AUC vs. DUC
In 2025, the terminal AUC was -1.0% (or -2.70 €2022) lower than the planned DUC. This results from the combination of significantly lower than planned terminal costs in real terms (-5.1%, or -7.5 M€2022) and lower than planned TNSUs (-4.2%).
Terminal service units
The difference between actual and planned TNSUs (-4.2%) falls outside the ±2% dead-band, but does not exceed the ±10% threshold foreseen in the traffic risk sharing mechanism. The resulting loss of terminal revenues is therefore shared between the ANSP and the airspace users (see the main ANSP regulatory result).
Terminal costs by entity
Actual real terminal costs are -5.1% (-7.5 M€2022) lower than planned. This is the result of lower costs for the main ANSP, ENAV (-5.8%, or -7.5 M€2022) and the NSA (-11.9%, or -0.1 M€2022) and higher costs for the other ANSP (ITAF, +0.3%).
Terminal costs for the main ANSP (ENAV) at charging zone level
Based on the additional information to the terminal reporting tables, the significantly lower than planned terminal costs in real terms for ENAV in 2025 (-5.8%, or -7.5 M€2022) result from:
Lower than planned staff costs (-4.9%), mainly due to: lower than planned inflation recorded during the year; an agreement to postpone predominantly ATCO bonuses, as part of labour contract renewal; reductions in the fixed portion of staff costs due to different hiring dynamics; a lower cost for operational overtime; and higher rate of capitalisation of internal effort.
Significantly lower than planned other operating costs (-14.4%), mainly due to: lower external support costs from cost-containment measures and greater use of internal expertise; reduced travel expenses following the postponement of some ATCO training sessions; lower utility and telecommunications costs driven by reduced electricity tariffs and partial deployment of the remote towers network; delayed data network infrastructure upgrades for security reasons; and lower infrastructure costs related to the Palermo offshore platforms and Pantelleria control tower.
Slightly lower than planned depreciation (-2.0%).
Significantly higher than planned cost of capital (+9.7%), mainly due to higher average cost of debt and higher total asset base.
Assessment of the actual performance in the charging zone reported by the NSA
The NSA of Italy provides the following overall assessment of the actual performance in 2025 at charging zone level:
“TCZ 2 2025 Italy AUC has been € 276.75, -1.0% compared to the 2025 DUC of € 279.46.
Cost reductions have been detailed in the Additional Information to Reporting Tables uploaded on ETNA.”
Explanation of the differences between actual and determined costs at charging zone level reported by the NSA
The NSA provides the following explanation for the differences between actual and determined costs in the charging zone:
“Main ANSP reductions for Staff and Operational have been already indicated in Section 2.4.1A. ERT-CZ 1 as they are at Company level. For what concerns Depreciation the reduction in TCZ 1 is 368 K€ that will be reimbursed to users. For increases, refer to COC considerations provided in Section 2.4.1A. ERT-CZ 1 that is valid for all ENAV SpA.”
Recommendations formulated by the NSA to the ANSP (ENAV) to rectify the situation and actions taken by the ANSP
The NSA 2025 monitoring report indicates the following recommendations formulated by the NSA:
“NSA recommended the ANSP a more precise cost planning for: specific investments and internal works capitalized.
NSA recommends as well more transparency in cost planning (specifically for what concerns revenue deductions).”
ENAV reports the implementation of the following actions:
“Refer to comment already indicated in En route CZ section.”