Frequenly Asked Questions

In a nutshell, the SDB is to European air transport what the contracts with a Telco Provider and an Internet Service Provider are for a household. The household purchases the “ICT Services” offered by the providers, and monitors that the services are provided as agreed. It does not get involved in the inner workings of how the providers go about producing these services.

The main difference is that air transport requires a multitude of interdependent contracts because the business is so complex. For example, different technologies are required for ground-ground and air-ground information exchanges so there need to be different contracts. But since the information needs to flow between all actors involved in the air transport value chain (e.g.pilots, dispatchers, controllers, ground handlers…), these contracts are interrelated.

The “pay – per-use” principle applies for each of the SDB individual services. This also means that no user of the SDB pays for services he does not use.

The SDB provides information exchange infrastructure only. This means that it exclusively deals with “data in flow”. Therefore it does not contain or “own” any data. This also means that the SDB respects all rights (ownership, intellectual property, etc.) of the stakeholders to their data by design.

No, the SDB cannot be an ATM Data Service Provider (ADSP) by definition. It enables ADSPs to do their business.

Because it allows operational stakeholders to directly coordinate on technology evolution, and incrementally change the communication infrastructure. Of course, regulatory oversight will continue to apply.

As is further explained in the Whitepaper, the 3SA will be guided by the following four principles:

- The 3SA will work to ensure that all European operational ATM stakeholders should have access to the same information exchange resources, so that there is a “level playing field” (competition objective).
- The 3SA will work to ensure that changes to the SDB are agreed in an inclusive, transparent and collaborative process (fair evolution objective).
- The 3SA will work to govern the SDB such that the actual operational needs of the Single European Sky, in particular with regards to safety, cyber security and overall systemic efficiency, are duly taken into account (responsibility objective).

The 3SA will push to accelerate the digital evolution of the European ATM systems. A light, non-heavy administrative approach will be promo ted (agility objective).

The 3SA will not do any research work and will not interfere with the competence of the SJU.

The 3SA could act as a useful provider of input for the SJU, as it is positioned to identify and articulate research needs related to information and communication technology that emerge during practical operations.

The 3SA-SDB initiative was originally started by the A6 Alliance of ANSP’s and EUROCONTROL. Today, the Working Group comprises volunteers from all segments of the ATM industry, and is facilitated by the SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM). All operational stakeholders are invited to join the initiative at any time.

The easiest way is to send an email to louise.assomo@sesardeploymentmanager.eu or magnus.molbaek@sesardeploymentmanager.eu and express your interest to join the Working Group. You will hear from us very quickly because we want you on the team!

According to DLS Recovery Plan, the IP proposals submitted for 2016 CEF Transport Calls shall highlight the stakeholders’ commitment to ensure that the ATN B1 multi frequency avionics is or will be tested against “best in class” criteria defined in ELSA. In this direction, the IP template includes a specific task, Task 0, aiming at ensuring the performance of testing activities on the avionics to demonstrate equivalent minimum level of performance in a MF environment prior to implementation.

The RMT.0524 on Datalink Services addresses elements of the PCP ATM functionality 6 requirements (‘Initial Trajectory Information Sharing’) and, in particular, the requirements necessary to implement ‘Extended Projected Profile’ (EPP). This RMT may also consider providing the requirements for various other applications related to the extended data link operations. Details available in the link provided by EASA: https://www.easa.europa.eu/document-library/terms-of-reference-and-group-compositions

DLS is an essential prerequisite to business trajectory (i4D/AF6 in PCP and 4D later) which is the backbone of SESAR operational concept. Therefore, benefits from a considerable portion of SESAR solutions would be severely inhibited unless AF6 delivers.

DLS is the broader framework of services and applications in the domain of aeronautical air-to-ground data communications. CPDLC is one such application, it enables the controller to issue instructions (such as transfers, frequency changes) and clearances (such as speeds, headings, direct-to, descend-to) by way of a text message implemented between the ATC and aircraft terminals. Another such application is ADS-C, anticipated for implementation in 2025. ADS-C is intended for system to system data exchange between the aircraft FMS and the ATC FDP.

The datalink is designed to deliver any message and its associated response within 16 seconds 95% of the time, and 20 seconds 99% of the time. This excluding the operator delay, that means the time the crew takes to consider the message and produce a response. While it is true that in the recent past, network congestion led to subpar datalink performance, recent operational statistics show a marked improvement; the 95th percentile is in fact returned in 10 seconds, and the 99th percentile in 24 seconds (September 2017). The bottom line is that in the European en-route environment, the controller will always have the plain old RT available to use as the safety critical communications channel. Controller training and experience will equip the controllers with the necessary skill to determine when to use datalink and when to use RT.

Indeed, there are some marked differences. The European DLS is built upon the ATN protocol suite, which could be described as an evolution of the FANS datalink as known from oceanic operations. In ATN there is a wider selection of messages available as well as a higher level of confidence of message delivery in a given timeframe.

ELSA is the acronym for “Enhanced Large Scale ATN deployment”. However, it is used as synonym for the results of the “VDL Mode 2 Measurement, Analysis and Simulation Campaign” that were produced by the “ELSA Consortium and Programme Partnership” for the SESAR Joint Undertaking between February 2015 and June 2016. The Final Report, Deliverable D11, was released on June 30th, 2016.

One of ELSA recommendations for the optimization of the ground network was the “Introduction of alternate channels using reserved frequencies, addition of frequencies, and transition to one managed MF VDL2 network per Service area”. The concept of “one managed MF VDL2 network per Sevice area” is referred to as “Model D” in the ELSA documents. The other models are:

- Model A: The initial situation in most parts of Europe, with a single VDL Mode 2 frequency shared by two different VDL M2 network operators (ARINC and SITA).
- Model B: Two different networks as an Model A, but with additional, reserved frequencies. I.e., each of the additional frequencies is managed by only one service provider.
- Model C: The initial situation in southern parts of Europa, with a single VDL Mode 2 frequency operated by only one network operator (ENAV)
- Model C* (or C MF): Multiple VDL Mode 2 frequencies operated by only one network operator.

According to SJU capacity study performed in 2015 and which assumed the use of 4 VDL Mode 2 frequencies, the study expected saturation of this network to occur around 2025. Taking into account the availability of a fifth frequency, and the growing demand for ACARS data that is being transmitted over this network, a new capacity study will be performed in 2018 to re-evaluate the expected lifetime of VDL Mode 2. Beside VDL Mode 2, complementary communication technologies will be taken into account to support the sustainability of the VDL Mode 2 network.

According to the EC mandate of the 18th October 2016, the SDM assumes the role of DLS implementation project manager responsible for organizing, implementing and monitoring the activities identified in the DLS Recovery Plan as necessary for the implementation of the DLS transitional solution and the preparatory actions for the full achievement of the European target solution, Model D, in order to achieve the implementation of AF6 in accordance with the deadlines defined in the PCP Regulation. This role is performed working together with all relevant stakeholders and EU Bodies, in particular the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), the European Defense Agency (EDA), the Network Manager (NM), the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU), EUROCAE, NSAs and the manufacturing industry.

SDM has supported the stakeholders in launching several projects to implement the DLS Recovery Plan:

- in the short term, to improve the performance of the VDL Mode 2 network to support the DLS IR (implementation of VDL Mode 2 Multi Frequency on the ground, and upgrade of avionics to “Best-in-Class” – supporting Multi Frequency – on the airborne side), as well as
- in the medium term, to improve the capacity of the VDL Mode 2 network to support AF6 by initiating preparatory activities to optimize the VDL Mode 2 network according to ELSA recommendations.

In addition, SDM is supporting stakeholders to launch a project to start the design of the first components of a common European ATN network.

The data are currently provided by 5ANSP’s in central EU. Further details can be provided by NM– Data link Performance Monitoring Group (DPMG).

The two architecture are fully transparent for the avionics as reported in the Path II WP2 architecture document.

It is the ANSP who holds the certificate for ATS ; AOC and ATS traffic belong to different services. It should be recognised that the concept of a single end-to-end certificate cannot be achieved within the present certification context. Rather than an end-to-end certification, we should focus on ensuring end-to-end performance. While the ATS is currently the only regulated part of datalink operations, discussions within the EASA RMT.0524 have highlighted that the interaction and sharing of resources between AOC and ATS needs to be accounted for in the measurement of performance. What is important is the level of performance required and how this performance is to be met and maintained.

The idea is to extend the VDL M2 lifetime by offloading data.

ENAV should provide the actual implementation status to the DPMG.

This was already addressed during the workshop. The target is to reduce the number of ATN routing domains to a single ATN-Service Area.

A cluster of ATN routers was proposed to provide the required availability figures. The architecture for such a solution is under investigation in IP1 (WP1 addresses the detailed design).

The AOC problem, if any, needs to be solved before a transition to Architecture 1. If needed, more details have to be discussed with CSPs (service providers) and then, the CSPs have to discuss with ENAV being their partner in providing the infrastructure.

This was already addressed during the workshop. The data are currently provided by 5 ANSP’s in central EU but further details can be provided by NM – Data link Performance Monitoring Group (DPMG). As central Europe is the high traffic area of Europe, the PA figures are significant and indicate the better performance achieved today.

This was already addressed during the workshop. Even if a single ATN routing domain is established in Europe, there will be boarders to adjacent regions (e.g. Africa, Russia, Middle East). It is not yet decided if these adjacent regions will implement ATN. However, if adjacent regions will implement ATN but will not join the European ATN Backbone, we will face the same issues.

Today there is no obligation to provide data to DPMG or other entities. This issue should be addressed by ENAV.

IP1-WP3 (business case) will do this.

The availibility requirements are the same on all VDL M2 Frequencies used for ATN traffic.
Dual coverage is one technical solution that is used widely in Europe to achieve this requirement .

The MF implementation was identified by ELSA as a transitional solution and today we have good results even if we never reached the targeted performance values. We need to guarantee also the service performance in the future considering the current increase of bandwidth demand. The Model D has been mandated by EC as European target solution. Regarding this architecture, further analysis of technical and non-technical (like costs) open points are taking place in IP1.

This was discussed at the last DPMG meeting and reporting on this topic will be expected at the next meetings.

The Model C/D was technically analysed and endorsed by ELSA. The possible future way to implement it is currently under analysis in Path II WP4 where all transitional aspects shall be considered in order to minimise any kind of risks.

The deployment of more advanced technologies is currently under investigation by SDM. More detailed questions on this matter should be raised to SJU.

As of today no, due to the very close channel allocation (only 25kHz space between DLS channels).

Ground Station Designers will have to consider requirements to avoid interference among VHF Voice and Data Stations installed at a location (i.e. an Airport). The limitations derived from physics must be respected for both VDL-architectures and will limit the number of frequencies operated at a single VGS. Operating more VDL Frequencies will therefore require additional VGS sites. This is the same for both architectures.

This was already addressed during the workshop. There are also other regions implementing additonal VDL M2 channels (e.g. USA) but only in Europe we are implementing ATN services together with AoA (ACARS over AVLC) over VDL M2.

This was already addressed during the workshop. Primarily VGS topology and usage of frequencies.

This was already addressed during the workshop. Median and optimistic traffic growth scenarios will be used.

Most likely, however this will also depend on the current equipment of the aircraft (e.g. SATCom). These technologies are however still under investigation.

Yes, it is covered by IP1 WP1.1.

Both options are under evaluation. Model D was identified by ELSA as a technical solution that would optimize the capacity and the performance of the existing implementation. IP1 together the Capacity assessment will provide information regarding the advantages (in terms of capacity/lifetime) of Model D over Model B and will also provide a business case to identify the costs associated with a possible Model D implementation across Europe. All this information will be provided to the European Commission to support their decision making process.

BIC is a synonym for best performant avionics in MF environment, as per the ELSA study.

This was already addressed during the workshop. It is too early to answer this question – EC/EASA will decide towards End of 2019.

The focus of the work currently being done under the DLS Recovery Plan is to secure the investments (by both AUs and ANSPs) that have already been made in VDL Mode 2. Indeed, the primary objective is to extend the lifetime of VDL Mode 2 as much as possible (in a reasonable way). Complementary technologies (like SATCOM, AeroMACS, LDACS, etc.) are expected to take over some of the load from the VDL Mode 2 network when they become available. As there will be no mandate (according to the current planning) for AUs to use these technologies, these potential costs are not considered.

This was already addressed during the workshop. Current operations should not be affected by any further transitional step.

The effort and cost associated with the implementation of Model D will be considered in the BC.

The simulation model is the same one that had already been used for the original SJU study. Nevertheless, the results of the simulations for 2018 will be compared to data available for 2018. This is currently being done by SDM, USBG and ECTL.

This was already addressed during the workshop. It is too early to answer this question – EC/EASA will decide towards End of 2019.

This was already addressed during the workshop. According to IR (Eu) No 29/2009, an ANSP has to provide DLS to all airspace users. I.e., SITA and ARINC customers. Contracting a single, most likely certified, DSP will reduce overhead for all ANSPs.

This is correct. AU’s will not be considered as DLS users because, according to the presented model, they will continue to receive the ACARS data directly from the existing CSP’s. There will be no direct contractual relation between AUs and the DSP. Therefore, the AU’s are not considered as users of the DSP.

Last year EUROCONTROL received the ICAO mandate for actions based on PBCS monitoring, in order to build synergies with other similar monitoring (cf. RMA) mechanisms. We intend to use the same channel/governance for communication with the state authorities. At the present time, the procedure is not yet finalised and does not include the adhesion to the fans-cra.com PBCS charter. We take comment and will analyse the potential benefit/feasibility.

This was already addressed during the workshop. The SDM is in charge of providing answers to the findings of the EASA report.

In the European framework, the elements of a datalink system are assessed through various certification and compliance oversight mechanisms. As discussed within the EASA RMT. 0524, rather than an end-to-end certification, we should focus on ensuring end to end performance that provides for an adequate level of safety and operational efficiency.

EASA has provided the DLS exemptions report with a proposal for the European Commission (EC) to consider. Taking into account EASA’s proposal, the EC will decide on the amendment to the regulation IR (EU) No 29/2009 and will provide a consolidated decision on aircraft models/types to be exempted. Based on the outcome of the adopted amendment to the DLS IR and the future consolidated decision on the Article 14 aircraft exemptions, it is recommended that the operator notifies their Competent Authority (NAA) of the aircraft operated that are subject to the exemptions conditions of the revised DLS IR or the published consolidated decision.

According to the DLS Recovery Plan, the SESAR Deployment Manager is acting as a precursor, stimulating the establishment of a single European DLS Governance taking advantage of SDA Model.

With regard to this, the SDM encourages the elaboration of a multistakeholder project that will specifically define an European Common DLS Governance and support the SDM in the identification of the Service Areas and the design of the required system architecture at Service Area and European level in order to implement the European target solution as defined in the ELSA study.

Moreover, as the definition and implementation of an effective data link end-to-end system certification process is considered an essential enabler to a successful deployment and operation, SDM will interface through dedicated working arrangements, with the relevant stakeholders and Bodies (EASA and Standardisation Bodies) to facilitate its execution.

Croatia is a Member State falling under the Cohesion Call (with still 23,4% – 105 mil Euro of available budget in cohesion envelope).
Serbia falls under the neighborhood countries which may participate without receiving funding in projects of common interest, if their participation is deemed necessary for the achievement of the objective of a Common Project. Where indispensable, neighborhood countries may receive funding for their participation. In any case, the evaluation and selection process of the submitted proposals is led by INEA/EC. Following the approval by the CEF Committee, the Commission adopts individual financing decisions for each of the selected projects.

In order to ensure adequate awareness on how the DLS strategy is expected to be translated into typical DLS projects to be submitted by the relevant stakeholders into 2016 CEF Transport Calls, the SDM is available to meet all the involved stakeholders on such topic.

The list of the selected projects, and the respective amounts of EU financial support, is submitted for approval to a committee formed by Member States representatives (the “CEF Committee”).
Following approval by the CEF Committee, the Commission adopts individual financing decisions for each of the selected projects, detailing the conditions under which the EU funds will be disbursed, including a set of milestones and deadlines to be reached.
INEA assists the Commission in processing, evaluating and selecting the projects. It also helps to communicate about the calls for proposals, manages the funds once these are allocated to specific projects, and monitors implementation of the projects.

Yes, Implementing Partner can decide to participate without requesting any funding. However, it will imply to perform monitoring and reporting activities included in the SGA, according to its Annex 1 “Description of the Action”. Please refer to Article 18 of the Model Specific Agreement, which you can find at the following link: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/model_grant_agreement_en.pdf. It’s worth noting that in such cases, those beneficiaries will not be subject to all the obligations normally foreseen for the other beneficiaries (e.g. they will not be subject to financial audits nor will they have to submit an IFS or CFS).

Pursuant to Article 9 of the CEF Regulation, only those proposals submitted by one of the following types of applicants are eligible:
• One or more Member States;
• With the agreement of the Member States concerned, international organizations, joint undertakings, or public or private undertakings or bodies established in Member States.

Proposals may be submitted by entities which do not have legal personality under the applicable national law, provided that their representatives have the capacity to undertake legal obligations on their behalf and offer guarantee for the protection of the Union’s financial interests equivalent to that offered by legal persons.
Proposals submitted by natural persons are not eligible.
Multi-Stakeholder projects are possible and welcome by INEA under the FPA long-term cooperation mechanism which establishes the management and implementation levels of the SESAR deployment governance (relations between 3-layer governance) and set the principles for the co-ordination among them.

The SDM will be in a position to answer the question in occasion of the Launch event planned on 27th of October 2016 in Brussels.

The deadline of the Indication of Interests (IoI) was on the 13th of September 2016. However, please note that the IoI process is not a binding process and has no impact on the submission of proposals for Implementation Projects in response to the 2016 CEF Transport Calls for Proposals.

The eligibility period of the proposals submitted under CEF Call 2016 Framework covers the February 2017 (date of the submission of the proposals) – December 2020 time span, as reported in the standard feedback to operational stakeholders following the Indications of Interest exercise.

The text of the CEF Call 2016 – published on October 13th – is available at the following link: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/2016-cef-transport_map_general_call_text.pdf
https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/2016_cef_tran_map_general_sesar.pdf In addition, SDM has set a different deadline for the first round of DLS Implementation Projects expected for November 17th

Please refer to question: When we describe the IP proposal in the template and we define the action in GANT and milestones, we define according to the internal PMO methodology and project timing. When the SGA is only signed off almost 1 year later, as from what moment cost can be made and will be eligible?
The period of eligibility of costs will start as specified in the Specific Grant Agreement.
If a partner can demonstrate the need to start the action before the agreement is signed, expenditure may be authorised before the grant is awarded. In such cases, costs eligible for financing may not have been incurred prior to the date of submission of the grant application (February 2017).

Please refer to question: In order to prepare the proposals for the call 2016, I was wondering if the SDM will make available a new IP template or if we can use the one used for the call 2015?
In support to the 2016 CEF Transport Calls for Proposals, a new template for IP Description is available.

According to the principle of non-retroactivity, no grant may be awarded retrospectively for actions already completed.
The period of eligibility of costs will start as specified in the Specific Grant Agreement.
If a partner can demonstrate the need to start the action before the agreement is signed, expenditure may be authorised before the grant is awarded. In such cases, costs eligible for financing may not have been incurred prior to the date of submission of the grant application.

In line with the INEA indications one bank account needs to be provided by each Action Beneficiary.

In accordance with the high-level principles stated in the Deployment Programme 2016 (Strategic View, Section 2.7.4), operational stakeholders are strongly suggested to liaise in order to present joint Implementation Projects, which shall encompass all activities deemed necessary to fully close Implementation gaps (as identified in the DP 2016 Project View). SDM has already exploited the Indications of Interest exercise to suggest to expand the scope of the project to other local stakeholders and – when necessary – to highlight to specific stakeholders the opportunity of merging specific initiatives into joint proposals. In addition, SDM will take advantage of the first round of Implementation Projects (expected for November 3rd; specifically, for DLS Implementation Projects the first round is expected for November 17th) to identify candidate Implementation Projects that still could be merged, in order to better synchronize and de-fragment the PCP deployment.

According to the INEA Guides for Applicants, the originals of the Administrative and Legal documentation need to be provided independently if they have been sent in support to the previous CEF Transport Calls for Proposals.

Yes, indeed, the envelope 300M euros are for both PCP (Category 1 ‘Common Projects’) and other projects (Category 2 ‘Other Projects’). Please note that the distribution of such amount should represent approximatively 80% of the envelope for Category 1.

The contractual reporting is compliant with the CEF framework, which is itself consistent with the general rules for EU grant management.

In order to consolidate the Action proposals, the inputs and supporting documents (legal and administrative) from the Implementing Partners are needed to fill in the Application Forms A, B, C and D.
The SDM is will present the process for proposal(s) preparation in occasion of the Launch event planned on 27th of October 2016 in Brussels.

For more details about the event please click here.

For the purpose of the 2016 CEF Transport Calls for Proposals, a new template for IP Description is available.
As many stakeholders have requested to benefit from maximum flexibility during the first round, in particular to facilitate exchanges with potential other partners, the SDM decided to run the first round on the basis of an Excel IP template.
Therefore, the first draft of your candidate IPs shall be submitted by 3rd of November using this Excel IP template Specific guidelines are provided to support you when filling in this Excel IP template.
However, from the second round onwards, you will be requested to consolidate your candidate IPs into the STAR tool. By 21st of October, together with the general guidelines for 2016 CEF Calls for Proposals preparation, the SDM will provide you with another specific guidelines to ease your migration from Excel to STAR tool.

The SDM is not in a position to answer this question.
However, please note that under the current CEF Regulation, EU Law, including the CEF Regulation, continues to apply to and within the UK until the UK actually leaves the EU. This includes the eligibility of UK legal entities to participate and receive funding in CEF actions.
Therefore, the outcome of the UK referendum has no impact on 2016 CEF Transport Call for Proposals.

Yes, indeed. Cohesion Member States, entitled to the co-funding of up to 85% under Cohesion call, can also submit and support proposals submitted under the General call as any other EU Member State. In that case, if selected, those proposals would benefit from the general CEF Transport funding rates (up to 50% for ground infrastructure and up to 20% for airborne equipment) and the funding would not count towards the national envelope of the Cohesion Member State in question.
However, the same implementation projects cannot be submitted twice under the 2 envelopes.

The IoI exercise was totally on voluntary basis, all organizations eligible to the CEF Transport Calls for Proposals can submit the IP description, even if not participating to the IoI process. In support to the 2016 CEF Transport Calls for Proposals a new template for IP Description is available. Please refer to Q&A 1.
The first deadline for the provision of IP Description has been set on 3rd of November 2016.

In response to Indications of Interest, on October 10th the SESAR Deployment Manager has provided targeted feedback to operational stakeholders, in order to better structure the future candidate Implementation Projects and build a more coherent and integrated proposal. With regard to the alignment between different stakeholders and the merging of similar/parallel initiatives, SDM has scouted potentially overlapping initiatives and underlined the opportunity of submitting a joint multi-stakeholder initiative. Specific Point of Contacts have been highlighted, in order to set the ground for bilateral contacts.
Furthermore, SDM will take advantage of the first round of Implementation Projects (expected for November 3rd, for DLS Implementation Projects the first round is expected for November 17th) to identify candidate Implementation Projects that could be merged, in order to better synchronize and de-fragment the PCP deployment.

For the time being the equipment referred to in the families 1.2.1, 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 are the ones eligible for funding.

For the time being the equipment referred to in the families 6.1.2 and 6.1.4 are the ones eligible for funding.

According to the Deployment Program 2015, chapter 5.1.1 these cases are covered under 2 categories: Implementation planned (no CEF funding requested/awarded) in light purple colour, “Implementation in progress (no CEF funding requested/awarded) in purple colour.

For the time being the question is not easy to answer, as the EASA-regulation is not published. The equipment which has to be obtained to fulfil the PCP-requirements is described in the families 1.2.1, 1.2.3 and 1.2.4.

The costs are eligible for co-funding from the date of the Specific Grant Agreement signature. In some cases and when properly justified the costs can be eligible for co-funding from the date of the proposal(s) submission.

The Application Forms in support to the CEF Transport Call 2015 are published on the INEA website. They can also be found annexed to the SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015 here.

The Proposal(s) to be submitted in response to the CEF Transport Call 2015 is composed of four parts (including their respective annexes) as follows:

- Application Form Part A identifies the main characteristics of the proposal (e.g. brief description of the proposed Action and its activities, contact details and characteristics of the applicants, as well as information related to the funding requested, the transport mode, placement on the network etc.).
- Application Form Part B provides administrative information about the applicants, their designated affiliated entities and their financial capacity.
- Application Form Part C provides information on the compliance of the proposed Action with EU law in the fields of environmental protection, interoperability, state aid, road charging, public procurement, and other sources of EU funding.
- Application Form Part D provides technical and financial information on the Action submitted for funding.

All Implementing Partners who want to participate to the CEF Transport Call 2015 have to prepare and submit to the SDM the information necessary to properly populate the four above mentioned forms according to the SDM Guidelines and INEA indications (including supporting documentation). SDM in its role of coordinator will prepare the overall Forms for the proposal according to the data provided.

The Proposal submitted in response to the CEF Transport Call 2015 is composed of the 4 parts:

• Application Form A

• Application Form B

• Application Form C

• Application Form D

The IP templates are one of the Annexes of the Part D of the proposal. The budget (included in part A) and Technical part of the proposal (included in part D) are elaborated on the basis of the information provided through the IP templates duly filled by the Implementing Stakeholders.
In particular, the process for the IP templates elaboration will be the following:

1. Implementing Stakeholders submit a first draft of the IP templates duly filled in

• SDM technical experts elaborate the assessment and recommendations to the IP templates received

2 . The Implementing Stakeholders elaborate and submit the second draft version of the IP templates on the basis of the SDM indications

• SDM technical experts elaborate the final assessment of the IP templates received

3 . The Implementing Stakeholders elaborate and submit the final version of the IP template to be included as an annex to the Application Form Part D (Final deadline for the provision of the finalised IP templates from Implementing Stakeholders to SDM: 16.12.2015)

4. Part D and Budget elaboration
On the basis of the IP templates the Part D (technical part) and Budget will be elaborated through the following iterative process:
SDM elaborates, according to the information provided by Implementing Stakeholders through the IP template, and uploads the draft of the Part D for the proposal v1.0 together with the relevant budget v1.0

• Implementing Stakeholders comments/provide the contributions (within the agreed deadline) SDM collects the comments/contributions and uploads the version 2.0 of the draft Part D and Budget .

• Implementing Stakeholders comments/provides the contributions (within the agreed deadline).
  SDM elaborates and uploads the final version 3.0 of the Part D and budget

• Implementing Stakeholders approve the version 3.0 of the Part D and budget

An Abstract of the approved versions, Part D and Budget, is submitted to the interested Member States for their endorsement to be provided according to INEA provisions.

Part A, B, C elaboration
The Administrative, Economic, Legal part and Part C (compliance with the EU policy) of the proposal will be elaborated on the basis of the documents received from the Implementing Partners (in line with the INEA process) through the following process:
Implementing Partners send scanned copies to SDM (according to the SDM indications and INEA request) .

• SDM provides the Implementing Partners with the comments to the documents received to support them in ensuring compliance with CEF transport call provisions.
  Implementing Partners send the requested information and documents, revised on the basis of the indications received, in original to the SDM.
  SDM collects and package the proposal for the submission to INEA trough the eTEN-tec tool for the part D, part A, B and C are provided in original.
  For further timeline details, please refer to the SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Calls for Proposals 2015 available here.

Yes, indeed. It is worth noting that all sections envisaged are needed in order to properly populate the different sections of the Application Form, as well as to enable exhaustive presentation of the Implementation project. Accordingly all the sections shall be duly filled in.

According to the INEA process no exception can be made for the period of the eligibility costs.

We understand the question is related to the upcoming call for proposals CEF Transport 2015. Within the CEF Transport Calls for Proposals 2015, 515 M€ are made available for the ATM priority under the general Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) budget, 300 M€ are made available for projects in Member States eligible for the Cohesion Funds. The ATM budget related to the period 2014-2020 should amount 2.5 billion € in total.

The necessary templates have been distributed as well as published on the SDM website on 11th of November 2015. In addition to the templates, reference is made to the SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Calls for Proposals 2015.

In order to efficiently manage the CEF Transport Call responses preparation and to facilitate the interaction with Implementing Partners SDM will carry out several facilities:

• Dedicated email address (cefcall2015@sesardeploymentanager.eu) to be used as unique address the formal communication between SDM and Implementing Part

• Questions & Answers – SDM intends to publish on its website the most relevant questions and answers

• Dedicated web-based platform which will be used as official repository of all guidelines and templates necessary to participate to the Proposals, public and restricted sections will be set up in order to ensure confidentiality of the information and documents provided in line with the article II.5 Confidentiality of the FPA

• Videos: All SDM videos are available on the SDM website
  

Being the coordinator of the SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership Agreement, the SDM coordinates all Implementing Partners’ proposals to the CEF Transport General and Cohesion Calls for Proposals under the category “common projects”. During the proposals’ preparation, the SDM performs an assessment and a screening of the candidate projects received and provides feedback to assist the candidate Implementing Partners in better addressing the CEF Transport calls 2015 requirements.
Reference is made to the CEF text regarding Funding Priority 3 (SESAR), category 1 (common projects), which states:
“Applicants under this category must coordinate their applications with the Deployment Manager who shall perform a screening of these applications to assess their relevance to this category. For this purpose the above mentioned applicants shall provide the Deployment Manager with all the necessary information that it requires to ensure coherence and effective coordination of the projects in accordance with the Deployment Programme. Based on this assessment, the Deployment Manager may advise the applicants to revise their applications or to submit them under the “Other projects” category.” (source: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/3.3.1.cef-t_2015_all_priority_sesar.pdf)

In the execution phase:
As coordinator of the actions into which the implementation projects are embedded, SDM is in charge of submitting Action Status Report to INEA and request each beneficiary to produce a declaration on honour stating that the information provided is “full, reliable and true” and that costs are “real” and “eligible.
As Deployment Manager, the SDM coordinates and synchronizes the implementation projects. The SDM analyses in particular the interdependencies between the implementation projects and the specific transversal risks stemming from these interdependencies. When mitigations are required, SDM interacts with the relevant implementing projects in order to mitigate transversal risks and ensure full and timely PCP implementation.

The new Implementing partners will share the same rights and obligations of those implementing partners already included in the Framework Partnership Agreement.
This applies also to the FPA Coordination Fee, which is regulated in the Internal Cooperation Agreement Part B art 6.: the same transparent rule applies to all Implementing Partners.
It is important to highlight that the FPA, and the ICA (which is required by Article I.5 of the FPA and it is an integral part of the FPA) represent the fundamental contractual framework for the SESAR deployment which already exists and which the selected CEF call applicants are required to join as partners before being able to sign the SGA covering their projects: “Applicants who are awarded a grant under this call and are not partners in the SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership will be required to join the SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership, as partners, by signing the Framework Partnership Agreement before being able to sign the Specific Grant Agreements covering their projects.” (source: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/3.3.1.cef-t_2015_all_priority_sesar.pdf)
The model FPA and SGA are published with the CEF call for proposals. The terms and conditions of the FPA, ICA and SGA are not subject to negotiation with the implementing partners as it is of utmost importance to ensure the equal treatment of CEF beneficiaries, and avoid customised provisions negotiated by beneficiaries

The new Implementing partners will share the same rights and obligations of those implementing partners already included in the Framework Partnership Agreement.
This applies also to the FPA Coordination Fee, which is regulated in the Internal Cooperation Agreement Part B art 6.: the same transparent rule applies to all Implementing Partners.
It is important to highlight that the FPA, and the ICA (which is required by Article I.5 of the FPA and it is an integral part of the FPA) represent the fundamental contractual framework for the SESAR deployment which already exists and which the selected CEF call applicants are required to join as partners before being able to sign the SGA covering their projects: “Applicants who are awarded a grant under this call and are not partners in the SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership will be required to join the SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership, as partners, by signing the Framework Partnership Agreement before being able to sign the Specific Grant Agreements covering their projects.” (source: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/sites/inea/files/3.3.1.cef-t_2015_all_priority_sesar.pdf)
The model FPA and SGA are published with the CEF call for proposals. The terms and conditions of the FPA, ICA and SGA are not subject to negotiation with the implementing partners as it is of utmost importance to ensure the equal treatment of CEF beneficiaries, and avoid customised provisions negotiated by beneficiaries

SDM has no mandate outside the PCP and therefore will not have any role in the non-PCP part of the 2015 call. This is valid for the preparation of the proposals as well as for the execution phase.

Commission Implementing Decision (2014/99/EU) of 18 February 2014 set out the list of regions eligible for funding from the European Regional Development Fund and the European Social Fund and of Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund for the period 2014-2020. These are Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia and Slovakia. Cohesion states are eligible for cohesion funds but not obliged to submit applications on Cohesion Fund only. However, it is important to underline that when submitting under the Cohesion Call, the co-funding rate is up to 85% of the eligible costs, regardless the nature of the investment as ground based infrastructure or as on board equipment, whist in the General Call the co-funding rates are respectively up to 50% for ground based infrastructure and up to 20% for on board equipment. Therefore, there is an obvious interest in submitting under the Cohesion Call.

Pursuant to Article 8 of the TEN-T Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013), Article 9 of the CEF Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013) and the eligibility criteria defined in the CEF multi-annual programme(Commission Implementing Decision No C(2014)1921), entities from third countries may participate in projects supporting projects of common interest and they could receive CEF Transport financial assistance provided that:

• they are neighbouring countries in the sense of Article 3 of the TEN-T Regulation and Article 2 of the CEF Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013);

• projects aim to implement traffic management systems (in the specific case of SES- SESAR implementation);

• their participation is necessary and indispensable to the achievement of the objectives of a given project of common interest;

• applications receive the agreement of a Member State.
  

Moreover, entities from third countries may participate in projects of common interest without receiving CEF financial assistance, where their participation is necessary and duly justified to achieve the objectives of a given project of common interest.
Common Projects, as defined in Regulation (EU) 409/2013, are projects of common interest in the sense of the TEN-T Regulation. Entities from third countries included in the scope of Common Projects could be considered as being necessary and indispensable for the achievement of the objectives of a Common Project. The application from will require the compulsory signature of a Member State certifying that the participation of a third country is necessary or necessary and indispensable.
The Neighbourhood Policy covers (http://eeas.europa.eu/enp/about-us/index_en.htm): Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egypt, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Moldova, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, Tunisia and Ukraine;
The Enlargement policy covers (http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/countries/check-current-status/index_en.htm): Albania, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo;
EEA and EFTA cover: Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Lichtenstein.

Indicatively, 80% of the funding available under Priority “Single European Sky – SESAR” will be dedicated to projects selected under the Common Projects category (Category 1).
However, the final allocation of funding may be adjusted between Common Projects and Other Projects (Category 2) depending on the actual funding needs of the selected proposals, while giving priority to the implementation of Common Projects. For further details, please consult the relevant documentation on the website of INEA.

In line with the second subparagraph of Article 8(7) of the CEF Regulation and Article 126(3)(c) of the Financial Regulation, VAT paid by beneficiaries of grants awarded following this call for proposals is eligible except:

• deductible VAT (VAT paid by the beneficiary for the implementation of taxed activities or exempt activities with right of deduction);

• VAT paid for the implementation of activities engaged in as a public authority by the beneficiary where it is a Member State, regional or local government authority of a Member State or another body governed by public law of a Member State.

Considering that beneficiaries that are public bodies of Member States are expected to carry out activities as public authorities (to exercise prerogatives of public powers), VAT paid by beneficiaries that are public bodies established in Member States is, in principle, ineligible.

The evaluation and selection of proposals, submitted under the CEF-Transport, is carried out exclusively by the Commission, with the assistance of INEA and the support of independent technical experts, whose role is to ensure that only the most high-quality proposals, which best meet the award criteria described in the relevant work programme and call text, including the Deployment Programme 2015, are selected for funding. SDM neither is responsible for the project selection, nor does it make recommendations to INEA and EC. Only INEA (EC) with support of the external experts are in charge of the evaluation. When preparing the proposals, SDM teams with the candidate implementing partners to develop the highest quality proposals.

A) SDM has distributed an updated IP template to its contact database on 11/11/2015. This template is also available on the SDM website.

The IP template constitutes the essential form through which the SDM collects relevant information on technical and economics of the implementation projects proposals. The Proposals will be submitted to INEA using the Application Form provided within the call, Application Form Part A, Part B, Part C and part D. The IP templates will be attached as annex to the Part D.

B) In case of project to be submitted under either General Call and Cohesion call, separate proposal(s) for General Call and Cohesion Call shall be submitted separately to INEA including clear cross referencing, according to requirements posed in the 2015 CEF transport Calls with the concept of “twinned proposals”.

Each partner participating to the 2015 CEF calls will have to re-submit the entire documentations requested by the calls to finalise each section of the proposal(s) (Part A; Part B; Part C and Part D) according to the instructions provided in the “SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015”.
All the information on information and documentation to be provided to the SDM are included in the “SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015” available on the SDM website.

The Proposal(s) to be submitted in response to the CEF Transport Calls 2015 is composed of four parts (including their respective annexes) as follows:
Application Form Part A identifies the main characteristics of the proposal (e.g. brief description of the proposed Action and its activities, contact details and characteristics of the applicants, as well as information related to the funding requested, the transport mode, placement on the network etc.).
Application Form Part B provides administrative information about the applicants, their designated affiliated entities and their financial capacity.
Application Form Part C provides information on the compliance of the proposed Action with EU law in the fields of environmental protection, interoperability, state aid, road charging, public procurement, and other sources of EU funding.
Application Form Part D provides technical and financial information on the Action submitted for funding.
All the information and documentation to be provided to the SDM are included in the “SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015” available on the SDM website.

Please use the information in the IP template as well as the filled-in example of an IP template available here for guidance on the level of detail required.

The Cohesion call for proposals addresses a number of priorities, as described in sections 3.1 to 3.3 of the multi-annual work programme, falling within one of the Funding Objectives of the CEF Regulation. Single European Sky – SESAR is the Funding Objective 3. As for the General call, the Cohesion call anticipates an indicative 80% – 20% sharing in between the “common projects” and “other projects” categories.

All proposal(s) have to be submitted to INEA within the deadline of 16 February 2016 (17:00 Brussels time).
A detailed roadmap for the proposals to be submitted with the SDM coordination in response to the priority PCP, is provided within the “SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015” available on the SDM website.

States will endorse the proposal after preparation and aggregation by SDM, prior to the delivery to INEA. The full package for the Member States endorsement shall be released on the 20th of January and endorsement shall be provided by the 10th of February. Please refer to the full roadmap included in the “SDM Guidelines for the CEF Transport Call 2015” available on SDM website.

No. The deadline for INEA call was initially 26/02/2015, extended to 09/03/2015.

The tasks of the SESAR Deployment Manager are defined by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013 article 9. In addition, as FPA coordinator, SDM is also the action coordinator for each (cluster of) implementation projects. As such, SDM will provide support and coordination services to the implementing partners in order to facilitate timely PCP implementation.

SDM acts as a facilitator in the framework of an EU Regulation. States and their stakeholders are already bound or “forced” by the regulation. SDM is there to help stakeholders to implement what they are already bound to implement by law (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 716/2014). Therefore, there is nothing more to be “forced” by SDM. On the contrary, when SDM detects that there is a gap in implementation (missing projects), it could go to the stakeholders not submitting the expected projects, analyse their show stoppers and work with them to create an environment more favourable to their individual decisions to invest.

The assessment of innovative funding mechanisms is one of the tasks of the SDM according to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013. The SDM will provide in due time proposals in this area. Any SDM proposal is foreseen to be first shared and validated with the EC and then, at a later stage and if specific mechanisms are foreseen to be put in place, consulted in the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform.

It is not the SDM who will control the correct application of the procurement procedures within a specific implementing project, those procedures are under the full responsibility of each implementing partner. The application of public or national procurement procedures will be eventually checked by INEA.

Yes, combining co-funding through grants and other incentives is possible. Under the INEA call framework, the co-funding ceilings have been established by law up to 20% for airborne equipment and up to 50% for ground infrastructure. Under Cohesion fund calls, the eligible regions can reach a higher level of co-funding.

Indeed, all European ATM stakeholders will be invited and supported to prepare relevant proposals for projects. This will first take place through their involvement in the DP development phase through the SCP, where they will be able to express their opinion on the DP, including on what the DP plans for them to implement and by when. Then, after the DP is approved by EC and used by INEA as the specification for the call, stakeholders will be expected to submit proposals according to the DP. In this submission phase, SDM will activate a “support to stakeholders” service to facilitate the development of proposals complying with the DP.

Such stakeholder will not be synchronised and coordinated by SDM through the FPA framework. However, some informal coordination and support from SDM could take place on a voluntary basis.

The final decision is up to INEA and EC.

SDM’s assessment of the implementation projects initiatives aims to confirm that they are within SDM’s scope, not to decide whether they should be co-funded or not. For the purpose of CEF Transport Call for proposals 2014, please refer to the chapter 2 and the annex A of the PDP V1.
For future CEF Transport Call for proposals, DP will be approved by EC before the calls are launched and become an integral requirement for these calls. DP V1 will thus endeavour to identify projects to be submitted in the next calls so that the PCP could be implemented timely and fully. Therefore, future calls should come with more details, including the technical and the performance view, making any future SDM assessment more straightforward than for the call 2014.

An Action is a cluster of Implementation Projects.

The Action Coordinator means the SESAR Deployment Manager acting as coordinator within each INEA Implementation Action for the purpose of performing the FPA Coordinator’s Tasks.

Action Leader means the Implementing Partner designated by all of the Implementing Partners of a given Implementation Action as the interlocutor with the SESAR Deployment Manager and the leader of that Action for and on behalf of all Implementing Partners of such action, and as the focal point for the flow of technical and economic information and regular updates to the Action Coordinator.

For technical and execution management of the projects, the SDM will directly liaise with the leaders of the Implementing Projects (called Implementing Project Leader – IP leader). In case of a multi-stakeholders IP, IP leader will act for and on behalf of the others Implementing Partners of the project.

No. All decisions on INEA applications remain with INEA (including co-funding percentage up to 50% for ground investment and 20% for airborne).

SDM steers the CEF Transport calls for proposals through its Deployment Programme (DP), the project view drawn from the PCP. For instance, the DP V1 that will be delivered to the EC on 30th June 2015 will be the specification for the next CEF Transport Calls for Proposals expected at the end of 2015. Because of the central role of the Deployment Programme, we invite and strongly recommend all operational stakeholders to get involved directly or indirectly in its consultation.

During the submission phase, the SESAR Deployment Manager supports the stakeholders and facilitates their applications. In anticipation of its future role to synchronise and coordinate, the SESAR Deployment Manager structures and clusters individual projects into a limited number of proposals. Within each proposal, the SESAR Deployment Manager inserts an FPA coordination work-package that includes specific coordination services to be delivered by the SESAR Deployment Manager during the execution of the projects. Consequently, the SESAR Deployment Manager is a partner in every proposal, together with the implementing partners.

Once projects have been awarded by INEA, the SESAR Deployment Manager provides for a single interface with INEA during the execution phase, with regard to the administrative and co-funding management of the projects. With regard to technical issues, operations and performance, the SESAR Deployment Manager will liaise directly with the project managers to ensure coordination and synchronisation of implementation projects as per EC regulation.

The financial envelope decision and information is up to INEA and the European Commission. They will publish their planning and their decisions. This also implies any relation to actions and decision in the context of the so called “Juncker plan”.

The SDM will adapt its planning according to INEA timelines and EC decisions.

The timeline and the sequence for the INEA calls is up to INEA. They will publish their dates and planning. The SDM will adapt its planning according to INEA timelines and EC requirements and support the implementing stakeholders in the context of PCP implementation and INEA calls to the largest extent possible.

It is up to the beneficiary to decide. It is recommended if any issues regarding the costs incurred are foreseen between the beneficiary (i.e. the EEIG) and its members. In such cases, the status of affiliated entities would provide a higher degree of legal certainty.

(source: INEA)

The model grant agreement is meant to cover a wide range of cases regarding examples of intellectual property rights and cannot be exhaustive in the text. Beneficiaries are requested to provide a list of IPR related to the supported action.

(source: INEA)

The time limit of 90 days for interim payments (if applicable) and for the payment of the balance begins with the reception of the official request from the beneficiary by INEA.

(source: INEA)

The rules governing the access to documents (Regulation 1049/2001) apply to INEA. It means that for documents originating from beneficiaries (financial statements, ASR, etc.) the Agency follows the rules established under article 4 and consults the beneficiary before disclosure. A Member State may request the Agency not to disclose a document originating from that Member State without its prior agreement.

(source: INEA)

The first ASR for all Actions starting in 2014 and before 1/7/2015 is due by 31/3/2016. The beneficiaries will be asked to report, inter alia, on achieved progress from the beginning of the Action until the end of 2015 (in other words no specific ASR is required for the year 2014).

(source: INEA)

A strong coordinator is a very important element in a successful Action. The coordinator is expected to have the overview of the Action’s implementation and is thus requested to gather all required information and documentation for the due submission of deliverables and requests for payment in accordance with the Grant Agreement.

Certification of costs incurred should be provided by the Member State in which the beneficiary is established. However in exceptional cases and where requested by the beneficiary, this certification may be provided by the Member State in which the action is implemented. Therefore, the Member State where the coordinator is established does not necessarily need to certify the cost incurred by beneficiaries established in other Member States or third countries and the Member State does not need to certify the entirety of the costs of the Action incurred in different Member States and third countries.

(source: INEA)

Amendments should be of exceptional nature only. The idea is to simplify the procedure for amendments as much as possible. Therefore, simple amendments may be done by an exchange of letters. More complex amendments requiring changing an important number of provisions will require a formal amendment.

(source: INEA)

The Grant Agreements will be signed by the Agency as provided for in its delegation of powers adopted by the Commission. However, the delegation of tasks to the Agency is without prejudice to the Commission’s competence as Authorising Officer, for instance regarding checks, audits and evaluation. In addition, the Commission is referred to where it is solely entitled to take action, i.e. enforceable Decisions with regard to the recovery of amounts unduly paid.

The Model Grant Agreement has been discussed with and validated by horizontal services of the Commission, which confirmed that the Commission does not need to co-sign the individual Grant Agreements.

(source: INEA)

If the Coordinator has received the mandate for the signature of the Grant Agreement, the Coordinator can sign on behalf of the beneficiaries also possible subsequent amendments. However, the Coordinator, in its role as an intermediary for all communications between the beneficiaries and the Agency, must keep all co-beneficiaries duly informed. It is therefore highly recommended that the beneficiaries establish internal arrangements which also cover the procedure to prepare and agree on requests for amending the Grant Agreement.

(source: INEA)

Annex IV is the mandate from the beneficiaries to the coordinator to act on their behalf and therefore it is always compulsory for multi-beneficiary Actions. However, all beneficiaries may sign the Grant Agreement in certain cases, as far as this is efficient and practical and does not represent a disproportionate administrative burden.

(source: INEA)

The obligations of the Member States derive directly from Article 22 of the CEF Regulation. There is no change to the TEN-T practice that Member States certify for the beneficiaries established in their territory. Gathering the certification by the Member States is an explicit requirement for EU beneficiaries under the terms and conditions of the Model Grant Agreement. Obviously, beneficiaries have all interest to cooperate with the Member State, as there can be no further payments without the certification by the responsible Member State. Member States are free to organise the modalities for providing such certification.

(source: INEA)

INEA has provided translations of the Model Grant Agreement into all EU official languages. They are available at the transport call website (at http://ec.europa.eu/inea/connecting-europe-facility/cef-transport/apply-funding/2014-cef-transport-calls-proposals/2014-cef under “background documents”). Furthermore, beneficiaries are aware of the specific features of each project, in particular the description in Annex I and the budget in Annex III. Therefore, INEA cannot reimburse costs for translation.

(source: INEA)

The reasons for the selection of English as the authentic language for the signature of the Grant Agreement are the following:

• The signature of Grant Agreements in English as the authentic language allows for high legal certainty (considering the number of mistakes evidenced by TEN-T beneficiaries in previous Commission decisions) as well as for a common reference language in multi-beneficiary grants. Indeed, English is the most used working language between beneficiaries and the Agency. The use of all EU official languages would require an excessive amount of working hours, budget and additional staff that cannot be justified.
  

• To fulfil the requirement of the time to grant established by the Financial Regulation the beneficiaries and the Agency only have a limited period for the final signature of the Agreement (a total of 9 months after call closure having in mind the need to wait for the selection decision before starting GA preparation). In addition, commitments and payments need to be executed before year end.
  

• The text of the Model Grant Agreement has been translated into all 23 EU languages and is available on INEA’s website since summer 2014.
  

• The individual elements of each Grant Agreement represent a rather low volume and they are mainly related to the information contained in Annex I (description of the activities) and the budget data (numerical data in Annex III). All this information is extensively discussed between the beneficiaries and INEA during the preparation of the Grant Agreement.
  

• As an inter-parties agreement, the Grant Agreement is in full respect of Regulation 1/58 as to the language regime.

(source: INEA)

You can find an overview of all SESAR Deployment projects on the Country Overview page.

The modernisation of Europe’s Air Traffic Management (ATM) networks is crucial for the sustainability of European aviation and the forecasted increase in air traffic by 2035. The Single European Sky (SES) ATM research project, “SESAR”, is one of the most ambitious modernisation projects launched by the European Union contributing to the implementation of SES.

You can find more information here.

The SESAR Deployment Alliance (SDA) is the organization which has been selected by the European Commission to perform the SDM function until 31st December 2020.

You can find more information here

The SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) function is defined by the Article 9 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) N°409/2013. Under the oversight of the European Commission, the SDM function consists of the synchronisation and the coordination of the deployment of the Common Projects. A Common Project is a Commission Implementing Regulation which mandates the implementation of the most essential operational changes in the European ATM Master Plan by the Member States of the European Union and their operational stakeholders. The first Common Project is known as the Pilot Common Project (PCP) and is defined by the Regulation (EU) N°716/2014. The SDM synchronises and coordinates implementation against the SESAR Deployment Programme which is a project view of the Common Projects organizing their implementation into optimum sequences of activities by all the stakeholders required to implement. To develop and maintain the SESAR Deployment Programme in close consultation with all the stakeholders is another important task under the SDM function.

The Internal Cooperation Agreement (ICA) is an integral part of the FPA. There is only one ICA that binds all the partners.
In the framework of SESAR Deployment Alliance bid proposal to the European Commission, a draft ICA has been submitted to EC. In compliance with the high level principles of the Framework Partnership Agreement concluded between the EC and the partners, the ICA further details the key arrangements between the partners, in particular the relationship between the coordinating partners grouped in the SESAR Deployment Manager (management level of the governance) and the implementing partners (implementation level of the governance). Through SDA’s selection as SESAR Deployment Manager, the EC has confirmed that the arrangements proposed in the draft ICA comply with FPA’s provisions.
The ICA has been finalised. After another review by EC it will be signed by the coordinating partners grouped in the SESAR Deployment Manager. The ICA will be made available through this website. Pending its publication, an information note with the main features of the ICA (consultation, SDM accession mechanism, FPA coordination fee) has been published on 25th February 2015 by SDM and is available here.

No. Every stakeholder receiving a grant from the Innovation & Networks Executive Agency (INEA) will have to become a member of the Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) of the Deployment Manager to get access to the grants, but it is not mandatory to become a member of the SESAR Deployment Manager consortium.

All operational stakeholders who have been awarded by INEA for an implementation project and who have signed the FPA, its Internal Cooperation Agreement (ICA) and the Specific Grant Agreement (SGA), could also apply to become a member of the SESAR Deployment Manager consortium afterwards, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the ICA.

The deployment takes place in the legal framework of the “SESAR Deployment Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA)”. The FPA was signed on the 5th of December 2014 by the European Commission and NATS as coordinator of the SESAR Deployment Alliance consortium, in the name and on behalf of all its members.
In the SESAR framework partnership, the SESAR Deployment Manager acts as the coordinator, the members of the SDM are the coordinating partners and the other partners, executing implementation projects, are the implementing partners. Note that the coordination partners are also implementing partners.
In particular, the SDM as coordinator shall:
Monitor that the Action plan and actions are implemented in accordance with the Framework agreement and the specific agreements;
Be the intermediary for all communications between the partners, the European Commission and the Innovation & Networks Executive Agency (INEA);
Make the appropriate arrangements for providing any financial guarantees required under the Framework agreement or a Specific agreement;
Establish the requests for payment in accordance with the Framework agreement and the Specific agreements;
Ensure that all the appropriate payments are made to the other partners without unjustified delay;
Bear responsibility for providing all the necessary documents in the event of checks and audits initiated before the payment of the balance, and in the event of evaluation.
The FPA is an open and evolving framework that all implementing partners have to join to access EU grants, complemented by an Internal Cooperation Agreement (ICA), mandatory according to FPA provision, and connecting all partners in the FPA together. EC is not bound by the ICA, only by the FPA.
Formally, all stakeholders with projects awarded by INEA have to sign both the FPA and the ICA to become FPA partners. Then, FPA partners have the option to become members of the SESAR Deployment Manager.
Within the FPA, Specific Grant Agreements will bind INEA and the beneficiaries, including SDM, for the reception and management of grants. The SESAR Deployment Manager, in its role of FPA coordinator, will manage the distribution of the financial support awarded by INEA to the implementing projects. The FPA coordination activities will be co-funded by the EC as an integral part of the awarded projects, and by the implementing partners of the projects, according to projects proposals and in compliance with the terms and conditions of the ICA.

Please contact one of our Liaison Officers. They are your points of entry to SDM. They will provide you with a first level of answer and, if needed, will provide you with the details of the right interlocutor within the SESAR Deployment Manager. In case you belong to one of the entities that will be linked to the SESAR Deployment Manager via a cooperative arrangement, please contact our Cooperative Arrangements (CA) Manager, Doina Mosneag. On this website, you will find information on the SESAR Deployment Manager, points of contact and information on many subjects related to deployment.

Contact details are provided here on this website.

There are three Liaison Officers in the SDM, for Civil Airspace Users, civil Airport Operators and civil ANSP’s. They have a transversal role over all Units of the SDM and provide the entry point for operational stakeholders. The concept of Liaison Officers has been implemented to connect with all stakeholders through trusted channels – talk to someone you know or is in the same business. They shall establish long-term relationships to take the views of the investors on board in the broader SDM work.

The SESAR Deployment Alliance is committed to working closely and openly with all stakeholders involved in the SESAR deployment process. A robust Stakeholder Consultation Platform has been established to seek operational stakeholders’ opinions on SDM’s proposals. Other stakeholders are being consulted or even directly involved into SDM’s work through a series of Cooperative Arrangements (CA) currently under development. We recognise that it is only by working together that we can ensure the successful deployment of SESAR across Europe.

Decisions on the timing of the next Common Project are up to the European Commission (EC). The SDM will work closely together with EC and SJU regarding the preparation of proposals for next Common Projects.

See DG MOVE’s website: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/sesar/deployment_en.htm.

The SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU) and the SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) are the two pillars of the same SESAR project. However, the SESAR Deployment Manager is a separate entity from the SESAR Joint Undertaking. SESAR Joint Undertaking’s focus is on developing, validating and preparing the technologies and the procedures required to modernise the European ATM system for industrialisation. SESAR Deployment Manager’s focus is on developing and executing an implementation plan for technologies and procedures mature for implementation and requiring synchronisation so as to ensure they are prioritised based on the benefits they will deliver to Europe’s air transport industry.
Recognising the strong interdependencies between SESAR Joint Undertaking and SESAR Deployment Manager, we work closely with the SESAR Joint Undertaking to ensure alignment between the Deployment Programme and the European ATM Master Plan, and to bridge between research and innovation activities of the SESAR Joint Undertaking and deployment activities of the SESAR Deployment Manager in a performance-driven manner.

The SESAR Deployment Manager (SDM) is the entity that synchronises and coordinates the modernisation of Europe’s air traffic management system under the political oversight of the European Commission. The SESAR Deployment Alliance has been appointed by the European Commission to fulfil this role. The main task of the SESAR Deployment Manager is to develop, submit to the European Commission for its approval and execute the Deployment Programme, a project view strictly drawn from the Pilot Common Project (PCP) set by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 716/2014, as well as any subsequent Common Projects in future regulations. Through the Deployment Programme, the SESAR Deployment Manager will ensure efficient synchronisation and coordination of implementation projects required to implement the PCP, as well as the related investments. The tasks of the Deployment Manager are described in Article 9 of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013.

The associations are invited to play a supportive role for the operational stakeholders in the deployment process to make best use of existing coordination mechanisms. They are invited to relay and complement SESAR Deployment Manager’s communication towards their members. Subject to a specific mandate issued by one or more of their members, associations could also participate in the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform (SCP). In this role, associations would complement and enhance SESAR Deployment Manager’s consultation mechanism connecting with their own internal consultation mechanisms.

The EC has requested the SDM to establish Cooperative Arrangements (CA) with a number of interfaces. The concept is laid down in Regulation (EC) No 409/2013. The SESAR Deployment Manager has furthermore proposed an extension of the concept.
There are two groups of Cooperative Arrangements:

• Group 1 (required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013): SJU, NM, EDA, NSAs and manufacturing industry – target date: Q2 2015.

• Group 2 (further proposed by SDM to EC, not exhaustive yet): Eurocontrol, PRB, EASA, EUROCAE, professional staff associations, etc. – target date: Q3 2015.

The Cooperative Arrangements (CA) Manager is the entry point for the stakeholders holding or targeting to conclude a cooperative arrangement with the SDM.

The discussion will start in the course of mid 2015. As a first step and deliverable to the EC, the Cooperative Arrangements (CA) by regulation will be concluded.

For DP V1 development, manufacturers will be invited to react on SDM’s draft DP. SDM’s expectation is that manufacturers will help SDM to de-risk DP execution highlighting parts of the plan where objectives are not aligned with what manufacturing industry could deliver to the operational stakeholders and by when. Such situation will be noted as risks and further analysed by SDM and manufacturing industry in order to identify mitigations.
Manufacturing industry will not be invited to the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform meetings as the platform is for the operational stakeholders required to invest into PCP implementation. Manufacturing industry will be consulted by SDM through a dedicated series of meetings in parallel but separately from the platform.

It is for manufacturing industry to set up the necessary working arrangement in order to cooperate with SDM in the most effective manner. SDM encourages any working arrangements that could result into some sort of manufacturing industry’s focal point on SESAR deployment.

Contact details are provided here on this website.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013 requires the SDM and the Network Manager to cooperate. A Cooperative Arrangement between SDM and Network Manager will be established to ensure in particular the alignment and assurance of synergies between the Deployment Programme and Network Manager Plans (NSP, NOP). Furthermore the NM will be consulted in an early phase of DP creation, already before submission of the DP Draft to the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform. The cooperative arrangement also foresees exchange of useful information in the area of performance measurement and review.

The SDM plans to establish a Cooperative Arrangement (CA) with the Professional Staff Associations on a voluntary basis. Discussions on the Cooperative Arrangement will start after the mandatory arrangements have been concluded. According to current timeline (as of April 2015) discussions with the Professional Staff Associations are foreseen for the second half of 2015.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013 has made coordination between SDM and NSA’s mandatory. A Cooperative Arrangement will therefore be concluded between SDM and NSA’s. NSAs will be consulted by SDM on draft DP v1 through a consultation process parallel but separated from the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform.

Yes, through several Cooperative Arrangements and through involvement of the SDM in the European ATM Standards Coordination Group (EASCG).

No.

First, the Deployment Programme is “only” a project view of the Pilot Common Project. This implies that what to implement, where to implement, by whom to implement and by when, is imposed by the regulation on SDM. Within this framework, SDM’s added value is to build on industry’s expertise to set how to best organise a portfolio of implementation projects that, when completed, will all together meet the what, the where, the who and the when set by the PCP. This is what the Deployment Programme aims at.

Second, final approval of the Deployment Programme (DP) will be by the European Commission (EC). The SESAR Deployment Manager has the contractual obligation to provide the DP to EC. The SESAR Deployment Manager will consult on the DP with all stakeholders before submission to EC to ensure the buy-in of the operational stakeholders to the greatest possible degree. Any major version of the DP submitted to EC for its approval will be accompanied by a consultation report that will record all opinions and recommendations issued by the members of the stakeholder’s consultation platform and how they were processed by SDM. This report will conclude with SDM’s assessment of stakeholders’ level of buy-in.

The Pilot Common Project (PCP) is a regulation, which has to be implemented by operational stakeholders in targeted geographical areas to bring the expected benefit for European ATM and European Transport Industry. The Deployment Programme is the breakdown of the PCP to project level, including clear timelines and planning details (“setting the HOW”) while the PCP sets what to implement, where and by whom as well as the time windows for implementation. This means that the Deployment Programme has direct influence on the investment plans and investment decisions of each investor. Early planning is key for the stakeholders and the DP is the tool to guide investment planning by each stakeholder. The aim of the DP is to provide the best planning to optimise the investments in ATM and bring the most value for money.

After EC’s approval, INEA will base the next CEF Transport Calls for Proposals on the Deployment Programme (and any future updates).

The timeline of consultation stems from the deadline given by the European Commission (EC) to the SDM for delivery of the Deployment Programme. The contractual deadline is 30th of June 2015. This deadline drives the consultation process.

Local plans already exist. They are made of projects, some of them PCP related, so within SDM’s scope, some others addressing implementation outside PCP, so outside SDM’s scope. In the absence of SDM and DP, it could happen that local projects, even when related to PCP, are not well coordinated in scope and in time, resulting into overlaps, duplications, sub-optimum implementation, higher costs, and lower or delayed benefits.
The Deployment Programme’s ambition is to develop a top-down project view of all implementation projects needed to fully and timely implement the PCP. After stakeholders’ consultation, buy-in and approval by EC, it is indeed SDM’s expectation that the same stakeholders will bring the DP back home, re-align their own local plans and submit proposals to future CEF Transport Calls accordingly.
So, whilst SDM acknowledges that stakeholders should continuously update their local plans, SDM strongly recommends considering DP after its approval as the reference. The more stakeholders’ local plans align with DP, the more chances stakeholders have to get their projects awarded for co-funding.

A robust and realistic Deployment Programme is the first step towards successful PCP implementation. Therefore, SDM will pay great attention to any specific situation at local level where SDM’s top-down approach to derive implementation projects from PCP does not fit. It is one of SDM’s added values to feature an ability to assess any local situation thanks to its wide ATM expertise and adapt the Deployment Programme accordingly. When such local specificities are not initially known by SDM, it is expected that the stakeholders’ consultation will allow to detect and address them adequately.

SDM has to work within the PCP framework. In particular, SDM’s PDPs and DPs shall be the project views for the PCP as adopted and published. DP cannot be an attempt to revise PCP through a modified project view. In a case where some PCP features would appear no longer appropriate, SDM would raise EC’s attention to them and suggest EC to launch the process for PCP revision. Only upon explicit request by EC would SDM take action and subsequently develop a proposal to review the PCP and then realign the DP.

Between the EC and SDM it is agreed that on the subject of Data-Link Services (DLS) implementation:

1. The first full Deployment Programme (DP V1) to be delivered to EC for its approval in June 2015 with the objective to steer the CEF Calls for Proposals expected at the end of 2015 will only address DLS in its monitoring part, ensuring continuity with IDSG’s monitoring for DLS.

2. SDM’s project view for DLS implementation will be introduced in the second version of the full Deployment Programme (DP V2) to be delivered to EC for its approval in June 2016 with the objective to steer the CEF Calls for Proposals expected at the end of 2016. The main reason for postponing DLS’ project view to DP V2 in June 2016 is that SDM remains dependent on SJU’s planning for validating EASA’s technical recommendation. SJU’s validation is expected by June 2016.

It is underlined that SDM will act with respect to DLS as for any other enabler to PCP ATM functionalities. DLS represents an extension of SDM’s scope. It is not an area in which the SDM will play a special role.
SDM has not been requested to play any specific role with respect to SPI or CVS Implementing Regulations. When those Regulations have common enablers with the PCP Regulation, SDM will play its role as defined in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013.

The Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform (SCP) is for operational stakeholders (or their duly mandated representatives), investing in current or future PCP related implementation projects and future Common Projects. The notion of “operational stakeholders” is defined in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 409/2013 and comprises civil airspace users, civil ANSPs, civil airport operators and the military. The purpose of the SCP is to seek stakeholders’ opinion on SESAR Deployment Manager’s proposals prior to their endorsement by SESAR Deployment Manager’s Supervisory Board and their submission for approval to the European Commission.

Invitations to join the SCP were sent out mid-March to the operational stakeholders and were published on this website here.
We invite the investing operational stakeholders themselves because they have to invest to implement the PCP and subsequent CPs. Because of the high number of individual operational stakeholders, SDM encourages them to organise their representation through groupings (e.g. SDAG for airports) or associations.

There are no “small” operational stakeholders. All operational stakeholders are invited to organise their participation through groupings in the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform. Each stakeholder is encouraged to contact SESAR Deployment Manager through the relevant Liaison Officer to determine how to get involved.

The Steering Group, chaired by the Managing Director of the SESAR Deployment Manager, is expected to provide opinions on the Deployment Programme. Its members should be able to commit to the content of the Deployment Programme.

Members of the Thematic Sub-Groups (TS) should be experts.

No. The future INEA calls are and remain open for all operational stakeholders, according to the eligibility criteria set forth in the calls. However, all operational stakeholders impacted by the PCP are invited to participate in the SCP. The participation to the SCP is indeed a great opportunity to have your voice heard on the Deployment Programme and other upcoming items (e.g. CBA, financial instruments, future Common Projects).

Indeed, in the framework of the SCP, participation of ANSP’s per FAB has been foreseen from the beginning as an option for bundling the consultation process within the ANSP community and to make use and build on existing coordination mechanisms and processes within some FABs. However, the final decision was up to the ANSPs themselves. In the light of the nominations received, it appears that ANSPs representation per FAB has been widely preferred.

It is not up to the SDM to select. However the SDM expects a manageable and efficient stakeholders’ consultation process and is encouraging the stakeholders to group. The Liaison Officers will try to support the process within each stakeholder grouping as far as possible to find sustainable and efficient solutions ensuring adequate representation and buy-in of the operational stakeholders.

The SDM has foreseen an equal number of participants per stakeholder grouping. The Stakeholder Platform shall remain manageable in size. Depending on the number of nominations, the SDM would support and endeavour grouping, if needed, to ensure an efficient work of the SCP.

In the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform, the opinions of the stakeholders will be collected and – as much as possible – accommodated. Any major version of the DP submitted to EC for its approval will be accompanied by a consultation report that will record all opinions and recommendations issued by the members of the Stakeholder’s consultation platform and how they were processed by SDM. This report will conclude with SDM’s assessment of stakeholders’ level of buy-in. Consultation will stop according to the consultation deadlines, but not necessarily until a consensus has been reached.

No. Travel and subsistence expenses incurred by participants in the activities of the Steering Group or the Thematic Sub-Groups will not be reimbursed by the SDM.

The Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform Manager is responsible for establishing and managing the SCP, ensuring prompt information and documents distribution, as well as recording consultation outcomes. The SCP Manager is also responsible to maintain and regularly evaluate the SCP and to seek synergies and complementarities with SDM’s Cooperative Arrangements.

Contact details of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform Manager are indicated here. However, for questions related to operational stakeholders’ involvement and not directly related to the platform management, please contact the Liaison Officers.

No consultation was foreseen for the PDP V1. According to SDM’s action plan in 2015, an update of the PDP V0 called PDP V1 was delivered to EC on 30th March 2015. The objective of PDP V1 is to build on PDP V0 and set the most up to date basis to develop DP V1. PDP V1 was published here on this website on 15th April 2015 and will be presented at the 1st meeting of the SCP steering group on 22nd April 2015.

The Member States have approved the Pilot Common Project (PCP) through a “positive opinion” given to EC through the Single Sky Committee (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 409/2013, item 22 in the recital). States are now bound by this regulation. As the Deployment Programme sets the “how” in full compliance with the Regulation the States have approved, the same Regulation says that States will be informed (recital 17, article 5.3). Member States are also involved into each CEF Transport call for proposals, according to INEA rules and national procedures.