AUC vs. DUC
In 2025, the terminal AUC was +0.8% (or +11.61 RON2022, +2.36 €2022) higher than the planned DUC. This results from the combination of significantly higher than planned terminal costs in real terms (+8.3%, or +10.5 MRON2022, +2.1 M€2022) and significantly higher than planned TNSUs (+7.5%). It should be noted that the actual inflation index in 2025 was +2.9 p.p. higher than planned.
Terminal service units
The difference between actual and planned TNSUs (+7.5%) falls outside the ±2% dead-band but does not exceed the ±10% threshold foreseen in the traffic risk sharing mechanism. The resulting gain of additional 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 +8.3% (+2.1 M€2022) higher than planned. This is the result of higher costs for the main ANSP, ROMATSA (+8.3%, or +2.1 M€2022) while the NSA costs were broadly in line with the plan (+0.1%).
Terminal costs for the main ANSP (ROMATSA) at charging zone level
Based on the additional information to the terminal reporting tables, the significantly higher than planned terminal costs in real terms for ROMATSA in 2025 (+8.3%, or +2.1 M€2022) result from:
Higher than planned staff costs (+4.9%), reflecting “an increase of pension costs, compensation of personnel with inflation and non-recurring amounts for the higher than planned traffic and achievement of capacity targets”.
Significantly higher than planned other operating costs (+64.0%), understood to result from: 1) the impact of higher than anticipated inflation on the prices of materials and external services, 2) the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on the costs of licences maintenance contracts denominated in Euros, 3) procurement delays in 2024 which resulted in recognition of some associated costs in the 2025 accounting year, and 4) the recognition of impairment allowance for amounts due to be reimbursed by the Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure stemming from exempted flights. This item, which constitutes an accounting provision, is understood to be “recorded in accordance with Romanian accounting regulations and was not included in the determined costs for the reference period, nor is it recoverable through charges to airspace users”.
Lower than planned depreciation (-2.5%), resulting from delays in the implementation and commissioning of some investment projects.
Significantly lower than planned cost of capital (-14.6%), reflecting mainly lower than planned asset base.
Assessment of the actual performance in the charging zone reported by the NSA
The NSA of Romania provides the following overall assessment of the actual performance in 2025 at charging zone level:
“In 2025, the real terminal unit cost at TCZ1 level was 1,552.39 RON/US (in 2022 prices), compared to the determined unit cost of 1,540.78 RON/US, representing a deviation of +0.75% above the planned level.
Total terminal costs in real terms amounted to RON 136,791 thousand against determined costs of RON 126,315 thousand (+8.29%). In nominal terms, actual costs were RON 166,655 thousand against the determined RON 150,081 thousand (+11.04%).
The cost overrun in unit cost terms is substantially moderated by traffic performance: TCZ1 service units realised in 2025 were 88,117 against a plan of 81,981 (+7.48%), reflecting the strong performance of Bucharest Otopeni and the other airports in the zone, driven by above-plan demand growth. The traffic outperformance absorbs a significant portion of the absolute cost overrun, resulting in a unit cost deviation of +0.75% despite a nominal cost overrun of +11.04%.”
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:
“The deviation in actual costs relative to determined costs is driven primarily by: (i) staff costs exceeding the determined level by 7%, attributable to pension cost increases arising from the annual IAS 19 actuarial revaluation, inflation-linked remuneration adjustments, and non-recurring bonuses linked to above-plan traffic and capacity target achievement; (ii) other operating costs above plan, reflecting the higher-than-anticipated inflationary environment, adverse EUR/RON exchange rate developments, materialisation of procurement processes carried over from RP3, and the recognition of an impairment allowance on trade receivables - an accounting provision not included in the determined cost base and not recoverable through charges; partially offset by (iii) depreciation below plan (RON 4,637 thousand vs. RON 4,755 thousand determined), due to commissioning delays on the two ILS/DME systems now expected in June 2027; and (iv) cost of capital below plan, also reflecting the deferred commissioning of those investment projects.”
Recommendations formulated by the NSA to the ANSP (ROMATSA) to rectify the situation and actions taken by the ANSP
No recommendation formulated by the NSA was provided in the NSA 2025 Monitoring Report. At the same time, ROMATSA reports the following information:
“The cost overruns recorded in 2025 are attributable predominantly to factors outside ROMATSA's direct control and, where applicable, are subject to recovery mechanisms already provided for under Regulation (EU) 2019/317, which do not require corrective action by the ANSP. Specifically:
— The deviation in pension costs arises from the annual actuarial revaluation of the defined benefit obligation under IAS 19. The increase in the actuarial provision does not reflect any change in the benefit structure or workforce size. The difference, excluding the inflation adjustment component, will be deferred for recovery, with the timing to be confirmed following consultation with airspace users.
— The deviation in other operating costs reflects the higher-than-planned inflationary environment, adverse exchange rate developments, and the recognition in 2025 of procurement processes carried over from prior years when underspending was recorded. ROMATSA continues to apply cost discipline within the parameters of its operational and contractual obligations. The overrun is also attributable to the recognition of an impairment allowance on trade receivables, recorded in accordance with Romanian accounting regulations. This item constitutes an accounting provision and was not included in the determined costs for the reference period, nor is it recoverable through charges to airspace users.
— The lower depreciation and cost of capital outturn is a direct consequence of implementation delays in certain investment projects and does not indicate underinvestment: the overall investment programme remains on track. No corrective action is required or appropriate.
ROMATSA considers that no additional corrective measures are warranted beyond the regulatory recovery mechanisms already in place, as the cost deviations do not reflect operational inefficiency or a failure to implement planned measures.”