1

Establishing guidance material on common projects for

SESAR deployment

DG MOVE orientations

(9.07.2012)

Disclaimer

This document does not present any formal position or commitment

of the European Commission or of its services

2

1. Introduction

On 3 May 2012, the Commission’s DG MOVE submitted a draft discussion paper on “Guidance material on common projects for SESAR deployment” to the Industry Consultation Body (ICB) for an opinion. The purpose of the paper was to consult stakeholders on their initial views on DG MOVE’s approach in setting up governance mechanisms for SESAR deployment. On the basis of the discussion paper, DG MOVE has conducted a series of bilateral meetings with individual and groups of stakeholders. These constructive discussions have been mutually beneficial in better understanding expectations and concerns of all the parties involved in SESAR deployment. The results of these bilateral meetings have led to the present revision of the initial discussion paper. In particular, we have acknowledged and addressed the need for simplifying the proposed governance mechanisms, clearly defining leadership and ownership in levels 1 and 2, underlining the central role of the ATM Master plan and creating buy-in and commitment. We have also received valuable input from the work of the Interim Deployment Steering Group (IDSG) over the past months and taken advantage of the ATM Master plan update campaign to ensure it prepares this plan for playing a central role in the deployment phase, addressing in particular: the transition from research and development to implementation; the driving role of the performance; the prioritisation of the operational changes in the deployment. We have also progressed in our reflection on the future of the SESAR Joint Undertaking in particular on the possibility to extend its scope with an enhanced connection with SESAR deployment including industrialisation processes. Based on these considerations, we have, as necessary, consolidated or revisited some of the initial elements presented in the discussion paper and also adapted the terminology accordingly. These results will serve as basis for drafting the future legislative proposal on guidance material:

ATM Master plan:

The ATM Master plan is not a deployment plan. However, it should be the sole reference on which to build deployment;

Deployment governance:

Full support for the thee level governance;

There should be only one leader and accountable entity for the political level (level 1) of the deployment governance: the European Commission;

There should be only one leader and accountable entity for the management level (level 2) of the deployment governance: the deployment manager;

Levels 1 and 2 should be supported, as appropriate, by existing entities optimising the use of their respective competencies and in accordance with their prerogatives;

There is no need for a coordination platform in level 2;

Common projects:

Common projects are the appropriate SES tools to implement the ATM Master plan;

Their definition, establishment and monitoring should be under the responsibility of Level 1, who should be supported by the competent entities and ensure that decisions are taken through the adequate consultation processes;

3

Common projects should define the agreed EU deployment objectives. For this purpose, they should include the essential operational changes identified in the ATM Master plan requiring synchronisation and that are supported by:

Validation of R&D results, including proven contribution to the SES performance objectives and coherence with performance plans;

Solid overall business case, in particular endorsed by airspace users; Assessment of safety cases; Identification of regulatory needs; Dedicated incentives;

Airspace users should endorse common projects’ CBAs and should contribute to the establishment of the deployment programme;

Professional staff organisations will have to play an essential role in deployment in particular on change management and on aspects impacting the human factor. They should be associated in the establishment of the common projects at level 1 and of the deployment programme at level 2 and ensure an adequate involvement of the human factor in the implementation projects. The Experts groups on the social dimension of the SES should play a strong supporting role towards level 1;

Under this approach, the establishment of 6 common projects based on the 6 SESAR key features has been reconsidered to favour of a more maturity-based definition of common projects. Furthermore, deployment governance and the deployment programme should no longer constitute common projects;

Deployment manager:

Without excluding membership for airspace users, the deployment manager should be mainly composed of civil and military service providers (ATS, CNS, MET) and airport operators that invest in implementation projects;

There was no consensus on the proposal for entrusting Eurocae with the leadership of the industrialisation forum. Moreover, the concept of industrialisation forum was not supported. Nevertheless, it is essential that the manufacturing industry provides an input to the establishment of the common projects and of the deployment programme, but should not participate in the governance of its execution.

The manufacturing industry could also support the deployment manager in setting up the coordination and the financial engineering of a complex industrial programme;

Coordinated military views are an essential support to level 1 in establishing common projects and to level 2 for the establishment of the deployment programme. Being SESAR deployment primarily a civil oriented initiative with the need for a close civil-military interface, the deployment by the military stakeholders should be the responsibility of the competent military authorities;

Deployment programme:

The deployment programme shall identify implementation projects and the mechanisms for their coordination and it should be developed, executed and maintained by the deployment manager who is accountable towards level 1 for its implementation;

Common projects constitute the “business” view of deployment, whereas the deployment programme constitutes its “project” view.

2. Setting up SESAR deployment The updated ATM Master plan provides us with a roadmap of the essential operational changes, which are the most critical for the achievement of the SES performance objectives. These changes

4

are supported by essential operational improvements, enablers (system, procedure, institutional, human) and implementation objectives. This roadmap from the ATM Master plan will ultimately have to be translated into clearly defined and coordinated implementation projects. Our objective is to bridge the gap between the roadmap and the implementation projects through mechanisms that:

Select essential operational changes, operational improvements, enablers and implementation objectives that are mature enough for implementation and that require synchronisation;

Cluster them into clear, performance based, beneficial and agreed deployment objectives;

build and maintain consensus and commitment amongst stakeholders that are called upon to invest in achieving these objectives;

establish binding legal instruments and incentives to support timely, synchronised and coordinated deployment of these objectives.

Article 15a of Regulation 550/2004 (SES Service provision Regulation) provides us with a specific instrument that supports SESAR deployment. It introduces the concept of common projects as instruments to assist the successful implementation of the ATM Master plan, supporting also the achievement of SES performance objectives in key areas such as capacity, cost efficiency, environmental sustainability and safety. In accordance with Article 15a(2) of the same Regulation, the Commission may also develop guidance material on how common projects can support the implementation of the ATM Master plan. To ensure a coordinated and synchronised deployment, it is necessary to establish appropriate governance mechanisms involving the relevant stakeholders and that include a deployment manager, a deployment programme to which the deployment manager commit to and that identifies specific implementation projects. These are the deployment instruments and the sequencing that we intend to put in place to set up SESAR deployment.

> ATM Master plan > Guidance material > Deployment governance > Common projects > Deployment manager > Deployment programme > Implementation projects

2.1. Guidance material on common projects: An EU framework for SESAR deployment

In order to exploit the potential offered by common projects and define the mechanisms mentioned above, the guidance material on common projects should:

i. Establish the deployment governance (the three levels, the actors, their roles, the processes and interrelationship between levels)

ii. Further develop the definition of common projects in terms of scope, requirements, setup and adoption

iii. Define the overall scope and characteristics of the implementation projects

5

iv. Define incentives for common projects connecting with the EU funding mechanisms and SES charging and performance schemes

In accordance to Article 15a of Regulation No 550/2004, the Commission, after consulting the Single Sky Committee, formally adopts the guidance material. The guidance material should take the form of a Commission implementing Regulation, immediately enforceable upon its entry into force, establishing a binding EU framework on how to organise SESAR deployment.

2.2. Deployment governance mechanisms The deployment governance mechanisms should aim to: – ensure a seamless transition from the validation of SESAR technologies and procedures to their

deployment for the benefit of all stakeholders; – ensure compliance with the SES policy and objectives; – identify deployment activities to ensure the effective implementation of the essential

operational changes; – coordinate, synchronise and monitor in a transparent manner and avoiding conflict of interest

the timely implementation of the essential operational changes in the ATM Master plan under a governance structure involving all deployment stakeholders in accordance with their responsibilities and competencies;

– contribute to the definition and implementation of deployment incentives, funding and alternative financing mechanisms on the essential deployment activities.

To fulfil these tasks in an effective and transparent manner involving the entities accountable for the performance of the ATM system, the deployment governance should be composed of three levels: political, management and implementation.

Political

Management

Implementation

Single Sky Committee

NSA

Network Manager

SESAR JU

Experts group on SES social dimension

ICB

EASA

PRB

Eurocontrol

EDA /military coordination

P1 P2 P3 Pn …

implementation project managers

Deployment manager

SESAR deployment governance

European Commission

TENT-EA

6

a) Political level The political level is responsible for exercising oversight of the deployment governance and deployment activities, enforcing their coherence with SES policy and instruments and safeguarding the public interest. The European Commission should lead the political level and in particular execute the following tasks: – adopt decisions on the establishment and maintenance of common projects; – establish and develop the appropriate relationships with non-EU States, standardisation

organisations and the relevant non-EU regulatory authorities to facilitate industrialisation processes and promote global interoperability;

– select the deployment manager, approve the deployment programme and select the implementation projects;

– decide on, manage and monitor the use of incentives, including EU funding, for common projects, in particular those provided to the deployment manager and to the implementation projects;

– Monitoring ANSP's investment plans' alignment with common projects; – Arbitrate in cases of conflict within and between the management and implementation levels. In executing these tasks the Commission consults the Single Sky Committee and is assisted by, Eurocontrol (DSS and network manager), the European defence agency (EDA), the Trans-European network executive agency (TEN-TEA), the ICB, the consultative group of experts on the social dimension of the SES, the National supervisory authorities (NSA), the Performance review body (PRB), the SESAR joint undertaking (SESAR JU) and the European aviation safety agency (EASA) within their respective existing roles and competencies.

b) Management Level The management level should manage the execution of the deployment programme by synchronising, coordinating and monitoring the activities defined in the deployment programme, including implementation projects. The deployment manager should lead the management level. There should be only one deployment manager and one deployment programme. The members of the deployment manager should be fully accountable for the execution of the deployment programme. In particular, the deployment manager should be responsible for: – executing of the deployment programme through the coordination of the implementation

projects, in particular assuring the respect of the synchronisation dates (i.e. air/ground deployments) ;

– monitoring the progress of implementation projects through reporting from their managers – Reporting to level 1 on the implementation of the deployment programme and on the related

risk management ; – Monitoring and ensuring its members’ investment plans alignment with the deployment program – Ensuring availability of the necessary financing to complement EU funding; – Act as the main interface between the Commission and the implementation projects The deployment manager should not interfere with the management of individual implementation projects, but should be empowered to provide appropriate steering and impose remedial actions to ensure the coordinated execution of the implementation projects in the deployment programme. There should be a strong link between the deployment manager and the network manager. Both should cooperate to ensure the mutual achievement of their individual responsibilities avoiding any

7

form of duplication or competition. In particular the network manager should monitor the impact of the deployment programme’s execution on the performance of the Network and its coherence with the Network Strategy plan. The network manager should also support, within its mandate, the coordination efforts of members of the deployment manager for projects related to network performance. The deployment manager should be assisted by and cooperate with the SESAR JU on issues related to standardisation and certification, consistency with the Master plan and to establish the necessary connections between R&D and deployment, ensuring technological reactivity to an evolving operational environment.

c) Implementation level The implementation level mainly consists of the implementation projects selected to deploy common projects in accordance with the deployment programme. Consequently, implementation projects are included in the deployment programme and should comply with the relevant criteria defined in the guidance material and should be eligible for EU funding. While the coordination of the overall execution and monitoring of these projects should be carried out by the deployment manager, the project managers are responsible for the execution of the individual implementation projects.. The implementation level could also include other projects, also from non-EU countries, not covered by the deployment programme:

whose objectives are within the scope of the ATM Master plan (i.e. addressing non-essential operational changes) and that have an added value for the deployment programme; and

that accept the overall coordination by the deployment manager.

2.3. Common projects

a) General principles A common project is based on validated ESSIP objectives and the stakeholders’ lines of actions defined in level 3 of the ATM Master plan that require synchronisation and that are related to essential operational changes identified in level 1 of the ATM Master plan. These criteria ensure:

Technological maturity for implementation (condition to be captured as an ESSIP objective);

Significant contribution to performance (condition to be identified as an essential change);

Added value compared to “business as usual” (enforcement of synchronisation). Additional objectives and/or stakeholders’ lines of actions coming from other sources could be added to the common projects to ensure their completeness as well as the relevance of the associated cost benefit analysis. Such additions could concern:

Additional lines of action for the network manager derived from the Network Strategy Plan and/or the Network Operation Plan and related to a validated ESSIP objective;

Additional ESSIP-like implementation objectives of an operational nature derived from the Network Strategy plan and/or the Network operation plan;

Anticipation of technologies and procedures in the ATM Master plan, although not yet captured as an ESSIP objective. Such anticipation might be required for technologies and procedures reaching maturity during the time of establishment of the common project to avoid unnecessary delay.

Eventually, ESSIP/LSSIP should be adapted to become the sole input for the implementation objectives of common projects.

8

A common project is established and adopted by the Commission as a Commission’s implementing Regulation subject to a stakeholder consultation process, an independent cost benefit analysis (CBA) and the positive opinion of the Single Sky Committee. The establishment of a common project requires that the technological and operational content originating from the ATM Master plan is complemented with further actions: – Definition, for each of the implementation objectives in the common project, of a precise

geographical scope (e.g. in term of target FAB, FIR, TMA, airports) and a precise planning, including air/ground synchronisation dates as needed;

– Demonstration of a global positive CBA while identifying local/individual negative CBA; – Identification of incentive mechanisms relevant to the common project, in particular to mitigate

the identified local/individual negative CBA; – Identification of links with existing implementing rules or of needs for new regulatory actions to

facilitate the implementation of the common project; – Assessment of compliance with clear and agreed safety requirements; – Assessment of global interoperability/relation with ICAO’s Global Air Navigation Plan and

Aviation System Blocks Upgrades. Airspace users should assess and endorse the result of the CBA associated to the common project before it can be adopted.

b) A “Pilot common project” Preparatory work on the establishment of a pilot common project should start as early as September 2012 with the objective to have it adopted by end 2013 at the latest. The definition of a pilot common project should be performed under the responsibility of the Commission (level 1 of the governance) with the support of the SESAR JU (inputs from the Master plan, economical studies, industry) assisted by the network manager (network dimension, inputs from Network Strategy plan), the EDA (military dimension, special approach to CBA aspects), the Directorate Single Sky of Eurocontrol (ESSIP/LSSIP expertise, regulatory expertise), the PRB (connection with the performance and the charging scheme) and EASA (regulatory and safety expertise). The initial work on the pilot common project would aim at: – Refining the working methodology developed by the IDSG to move from the implementation

view in the ATM Master plan to the business view in the common project; – Defining the necessary expertise and support and the related resources needed by the

Commission; – Assessing the level of details required for the cost benefit analysis – Setting up the appropriate stakeholder consultation process; – Defining the interface between the Commission and the airspace users The pilot common project and its cost benefit analysis will build on: – The updated ATM Master plan edition 2012, including ESSIP plan 2012; – The Network Strategy plan and the Network operation plan as required to ensure consistency

and completeness; – Work in progress within the IDSG , in particular the interim deployment programme; – Latest SESAR JU’s validation results expected from release 2012; – Ad-hoc update of the ATM Master plan’s business view by mid-2013 as requested by the EU; – Performance targets for the second reference period as it is anticipated that most of the

implementation objectives in the pilot common project will target the RP2 window. Today it is premature to give an exhaustive list of the implementation objectives in the pilot common project. However, it could be anticipated that it will be a subset of the baseline and step 1 essential

9

changes as they are identified in chapter 3 of the Master plan edition 20121. The potential benefits from the pilot common project will be highly dependent on the performance demand resulting from RP2 performance targets and how much SESAR could contribute achieving them. The pilot common project is of special importance as it will be the subject of the call that will lead to the selection of the deployment manager, the establishment of the initial deployment programme and the selection of a first set of implementation projects. Any subsequent common project will induce an extension of the deployment programme to include a new batch of implementation projects. However, once established, there is only one deployment manager.

2.4. Establishing the deployment manager, deployment programme and the implementation projects

a) Procedure Based on the guidance material, the Commission could launch a call for the selection of the deployment manager through a competitive dialogue procedure, under the Trans-European Network – Transport (TEN-T) / Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) framework, with a threefold scope:

1. Select candidates to constitute the industrial consortium that will be appointed as the deployment manager

2. Establish a draft deployment programme 3. Select proposals for implementation projects to be awarded EU funding

b) Deployment manager The deployment manager should be a consortium composed of operational stakeholders of the SES area that present implementation projects and collectively commit to coordinate the execution of these projects in accordance with a deployment programme. The deployment manager should be mainly composed of civil and military ANS, ATS, CNS and MET service providers and airport operators. This does not exclude the possibility for airspace users (scheduled, business and general) to be members of the deployment manager, in particular to ensure synchronisation between airborne and ground deployment. It is essential that the composition of the deployment manager is sufficiently representative in terms of category of stakeholders, investments, geographical coverage and FAB dimension to reach the required critical mass to ensure the successful and timely implementation of common projects. Detailed criteria on the composition of the deployment manager will be defined in the guidance material. Manufacturing industry should not actively takepart of the decision making process within the deployment manager, but should provide information on products and their development to the members of the deployment manager and should provide, under the appropriate contractual arrangements, expert support in setting up a large scale deployment programme and its financial engineering. The members of the deployment manager shall be bound by an appropriate contractual arrangement, which also establishes internal governance mechanisms, and collectively contractually bound to the Commission as a consortium.

1 Such as: initial 4D, extended AMAN horizon, PRNAV, initial SWIM, etc.

10

The contract between the Commission and the deployment manager should take the form of a framework contract. In this case, the selection of the consortium would be based on its potential capacity to implement any essential change in the ATM Master plan. Each new common project, upon its adoption, would constitute a work order for which the deployment manager would be requested to submit a proposal for its implementation consisting of a revised deployment programme and the relevant additional implementation projects. The coordination efforts of the deployment manager should be entirely financed by the Commission within an established budget.

c) Deployment programme The deployment programme should be a comprehensive project view of all deployment activities necessary to implement common projects. As part of the call for a competitive dialogue to select to deployment manager, the selected candidates will be required to agree on a draft deployment programme to implement the common projects. The draft deployment programme would be the main result of the dialogue phase of the selection procedure and would constitute the basis for the following phase consisting in the submission of proposals for implementation projects and a proposal on the setup of the consortium that eventually will become the deployment manager. The dialogue phase involves all the selected candidates and is led by the Commission (level 1). The SESAR JU, the TEN-TEA, EASA, EDA and the network manager should also participate in the dialogue to ensure consistency with the common projects and feasibility of the proposed consortium setup. Candidates shall ensure that their proposals take into account reliable information from the manufacturing industry to assess the impact on legacy systems, to provide technical feasibility, cost estimates, roadmaps of technical solutions and support the assessment of performance achievements. At the end of the competitive dialogue procedure, the draft deployment programme should be approved by the Commission and should constitute a binding commitment for the members of the deployment manager and the other participants in the implementation projects.

d) Implementation projects Implementation projects covered by the deployment programme should be:

Projects proposed and executed by members of the deployment manager; and

Projects proposed and executed by entities which are not members of the deployment manager but who nevertheless accept the overall coordination by the deployment manager.

Consequently:

a member of the deployment manager should carry out at least one or part of one implementation project;

a participant in an implementation project does not necessarily need to be a member of the deployment manager.

The implementation level should also be open to projects outside the SES area, provided that these projects bring additional benefits to deployment programme. Implementation projects must ensure open competition within the supply industry. The Commission shall conclude contractual arrangements with the implementation projects selected to receive EU funding either directly or through the deployment manager.

11

2.5. Incentives

a) EU funding EU funding for common projects should be focussed on activities that, with a proven added value, aim to coordinate, synchronise or implement the deployment of the essential operational changes in the ATM Master plan. Without prejudice to the eligibility and award criteria and the selection processes set out for the relevant EU funding instruments, eligibility criteria relating to the nature and objectives of the implementation projects will be established in the guidance material and in the relevant call for proposals. SESAR deployment fully complies with the objectives of the proposed future TEN-T Programme and in particular with the definition of projects of common interest supported under the Programme. SES and SESAR are defined as horizontal priorities on the “Core network”. The projects supported under the TEN-T Programme can encompass their entire lifecycle from feasibility studies to implementation and evaluation making the TEN-T programme particularly suited to support SESAR deployment. The CEF is the financial implementation instrument for the future TEN-T Programme. The CEF can support a multitude of actions comprising purchase, supply and deployment of components, systems and services including software, development, construction and installation activities (defined as “Works” eligible for 20% co-funding) and activities needed to prepare project implementation from feasibility to validation studies, including software and other technical support measures to define and develop projects and decide on their financing (defined as “studies” eligible for 50% co-funding). The CEF can be implemented through one or more forms of financial aid, in particular, grants, procurements and financial instruments such as:

equity instruments, such as investment funds with a focus on providing risk capital for actions contributing to projects of common interest;

loans and/or guarantees facilitated by risk-sharing instruments, including enhancement mechanism to project bonds.

The appointment of the deployment manager should be established through a procurement process, envisaging the possibility to support 100% of the coordination and synchronisation efforts, while the selection of the implementation projects should follow the normal grant/study selection process with the related funding rates.

b) Other incentives for common projects Other incentives for the implementation of common projects should be based on and in accordance with the incentive mechanisms defined in the Charging scheme and Performance scheme regulations and should include: – Modulation of charges for airspace users executing implementation projects; – Unit rate adjustment (bonus) for ANSPs executing implementation projects; – Part of the revenue from charges can also be used to fund Network related common projects. Any EU financial support to ANSPs for implementation projects should be deducted from the costs for such projects that are included in the calculation of the unit rates. Further studies are being conducted on possible incentives for implementing common projects.

12

3. Executing SESAR deployment From early 2015, at the end of the set up sequence described in Chapter 2, another sequence will start, consisting primarily in the execution of the deployment programme by the deployment manager through the coordination of the related implementation projects, progress monitoring and reporting. However, the deployment programme and its implementation projects constitute a living reference for the deployment manager, requiring regular updates ranging from minor (e.g. adjustments without any impact at the level of the common projects) to highly significant (e.g. dealing with the consequences of the establishment of a new common project).

3.1. Maintenance of the deployment programme Maintenance is limited to minor updates of the deployment programme with minor adjustments of some implementation projects without any impact on the common projects. Maintenance actions should be proposed on an initiative of the deployment manager on the basis of its analysis of reports from implementation projects’ managers. Minor updates of the deployment programme should not require a new decision of the Commission. They should nevertheless require a favourable opinion of the Commission.

3.2. Revision of the deployment programme Revision is when adjustments cannot be confined to the deployment programme and its related implementation projects. In this case one or more common projects must be revised, potentially including a revision of their CBA and a new assessment and endorsement by the airspace users. In this case a revision of the related Commission implementing Regulation would be necessary. Revision is an initiative of the Commission. The deployment manager on the basis of its analysis of reports from the implementation projects, could propose the need for a revision to the Commission. The Commission could also decide to launch a revision, for example. As a consequence of an ATM Master plan update or new incoming SESAR JU’s validation results.

3.3. New common projects The need for establishing a new common project will most probably arise from an update of the ATM Master plan (ESSIP plan) confirming new technologies and procedures, which are critical to performance and requiring synchronisation, are mature for deployment. The Commission should take the initiative of launching a new common project in accordance with Chapter 2.3. When established, a new common project would trigger:

A new work order from the Commission to the deployment manager

A proposal from the deployment manager for a revised deployment programme including a new set of implementation projects;

A new Commission decision on the revised deployment programme;

New contracts for new implementation projects.

13

4. Industrialisation SESAR deployment includes both industrialisation and implementation. Industrialisation should be understood as the process bridging between successful validation of new technologies and procedures performed under the scope of the SESAR Joint Undertaking (end of V3) and the readiness for them being implemented (end of V4). Industrialisation is essential to achieve SESAR deployment in a timely fashion. Industrialisation must be open to any supplier, regardless of its level of involvement in SESAR development phase, thus ensuring fair competition. The concept of Industrialisation Forum tested in the initial version of this Discussion Paper is abandoned on the basis of the feedback received through the bilateral meetings. However, the contributions that were expected from this forum are still necessary. It is envisaged to ensure them through the manufacturing industry and the SESAR JU.

4.1. The manufacturing industry The manufacturing industry is at the crossroad between industrialisation and implementation. Although industrialisation is perceived as the natural sequence of the validation, manufacturing industry will not launch any industrialisation activity without, at least, a committing deployment programme and its accompanying regulatory and standardisation roadmaps. The ground industry even requires contracts from its customers before launching industrialization. Such contracts will result from calls to be issued by civil and military ANSPs and airports as part of the implementation projects. Consequently, industrialisation and implementation are strongly interrelated:

Commitments on implementation require detailed planning and CBAs , which will be achieved through the common projects and the related deployment programme, that require reliable availability dates and costs for new technologies and procedures to be drawn from industrialisation; while

Industrialisation will not start without clear commitments on implementation. In addition to its obvious role in industrialisation, the manufacturing industry should play decisive underlying roles in implementation ensuring the vital connection between industrialisation and implementation:

in an advisory capacity, providing reliable information to the Commission in level 1 (through the SESAR JU), to the deployment coordinator in level 2 (subject to specific arrangements) and to its customers involved in implementation projects in level 3 (directly, through proposals and then contracts). This information should address industrialisation of new technologies and procedures (availability dates, costs), specific transition scenarios (e.g. where legacy systems are involved) and risk management;

through the timely delivery of technologies and procedures required by its customers to fulfil their commitments in the implementation projects;

potentially, in a supporting capacity, providing the deployment manager with the industrial support required to coordinate a wide range of complex implementation projects and the financial engineering required to establish them.

14

With these roles in the implementation of SESAR, manufacturing industry is expected to be pro-active in the industrialisation, delivering on-time and on-cost.

4.2. Standardisation and certification Industrialisation also covers the consolidation of the standards required to support the development of new technologies and procedures. It also ensures interoperability as well as the development of the safety regulations required for their certification before they can go operational. The detailed activities will be identified in the regulatory and standardisation roadmaps in the ATM Master plan. Standardisation activities will continue to be coordinated by Eurocae with the participation of the industry. Safety regulatory activities will be handled by EASA. The SESAR JU should support and advise the Commission (level 1) and the deployment manager (level 2) on standardisation and certification matters and facilitate timely standardisation and certification in the industrialisation phase mainly through the anticipation of Eurocae and EASA activities already in the R&D phase, also taking advantage of SESAR JU's validation campaigns. This is possible because of the SESAR JU’s relations with Eurocae and EASA through dedicated Memoranda of Cooperation and its wide industry membership.