather continues to be the leading cause of delay at national level and in LEBL, LEPA, LEMD and LEIB. Weather is expected to become increasingly important due to the effects of climate change, which is already affecting Spain.

The second leading cause of delay is G-Aerodrome Capacity (16% of the 2024 total, compared to 11% in 2023 and 7% in 2022), focused on GCLP (56% of the minutes due to this cause) and LEMD (29% of the minutes due to this cause). The minutes for this cause in 2024 are 2,5 times those of 2023.
The third cause of delay is C-ATC Capacity (13% of the 2024 total, compared to 18% in 2023 and 26% in 2022), focused on LEPA (43% of the minutes due to this cause) and LEMD (40% of the minutes). There is some improvement in the delay due to this cause because the minutes for this cause in 2024 are similar to those of 2023 despite the increase in traffic.

Delay minutes in GCLP are 13% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to G-Aerodrome Capacity (73%) and W-Weather (9%), with October and November values standing out.
Delay minutes in LEAL are 0,5% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to G-Aerodrome Capacity (60%) and E-Aerodrome Services (26%) but they are few minutes.
Delay minutes in LEBL are 34% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to W-Weather (92%) and V-Environmental Issues (5%), highlighting the values from June to November.
Delay minutes in LEIB are 2% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to W-Weather (55%) and some minutes due to G-Aerodrome Capacity and E-Aerodrome Services.Delay minutes in LEMD are 17% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to W-Weather (38%), C-ATC Capacity (29%) and G-Aerodrome Capacity (27%).
Delay minutes in LEMG are 4% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to C-ATC Capacity (37%), W-Weather (29%) and G-Aerodrome Capacity (26%), with a significant increase in minutes due to C-ATC Capacity and G-Aerodrome Capacity compared to the previous year.
Delay minutes in LEPA are 30% of the total SPA7 and are mainly due to W-Weather (80%) and C-ATC Capacity (18%).
Regarding the particularity of the LEAL and LEIB airports, in which different ANSPs are involved, from 2023 onwards it is necessary to differentiate TAD value for LEAL and LEIB aerodromes for incentive purposes. LEAL and LEIB arrival delay can be differentiate between SKYWAY (Aerodrome ATC service provider) and ENAIRE (Approach ATC service provider). According the document “Monitoring of delays in arrivals in RP3 for Alicante and Ibiza airports” prepared by AESA, the part of delay that would correspond to ENAIRE or SKYWAY (previously FerroNATS) for these two airports would be as follows:
- LEAL: ENAIRE: 0,00 min/flight. SKYWAY: 0,07 min/flight. A few minutes due to E-Aerodrome Services and G-Aerodrome Capacity mainly. Attributable delay causes is zero for both providers.
- LEIB: ENAIRE: 0,12 min/flight . SKYWAY: 0,31 min/flight. Delay minutes due to W-Weather, G-Aerodrome Capacity and E-Aerodrome Services, so more minutes are allocated to the TWR-AD environment than to the APP-TMA environment. Attributable delay causes is zero for both providers.

The alert mechanism continues to be active to warn, months before the end of the year, of possible non-compliance. In 2024 this mechanism was activated to report to the Commission the expected non-compliance of this indicator, which finally occurred.
Identification and analysis by the NSA of the underlying reasons or circumstances having led to the performance target not being achieved
The targets have been exceeded both at the Spanish level and at the 7 airports. W-Weather was the first cause of delay at national level and very significant at LEBL and LEPA, G-Aerodrome Capacity was the next cause due to the minutes accumulated mainly at GCLP and LEMD, C-ATC Capacity was the third cause globally and the most significant at LEMG, the only airport where, considering only this cause of delay, its target would have already been failed to be met. Globally (SPA7) the delay minutes for W-Weather and G-Aerodrome Capacity are double compared to 2023 but those for C-ATC Capacity are similar.

Although the arrival traffic increase in Spain is very significant, 10% compared to 2023, the proportion of increase in TAD indicators has been higher in LEBL, LEPA and GCLP.
The TAD ATT indicator of attributable causes of delay (CRSTMP) has also not met its target at national level, as well as at 4 of the 7 airports (LEMD, LEPA, LEMG and GCLP).

The non-compliance of TAD was anticipated before the end of the year and was informed to the Commission according to Regulation (EU) 2019/317 Article 37 (1), concluding that the main reasons that have led to this situation are meteorological issues especially in the warm Mediterranean Sea. Lack of capacity in LEMD because of implementation of parallel independent approaches and TCAS notifications. Environmental concerns in LEPA that have been delaying implementation of capacity improving projects. Shifts in demand during the day that bring higher than expected traffic counts to the night shift in LEPA and LEMG. Significantly increase of demand to LEMG. In GCLP the main factor has been Aerodrome Capacity, additionally between September and November 2024, the transition plan for the introduction of the new procedures reduced capacities causing some delay.

As a result of the monitoring of the capacity plan and the evolution of the arrival capacity related projects initially set out in ESPP3, it was observed that about 41% of the planned projects had not been completed but there were a similar number of new projects, not initially planned, already implemented or under development. Nevertheless, the improvements in capacity obtained after the implementation of the completed projects plus the new projects have not been sufficient to meet the volume of traffic managed as well as the current characteristics of the delay in the different regions, together with the occurrence of bad weather, resulting in the non-compliance with the targets.
Recommendations to the ANSP to rectify the situation
In the report to the Commission, some of the additional measures planned by ENAIRE were explained. Manual TWR, Auto-switch, RECAT departures and Improved procedures in LEPA approach will contribute to the objective of meeting the targets. An improvement in LEMD with the implementation of simultaneous parallel independent approaches in South Configuration. New dynamic procedures in LEBL which enable peak capacities of 42 arrivals/hour. The introduction of configurations of three sectors will increase capacity in LEMG and in the TMA. New

Encourage ENAIRE to continue implementing the capacity plan in order to achieve the objectives of delays and better air traffic management, focusing on projects that have an impact on the increase of available capacity, as well as on the implementation of projects that improve operations to manage traffic increases. An extra effort to find projects that can reduce the bad weather delay despite the unpredictable nature of this delay would be desirable.

What action has the NSA taken to check/monitor the implementation of those measures and what further actions (if any) are planned during the ongoing calendar year? AESA performs several monitoring activities, particularly that of the KPIs associated with a target to be met, which is monitored on a monthly and annual basis. With them, it is possible to keep track of the evolution of the indicators and to maintain an adequate coordination and communication with the parties involved.

Additionally, before the end of the year and having previously made a forecast of the possible final values of the KPIs, AESA monitors the implementation status of the projects mentioned in the ESPP3 Performance Plan as well as new projects that may have been included in the NOP and ERNIP and that can have a positive effect in the capacity area, in order to know their evolution as well as the impact on the corresponding indicators. The measures are being implemented and future improvements are expected to be observed in the coming years. AESA will continue its monitoring activities in the new RP4 reference period.

Monitoring activities continue during the fourth reporting period (RP4). As the year progresses and with the existing follow-up mechanisms thanks to monthly monitoring, if this risk of non-compliance materializes, it will be notified to the Commission according to Regulation (EU) 2019/317 Article 37(1).

Spain’s performance plan sets a national target on arrival ATFM delay for 2024 of 0.57 min/arr. This target was not met, with an actual performance of 1.10 min/arr. The incentive scheme uses modulated pivot values limited to CRSTMP delay causes. According to the Spanish monitoring report, this pivot value for CRSTMP is 0.168 min/arr in 2024 and based on the attribution of the regulation reason, the actual CRSTMP value for 2024 was 0.172 min/arr, which falls within the dead band.
The NSA calculates therefore no bonus or penalty.

Other terminal performance indicators (PI#1-3)

Airport level
Airport name
Avg arrival ATFM delay (KPI#2)
Slot adherence (PI#1)
ATC pre departure delay (PI#2)
All causes pre departure delay (PI#3)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Alicante 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.07 98.8% 99.7% 99.1% 99.3% 99.5% 0.23 0.23 0.51 0.67 0.63 9.0 8.1 17.4 19.4 19.0
Barcelona 0.12 0.06 0.52 0.65 1.61 94.9% 98.7% 99.0% 99.2% 99.3% 0.00 0.04 0.09 NA NA 8.7 8.3 15.8 17.1 19.0
Ibiza NA 0.09 0.40 0.71 0.43 99.0% 98.6% 99.1% 99.6% 99.5% NA NA 0.00 NA 0.12 6.3 9.1 19.7 21.1 20.7
Las Palmas 0.97 0.44 0.46 0.52 1.51 96.4% 95.5% 98.3% 96.8% 97.5% 0.08 0.05 0.29 0.23 0.17 11.3 9.4 15.0 16.1 17.2
Madrid/Barajas 0.49 0.27 0.35 0.69 0.69 94.2% 96.6% 97.4% 97.1% 97.4% NA NA 0.04 NA NA 9.5 9.7 13.1 14.9 16.6
Malaga 0.01 0.02 0.11 0.49 0.40 93.4% 95.0% 95.2% 94.8% 95.0% 0.18 NA 0.52 0.48 0.52 11.3 10.9 19.1 20.8 21.2
Palma De Mallorca 0.05 0.29 1.13 1.32 2.07 97.3% 96.8% 97.9% 98.9% 98.7% NA NA 0.30 0.35 0.03 5.4 8.2 20.0 20.6 22.9

ATFM slot adherence

All Spanish airports showed adherence around or above 95% and the national average was 98.1%. With regard to the 2% of flights that did not adhere, 1.4% were early and 0.6% were late.

The Spanish monitoring reports adds: The result for 2024 (aggregate of the 7 airports subject to monitoring) improves by 0,1% the result of the previous year, being all results well above the value of 80% set in Regulation (EU) No. 255/2010 of the Commission . ANSPs does not believe it is necessary to establish specific improvement measures. This PI is being monitored by AESA to evaluate the evolution of the indicators. If significant deviations are found, the possible causes will be analysed by contacting the relevant stakeholder.

ATC pre-departure delay

The calculation of the ATC pre-departure delay is based on the data provided by the airport operators through the Airport Operator Data Flow (APDF) which is properly implemented at all 6 Spanish airports subject to monitoring of this indicator. However, there are several quality checks before EUROCONTROL can produce the final value which is established as the average minutes of pre-departure delay (delay in the actual off block time) associated to the IATA delay code 89 (through the APDF, for each delayed flight, the reasons for that delay have to be transmitted and coded according to IATA delay codes.

However, sometimes the airport operator has no information concerning the reasons for the delay in the off block, or they cannot convert the reasons to the IATA delay codes. In those cases, the airport operator might:
- Not report any information about the reasons for the delay for that flight (unreported delay)
- Report a special code to indicate they do not have the information (code ZZZ)
- Report a special code to indicate they do not have the means to collect and/or translate the information (code 999)

To be able to calculate with a minimum of accuracy the PI for a given month, the minutes of delay that are not attributed to any IATA code reason should not exceed 40% of the total minutes of pre-departure delay observed at the airport.

Finally, to be able to produce the annual figure, at least 10 months of valid data is requested by EUROCONTROL. The high share of unidentified delay reported by 4 out of the 6 Spanish airports under monitoring prevent the calculation of this indicator. At Alicante the delay slightly decreased in 2024 (LEAL; 2022: 0.51 min/dep.; 2023: 0.68 min/dep.; 2024: 0.63 min/dep.). At Malaga the indicator resulted in an annual average of 0.53 min/dep.

According to the Spanish monitoring report: LEBL and LEMD do not report data for any month. GCLP and LEIB report around half of the months while LEPA only reports 2 months. Only LEAL and LEMG provides data every month. At some airports, such as LEMG and LEIB, data collection has slightly improved compared to 2023.
LEIB already reached 80k movements in 2023 and it is monitored together with these 6 airports since it is one of the airports considered in the Spanish performance plan (ESPP3) for RP3. This PI is being monitored by AESA to evaluate the evolution of the indicators. If significant deviations are found, the possible causes will be analysed by contacting the relevant stakeholder. There has been no change compared to previous years.

During 2022 AESA focused on investigating the origin of the lack of data. The delay represented in this indicator is related to IATA code 89 and AESA was able to confirm that the lack of data was due to the fact that these data did not meet the minimum quality required to be considered. PRU sets a minimum threshold on the quality of its data, so if codes ZZZ and 999 exceed 40% of the delay minutes, then the indicator is not published with a numerical value, as it exceeds that minimum threshold set by PRU. Sometimes it happens that the airport operator has no information on the reasons for the delay or it cannot be associated with an IATA code. After several communications with the airport manager, AESA has understood that codes ZZZ and 999 are generally assigned when no code has been given (and therefore the cause of the delay is not known) or when the actual delay does not match the declared delay. The indicator picks up the initial declared delay data but this is subject to change and so there are occasions when it does not match the actual delay. This is why there is so much indeterminacy represented by these ZZZ and 999 codes.
There does not seem to be a simple resolution to this situation since the data needed to publish the indicator is collected around the middle of the following month and the process of defining the codes that are more in line with reality is done through a post-operational analysis that takes considerably longer.

All causes pre-departure delay

The total (all causes) delay in the actual off block time at Spanish airports in 2024 increased once again at 5 of the 6 airports monitored for this indicator. The highest pre-departure delays were observed at Palma (LEPA: 2020: 5.44 min/arr; 8.20 min/arr; 2022: 19.98 min/dep; 2023: 20.62 min/dep; 2024: 22.89 min/dep) and Malaga (LEMG: 2020: 11.33 min/arr; 10.86 min/arr; 2022: 19.14 min/dep; 2023: 20.85 min/dep; 2024: 21.20 min/dep).

According to the Spanish monitoring report: In general, 2024 values are higher than the 2020-2023 values. The indicator is worsening mainly due to the increase in traffic this year, which at some airports (LEBL and GCLP) has reached an increase of 9% compared to the registered traffic in 2023. The evolution of the indicator throughout 2024 is upward in the first half of the year and then remains stable until the end of the year, this behaviour is given in almost every airport considered in ESPP3 (except GCLP). The aggregated result for 2024 (of the 6 airports subject to monitoring) is 19,06 min/dep, which continues to worsen compared to 2023 (17,57 min/dep) or 2022 (16,20 min/dep).

This type of delay seems to increase when the number of movements grows. The historical series with only 5 years (2020-2024) is very small because 2020-2021 are special years and therefore the behaviour of 2022-2024, being only three years, might not be extrapolable for future years considering that ENAIRE has reached its maximum historical level of traffic in 2024.

In addition, all cause departure delay is very generic and ATFM delay is only a small contributor. Departure delay can be generated by ATFM en-route delay (not only local airport, but the complete Network), but also reactionary and turnaround delay, technical issues with the aircraft, airport operations, problems with passengers and/or luggage, etc. In other words, it is not always possible to address a specific reason as this delay is quite generic. Consequently, without a clear focus of the problem to address, it is not feasible to establish measures that can significantly impact the improvement of the indicator, beyond those already mentioned in section 2.2.2.C PI #3 of this monitoring report.

This PI is being monitored by AESA to evaluate the evolution of the indicators. If significant deviations are found, the possible causes will be analysed by contacting the relevant stakeholder.