Q & A 1/12 Midterm review workshop CEF 2015 Transport Call for Proposals

 

  1. INEA indicated during Info Day held on 30th of November 2015 that Cost Effectiveness Analysis are only required for “work” but not “study”. Do you confirm this understanding that a “study” IP would not need to provide CEA?

A: In line with what written in the Call for Proposals concerning projects of common interest under the connecting Europe facility in the field of Trans-European Transport Network (available on INEA website), in particular the page 8 reports that for the proposals submitted under the “Single European Sky – SESAR – Common Projects category“, all project proposals for ‘works’ or proposals including both ‘studies’ and ‘works’ must be accompanied by a cost effectiveness analysis.

 

  1. Are Implementing Partners required to submit certified copies in the administrative part of the Applications?

A: Implementing Partners are required to provide SDM with the originals of the documents mentioned in the SDM Guidelines for CEF Transport CALL 2015 which are available on http://www.sesardeploymentmanager.eu/. With specific regard to the Financial Statements, when they are required, the documents must be certified by external auditorsfor the last financial year for which the accounts have been closed. In other cases no certified copies are required.

If an applicant has been operating for less than one year, the financial statements may be replaced by a letter of support obtained from a third party (for example, the applicant’s parent company) or by another applicant of the proposed Action.

 

  1. What is the official deadline for submitting Part A, B stamped and signed is it the 9th December or they can be submitted on 15th

A: The scanned copies of the Administrative/Legal documents should be provided by 9th of December. On the basis of the SDM comments and recommendations Implementing Partners will be required to provide the SDM with the originals by 15th of January 2016 (except the Application Form A2.3 – Member State endorsement which should be provided by 10th of February).

 

  1. RNP-AR is mentioned P.185 of DP2015 but not mentioned in family description 1.2.1. Can you confirm if RNP-AR is part of Pilot Common Project?

A: RNP – AR is currently not included in the description of Family 1.2.1 of the Deployment Programme 2015; in this respect, it shall be considered outside of the Pilot Common Project scope.

 

  1. Should Implementing Partners fill out the word versions of Application Form (A-C) and send it to SDM? And then SDM will use it to fill out the online version? Could you provide a check-list including all administrative documents that need to be submitted until 9th?

A: Yes, Part A to C shall be filled in according to the set of instructions described in the SDM Guidelines for CEF transport Calls 2015 and provided to the SDM. The Guidelines together with the Annexes are available on the http://www.sesardeploymentmanager.eu/sdm-guidelines-for-the-cef-transport-call-2015-available/. All information related to which documents and in which form (original/scanned) must be provided are reported in the Guidelines prepared by SDM to support you in the phase of elaboration and finalisation of the 2015 CEF Transport Calls responses preparation.

 

  1. Please explain in detail which additional documents to the excel IP template must be completed by Implementing Partners and which will be filled by theSDM. In other words: you have presented the various standardized word templates by INEA. Additionally you mentioned that you clusterprojects. Thus, are Forms A-C required for any project or do you prepare them for your clusters.

A: A correct Application to INEA consists of duly completed Application Forms A, B, C and D according to 2015 CEF Transport Call requirements.

The IP template duly filled in will be attached as annex to the Application Form part D. On the basis of the IP templates received, the SDM will elaborate a cluster approach to ensure full alignment with Deployment Programme, cluster will group a number of IP templates. Accordingly a full set of Part A, B, C and D will be required for each of the clusters.

In other words each Implementing Partner has to provide the SDM with the full batch of the originals one per cluster (e.g. if you participate to two different clusters you have to provide us with two batches of originals independently on how many projects are included in the cluster). For detailed information please refer to the SDM Guidelines available on our website http://www.sesardeploymentmanager.eu/sdm-guidelines-for-the-cef-transport-call-2015-available/.

 

  1. Where do we take the TENtec number from?

A: The TENtec number will be generated once the Application Forms are uploaded to the TENtec website. The SDM will send you in advance the email including the TENtec number to be put in Application Forms A2.2 and A2.3.

 

  1. Can projects be funded as part of the cohesion fund which are not within the regional area of the PCP like AMAN Prag?

A: Yes, Indeed. The project should be submitted under the category “Other Projects” within the Cohesion/General Call envelope. This category comprises other projects not included in Common Projects and not falling under the competence of the SESAR Deployment Manager that contribute to the implementation of the SES by promoting the optimal provision of air navigation services and seamless functioning of the European ATM system

 

  1. Can you please further elaborate on the required Operational Capacity statement in the scope of Form B? Can you please provide examples of acceptable statements?

A: Applicants that have to demonstrate their operational capacity must submit appropriate documents attesting that they have the technical and operational capacity to complete the proposed Action. These may include organisations activity report, proof of adequate professional qualifications of the team responsible for implementing the proposed Action (e.g. CVs), proof of recent experience in carrying out similar or related actions, or evidence of previous cooperation with European or international bodies.

 

  1. Can you confirm the status of Switzerland/Swiss companies considering that a bilateral aviation agreement with the EU is in place? Is this considered as “EU country” or “Third/Neighboring Country”?

A:In line with the art.2 of the CEF Regulation, Switzerland falls under the category “neighbouring country’ which  means a country falling within the scope of the European Neighbourhood Policy including the Strategic Partnership, the Enlargement Policy, and the European Economic Area or the European Free Trade Association.

 

  1. Do we need to split a project in 2 based on the co-funding rate 20% / 50%?

A: For the purpose of the projects submission in response to the 2015 CEF Transport Calls for Proposals no splitting on the basis of the co-funding rate is required. The split will be performed in case of positive evaluation and selection of the project, in the SGA preparation phase and on the basis of EC and INEA indications 

 

  1. What is the co-funding rate to upgrade flight simulators for training purposes?

A: The upgrade/purchase/procurement of Flight Simulators for training purposes has to be considered as outside of the PCP and Deployment Programme 2015 scope. Therefore all related activities are not eligible for funding within the 2015 CEF transport Calls – General call and Cohesion call under the category – “Common Projects”.

 

  1. Can you confirm that the rate of funding for airborne industrialization actions is 50% for a general call project? or Call for tender text states that “studies encompass deploy an existing technology…already in use elsewhere…in order to create marketconditions for deployment at a larger scale”. From that definition we assume that 50% is the standard funding rate that can be applied (study rate). Can you please confirm this understanding to be valid?

A: SDM shares the understanding of the candidate Implementing Partner: as mentioned in the 2015 Calls for Proposals text, studies aimed at creating market conditions for deployment of existing technologies at a larger scale and shall be considered as eligible for a co-funding of the incurred costs up to the 50% of the overall investment. However, the ultimate decision on such topic is within INEA remit.

 

  1. As an AIRLINE we actually have the issue that the proactivity of ANSPs/airports is quite low to ask us to join specific projects. However we have the obligation to submit applications to PCP related measures within this call to ensure funding’s for our investment needs.Therefore individual up applications for our adaption needs have been prepared. In this regards we already saw that similar proposalshave been already prepared but there was never any contact to us. One example: we have to adapt to SWIM and prepared an IPapplication. ANSP/airports have prepared an application as well. Due to the actual time constraints there will be no option anymore tomerge templates into one IP application. Thus the only option is to refer to each other. Is this ok and supported by the SDM thatindividual adaption needs of stakeholders are reflected and individual templates; but referred to each other. We expect that SDM willcomment on that in the handover to INEA.

A: SDM takes in the utmost consideration the synchronization and coordination among different stakeholders in the deployment of similar/intertwined projects or implementation initiatives; in this respect, SDM has suggested, whenever possible and in compliance to potential confidentiality issues, to establish contacts and liaise between different stakeholders. Considering the tight available timeframe, it is however acknowledged that in several cases, it is highly difficult or not possible the merging of similar initiatives. In such occurrence, SDM support the understanding of the candidate Implementing Partners: cross-reference and indication between similar or linked projects are needed and encouraged, in order to better plan, execute and monitor the implementation initiatives.

 

  1. You mentioned that “No more Action leader is required”. We did not understand exactly the impact. Does it still mean each IP needs to have a “Project Leader” to be the sole interface with SDM and with IP partners (or does SDM substitute to that and directly manages the various IPPs)? Also you mentioned about a separate open call for PMO, does it mean that PMO activities don’t need to be planned in each IP?

A: The previous 2014 CEF Transport Calls for Proposal was launched in September 2014 whilst the SDM was established only on 5th of December 2014 through the signature of the SESAR Deployment FPA. Accordingly, SDM started the coordination of applications already being prepared under the leadership of single operational stakeholder. According to such specific and unique framework, the EC accepted the differentiation of roles between SDM as Action Coordinator and the Action leader. The former in charge of the tasks listed in FPA art II.1.3, the latter acting as interlocutor between the Implementing Partners and SDM on behalf of all the other Implementing Partners, and as a focal point for the information flow and regular updates to SDM.

With reference to the current 2015 CEF Transport Calls, EC confirmed that the two roles cannot be maintained, and the SDM shall provide the overall coordination of the whole Action.

In this respect, SDM will not substitute the internal management of the single IPs, each IP has to plan and perform the project management activities needed at project level. In addition, we confirm the need for the identification of Project Leaders as a single interface between the SDM and IPPs of a single IP for project technical aspects. On the other hand for the financial, administrative and legal aspects the SDM will manage directly with the IPPs.

 

  1. Regarding Application Form Part C: Under section I it is stated that for SESAR section I only need to be filled out if the proposed action includes physical works affecting a site designated as protection zone. If our proposal does not include physical works, does this mean, that we do not have to fill out Section I and thus, for example, also do not need to Annex C-I?

A: Yes, indeed. If the IP does not include physical works affecting a site designated as protection zone the Part C Section 1 shall not be filled in, all other sections shall be considered and filled in according to the instructions and relevance.

 

Disclaimer

The content and conditions of all 2015 CEF Transport Calls related documents (https://ec.europa.eu/inea/en/connecting-europe-facility/cef-transport/apply-funding/2015-cef-transport-calls-proposals) SESAR Deployment FPA and Model Grant Agreement always prevail on any different information, which may be included in this document and/or in any formal or informal communication with the Implementing Partners, exchange of emails, etc.