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
1
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
European Coal and Steel Community
Treaty of Paris - 1951
...expired in 2002
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
The ECSC Flag
1952
1973
1981
1986
Launching of the
Research Fund for Coal and Steel
Treaty of Nice - 2001
The residual assets of the ECSC are
transferred to the European Commission
10 Years of RFCS
Luxembourg, 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 €
Annual Budget
50-60 million € / year
Coal:
27.2 %
Steel:
72.8%
Annual Budget
62
Mio
€
60
58
56
54
52
50
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
The Commission
RFCS Programme management
COSCO
CAG/SAG
Programme Committee
Representatives of the
Member States 1)
Coal / Steel Advisory Group
Recommended
representatives 2)
Technical Groups
12 Technical Groups
Senior Experts for
project monitoring & review
1)
2)
2)
Appointed by the Member States
Appointed by the EC
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….
Coal Research Objectives
Articles:
4.
5.
6.
7.
Improving the competitive position of
Community coal
Health and safety in mines
Efficient protection of the environment
and improvement of the use of coal as a
clean energy source
Management of external dependence on
energy supply
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
Eligible Actions:
•
Research projects (60% funding)
to cover investigative or experimental work with the aim of acquiring further knowledge
•
Pilot projects (50% funding)
~ 15 €/y
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
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.
Project Synopses
Success Stories
http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/home_en.html
Success Stories
http://cordis.europa.eu/coal-steel-rtd/home_en.html
Benefits from the RFCS
An insight into the
Monitoring and Assessment
Exercise
Why ?
• The exercise is foreseen every 7 years in the Legal
Basis
(Last one in 2006  due date is 2013)
How ?
• 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
Assessment of 198 projects completed over
the period 2003 - 2020
198 projects
being
completed
in the
evaluation
period with
approved
Final Report
by
d
e
ts
een
scr Exper t
TG Shor ire
h
wit ionna
est
u
Q
78 projects
identified by TG
Rapporteurs as
promising for
quantification
of benefit
46 projects
selected for
In depth
assessment
23%
23%
ofofprojects
projects
assessed
selected
in-depth
y
hb
t
p
e
in-d eurs;
d
lyse pport with
a
n
A
Ra iews tors
nd
G
a
T
ed y
terv ordina aire
b
n
i
i
r
b
c
 t co tionn
des lysed eurs
jec ues
o
a
t
r
r
n
Q
p
a
po
ng
p
o
a
L
R

TG
RFCS projects rated as very successful
coal & steel
scientific
degree of
achievement
technical
100%
80%
60%
economical
40%
social
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
High degree of achievement of the
individual objectives of the projects
Outcomes of the projects
coal & steel
knowledge
recommendation
new practice
new process
numerical model
new solution
new product
measuring device
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Practically and industrially validated
solutions, ready for dissemination
100%
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€/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
50 m€/y invested by RFCS
700 m€/y potential benefits
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
Research and Innovation
Sources for EU funding at DG RTD
• Framework programmes
• (FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)
1984 – 2020
• RFCS
2003 - ?
Research and Innovation
Sources for EU funding at DG RTD
In 2013:
• Framework programmes
• (FP1… FP7, Horizon 2020)
€ 11 b/y
• RFCS
€ 52 m/y
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
Framework Programmes
RFCS
Open call
(proposal submission limited to JuneSeptember)
FPs
Calls are announced by the EC
Funding rate:
Funding rate:
60% Research
50-75% Research
50% Demonstration
50% Demonstration
60% Accompanying measures
100% Other activities
RFCS
versus
Framework Programmes
RFCS
Actual costs
Indirect costs:
35% of staff costs
FPs
Actual costs
(average hourly rates still accepted)
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
Framework Programmes
RFCS
Fully managed by the
European Commission
FPs
Partially externalised
(executive agencies)
RFCS
versus
Framework Programmes
RFCS
FPs
Stable
Dynamic
Structure of Presentation
1. RFCS: history, activities, benefits
2. RFCS vs Framework Programmes
3. Proposal submission and evaluation
4. Technical Reporting
5. Financial Reporting
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.
No threshold nor limit on budget, consortium
size, project duration.
However, typical projects have:
•
•
•
•
Number of partners: 4 - 8
Total budget: 2 - 4 million €
RFCS funding: 1 -2 million €
Duration: 36 – 42 months
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
ANNEX
Contractual document
•Part 1: Project Objectives
• Part 2: Workpackage
Description
• Part 3: Bar Chart
Proposal Selection Process
1.
Proposal
submission
(Sept 2013)
2.
eligibility
check
submitted
proposals
3.
evaluations
eligible
proposals
4.
budget
cut-off
ranking
list
5.
SAG, COSCO
Commission
Decision
negotiation
unsufficient
budget
ineligible
proposals
not
recommended
for funding
Project
Start
(Jul 2014)
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
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
0 - 5 pts*
2.
Innovative content
0 - 5 pts*
3.
Consistency of resources and quality of
partnership
0 - 5 pts
4.
Industrial interest and scientific/technical 0 - 5 pts
prospects
0 - 5 pts
Added value for the European Union
5.
* Required threshold of 3 points
Selection Criteria
(Accompanying Measures)
1.
Contribution to RFCS Objectives
0 - 5 pts
2.
Scientific, technical and socio-economic
prospects
0 - 5 pts
3.
Added value for the European Union
4.
Budget and resources
Required threshold : 15 total points
0 - 5 pts
0 - 5 pts
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
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
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
53
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
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.
Cut-off budget
bad
proposals
(not funded)
good
proposals
(funded anyway)
Final mark
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
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
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
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
Guidelines for Technical Reporting
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
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”).
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
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.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.
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.






Main Changes
year of signature
Real staff costs
Staff cost excess
Overheads
Travel and
subsistance
Equipment
Currency
Sumbission time
limit
Contracts 2008 and earlier
mid-term and final report
(otherwise AR needed on midterm)
30% of staff costs
1 coordination meeting per
semester, 1 representative,
hosted meetings not eligible
36 / 60 months
local currency +
exchange rate to €
Grant Agreements 2009 and later
Mandatory only in final report
(adjustment needed)
need to notify if 20% (Art.II.3.f)
35% of staff costs
not covered
( included in the overheads)
60 months
local currency
max. 31/03 of year after the end of
the reporting period
DEADLINE:31/12 of that year. Project
max. 31/03 of year after the end can be closed by EC assuming no
of the reporting period
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!
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
Common mistakes and examples
of good practice
Details for each
item needed!
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
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.
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




79
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).
Web Links / RFCS Info
• 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…
82
Thank you for your attention
83