Presentation on theme: "DG Research and Innovation Directorate G - Industrial Technologies"— Presentation transcript:
1DG Research and Innovation Directorate G - Industrial Technologies The Research Fund for Coal and Steel of the European Commission Katowice, 21 February 2013Mario IamarinoAnna ZietekDG Research and InnovationDirectorate G - Industrial Technologies
2Structure of Presentation 1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps4. Technical Reporting5. Financial Reporting
3European Coal and Steel Community Treaty of Paris...expired in 2002
4European Coal and Steel Community Main scopecoordination of the national coal and steel sectorsboosting economical progress through cooperationensuring stabilitysupporting technological innovation by co-financing research projectsMain financial resources: levies on coal and steel products paid by the companies non-public money
6Research Fund for Coal and Steel Launching of theResearch Fund for Coal and SteelTreaty of NiceEuropean Coal and Steel Community Treaty signed for 50 year periodActivities 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 productionThe 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 productsCleaner and carbon free processes to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirementsThe residual assets of the ECSC are transferred to the European Commission
710 Years of RFCS Luxembourg, September 2012 European Coal and Steel Community Treaty signed for 50 year periodActivities 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 productionThe 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 productsCleaner and carbon free processes to meet increasingly stringent environmental requirements
8ECSC 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 €
9Annual Budget50-60 million € / yearCoal:27.2 %Steel:72.8%
11The Commission RFCS Programme management COSCO CAG/SAG Programme CommitteeRepresentatives of theMember States 1)COSCOThe CommissionCoal / Steel Advisory GroupRecommendedrepresentatives 2)CAG/SAG12 Technical GroupsSenior Experts forproject monitoring & review 2)Technical GroupsAppointed by the Member StatesAppointed by the EC
12The RFCS Legal BasisCOUNCIL 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….
13Coal Research Objectives Articles:4. Improving the competitive position of Community coal5. Health and safety in mines6. Efficient protection of the environment and improvement of the use of coal as a clean energy source7. Management of external dependence on energy supply
14Steel Research Objectives Articles:8. New and improved steelmaking & finishing techniques9. RTD and the utilisation of steel10. Conservation of resources and improvement of working conditions
15Eligible Actions: Research projects (60% funding) to cover investigative or experimental work with the aim of acquiring further knowledgePilot projects (50% funding)development of an installation with a view to examining the potential for putting theoretical or laboratory results into practiceDemonstration projects (50% funding)construction or operation of an industrial-scale installation for the industrial and/or commercial exploitation of the technology at minimum riskAccompanying measures (60% funding, up to 100% in special cases)promotion of the use of knowledge gained in projects of the Research Programme~ 15 €/y
16Project 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.
20Benefits from the RFCS An insight into the Monitoring and Assessment Exercise
21Why ?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 methodDraft results are now available for both the monitoring and assessment exercisesFinal version to be published at the end of 2013How ?
22Assessment of 198 projects completed over the period 2003 - 2020 23%of projectsassessedin-depth
23RFCS projects rated as very successful High degree of achievement of the individual objectives of the projects
24Outcomes of the projects Practically and industrially validated solutions, ready for dissemination
25In-depth assessment Examples of benefits provided by the projects Quantified Benefits : Financial Returns estimated at the project level for the beneficiariesOperational cost reductionProductivity improvementEnergy, raw materials savingsNew market sharesQualitative BenefitsNew knowledgeEnvironmental benefitHealth, safety, working conditions
26Examples of financial returns (Coal sector) Coal MiningNew mechanisation and automation of longwall mining equipmentProductivity 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 marketsClean Coal technologiesCost saving in power plantsIncrease of plant availability by 1 % 1 M€/yCost saving by avoiding wrong investment of cleaning system 10 M€Coal ConversionImproving coke battery life through integrated monitoringCapital cost net reduction of 5 % through life extension potential 0.75 €/t/y
33RFCS versus Framework Programmes FPsDoes not rely on contributions from member statesRelies on contributions from member statesBottom - upTop - downContinuous programmeDiscontinuous programme
34RFCS versus Framework Programmes FPsOpen call(proposal submission limited to June-September)Calls are announced by the ECFunding rate:60% Research50% Demonstration60% Accompanying measures50-75% Research100% Other activities
35RFCS versus Framework Programmes FPsActual costs(average hourly rates still accepted)Indirect costs:35% of staff costs40% 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
36RFCS versus Framework Programmes FPsFully managed by the European CommissionPartially externalised (executive agencies)
37RFCS versus Framework Programmes FPsStableDynamic
38Structure of Presentation 1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes3. Proposal submission and evaluation4. Technical Reporting5. Financial Reporting
39WHO 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.
40No threshold nor limit on budget, consortium size, project duration. However, typical projects have:Number of partners: 4 - 8Total budget: million €RFCS funding: 1 -2 million €Duration: 36 – 42 months
41How to submit a proposal Since 2011, RFCS proposals are to be submitted electronically through the SEP platformGo to RFCS webpage on Cordis:
42Submission of proposals A1 – General information on the proposalA2 – Beneficiaries profilesA3 – BudgetB1 – Proposal administrative overviewB2 – Proposal description(B3 – Resubmitted proposals)B4 – Technical Annex
43B4 - TECHNICAL ANNEX Contractual document Part 1: Project Objectives Part 2: Workpackage DescriptionPart 3: Bar Chart
47Evaluations On site evaluation (Brussels) 1 week for coal 4 weeks for steelAround 25 to 30 Experts per week + 1 observerRequirement for experts selectionExpertise & CompetencesNo conflict of interestCa. 50% renewalMax. 3 consecutive participationsGeographical originsGender balance
48Do you want to become an expert? Expert RegistrationOn RFCS website, follow the link to Participant PortalFor both FP and RFCSSimple process
49Selection Criteria (Research, Pilot & Demonstration projects) 0 - 5 pts*0 - 5 ptsScientific and technical approachInnovative contentConsistency of resources and quality of partnershipIndustrial interest and scientific/technical prospectsAdded value for the European Union* Required threshold of 3 points
50Selection Criteria (Accompanying Measures) 0 - 5 ptsContribution to RFCS ObjectivesScientific, technical and socio-economic prospectsAdded value for the European UnionBudget and resourcesRequired threshold : 15 total points
51Annual Research Priorities If a proposal meets an annual priority, it will be awarded 1 extra pointDifferent from Project ObjectivesNot mandatoryFor Research, Pilot and Demonstration onlyAvailable electronically and listed also in Infopack Vol.1
52Coal Priorities 2013 (1)1. Management of environmental risks during or after mine closure2. Increasing the efficiency of mine production and development by utilising Information and Communication Technologies for improved process optimisation3. Protection of mine infrastructure in the case of major accident hazards like rock bursts, gas explosion, fire, etc.
53Coal Priorities 2013 (2)4. Improving the efficiency and economics of underground coal gasification5. Improvement in coal carbonisation through the use of alternative raw materials in coking blends6. Upgrading of coal-derived liquids
54Coal Priorities 2013 (3)7. Technological improvements targeting enhanced efficiency and environmental performance of coal fired power plants8. The development of flexible CCS plants in terms of fuel mix and dynamic behaviour9. Pilot projects validation of emerging and innovating technologies leading to efficiency improvements and CO2 capture
55Annual 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 budgetgoodproposals(funded anyway)bad proposals(not funded)Final mark
56Step 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.
58Outcomes 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.
59Final remarks & advice Strong competition High quality level of proposalsLong process: start early with experienced partners !Descriptions should be short & concise, but don't expect the evaluators to dig out necessary informationExplain improvements in case of resubmissionMake use of the RFCS projects synopsesEnrol as an expert (Evaluator)
60Structure of Presentation 1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps4. Technical Reporting5. Financial Reporting
62Monitoring of the projects is done by: 1 Scientific Project Officer1 Set of financial officers (allocated by country)1 Set of external experts (Technical Group)
63Technical Groups CoalTGC1 – Coal mining operation, mine infrastructure and management, unconventional use of coalTGC2 – Coal preparation, conversion and upgradingTGC3 – Coal combustion, clean and efficient coal technologies, CO2 capture
64Technical Groups Steel TGS1 – Ore agglomeration and ironmakingTGS2 – Steelmaking processTGS3 – CastingTGS4 – Hot and cold rolling processesTGS5 – Finishing and coating
65Technical Groups Steel TGS6 – Physical metallurgy and design of new generic steel gradesTGS7 – Steel products and applications for automobiles, packaging and home appliancesTGS8 – Steel products and applications for building, construction and industryTGS9 – Factory-wide control, social and environmental issues
66Guidelines for Technical Reporting First AnnualMid-TermAnnualDraft FinalCover pageXDistribution listTable of ContentsAbstract (max 250 words)Project Overview TableBudget informationBar chart (actual vs planned)List of DeliverablesState of the ArtProgress of work and problems encounteredFinal summary (max 10 pages)Scientific and technical description of work (task by task)Dissemination activities, patentsList of achronims, abbreviations, referencesSigned Technical Annex
67DeliverablesTo 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”).
68Structure of Presentation 1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps4. Technical Reporting5. Financial Reporting
69Guidelines for Financial reporting 2 Cost Statements:MID-TERM COST STATEMENTDelivered max. 90 days from the end of the first reporting periodTriggers the 2nd pre-financing (40%, Annex III)if <70% of 1st pre-financing used, payment reduced by unused amount
70Guidelines for Financial reporting 2. FINAL COST STATAMENTDelivered max. 90 days from the beginning of the calendar year following the closing date of the projectTriggers the final payment (only after approval of publishable final report)!Art. II.4.bIn 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.
71Guidelines for Financial reporting CERTIFICATE ON FINANCIAL STATEMENTSAudit certificateprepared and certified by an external auditorcompulsory with the Final Cost Statementcovers the costs of the entire projectsubcontract costs, if exist, should be certifiedconfirmation that on no conflict of interest existsthe Commission is entitled to reject some of the costs accepted by the Auditorthe only existing cost incurred after the end of the project and considered as an eligible costan 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.
73Staff costsStaff costs must be consistent with objectives and duration of corresponding tasks.Art.II.3.fNotify the Commission if staff costs are >20% then planned at the grant agreement preparation stageTo 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.
74Common mistakes and examples of good practice After 2009 the depreciationperiod is always 60 months!Invoices for equipment always requested!
75Common mistakes and examples of good practice Annual working hours and the hourly rate for each staff member24,002.400,004.900,00
76Common mistakes and examples of good practice Details for each item needed!
77Common mistakes and examples of good practice Please providealways the copy of the invoice above 5.000,00 EUROInv. no 128/10/ECEL,, purchase of: electronic detectors PCB Piezotronics, 40 pcs16.000,00Inv. no WK/2011/3320, purchase of: shroff casette, 4 pcs3.580,00Inv. no 57/1/11, purchase of: electronic component of the probe, 50 pcs2.859,00Inv. no 102/11/ECEL, purchase of: small-size acelometer detectors type 1,16 pcs6.880,00Inv. no 108/07/2011, purchase of: probe covers 1-component 50 pcs45.568,5574.887,55
78Guidelines for Financial reporting: on time payment Prepare the cost statements on timeSend 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 addressAll items should be clearly identified, please avoid lumped sumsAttach all invoices for single items > 5000€.Attach invoices for claimed equipmentRevenues 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.
79Subcontracts For research assistance only Max 40% of beneficiary’s budget (unless affiliates)Should be foreseen at GA preparationMust be approved by EC prior to signingCopy of draft subcontractForms B5 for subcontractorA signed copy is to be sent once the subcontract is actually signed
80AmendmentsChanges 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.
81Changes 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).
82Web 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 guideGuidelines for Technical and Financial ReportingProject Synopses and Success Storiesand much more…