Commission Decision (EU) 2026/866 of 27 March 2026 on the initiation of the detailed examination of certain performance targets included in the revised draft functional airspace block performance plan for the fourth reference period submitted by Switzerland pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2026) 2002)

Official Journal EN of the European Union L series 2026/866 20.4.2026 COMMISSION DECISION(EU) 2026/866 of 27 March 2026 on the initiation of the detailed examination of certain performance targets included in the revised draft functional airspace block performance plan for the fourth reference period submitted by Switzerland pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council (notified under document C(2026) 2002) (Only the French, German and Italian texts are authentic) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on Air Transport(1), Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2004 laying down the framework for the creation of the single European sky (the framework Regulation)(2), and in particular Article 11(3) point (c), second paragraphs thereof, Having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/2803 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on the implementation of the Single European Sky(3), and in particular Article 58(3) thereof, Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 of 11 February 2019 laying down a performance and charging scheme in the single European sky and repealing Implementing Regulations (EU) No 390/2013 and (EU) No 391/2013(4), and in particular Article 15(1) and (3) thereof,

Whereas:

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

(1) Pursuant to Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 549/2004, Member States are to draw up plans, either at national level or at the level of functional airspace blocks (‘FABs’), including performance targets, for each reference period of the performance and charging scheme for air navigation services and network functions. Those plans are to include local performance targets which are consistent with the Union-wide performance targets for the reference period concerned.

(2) On 12 June 2024, the Commission adopted Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period (‘RP4’, 2025-2029). Those Union-wide performance targets were set out in Commission Implementing Decision

(EU) 2024/1688(5).

(3) On 1 October 2024, Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland (the ‘FABEC States’) submitted to the Commission a draft performance plan for RP4 adopted jointly at the level of Functional Airspace Block Europe Central (‘FABEC’). After the verification of completeness of that draft performance plan by the Commission, the FABEC States submitted an updated draft performance plan (‘the draft FABEC performance plan’) on 15 November 2024.

(4) The Commission found that the cost-efficiency performance targets included in the draft FABEC performance plan for the en routecharging zones of Belgium and Luxembourg, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland do not meet the assessment criteria laid down in point 1 of Annex IV of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 and thus are not consistent with Union-wide performance targets for RP4.

(1) OJ L 114, 30.4.2002, p. 73, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_internation/2002/309(2)/oj.

(2) OJ L 96, 31.3.2004, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2004/549/oj.

(3) OJ L, 2024/2803, 11.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2803/oj.

(4) OJ L 56, 25.2.2019, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/317/oj.

(5) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688 of 12 June 2024 setting Union-wide performance targets for the air traffic management network for the fourth reference period from 1 January 2025 to 31 December 2029 (OJ L, 2024/1688, 17.6.2024, ELI:

http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2024/1688/oj).

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/oj 1/8EN OJ L, 20.4.2026

(5) On 16 May 2025, the Commission therefore notified Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands of the findings regarding the inconsistency of the performance targets referred to in recital 4 through Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1040(6), whilst Switzerland was notified of those findings through Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1039(7). In those Decisions, the Commission issued recommendations to the FABEC States in view of ensuring the consistency of their performance targets with the Union-wide performance targets for RP4.

(6) On 14 August 2025, the FABEC States submitted a revised draft FABEC performance plan for RP4 for assessment by the Commission. Following the verification of completeness of that plan, Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland submitted an updated version of the revised draft FABEC performance plan (the ‘revised draft FABEC performance plan’) on 17 October 2025.

(7) In accordance with Article 15(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission has assessed the consistency of the local performance targets contained in the revised draft FABEC performance plan on the basis of the assessment criteria laid down in point 1 of Annex IV to that Implementing Regulation, and taking account of local circumstances where relevant.

(8) This Decision sets out the Commission’s doubts about the consistency with the Union-wide targets of the revised cost-efficiency performance targets of Switzerland contained in the revised draft FABEC performance plan. In parallel, the EU Member States part of FABEC have been notified separately by the Commission of the doubts about the consistency of the Netherlands’ revised cost-efficiency performance targets with the Union-wide targets.

(9) The Performance Review Board (‘PRB’), assisting the Commission in the implementation of the performance and charging schemes pursuant to Article 13(2) of Regulation (EU) 2024/2803, has submitted to the Commission its opinion on the performance targets included in the revised draft FABEC performance plan with regard to the consistency of those targets with the Union-wide performance targets. The findings set out in this Decision have been informed by the detailed technical assessment set out in the PRB opinion(8).

REASONS FOR INITIATING A DETAILED EXAMINATION

(10) The revised draft FABEC performance plan sets out revised cost-efficiency performance targets for the en route charging zone of Switzerland, together with updated baseline values for the determined unit cost (‘DUC’) for the years 2019 and 2024. The revised cost-efficiency performance targets and baseline values are shown in the table below in comparison with the corresponding numbers presented in the draft FABEC performance plan submitted in 2024.

(6) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1040 of 16 May 2025 on the inconsistency of certain performance targets included in the draft national and functional airspace block performance plans submitted by Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, France, Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Slovakia pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period of the Single European Sky performance and charging scheme (OJ L, 2025/1040, 23.5.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/1040/oj).

(7) Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1039 of 16 May 2025 on the inconsistency of certain performance targets included in the draft performance plan submitted by Switzerland pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 549/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council with the Union-wide performance targets for the fourth reference period of the Single European Sky performance and charging scheme (OJ L, 2025/1039, 23.5.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec_impl/2025/1039/oj).

(8) PRB Opinion No 1-2026 on the assessment of the revised draft performance plans for the fourth reference period (RP4), 28 January

2026.

2/8 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/ojEN OJ L, 20.4.2026 2019 2024 En routecharging baseline baseline 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 zone of Switzerland value value Initial cost-efficiency CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF targets (draft FABEC 110,08 124,74 131,82 133,17 131,03 128,63 129,42 performance plan submitted in 2024), expressed as determined unit cost EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ (in real terms in 2022 EUR 128,79 109,54 124,13 131,17 132,51 130,39 128,00 prices) Revised cost- CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF efficiency targets 109,47 129,67 135,41 136,48 133,56 130,38 122,05 (revised draft FABEC performance plan), expressed as determined unit cost EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR 121,45 (in real terms 108,93 129,03 134,75 135,81 132,90 129,74 in 2022 prices) Difference – 0,6 % + 4,0 % + 2,7 % + 2,5 % + 1,9 % + 1,4 % – 5,7 %

(11) The Commission notes that Switzerland has set an improved cost-efficiency performance target for the year 2029, whilst the cost-efficiency performance targets for the years 2025, 2026, 2027 and 2028 have been revised upwards, thus showing a deterioration compared to the draft FABEC performance plan submitted in 2024.

(12) The update of the traffic forecast for the charging zone, in line with the Eurocontrol STATFOR February 2025 base traffic forecast, had a significant negative impact on the cost-efficiency targets for each year of RP4. The revised traffic assumptions for the charging zone of Switzerland are presented in the table below.

En routecharging zone of 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Switzerland Initial traffic forecast (draft performance plan submitted 1 930 1 976 2 022 2 075 2 114 in 2024), expressed in thousands of en route service units Updated traffic forecast (revised draft performance 1 884 1 942 1 979 2 022 2 052 plan), expressed in thousands of en route service units Difference – 2,4 % – 1,8 % – 2,1 % – 2,5 % – 2,9 %

(13) The determined costs for the charging zone, on the other hand, were slightly increased in real terms for the years 2025 and 2026, whilst they were revised downwards for years 2027 to 2029. A significant decrease of 8,4 % compared to the draft performance plan is observed for the year 2029. The table below shows the revised determined costs for RP4, expressed in real terms in 2022 prices, as compared to the determined costs in the draft FABEC performance plan submitted in 2024.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/oj 3/8EN OJ L, 20.4.2026 En routecharging zone of 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Switzerland Initial determined costs in real terms CHF 254 M CHF 263 M CHF 265M CHF 267 M CHF 274 M in 2022 prices (draft performance plan submitted in 2024) EUR 253 M EUR 262 M EUR 264 M EUR 266 M EUR 272 M Revised determined costs in CHF 255 M CHF 265 M CHF 264 M CHF 264 M CHF 250 M real terms in 2022 prices (revised draft performance plan) EUR 254 M EUR 264 M EUR 263 M EUR 262 M EUR 249 M Difference + 0,3 % + 0,7 % – 0,2 % – 1,2 % – 8,4 %

(14) The Commission notes that the inflation forecast for RP4 for Switzerland has been revised downwards in the revised draft FABEC performance plan, compared to the draft FABEC performance plan. Therefore, the revised determined costs in real terms presented in recital 13 result in a reduction of the determined cost expressed in nominal terms for each year of RP4, including for the years 2025 and 2026 for which the determined costs in real terms are higher than in the draft performance plan.

(15) The Commission has assessed the consistency of the revised cost-efficiency targets proposed for Switzerland’s en route charging zone based on the criteria laid down in points 1.4(a), (b) and (c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation

(EU) 2019/317.

(16) Concerning the criterion laid down in point 1.4(a) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the en route DUC trend at charging zone level of – 1,2 % over RP4 is in line with the Union-wide trend of – 1,2 % over the same period. That finding is, however, subject to a further review and verification by the Commission of the adjustments applied by Switzerland to its baseline value for the DUC in respect of the year 2024 (‘baseline value for 2024’).

(17) Concerning the criterion laid down in point 1.4(b) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the long-term en routeDUC trend at charging zone level over the third reference period (‘RP3) and RP4 of +1,2 % underperforms the long-term Union-wide trend of – 1,0 % over the same period.

(18) Concerning the criterion laid down in point 1.4(c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission observes that the baseline value for 2024 of EUR 129,03 of Switzerland in EUR2022 is 52,6 % higher than the average baseline value of EUR 84,53, expressed in real terms in 2022 prices (‘EUR2022’), of the relevant comparator group set out in Article 7, point (e), of Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688. Furthermore, as indicated in recital 16, the Commission considers that the adjustments of the baseline value for 2024 have to be further reviewed and verified.

(19) In respect of the assessment criterion referred to in recital 18, Switzerland considers that the observed differences in the purchasing power parity and in the complexity of airspace between the States within the comparator group should be taken into account. However, it has not been possible for the PRB to conclude at this stage on the related effects on the cost bases of the air navigation service providers (‘ANSPs’) concerned. More detailed analysis is required in order to appraise the impact of purchasing power parity differences, airspace complexity variations and of any other operational or economic factors significantly impacting comparability between the ANSPs within the comparator group set out in Article 7, point (e), of Implementing Decision (EU) 2024/1688.

(20) Furthermore, the Commission has examined whether the deviations observed in recitals 17 and 18 may be deemed necessary and proportionate in accordance with point 1.4(d) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation

(EU) 2019/317. Accordingly, the Commission has assessed whether the observed deviation from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend referred to in recital 17 is exclusively due to additional determined costs related to measures necessary to achieve the performance targets in the key performance area of capacity or to restructuring costs within the meaning of Article 2, point (18), of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

4/8 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/ojEN OJ L, 20.4.2026

(21) The PRB has calculated the estimated difference between the determined costs for RP4 set by Switzerland in the revised draft FABEC performance plan and the determined costs that would be required to meet the long-term Union-wide DUC trend for RP3 and RP4 combined. Based on the PRB findings, the total determined costs for RP4 proposed by Switzerland fall short by approximately EUR 289,5 M in EUR2022 from the level required to meet the long-term Union-wide DUC trend, which corresponds to an annual average gap of EUR 57,9 M in EUR 2022.

(22) In respect of the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(i) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, the Commission notes that Switzerland refers in the revised draft FABEC performance plan to additional determined costs incurred over RP4 by the ANSP ‘Skyguide’ in relation to measures for the achievement of capacity targets (‘capacity measures’).

(23) Switzerland stresses, in the revised draft FABEC performance plan, that Skyguide provides services in a highly complex airspace and has been at the forefront of developing technological and operational solutions to improve the delivery of air navigation services. In particular, the innovative efforts pursued by Skyguide have aimed to digitalise and transform the provision of air navigation services though the so-called ‘Virtual Centre Programme’, which also continues to be implemented in RP4.

(24) Switzerland indicates that the focus over RP4 for Skyguide will be, firstly, to ensure an adequate number of air traffic controllers (‘ATCOs’) to meet the local capacity targets. Secondly, Skyguide will work, in parallel with the modernisation efforts comprised in the Virtual Centre Programme, on strengthening the resilience of its existing technologies, processes and infrastructure. In particular, Skyguide plans to allocate increased resources to the maintenance of its legacy equipment and infrastructure, in response to technical issues faced during RP3.

(25) Switzerland points out that the planned capacity measures are necessary to meet the local capacity targets. According to Switzerland, reducing or delaying those measures would lead to a deterioration of the quality of services in Swiss airspace.

(26) The Commission observes that Switzerland has presented and quantified five capacity measures in the revised draft FABEC performance plan. Over RP4 as a whole, the capacity measures presented by Switzerland amount to total determined costs of CHF 218,8 M expressed in real terms in 2022 prices (equivalent to EUR 217,7 M in EUR 2022).

Those capacity measures were already detailed in the draft FABEC performance plan submitted in 2024. However, the costs reported for those measures were revised significantly upwards in the revised draft FABEC performance plan.

(27) The Commission has initially examined and analysed below the following capacity measures reported by Switzerland

in relation to Skyguide: — Training and recruitment of additional air traffic controllers (‘ATCOs’) to manage rising traffic levels and to replace the planned retirements expected during RP4 (‘Measures 1 and 2’), — Implementation and development of business continuity management tools and procedures to enhance resilience (‘Measure 3’), — Investments in location-independent ATM operations (‘Measure 4’), — Deployment of various tools for the optimisation of air traffic flow management to and from airports (‘Measure 5’).

(28) Measures 1 and 2 include the training and recruitment by Skyguide of new ATCOs, both for the purpose of increasing the total number of ATCOs in operations at the Zurich and Geneva area control centres (‘ACCs’) and in order to replace the ATCOs who are due to retire during RP4. As a result of the actions planned under Measures 1 and 2, the number of ATCOs working on en routesectors at the Zurich and Geneva ACCs is expected to rise from approximately 198 full-time equivalents (‘FTEs’) in 2024 to approximately 219 FTEs in 2029, thus showing a notable increase of approximately 21 FTEs over RP4.

(29) Switzerland points out that the employment of additional ATCOs, as presented under Measures 1 and 2, is essential to accommodate the traffic growth expected over RP4. In particular, Switzerland explains that the availability of a higher number of ATCOs will enable the opening by Skyguide of additional sectors and will thus provide the capacity and flexibility needed to manage peak traffic demand.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/oj 5/8EN OJ L, 20.4.2026

(30) Measures 1 and 2 taken together amount to a reported total cost of CHF 154,0 M in nominal terms over RP4.

(31) The aim of Measure 3 is to strengthen the resilience of Skyiguide’s operations in order to enable a rapid restoration of critical systems and services in the event of unforeseen technical disruptions. Switzerland explains that Measure 3 will deliver additional redundancies and fallback solutions supporting operational business continuity and the resilience of systems, infrastructure and facilities.

(32) Switzerland has reported a total cost of approximately CHF 30,2 M in nominal terms over RP4 for Measure 3.

(33) Measure 4 encompasses the continued efforts of Skyguide to transition towards location-independent ATM operations through the implementation of the Virtual Centre Programme referred to in recital 23. The objective is that, as a result of the planned technical enhancements of the air traffic management system, Skyguide will be able to control any flight within the Swiss airspace from either of the two ACCs (Zurich and Geneva), thus enabling increased capacity, flexibility and efficiency of air navigation services. Skyguide also aims under Measure 4 to reduce the workload of ATCOs through increased automation and to roll out improved tools and processes for air traffic flow and capacity management. Measure 4 represents a total cost of CHF 42,4 M in nominal terms over RP4 as a whole.

(34) Under Measure 5, Switzerland invokes costs related to various initiatives and tools for the optimisation of air traffic flow management to and from airports. According to Switzerland, the actions presented under Measure 5 aim to optimise runway operations and increase efficiency. Switzerland reports a total cost of CHF 1,5 M in nominal terms over RP4 for Measure 5 in the revised draft FABEC performance plan.

(35) The Commission notes that the actions presented by Switzerland under Measure 5 relate to a large extent to the provision of air navigation services at aerodromes. Given that the costs of such services are outside the scope of the en routecost base, such costs may not be invoked to justify a deviation from the Union-wide cost-efficiency targets for en routeservices. The Commission considers that further information is necessary concerning the costs reported by Switzerland under Measure 5, in particular with regard to their allocation between en route and terminal air navigation services.

(36) Overall, the capacity measures invoked by Switzerland to justify the deviation from Union-wide long-term DUC trend are significant both in terms of magnitude and financial impact. A more detailed analysis of those capacity measures is necessary to assess their scope, costs, and proportionality in view of the achievement of the capacity targets.

(37) Without prejudice to the outcome of the further analysis referred to in recital 36, it is nonetheless clear that the additional costs reported by Switzerland for the capacity measures referred to in recitals 22 to 36 only partially justify the observed average annual gap from the long-term Union-wide cost-efficiency trend noted in recital 17.

That deviation can hence not be exclusively attributed to the additional determined costs for the presented capacity measures, regardless of whether those measures are in their entirety considered necessary and proportionate in view of achieving the local capacity targets.

(38) Therefore, the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(i) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 is not fulfilled in respect of Switzerland.

(39) In respect of the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(ii) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317, it suffices to mention that Switzerland has not presented, in the revised draft FABEC performance plan, any restructuring measures which would justify a deviation from the Union-wide DUC trend or from the Union-wide long-term DUC trend. Therefore, the criterion set out in point 1.4(d)(ii) is not fulfilled in respect of Switzerland.

CONCLUSIONS

(40) In conclusion, the Commission considers that Switzerland has not adequately addressed, in the revised draft FABEC performance plan, the recommendations set out in Article 2 of Implementing Decision (EU) 2025/1039 with regard to the cost-efficiency performance targets for its en routecharging zone.

(41) In particular, the Commission notes that the revised cost-efficiency performance targets proposed by Switzerland are not consistent with the long-term Union-wide DUC trend. The Commission also observes that the determined costs for the charging zone of Switzerland have not been reduced to a sufficient extent in view of ensuring consistency with the Union-wide performance targets. Furthermore, as indicated in recitals 16 and 18, the Commission considers that the adjustments applied by Switzerland to its baseline value for 2024 need to be further reviewed and verified.

6/8 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/ojEN OJ L, 20.4.2026

(42) Finally, the Commission did not find, based on the elements and justifications provided in the revised draft FABEC performance plan, that the deviation from the long-term Union-wide DUC trend could be exclusively attributed to additional costs incurred for the achievement of the local capacity performance targets. Further information and analysis would be required in order to examine other operational and economic considerations raised by Switzerland to justify the deviations observed in recitals 17 and 18 in respect of the assessment criteria set out in points 1.4(b) and (c) of Annex IV of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317.

(43) On the grounds of the findings set out in recitals 14 to 42, the Commission therefore considers, at this stage of the assessment of the revised draft FABEC performance plan, that doubts remain as to the consistency of the revised cost-efficiency performance targets proposed by Switzerland.

(44) The Commission has therefore decided to initiate the detailed examination set out in Article 15(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 in respect of the cost-efficiency performance targets for the en route charging zone of Switzerland,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1 The following cost-efficiency performance targets proposed for Switzerland’s en routecharging zone, included in the revised draft RP4 performance plan of the Functional Airspace Block Europe Central, give rise to doubts in respect of their consistency with the Union-wide performance targets:

2019 2024 En routecharging zone of baseline baseline 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Switzerland value value Revised cost-efficiency CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF CHF performance targets, 109,47 129,67 135,41 136,48 133,56 130,38 122,05 expressed as determined unit cost (in real terms EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR­ EUR 121,45 in 2022 prices) 108,93 129,03 134,75 135,81 132,90 129,74 Article 2

1. The detailed examination procedure set out in Article 15(3) of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 is hereby initiated with regard to the cost-efficiency performance targets referred to in Article 1.

2. In order to support the further assessment of the performance targets referred to in Article 1, Switzerland shall provide, upon request by the Commission, relevant additional data and information with regard to the elements set out in the Annex to this Decision.

Article 3 This Decision is addressed to the Swiss Confederation.

Done at Brussels, 27 March 2026.

For the Commission Apostolos TZITZIKOSTAS Member of the Commission

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/oj 7/8EN OJ L, 20.4.2026 ANNEX NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ELEMENTS FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS IN RESPECT OF THE COST-EFFICIENCY PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR THE EN ROUTECHARGING ZONE OF SWITZERLAND

(1) Determined costs for the fourth reference period (‘RP4’) with a focus on the upcoming calendar years 2027, 2028 and 2029, including the detailed assumptions and parameters underlying those determined costs for each entity in the scope of the charging zone

(2) Adjustments applied to the determined unit cost baseline values for the years 2019 and 2024

(3) Latest available actual costs recorded for the year 2025 for each entity in the scope of the charging zone

(4) Traffic assumptions used in the revised draft performance plan and latest available information on the forecasted traffic evolution over RP4 for the charging zone

(5) Measures invoked by Switzerland to justify the observed deviations from the Union-wide cost-efficiency trends on the grounds of additional costs for the achievement of capacity performance targets, and incentive schemes associated with those capacity targets

(6) Local circumstances possibly justifying a deviation from the assessment criteria set out in points 1.4(a) to (c) of Annex IV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/317 8/8 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2026/866/oj