The Research Fund for Coal and Steel of the European Commission Katowice, 21 February 2013

1

The Research Fundfor Coal and Steel

of the European Commission

Katowice, 21 February 2013

Mario IamarinoAnna Zietek

DG Research and Innovation Directorate G - Industrial Technologies

1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits

2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes

3. Proposal submission and evaluation steps

4. Technical Reporting

5. Financial Reporting

Structure of Presentation

European Coal and Steel CommunityTreaty of Paris - 1951

...expired in 2002

European Coal and Steel CommunityMain 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

1952

1973

1981

1986

The ECSC Flag

Launching of theResearch Fund for Coal and Steel

Treaty of Nice - 2001

The residual assets of the ECSC are transferred to the European Commission

10 Years of RFCSLuxembourg, September 2012

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 €

50-60 million € / year50-60 million € / year

Steel:72.8%

Coal:27.2 %

Annual BudgetAnnual Budget

Annual BudgetAnnual Budget

Th

e C

om

mis

sio

n

Technical Groups

CAG/SAG

COSCO

RFCS Programme management

Programme CommitteeRepresentatives of the

Member States 1)

Coal / Steel Advisory GroupRecommended

representatives 2)

12 Technical GroupsSenior Experts for

project monitoring & review 2)

1) Appointed by the Member States2) Appointed by the EC

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.

The RFCS Legal BasisThe RFCS Legal Basis

Highly industry-oriented….

4. Improving the competitive position of Community coal

5. Health and safety in mines6. 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

Articles:

Coal Research ObjectivesCoal Research Objectives

8. New and improved steelmaking & finishing techniques

9. RTD and the utilisation of steel10. Conservation of resources and

improvement of working conditions

Articles:

Steel Research ObjectivesSteel Research Objectives

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

Project Synopses

Collection of about 550 projects (2003 – 2013),Completed projects have direct link to final report.

http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/home_en.html

Project Synopses

Success Stories

http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/home_en.html

Benefits from the RFCS

An insight into theMonitoring and Assessment

Exercise

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 ?

Assessment of 198 projects completed over the period 2003 - 2020

78 projectsidentified by TG Rapporteurs as promising for quantification

of benefit

198 projectsbeing

completedin the

evaluation period with approved

Final Report

46 projects selected for

In depth assessment

23% of projects

selected

23% of projectsassessedin-depth

RFCS projects rated as very successful

High degree of achievement of the individual objectives of the projects

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

scientific

technical

economical

social

100%

80%

60%

40%

coal & steel

degree of achievement

Outcomes of the projects

Practically and industrially validated solutions, ready for dissemination

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

knowledge

recommendation

new practice

new process

numerical model

new solution

new product

measuring device

coal & steel

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

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€/yCost 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

50 m€/y invested by RFCS

700 m€/y potential benefits

Research and InnovationSources for EU funding at DG RTD

• Framework programmes 1984 – 2020• (FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)

• RFCS 2003 - ?

Research and InnovationSources for EU funding at DG RTD

• Framework programmes € 11 b/y• (FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)

• RFCS € 52 m/y

In 2013:

FP7 budget breakdown

Complementary to RFCS

Transition from FP7 to…

Total: € 960 bn (European summit 7-8/2/2013)

Budget Horizon 2020: € 80 bn(not confirmed)

RFCS versus

Framework Programmes

RFCS FPs

Does not rely on contributions from member states

Relies on contributions from member states

Bottom - up Top - down

Continuous programme Discontinuous programme

RFCS versus


RFCS FPs

Open call(proposal submission limited to June-September)

Calls are announced by the EC

Funding rate: 60% Research50% Demonstration60% Accompanying measures

Funding rate:50-75% Research 50% Demonstration100% Other activities

RFCS versus

Framework ProgrammesRFCS FPs

Actual costsActual costs(average hourly rates still accepted)

Indirect costs:35% of staff costs

Indirect 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

RFCS versus


RFCS FPs

Fully managed by the European Commission

Partially externalised (executive agencies)

RFCS versus


RFCS FPs

Stable Dynamic



3. Proposal submission and evaluation




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.

• Number of partners: 4 - 8• Total budget: 2 - 4 million €• RFCS funding: 1 -2 million €• Duration: 36 – 42 months

No threshold nor limit on budget, consortium size, project duration.

However, typical projects have:

How to submit a proposal• Since 2011, RFCS proposals are to be

submitted electronically through the SEP platform

• Go to RFCS webpage on Cordis:http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/

41

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

B4 - TECHNICAL ANNEXContractual document

•Part 1: Project Objectives

• Part 2: Workpackage Description

• Part 3: Bar Chart

1.Proposal

submission(Sept 2013)

submittedproposals

2.eligibility

check

eligibleproposals

ineligibleproposals

3.evaluations

not recommended

for funding

rankinglist

4.budget cut-off

negotiation

unsufficientbudget

5.SAG, COSCOCommission

Decision

Project Start

(Jul 2014)

Proposal Selection Process

• 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

Evaluations

47

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

48

Selection Criteria(Research, Pilot & Demonstration projects)

1. Scientific and technical approach

2. Innovative content

3. Consistency of resources and quality of partnership

4. Industrial interest and scientific/technical prospects

5. Added value for the European Union

* Required threshold of 3 points

0 - 5 pts*

0 - 5 pts*

0 - 5 pts

0 - 5 pts

0 - 5 pts

Selection Criteria(Accompanying Measures)

1. Contribution to RFCS Objectives

2. Scientific, technical and socio-economic prospects

3. Added value for the European Union

4. Budget and resources

Required threshold : 15 total points

0 - 5 pts

0 - 5 pts

0 - 5 pts

0 - 5 pts

• Different from Project Objectives• Not mandatory• For Research, Pilot and Demonstration only• Available electronically and listed also in Infopack Vol.1

Annual Research Priorities

If a proposal meets an annual priority, it will be awarded 1 extra point

Coal Priorities 2013 (1)

1. 1. Management of environmental risks during or after mine closure

2. 2. Increasing the efficiency of mine production and development by utilising Information and Communication Technologies for improved process optimisation

3. 3. Protection of mine infrastructure in the case of major accident hazards like rock bursts,

gas explosion, fire, etc.

52


• 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

53


• 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

54

Annual Research Priorities

Good proposals and bad proposals do not need the priority bonus!

Proposals with intermediate marks may benefit from the priority bonus.

Final mark

bad proposals(not funded)

goodproposals(funded anyway)

Cut-off budget

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.

Proposals received Proposals received

57

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.

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)

59

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)

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

Technical Groups Steel

TGS1 – Ore agglomeration and ironmaking

TGS2 – Steelmaking process

TGS3 – Casting

TGS4 – Hot and cold rolling processes

TGS5 – Finishing and coating

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

First Annual Mid-Term Annual Draft Final

Cover page X X X X

Distribution list X X X X

Table of Contents X X X X

Abstract (max 250 words) X X X X

Project Overview Table X X X X

Budget information X X

Bar chart (actual vs planned) X X X X

List of Deliverables X X X X

State of the Art X

Progress of work and problems encountered X X X

Final summary (max 10 pages) X

Scientific and technical description of work (task by task)

X X

Dissemination activities, patents X X X X

List of achronims, abbreviations, references X X X X

Signed Technical Annex X X X

Guidelines for Technical Reporting

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”).

Guidelines for Financial reporting

2 Cost Statements:

1. 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

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.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.

Guidelines for Financial reportingCERTIFICATE 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.

Main Changes

year of signature Contracts 2008 and earlier Grant Agreements 2009 and later

Real staff costs

mid-term and final report (otherwise AR needed on mid-

term)Mandatory only in final report

(adjustment needed)Staff cost excess need to notify if 20% (Art.II.3.f)

Overheads 30% of staff costs 35% of staff costs

Travel and subsistance

1 coordination meeting per semester, 1 representative,

hosted meetings not eligiblenot covered

( included in the overheads)Equipment 36 / 60 months 60 months

Currencylocal currency +

exchange rate to € local currency

Sumbission time limit

max. 31/03 of year after the end of the reporting period

max. 31/03 of year after the end of the reporting period

DEADLINE:31/12 of that year. Project can be closed by EC assuming no

claims

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.

Common mistakes and examples of good practice

After 2009 the depreciation period is always 60 months!

Invoices for equipment always requested!


Annual working hours and the hourly rate for each staff member

2.400,0024,00

4.900,00


Details for each item needed!


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

Inv. no WK/2011/3320, purchase of: shroff casette, 4 pcs

Inv. no 57/1/11, purchase of: electronic component of the probe, 50 pcs

Inv. no 102/11/ECEL, purchase of: small-size acelometer detectors type 1,16 pcs

Inv. no 108/07/2011, purchase of: probe covers 1-component 50 pcs 45.568,55

16.000,00

3.580,00

2.859,00

6.880,00

74.887,55

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 email 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

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

Subcontracts

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.

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

• RFCS website is hosted by Cordis:

http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/

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…

Web Links / RFCS Info

Thank you for your attention

83

The Research Fund for Coal and Steel of the European Commission Katowice, 21 February 2013

Documents

Transcript of The Research Fund for Coal and Steel of the European Commission Katowice, 21 February 2013