• 3SA-SDB

    • Can you explain in simple terms what the SDB is?

      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.

    • Who pays for the SDB services?

      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.

    • Who owns the data that is exchanged using the SDB services?

      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.

    • Will the SDB function as an ATM Data Service Provider (ADSP) as foreseen in the Single European Airspace System?

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

    • Why is the 3SA a driver of digitalisation?

      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.

    • What are the principles driving the 3SA?

      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).

    • Does the 3SA interfere with competences of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU)?

      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.

    • Who is behind the 3SA-SDB Working Group?

      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.

    • How can I contribute to the 3SA-SDB initiative?

      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!

  • INEA CEF Calls 2016

    • Are the non UE ANSPs eligible for the funding e.g. Serbia? What about Croatia under the Cohesion envelope?

      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.

    • A new private one, I was leading WA3 of Elsa project mainly about the “Best in class” testing. Could I have a meeting with involved people on SDM part on this topic, in order to go forward on defining test framework for avionics and ground?

      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.

    • As a non-EU country, we would be interested in understanding how the EU will alleviate the different treatment for skyguide as the Swiss ANSP. We have agreed to take over the PCP and also the Charging and Performance regulations.

      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.

    • Is it possible to participate in a call for proposals as a project partner but requesting any funding?

      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).

    • How does SDM plan to align the selection and prioritisation process with INEA?

      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.

    • Oct 10 is the deadline for the submission of expression of interest. This is a really short time-limit, especially for consortium of stakeholders, for which Member States are welcomed. Can this deadline be extended?

      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.

    • As the period between the formal Call launch and 3/11 deadline is extremely short, what advance information can you give us about the Call priorities and the eligibility window for implementing projects? E.g. Delivery by 31/12/20 or 31/12/21 or 31/12/22…

      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

    • Grants agreements have been signed in October / November, does this mean that project start date should be January of the following year – i.e. January 2018 project start date for this 2016 Call?

      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).

    • Does the SDM plan to use the same IP Template for Call 2016 as presented for Call 2015? Or shall we expect any changes? If yes, can SDM share the new IP Template well in advance?

      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.

    • When we describe the IP proposal and 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?

      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.

    • For Call 2016, The Military may provide more than 1 Bank Account per State as Different MoD Organizations could bid, i.e. Air Force, Procurement Agencies. How SDM will manage this issue?

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

    • When and how does SDM plan to bring partners together to merge projects and provide joint IP Templates?

      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.

    • Is the 300M euro for both part A-PCP relevance AND part B-other?

      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.

    • From the video clip you suggest that we will have to complete a Part A, B, C, & D for each project. Do the bids look more like the normal INEA process rather than using the Excel based application? Therefore, do you expect to Cluster the proposals?

      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.

    • 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?

      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.

    • What does the future hold for British investors in SESAR Deployment funding support?

      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.

    • Can a Cohesion State propose a project under the General 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.

    • If we have not express previously the IoI, how we could have access to the IP template? Will it be accessible at website?

      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.

    • Will the SDM actively coordinate between IoI submission to align possible project partners / assure multi-stakeholder projects?

      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.

  • Previous INEA CEF Calls (2014 and 2015)

    • What can be said about the potential eligibility of RNAV 5 and RNAV 1 as stepping stones to improve the overall SES network where the CBA for RNP 1 is unrealistic/technically unfeasible?

      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.

    • What if a given stakeholder is implementing or going to implement an initiative relevant for PCP but without application for EU grants. Will this still be a gap in the Deployment Programme?

      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.

    • PCP IR and the Deployment Programme currently implement RNP1. The latest information is that EASA PBN will state RNAV 1 as a minimum standard. What is the EC direction and guidance?

      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.

    • Costs incurred in what timeframe will be eligible for funding?

      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.

    • Will INEA application forms for the CEF Call 2015 remain unchanged as compared to the CEF Calls 2014?

      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.

    • Who will have to fill in the Application Forms A, B, C and D within the CEF Transport Call 2015?

      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.

    • What will be the process of submitting to INEA once the IP Templates per project have been submitted by Implementing Stakeholders to SDM? What is the process for the proposal(s) elaboration?

      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.

    • Should the IP Templates be filled in all sheets of the template including the Financial and Performance?

      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.

    • Could an exception be made from the non-retroactive funding principle in case of a high -relevance family in the DP with an FOC e.g. 1st January 2015?

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

    • What will be the expected financial amount available for ATM and specifically PCP implementation (“regular” as well as Cohesion Fund)?

      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.

    • When will the SDM make available the necessary templates to collect the information for the 2015 CEF bid?

      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.

    • What tools will be used for the bid drafting?

      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

    • Apart from coordinating projects vis-à-vis INEA/EC, what will be the role of SDM towards the Implementing Partners in the execution phase?

      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.

    • Which fees are expected for new Implementing Partners (e.g. SDM coordination fee). Will new Implementing Partners share all rights and obligations in accordance to ICA?

      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

    • Which fees are expected for new Implementing Partners (e.g. SDM coordination fee). Will new Implementing Partners share all rights and obligations in accordance to ICA?

      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

    • Does SDM anticipate having any role in the non-PCP part of the 2015 Call?

      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.

    • Are stakeholders from Cohesion states obliged to submit their projects under the Cohesion Call?

      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.

    • Which non-EU States could be considered as eligible for co-funding?

      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.

    • Will there be an 80/20 ratio for PCP/non-PCP within the CEF funds available for SESAR in the CEF call 2015?

      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.

    • Will VAT be eligible for an organisation within an EU-member state?

      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.

    • SDM is not responsible for the projects selection process under the call 2015, but the SDM is supposed to make recommendations to the INEA and EC in that process?

      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.

    • Are project proposals expected to be submitted using the IP Template? What if a project includes Cohesion States and airborne costs (different funding rates) – will separate finance sheets be required for the funding claim?

      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”.

    • If legal/administrative/financial documents and declarations were provided for the previous call in 2014 already, are we required to resubmit the same documents for the 2015 call?

      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.

    • What technical detail is required in the project description regarding milestones, deliverables etc.?

      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 timelines presented are for PCP applications through SDM. Does the same timeline apply for non PCP applications?

      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.

    • Shall states have the “say” in the proposals delivery to SDM or will they also be involved at the stage of the final proposal delivery by SDM to INEA/EC?

      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.

    • Can I still apply for the INEA call 2014?

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

    • What will be the tasks of the SESAR Deployment Manager in the implementation phase of the deployment after INEA has approved a project?

      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.

    • Besides steering funding, which other instruments does the SDM have to steer implementation? How can a non-willing stakeholder be ‘forced’ to implement?

      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.

    • Could you explain what innovative funding solutions mean and are airlines able to make use of them?

      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.

    • How can SDM ensure that funds available under the SESAR Deployment are allocated under unified European procurement rules and national procurement laws?

      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.

    • Would it be possible to combine 20% grants from INEA together with other types of incentives? Is that 20% limit a generic rule or could other types of grants be higher?

      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.

    • Is there an established mechanism (or plan to have) to invite stakeholders to prepare relevant proposals for projects?

      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.

    • If a stakeholder does not intend to participate the PCP deployment through SDM INEA- financing (e.g. due to the short notice of the SDM application call), how does SDM coordinate such stakeholder´s PCP deployment project(s)?

      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.

    • Who will have the final decision for INEA applications award?

      The final decision is up to INEA and EC.

    • How does SDM assess the Implementing Projects initiatives? (criteria, external experts, etc.)?

      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.

    • What are the roles of the Action Coordinator and the Action Leader in the INEA action application?

      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.

    • Is the SESAR Deployment Manager deciding on applications for INEA projects and on the distribution of the public funds?

      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.

    • Can you inform on envisaged financial envelopes of the next INEA calls?

      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.

    • Can you inform on the timelines of the next INEA calls?

      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.

    • In case of an EEIG being the beneficiary of an Action and incurring all the costs, are there any reasons to add the members of the EEIG as affiliated entities?

      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)

    • How should a beneficiary implement practically Article II.8.2 with regard to the use of intellectual property rights?

      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)

    • When does the time limit for payments mentioned in Article 4.2 begin?

      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)

    • How is INEA ensuring the confidentiality of information as foreseen by Article II.5?

      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)

    • When do the beneficiaries have to submit their first Action Status Report (ASR) under the transport calls 2014, in particular for Actions starting in 2014?

      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)

    • What is the role of the Coordinator regarding certification?

      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)

    • What are the procedures to update or amend a Grant Agreement, once it has entered into force?

      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 Model Grant Agreement mentions both INEA and the Commission at various occasions. Are there any differences, as only INEA signs the Grant Agreement?

      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)

    • Can the coordinator sign amendments on behalf of all beneficiaries without involving them?

      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)

    • Is it possible that all beneficiaries sign the Grant Agreement instead of the Coordinator? If yes, are the mandates under Annex IV still required, even if all beneficiaries sign the Grant Agreement?

      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)

    • Does the Grant Agreement address the relationship between beneficiaries and certifying Member States?

      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)

    • Can INEA reimburse costs for translations from English into other official EU languages of the Grant Agreement?

      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)

    • Why is English foreseen as the authentic language of the Grant Agreement?

      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)

  • SDM General

    • Where can I find an overview of all SESAR Deployment projects being implemented in Europe?

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

    • Why is it important to modernise Europe’s Air Traffic Management?

      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.

    • What is the SESAR Deployment Alliance?

      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

    • What is the function of the SESAR Deployment Manager?

      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.

    • By signing the FPA there is an obligation to conclude an internal cooperation agreement. How and when will the negotiations start? Will a first draft be made available and to whom?

      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.

    • Do I need to become a member of the SESAR Deployment Manager consortium to be part of deployment planning and to get access to the grants of the INEA agency?

      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.

    • Whom can I contact when I have questions on my own participation in the “deployment journey” or if I would like to invite representatives of the SESAR Deployment Manager to present in my own company/institution on SESAR deployment?

      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.

    • How can I contact the Liaison Officers in SDM?

      Contact details are provided here on this website.

    • What is the concept of Liaison Officers in the SDM?

      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.

    • How do you interact with stakeholders outside of the Alliance?

      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.

    • What about the timing of the next Common Project?

      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.

    • Where can I find information of the European Commission on SESAR Deployment?

    • What is your relationship with the SESAR Joint Undertaking?

      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.

    • What is the SESAR Deployment Manager?

      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.

    • What will be the role of the operational stakeholder associations?

      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.

  • Cooperative Arrangements

    • What is the scope of the Cooperative Arrangements?

      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.

    • What will be the role and responsibility of the Cooperative Arrangements Manager?

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

    • When will discussion on the other voluntary Cooperative Arrangements start?

      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.

    • Could you clarify how manufacturing industry consultation will take place and will fit within operational stakeholders’ consultation?

      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.

    • How is involvement of other manufacturers (apart from the “big” ones) being handled and how will their involvement be structured?

      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.

    • How can I contact the Cooperative Arrangements Manager in the SDM?

      Contact details are provided here on this website.

    • How do you make sure that the Network Manager plans have been properly taken into account?

      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.

    • How in concrete terms do you plan to include the Professional Staff Organizations and when?

      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.

    • What is the consultation process envisaged for the NSAs?

      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.

    • Will there be contacts/relations with standardisation bodies?

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

  • Deployment Programme

    • Is the SESAR Deployment Manager deciding on the Deployment Programme?

      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.

    • Why is the Deployment Programme so important?

      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).

    • How is the timeline of consultation of the Deployment Programme set?

      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.

    • What is the relation between the Deployment Programme and local plans? Should operational stakeholders have to wait for DP version 1 before developing local plans?

      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.

    • How to ensure reality of plans and deal with the differences throughout Europe, while mandates are general/global for Europe?

      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.

    • Some things in the PCP mandates for individual stakeholders do not make sense and will neither deliver a network nor a local benefit. Will there be any refinement of the PCP? Or how can a stakeholder prove that something is not beneficial?

      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.

  • Stakeholders Consultation Platform

    • What are the roles and responsibilities of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform?

      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.

    • How can I become a member of the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform (SCP) and receive the information?

      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.

    • How to secure involvement of small stakeholders?

      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.

    • What level are you expecting at the Steering Group and Thematic Sub-Groups (CEO, Director or Subject matter experts)?

      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.

    • Do I need to be part of the Stakeholder Consultation Platform to apply for an INEA project and public funding?

      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).

    • Stakeholders’ Platform and ANSP representation: Is a representation per FAB envisaged?

      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.

    • How will the DM select the stakeholders for the SCP Steering Group and Thematic Sub-Groups?

      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.

    • Is the number of participants already determined or can it be flexible?

      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.

    • Do you foresee a consultation until a consensus is reached? There were significant comments pending when the PCP was adopted. What is the process to integrate these comments in the PDP? How will the DM deal with conflict of interests?

      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.

    • Will costs for participating in the Stakeholder Consultation Platform, incurred by members of the Steering Group and/or Thematic Sub-Groups be reimbursed?

      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.

    • What will be the role and responsibility of the Consultation Platform Manager?

      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.

    • How can I contact the Stakeholders’ Consultation Platform’s Manager in the SDM?

      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.

    • What about consultation of the Preliminary DP (PDP)?

      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.

    • At what level will Members States be part of any consultation and/or be targeted at?

      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.