1. DG Research and Innovation Directorate G - Industrial Technologies
The Research Fund for Coal and Steel of the European Commission Katowice, 21 February 2013
Mario Iamarino
Anna Zietek
DG Research and Innovation
Directorate G - Industrial Technologies

2. Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting

3. European Coal and Steel Community
Treaty of Paris
...expired in 2002

4. European Coal and Steel Community
Main scope
coordination of the national coal and steel sectors
boosting economical progress through cooperation
ensuring stability
supporting technological innovation by co-financing research projects
Main financial resources: levies on coal and steel products paid by the companies  non-public money

5. The ECSC Flag
1952
1973
1981
1986

6. Research Fund for Coal and Steel
Launching of the
Research Fund for Coal and Steel
Treaty of Nice
European Coal and Steel Community Treaty signed for 50 year period
Activities were financed through a levy paid by the European coal and steel industries.
Over this period around 1 Billion € was spent in coal and steel research.
Coal is still abundant and available in large quantities across the world in a variety of politically stable countries. Europe’s energy security of supply calls for a balanced fuel mix within which coal is and will remain a key element. It accounts for 27% of the EU25 electricity production (96% in Poland) and around 35% of the world electricity production
The European steel industry is a world leader notably in the design & production of high added value grades but is facing strong competition from Asia.
Need to meet new challenges:
New steel grades/high added value products
Cleaner and carbon free processes to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirements
The residual assets of the ECSC are transferred to the European Commission

7. 10 Years of RFCS Luxembourg, September 2012
European Coal and Steel Community Treaty signed for 50 year period
Activities were financed through a levy paid by the European coal and steel industries.
Over this period around 1 Billion € was spent in coal and steel research.
Coal is still abundant and available in large quantities across the world in a variety of politically stable countries. Europe’s energy security of supply calls for a balanced fuel mix within which coal is and will remain a key element. It accounts for 27% of the EU25 electricity production (96% in Poland) and around 35% of the world electricity production
The European steel industry is a world leader notably in the design & production of high added value grades but is facing strong competition from Asia.
Need to meet new challenges:
New steel grades/high added value products
Cleaner and carbon free processes to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirements

8. ECSC Assets Current investment portfolio: 1 673 million €
Interests generated annually :  3 %
Annual budget for the programme:  50 – 60 million €
Revenues made available so far: 563 million €

9. Annual Budget
50-60 million € / year
Coal:
27.2 %
Steel:
72.8%

10. Annual Budget

11. The Commission RFCS Programme management COSCO CAG/SAG
Programme Committee
Representatives of the
Member States 1)
COSCO
The Commission
Coal / Steel Advisory Group
Recommended
representatives 2)
CAG/SAG
12 Technical Groups
Senior Experts for
project monitoring & review 2)
Technical Groups
Appointed by the Member States
Appointed by the EC

12. The RFCS Legal Basis
COUNCIL DECISION 2008/376/EC on the adoption of the Research Programme of the Research Fund for Coal and Steel and on the multiannual technical guidelines for this programme.
Highly industry-oriented….

13. Coal Research Objectives
Articles:
4. Improving the competitive position of Community coal
5. Health and safety in mines
6. Efficient protection of the environment and improvement of the use of coal as a clean energy source
7. Management of external dependence on energy supply

14. Steel Research Objectives
Articles:
8. New and improved steelmaking & finishing techniques
9. RTD and the utilisation of steel
10. Conservation of resources and improvement of working conditions

15. Eligible Actions: Research projects (60% funding)
to cover investigative or experimental work with the aim of acquiring further knowledge
Pilot projects (50% funding)
development of an installation with a view to examining the potential for putting theoretical or laboratory results into practice
Demonstration projects (50% funding)
construction or operation of an industrial-scale installation for the industrial and/or commercial exploitation of the technology at minimum risk
Accompanying measures (60% funding, up to 100% in special cases)
promotion of the use of knowledge gained in projects of the Research Programme
~ 15 €/y

16. Project Synopses http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/home_en.html
Collection of about 550 projects (2003 – 2013),
Completed projects have direct link to final report.

17. Project Synopses

18. Success Stories

19. Success Stories

20. Benefits from the RFCS An insight into the Monitoring and Assessment Exercise

21. Why ?
The exercise is foreseen every 7 years in the Legal Basis (Last one in 2006  due date is 2013)
An expert committee has been appointed and has formulated a working method
Draft results are now available for both the monitoring and assessment exercises
Final version to be published at the end of 2013
How ?

22. Assessment of 198 projects completed over the period 2003 - 2020
23%
of projects
assessed
in-depth

23. RFCS projects rated as very successful
High degree of achievement of the individual objectives of the projects

24. Outcomes of the projects
Practically and industrially validated solutions, ready for dissemination

25. In-depth assessment Examples of benefits provided by the projects
Quantified Benefits : Financial Returns estimated at the project level for the beneficiaries
Operational cost reduction
Productivity improvement
Energy, raw materials savings
New market shares
Qualitative Benefits
New knowledge
Environmental benefit
Health, safety, working conditions

26. Examples of financial returns (Coal sector)
Coal Mining
New mechanisation and automation of longwall mining equipment
Productivity increase with a fully automated shearer loader system  1.5 M€/y/longwall; potential 45 M€/y (EU)
Cost reduction: decrease of labour cost, increase of running time  0.1 M€/y/longwall; potential 3 M€/y (EU)
sales of the automated shearer loader in booming markets
Clean Coal technologies
Cost saving in power plants
Increase of plant availability by 1 % 1 M€/y
Cost saving by avoiding wrong investment of cleaning system  10 M€
Coal Conversion
Improving coke battery life through integrated monitoring
Capital cost net reduction of 5 % through life extension  potential 0.75 €/t/y

27. 700 m€/y potential benefits
50 m€/y invested by RFCS
700 m€/y potential benefits

28. Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting

29. Research and Innovation Sources for EU funding at DG RTD
Framework programmes – 2020
(FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)
RFCS ?

30. Research and Innovation Sources for EU funding at DG RTD
Framework programmes € 11 b/y
(FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)
RFCS € 52 m/y

31. FP7 budget breakdown
Complementary to RFCS

32. Total: € 960 bn Budget Horizon 2020: € 80 bn
Transition from FP7 to…
Total: € 960 bn
(European summit 7-8/2/2013)
Budget Horizon 2020: € 80 bn
(not confirmed)

33. RFCS versus Framework Programmes
FPs
Does not rely on contributions from member states
Relies on contributions from member states
Bottom - up
Top - down
Continuous programme
Discontinuous programme

34. RFCS versus Framework Programmes
FPs
Open call
(proposal submission limited to June-September)
Calls are announced by the EC
Funding rate:
60% Research
50% Demonstration
60% Accompanying measures
50-75% Research
100% Other activities

35. RFCS versus Framework Programmes
FPs
Actual costs
(average hourly rates still accepted)
Indirect costs:
35% of staff costs
40% of total costs for public bodies and SMEs (60% up to 2010)
20% other companies
(moving towards actual indirect costs)
Actual indirect costs are welcome

36. RFCS versus Framework Programmes
FPs
Fully managed by the European Commission
Partially externalised (executive agencies)

37. RFCS versus Framework Programmes
FPs
Stable
Dynamic

38. Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting

39. WHO can participate?
Any legal entity established in any of the Member States (public or private organizations).
New EU member states (non-ECSC countries) have the some rights to participate as old member states.
Partners from Candidate or Third Countries can participate, but cannot receive funding.
From 1 July 2013: Croatia joins EU and can receive RFCS funding.

40. No threshold nor limit on budget, consortium size, project duration.
However, typical projects have:
Number of partners: 4 - 8
Total budget: million €
RFCS funding: 1 -2 million €
Duration: 36 – 42 months

41. How to submit a proposal
Since 2011, RFCS proposals are to be submitted electronically through the SEP platform
Go to RFCS webpage on Cordis:

42. Submission of proposals
A1 – General information on the proposal
A2 – Beneficiaries profiles
A3 – Budget
B1 – Proposal administrative overview
B2 – Proposal description
(B3 – Resubmitted proposals)
B4 – Technical Annex

43. B4 - TECHNICAL ANNEX Contractual document Part 1: Project Objectives
Part 2: Workpackage Description
Part 3: Bar Chart

46. Proposal Selection Process1.
Proposal submission
(Sept 2013) 2.
eligibility
check 3.
evaluations 4.
budget
cut-off 5.
SAG, COSCO
Commission Decision
Project
Start
(Jul 2014)
negotiation
ranking
list
eligible
proposals
submitted
proposals
unsufficient
budget
not recommended
for funding
ineligible
proposals

47. Evaluations On site evaluation (Brussels) 1 week for coal
4 weeks for steel
Around 25 to 30 Experts per week + 1 observer
Requirement for experts selection
Expertise & Competences
No conflict of interest
Ca. 50% renewal
Max. 3 consecutive participations
Geographical origins
Gender balance

48. Do you want to become an expert?
Expert Registration
On RFCS website, follow the link to Participant Portal
For both FP and RFCS
Simple process

49. Selection Criteria (Research, Pilot & Demonstration projects)
0 - 5 pts*
0 - 5 pts
Scientific and technical approach
Innovative content
Consistency of resources and quality of partnership
Industrial interest and scientific/technical prospects
Added value for the European Union
* Required threshold of 3 points

50. Selection Criteria (Accompanying Measures)
0 - 5 pts
Contribution to RFCS Objectives
Scientific, technical and socio-economic prospects
Added value for the European Union
Budget and resources
Required threshold : 15 total points

51. Annual Research Priorities
If a proposal meets an annual priority, it will be awarded 1 extra point
Different from Project Objectives
Not mandatory
For Research, Pilot and Demonstration only
Available electronically and listed also in Infopack Vol.1

52. Coal Priorities 2013 (1)
1. Management of environmental risks during or after mine closure
2. Increasing the efficiency of mine production and development by utilising Information and Communication Technologies for improved process optimisation
3. Protection of mine infrastructure in the case of major accident hazards like rock bursts, gas explosion, fire, etc.

53. Coal Priorities 2013 (2)
4. Improving the efficiency and economics of underground coal gasification
5. Improvement in coal carbonisation through the use of alternative raw materials in coking blends
6. Upgrading of coal-derived liquids

54. Coal Priorities 2013 (3)
7. Technological improvements targeting enhanced efficiency and environmental performance of coal fired power plants
8. The development of flexible CCS plants in terms of fuel mix and dynamic behaviour
9. Pilot projects validation of emerging and innovating technologies leading to efficiency improvements and CO2 capture

55. Annual Research Priorities
Good proposals and bad proposals do not need the priority bonus!
Proposals with intermediate marks may benefit from the priority bonus.
Cut-off budget
good
proposals
(funded anyway)
bad proposals
(not funded)
Final mark

56. Step 2: Consensus meeting
When the 3 individual evaluations are ready, these are merged together into one single text (Draft Consensus Report).
Unanimity is required concerning the fact that a proposals passes (or does not pass) the eliminating threshold on criteria 1 and 2.

57. Proposals received

58. Outcomes of the 2012 evaluation exercise
Not yet available!
A written communication will be sent to the Project Coordinators between the end of 2012 and the first months of 2013.

59. Final remarks & advice Strong competition
High quality level of proposals
Long process: start early with experienced partners !
Descriptions should be short & concise, but don't expect the evaluators to dig out necessary information
Explain improvements in case of resubmission
Make use of the RFCS projects synopses
Enrol as an expert (Evaluator)

60. Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting

62. Monitoring of the projects is done by:
1 Scientific Project Officer
1 Set of financial officers (allocated by country)
1 Set of external experts (Technical Group)

63. Technical Groups Coal
TGC1 – Coal mining operation, mine infrastructure and management, unconventional use of coal
TGC2 – Coal preparation, conversion and upgrading
TGC3 – Coal combustion, clean and efficient coal technologies, CO2 capture

64. Technical Groups Steel
TGS1 – Ore agglomeration and ironmaking
TGS2 – Steelmaking process
TGS3 – Casting
TGS4 – Hot and cold rolling processes
TGS5 – Finishing and coating

65. Technical Groups Steel
TGS6 – Physical metallurgy and design of new generic steel grades
TGS7 – Steel products and applications for automobiles, packaging and home appliances
TGS8 – Steel products and applications for building, construction and industry
TGS9 – Factory-wide control, social and environmental issues

66. Guidelines for Technical Reporting
First Annual
Mid-Term
Annual
Draft Final
Cover page X
Distribution list
Table of Contents
Abstract (max 250 words)
Project Overview Table
Budget information
Bar chart (actual vs planned)
List of Deliverables
State of the Art
Progress of work and problems encountered
Final summary (max 10 pages)
Scientific and technical description of work (task by task)
Dissemination activities, patents
List of achronims, abbreviations, references
Signed Technical Annex

67. Deliverables
To facilitate the work of the TG reviewers, it is recommended to append deliverables to the periodic reports
(upload deliverables on CIRCABC is also an option).
For deliverables which are not in the form of a written report (e.g., a new process, a new product, a web site), a short description (plus some pictures) should be provided.
Whenever possible, avoid distributed (or do-it-yourself) deliverables (“Deliverable consists of Fig on pag X plus Table on pag Y”).

68. Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting

69. Guidelines for Financial reporting
2 Cost Statements:
MID-TERM COST STATEMENT
Delivered max. 90 days from the end of the first reporting period
Triggers the 2nd pre-financing (40%, Annex III)
if <70% of 1st pre-financing used, payment reduced by unused amount

70. Guidelines for Financial reporting
2. FINAL COST STATAMENT
Delivered max. 90 days from the beginning of the calendar year following the closing date of the project
Triggers the final payment (only after approval of publishable final report) !
Art. II.4.b
In case that a final financial statement has not been received until the 31/12 of the calendar year following the closing date of the project, the Commission is entitled to proceed to the closure of the project account on the basis of the assumption that the beneficiary(ies) concerned do not claim any costs for the entire project.

71. Guidelines for Financial reporting
CERTIFICATE ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Audit certificate
prepared and certified by an external auditor
compulsory with the Final Cost Statement
covers the costs of the entire project
subcontract costs, if exist, should be certified
confirmation that on no conflict of interest exists
the Commission is entitled to reject some of the costs accepted by the Auditor
the only existing cost incurred after the end of the project and considered as an eligible cost
an additional financial and/or technical Audit can be requested by the Commission at any time of the duration of the project and up to 5 years after completion of the project.

72. Main Changes

73. Staff costs
Staff costs must be consistent with objectives and duration of corresponding tasks.
Art.II.3.f
Notify the Commission if staff costs are >20% then planned at the grant agreement preparation stage
To assess the eligibility of additional staff costs, the Commission shall seek the advice of the Technical Group.
In absence of any notification before the closing date of the project, the staff cost amount agreed during the grant agreement negotiations will be retained and used as an upper ceiling.

74. Common mistakes and examples of good practice
After 2009 the depreciation
period is always 60 months!
Invoices for equipment always requested!

75. Common mistakes and examples of good practice
Annual working hours and the hourly rate for each staff member
24,00
2.400,00
4.900,00

76. Common mistakes and examples of good practice
Details for each item needed!

77. Common mistakes and examples of good practice
Please provide
always the copy of the invoice above 5.000,00 EURO
Inv. no 128/10/ECEL,, purchase of: electronic detectors PCB Piezotronics, 40 pcs
16.000,00
Inv. no WK/2011/3320, purchase of: shroff casette, 4 pcs
3.580,00
Inv. no 57/1/11, purchase of: electronic component of the probe, 50 pcs
2.859,00
Inv. no 102/11/ECEL, purchase of: small-size acelometer detectors type 1,16 pcs
6.880,00
Inv. no 108/07/2011, purchase of: probe covers 1-component 50 pcs
45.568,55
74.887,55

78. Guidelines for Financial reporting: on time payment
Prepare the cost statements on time
Send dated and signed original versions (if final report,
Audit certificate must be attached)
Check carefully the reporting dates, project acronym, grant agreement number, contact person address
All items should be clearly identified, please avoid lumped sums
Attach all invoices for single items > 5000€.
Attach invoices for claimed equipment
Revenues genereted by the project and other sources contribution must be declared;
Provide staff costs per single calendar year and, if required by the Commission, per single task.

79. Subcontracts For research assistance only
Max 40% of beneficiary’s budget (unless affiliates)
Should be foreseen at GA preparation
Must be approved by EC prior to signing
Copy of draft subcontract
Forms B5 for subcontractor
A signed copy is to be sent once the subcontract is actually signed

80. Amendments
Changes to the Grant Agreements may be requested by any of the parties. It shall be signed by the Legal Representative of the concerned party, and submitted in written to the Commission by the Coordinator. If accepted, a modified version of the Grant Agreement is issued and sent to the consortium for signature.
If >1 modification requested, the request is to be considered as a package and shall be approved/rejected as a whole.
Examples of possible amendments:
- Termination and inclusion of a beneficiary;
- Suspension / termination / extension of the project;
- Changes in the technical objectives of the project (limited changes are accepted);
- Transfer of activities and budget from one beneficiary to another;
Please refer to the Guidelines for amendments on the RFCS website.

81. Changes of cost positions
Changes to the different costs positions in the budget do not require an amendment (budget breakdown is not a contractual document).
However, the beneficiary concerned should contact the Project Officer and ask for the acceptance of the new breakdown of costs.
If this is not done, the Project Officer may reject the modified costs during the analysis of the cost statements.
If the new budget is accepted, new budget forms should be provided (Form B5).

82. Web Links / RFCS Info RFCS website is hosted by Cordis:
Here you will find:
Information Package volume I (proposal submission)
Information Package volume II (preparation of Grant Agreement)
Amendment guide
Guidelines for Technical and Financial Reporting
Project Synopses and Success Stories
and much more…

83. Thank you for your attention