Q and A Below is a collection of questions on this call asked by potential applicants and

replies given by the Commission. Last updated on 31 October 2014.

***

Q1 - Is MSFD descriptor 5 “Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially

adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation,

harmful algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters” considered as bio-

diversity related ?

Could therefore a project focussing on MSFD descriptor 5 be considered as

potentially relevant in the light of the specific priorities of point 2.3?

Q2 - Paragraph 2.3 of the call includes some specific priorities, one of which states: "To focus primarily on issues and open questions concerning the biodiversity-related descriptors (in particular 1, 4, 6 and 7), by developing strategies or methodologies for their ongoing assessment, including further development of candidate indicators, gathering of data, testing methodologies or developing guidance on how to address the gaps in the coming years; "

Can you please advise on how other priorities also identified by Regional Seas Conventions would be treated by this call? For instance proposals for developing strategies or methodologies for (sub) regional assessments of indicators on noise (descriptor 11). Would these be considered at all? Would these for instance only be considered if no other biodiversity proposals were put forward?

Answer to Q1 and Q2: According to the award decision (section 9.2), the

applications which get the highest ranking based on the total score during the

evaluation process (see section 9.1) will be selected and receive the grand. As

specified in the award criteria of the call for proposals (section 9.1) proposals

focusing on strengthening the GES definition of the biodiversity descriptors, will be

positively considered during the evaluation process. However, this is not exclusive

and proposals focusing on other descriptors (i.e. descriptor 5 on eutrophication or

descriptor 11 on noise) are eligible for funding, provided they pass the minimum

sufficiency level and they achieve the highest ranking.

Furthermore, as mentioned in the specific objectives of the call (section 2.3), any

proposal for action plans should be based on existing and ongoing regional

cooperation mechanisms including, where relevant, those mechanisms established

by the Regional Sea Conventions (RSCs). Thus, links to the work carried out at RSCs

level and to the priorities they have identified per relevant region or subregion

should be included in the proposed action plans.

***

Q3: According to the call point 6.1. the following types of entities are allowed to

participate to the call:

“Applicants and their partners (potential co-beneficiaries of the grant) must be public

or private bodies.”

BUT under the same point amongst the conditions the text is:

“b) Proposals must be submitted jointly and implemented by partners who are public

authorities or bodies of at least two Member States within the relevant

region/subregion;”

Our question is, whether our company as a private body can participate in a

consortium or not?

Answer to Q3: Private bodies can participate in a consortium. Proposals must be

submitted jointly and implemented by partners who are public authorities or

private bodies of at least two Member States within the relevant region/subregion.

***

Q4: Could you confirm me that I could apply as a private body?

Answer to Q4: Private bodies can apply. However, proposals must be submitted

jointly and implemented by partners who are public authorities or private bodies

of at least two Member States within the relevant region/subregion.

***

Q5 Do I have limited funding (≤€60,000)? Or does it depend from the project length?

Answer to Q5: As indicated in the point 4 budget available, the indicative grant per

project will be between € 500 000 and € 1 000 000 if the proposal covers the entire

region in the case of the Baltic Sea, North East Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean

Sea. In the case of proposals covering the Black Sea or the subregions of the North

East Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea (see Article 4 of MSFD), the indicative

grant per project will be between € 200 000 and € 400 000.

***

Q6: Do I have to send a certification of my VAT number with my application form?

Answer to Q6: Yes, this document is needed together with the Legal Identification

Form (Annex D)

***

Q7: Do I have to send and complete ONLY the forms of the Annex A,B,C,D,E? Or do I

have to send also details from my action plans /projects?

Answer to Q7: At this stage, we only need to complete the forms of the Annex A,B,

C, D, E . Your detailed action plan can be provided in the annex A.

***

Q8: Is a legal representative a lawyer? Is it necessary a lawyer sign (Annex A)?

Answer to Q8: By legal representative, we mean the authorised person that can

sing on behalf of the company/entity: authorised representative.

***

Q9: Do I have to create three budgets (short-term 2015/2016, mid-term 2018 and

long-term beyond 2018)?

Answer to Q9: In order to apply for this call, you should provide one estimated

budget (See annex C) for the entire period of the project.

***

Q10: Is it necessary my final financial statement be approved by external

accountant?

Answer to Q10: Yes for Grants ≥ EUR 750 000 it is compulsory to provide a

certificate on the financial statements and underlying accounts when requesting

the payment of balance. This certificate shall be produced by an approved auditor

or, in case of public bodies, by a competent and independent public officer. When

necessary, the Grant Agreement could contain a certificate model.

***

Q11: Call text: 2.1 "If possible, the project should also complement the

implementation of the monitoring programmes and the preparation of the

programme of measures addressing particular gaps identified at these stages."

QA: where can these identified steps be found (web based?)

Answer to Q11: The gaps refer to those identified in the Commission assessment of

Member states reports ("Article 12 Report")1. All the relevant reports can be found

in the following link:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/eu-coast-and-marine-

policy/implementation/reports_en.htm

1COM(2014) 97 final. Report from the Commission to the Council and the European

Parliament. The first phase of implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework

Directive (2008/56/EC). The European Commission's assessment and guidance

("Article 12 Report").

QB: The call relates to marine waters whereas fresh water sources contribute to the pollution found in the marine environment; assessing the baseline and designing monitoring programs etc for the contribution of the fresh waters under the WFD is a necessity to progress to GES under the MSFD. Is the relation with fresh water recognised in this call and if so, are programs related to those (fresh water) sources eligible for funding?

According to the eligibility and exclusion criteria, programmes related to fresh water sources of pollution are not excluded from funding. For more information regarding measures related to MSFD please see the document "Programmes of measures under MSFD Towards recommendations for establishment / implementation and related reporting" in circabc

https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/3aedefcc-3f7e-4f52-a58c-556de986bd6d/MSCG_13_2014_04_DraftRecommendationPoMs_v1-290414.doc

However, in the award criteria (section 9.1) certain priorities have been identified and will be positively considered during the assessment

Please let me know if there are any consortia that are working on the presentation of

a proposal that may seek relevant partners.

We do not have this information.

***

Q12: As for the call for proposal "Best practices for action plans to develop integrated, regional monitoring programmes, coordinated programmes of measures and addressing data and knowledge gaps in coastal and marine waters" (DG ENV/MSFD Action Plans/ 2014) it is not clear whether a proposal aimed at the whole Mediterranean (i.e. including all the Mediterranean subregions) is acceptable or not. At page 10 (4. Budget available) is seems it is ("...if the proposal covers the entire region in the case of the Baltic Sea, North East Atlantic Ocean a nd Mediterranean Sea. ..."), but at page 11/12 (Section 6.1, list entry) it seems it is not ("...entire region (for the Baltic and the Black Sea) or subregion (the ones from the North East Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea regions)"). List entry c) at pag. 12 also seems in agreement with a sub-regional approach in the Mediterranean Sea ("Only one proposal per region (Black, Baltic Seas) or subregion (the ones from the NE Atlantic and Mediterranean) will be granted,..."). Other instances in the following pages are consistent in suggesting that a sub-regional approach is the only viable solution in the Mediterranean. However, Italy is the only Mediterranean country that is involved in three (out of four) subregions, and therefore we think that a regional approach really makes sense and that Italy might play a role in connecting actions aimed at different Mediterranean subregions. Finally, a basin-wide scale would also be more appropriate in the light of the Barcelona convention. Can you please shed some light on this issue?

Answer to Q12: Proposals with a regional approach in the case of Mediterranean

Sea or the North East Atlantic Ocean are not excluded from the grant.

Section 4 refers to the budget available and according to text therein the indicative

grant per project will be between Euro 500,000 and Euro 1,000,000, if the proposal

covers the entire region.

Based on the eligibility criteria (section 6), only one proposal per region will be

granted. This is valid for all the regions (Black, Baltic, Mediterranean Sea and NE

Atlantic Ocean) in case the proposal covers the whole region.

However, in the case of the Mediterranean Sea or the North East Atlantic Ocean,

there is the possibility to grant more proposals if they focus on different

subregions.

***

Q13: ELIGIBILITY: We would like to know whether our proposal can cover the overall marine waters of all MS ad defined by the MSFD, with partnerships with reasonable geographical balance:

We think this is particularly important as it will result in comparable outcomes and action plans between the different regions.

In case, point 1 is not eligible, could then 2 proposals specific on two marine regions include common partners;

i.e. partners that will have the responsibilities of establishing the information management system and/ or partners responsible for the design of the action plans; as we think these areas need to be coordinated to provide comparable results all over the MS sea regions.

Answer to Q13: According to the eligibility criteria (point 6), proposals should be

focused on a particular marine region (as defined in art. 4.1 of the MSFD).

For the second part of the question, please refer to the answer given to Q19.

***

Q14: Our question is referred to the priority given to issues and open questions

concerning biodiversity-related descriptors, in particular 1, 4, 6 and 7. It is surprising

that the last one is considered biodiversity-related in the same level as 1, 4, 6. Could

descriptor 11 receive the same priority treatment, provided that an action on its

impact in marine fauna is tackled in the proposal?

When considering D11, there is a big gap identified in Mediterranean region in Art.12

assessments and also in the framework of Barcelona Convention and Accobams work

in the ECAP. For this reason the possibility of preparing a proposal is being studied

including the development of a joint monitoring programme for D11 and also having

a strong component of improving the current definition of GES, which would go in

depth in impacts in marine fauna.

Answer to Q14: As specified in the award criteria, under this call of proposals,

descriptor 11 will not receive priority treatment. However, proposals focusing on

other descriptors than the biodiversity –related ones (i.e. descriptor 11 on noise)

are eligible for funding, provided they pass the minimum sufficiency level and they

achieve the highest ranking.

***

Q15: Could you give a definition of affiliated entities (used in page 12 of the call).

Answer to Q15:

Affiliated entities are entities having a legal or capital link with the beneficiary or

entities composing the beneficiary.

For the first situation, affiliated entities should:

- Have stable legal or capital link with the beneficiary which is neither limited

to the action nor established for the sole purpose of its implementation

- satisfy the eligibility criteria

- not be in an exclusion situation

For the second situation, affiliated entities should:

- be members of the beneficiary (sole beneficiary)

- satisfy the eligibility criteria

- not be in an exclusion situation

- satisfy the selection criteria

"Sole beneficiary":

- established specifically for the implementation of the action OR

a pre-existing entity

***

Q16: "Best practises for action plans to develop integrated, regional monitoring

programmes, coordinated programmes of measures and addressing data and

knowledge gaps in coastal and marine waters, the composition of partnership is not

very clear"; I need to have more detailed info about the partnership (minimum of

participating countries, minimum and maximum of partners, how many partners of

each country...).

Answer to Q16: Proposals must be submitted and implemented by partners who

are public authorities or bodies of at least two Member States with the relevant

region/subregion.

There is no maximum number of partners.

***

Q17: In the above mentioned call for proposals it is mentioned that: “successful

implementation of any project funded under this call should include establishing

effective links to the relevant RSCs and to Member State relevant national

administrations” (Article 1.3)

“Applicants and their partners (potential co-beneficiaries of the grant) must be public

or private bodies” (Article 6.1, Par.1)

“Proposals must be submitted jointly and implemented by partners who are public

authorities or bodies of at least two Member States within the relevant

region/subregion” (Article 6.1, Par. 3, Point b)

We understand that it is very important to ensure the involvement of the National

public Authority (administration) in order to be able to have access to the relevant

data and implementation of the Directive, and in order to assist it in the

implementation of next steps of MSFD.

Our questions:

is it required to include, as partner, in a consortium of private entities, a public authority (or public body-entity) from each Member State within the relevant subregion, or the proposal can be submitted exclusively by private bodies (of course having the relevant experience)?

In case that there is no need for participation of public authorities in a consortium, how can we prove that there is the required effective link with the Member State relevant national administration? An official letter of MS relevant national administration addressed to the applicant with the appropriate content would be acceptable?

Answer to Q17: Proposals can be submitted and implemented exclusively by

partners who are private bodies (of at least two Member States with the relevant

region/subregion).

According to the award criteria proposal will be assessed on the basis of the

involvement of different stakeholders, i.e key national and regional organisations.

As different ways exist to ensure effective links to the relevant RSCs and to

Member State relevant national administrations (inter alia, letters of support,

participation of consortium experts in relevant RSCs working groups) it is left to the

discretion of the applicant to provide the necessary proofs that will be assessed

during the evaluation process.

***

Q18: I would like to submit a question related to the payments arrangements

of the call:

According to Article 11.3 Payment arrangements of the call for proposals, there are going to be a "Pre-financing" of 30% of the grant amount at the beginning of the project and a "Payment of the balance" after acceptance by the European Commission of the final technical report on the basis of the final financial statement and the eligible costs of the action/project calculated by the European Commission. This means that there is not to be any interim payments? Is the amount of 30% enough to provide the consortium with a float??

Answer to Q18: There a no interim payment foreseen for this grant. The 2

payments foreseen are indeed the pre-financing and the payment of the balance.

Applicants must have stable and sufficient sources of funding to maintain their

activity throughout the 18 months period during which the action is being carried

out.

***

Q19: My organisation has options to join as a partner in consortia for several project

proposals under this call. Does the eligibility criteria for this call allow for us to be a

partner and receive grant funding in more than one project proposal?

Answer to Q19: The principle of non-cumulative award (see section 11.1.a) aims to

prevent double funding of costs incurred in an action or work program. This

principle comes from the prohibition to grant more than one grant funded by the

EU budget for the same action in favor of the same beneficiary. However, it should

be noted that a beneficiary may receive more than one grant for the

implementation of different actions without affecting the application of this

principle.

To avoid the risk of double funding, the beneficiaries are required to inform the

Commission of any multiple grant applications for the same action or work

program when submitting the proposal. It should be noted that indirect costs are

limited to 7% which represents the beneficiary's general administrative costs. In

this situation, it is also suggested to keep separate accounts for each project.

***

Q20: Once the grant has been awarded, do all funds go directly to the coordinator

for them to distribute amongst consortium partners? Or will the coordinator and

consortium partners receive their relevant portion of funds individually, directly from

the Commission?

Answer to Q20:

The Annex F – Model of Standard Grant Agreement is a multibeneficiary grant

model. It needs the involvement of several independent entities, organized in a

group, partnership or consortium for the purposes of the implementation of the

project. The roles and obligations of each beneficiary is detailed in Article II.1 of the

General Conditions of the model grant agreement.

If a grant should be awarded, it will be paid to the coordinator's bank account (See

Article I.5 of the model grant agreement).

***

Q21: In the “Technical Administrative Application Form” Section III 3.1 asks for

‘Estimated Budget — Annex 1’. What and where is Annex 1, please? I cannot find it

on the website http://ec.europa.eu/environment/funding/msfd_14.htm.

Answer to Q21: The estimated budget corresponds to Annex C in this Call for

proposals. The application form has been updated.

***

Q22: This question concerns the correct interpretation of the following provisions in

the call “Best practices for action plans to develop integrated, regional monitoring

programmes, coordinated programmes of measures and addressing data and

knowledge gaps in coastal and marine waters" - "DG ENV/MSFD Action Plans/ 2014”:

2.4. Main tasks

e. Organise workshops, meetings etc., as appropriate, to foster (sub)regional

cooperation, including the possibility to finance the participation of particular

experts who are essential to address the specific gaps that are identified;

6.2. Eligible activities, third bullet point

- organisation of workshops, meetings, conferences, seminars, including financing

participation of invited experts;

The proposal is planned to include workshop(s) in which it is essential that all the

countries of the region attend, due to the need to establish/maintain the links to the

national work, in addition to utilizing the expertise available in each of the countries.

Is it possible to use the possibility to earmark some travel funds for, at this stage,

unidentified experts representing selected countries that have particular difficulties

in attending meetings taking place abroad due to their budget constraints?

Please advise if these clauses could be used for such an earmarking in order to

ensure the countries’ participation and ownership.

Answer to Q22: There is no inconvenience to finance the participation of particular

(external) experts to conferences as long as this is duly justified and explained in

their technical application. Those conferences should be in relation to the action.

For the financial reporting, I would suggest to declare this type of cost in "other

costs" since these experts are not part of the staff of the beneficiaries. It would be

good to already establish internal rules/usual practices on travel.

***

Q23:

1. If we decide to have a consortium of partners from RO-BG-TR this means that

it will not cover the entire Black Sea region. As at the [page 11, pct.a] from the

guideline it is requested that "the proposal should be focused on a particular

marine region covering ideally the entire region (for Black Sea)", should we

consider that is a mandatory criteria to be taken into account?

2. Partner from Turkey could have a different share of the budget (different than

10% from the total cost of the action) being EU-Accessing country or they may

be considered just non-EU country associated to the action?

Answer to Q23:

1. According to the eligibility criteria (point 6.1) the following condition should be

applied:

a) Proposals should be focused on a particular marine region (as defined in Art. 4.1

of the MSFD).

It is also proposed that ideally the proposal would cover the entire region (for the

Baltic and the Black Sea) or subregion (the ones from the North East Atlantic Ocean

and Mediterranean Sea regions).

Please note, that under Award criteria (point 9.1) it is stated in relation to

geographic coverage that proposals submitted jointly covering all EU Member

States in a region (for Black Sea and the Baltic) or subregion (for the Mediterranean

and the NE Atlantic) will be positively considered during the assessment

2. According to point 6.1 on eligible applicants "Partners from non-EU Countries

being a contracting party to one of the four Regional Sea Conventions can be

associated to the action on a no-cost basis or at a maximum of 5% for each partner

and maximum total of 10% for all partners, if this is valuable for the contents of the

action".

***

Q24: CORILA is an association of the Ca’Foscari University and the University IUAV of Venice, the University of Padua, the National Research Council CNR and the National Institute of Oceanography and Experimental Geophysic OGS (all entities associated are public bodies). It is a non-profit organisation, with legal status, overseen by the Italian Ministry of University and Research. Web site: www.corila.it. According to the directive 2004/18/CE CORILA can be defined as a “public equivalent body” as it satisfies the requirements stated at art. 1, comma 9 of the Directive. The PIC number in ECAS is

997353225.

CORILA intends to participate as “beneficiary” in Tender SG ENV/MSFD Action Plans/2014.

In previous FP7 calls CORILA responded as a "grouping", involving its associated bodies (Universities and National Institutes), applying the Special Clause 39 of GA;

In this tender is not stated such kind of clause, nor a clear definition of "affiliated" is reported.

CORILA would like to participate to this tender including the personnel belonging to its associated bodies (public administrations). Is this feasible/acceptable? In this case, similar to what requested in the FP7 calls, we could provide an administrative report separated for each administration in our "grouping" and one for the whole grouping, being it the sum of them.

This procedure will limit the number of partners in the Consortium, will facilitate the resource allocation and management, we believe also from the EC's point of view.

The question for the EC is if CORILA can participate to the Consortium which is preparing to answer the tender as a "grouping" of its associated bodies.

Thank you in advance for your clarification.

Answer to Q24: Yes, you could apply as a sole beneficiary. As stated in our call:

By way of exception, application may be submitted by one applicant, whether established specifically or not for the action, provided that: - it is formed of several legal entities complying with the eligibility, non-exclusion and selection criteria set out in this call for proposals, and implementing together the proposed action;

- the application identifies the said entities. For the purpose of declaring eligible costs as specified under section 11.2,

the entities composing the applicant shall be treated as affiliated entities.

***

Q25: I'm writing on behalf of the association "Domenico Allegrino NGO" based in

Pescara, (Italy).

We are very interested about the call of proposal that regards "best practices for

action plans to develop integrated, regional monitoring programmes,coordinated

programmes o9f measures and addressing data and knowledge gaps in coastal and

marine waters".

In the past we have done several activities for the enhancement of our land and the

environment, we also have a committee called "Pescara , a river to drink"

We would like to know if you include in the project programme also rivers and the

development of the surrounding areas aimed to the tourism.

Answer to Q25: According to point 6.1 of the call "The activities eligible under this

call will be applicable to the marine waters of Member States as defined in Art. 3.1

of the MSFD". According to the later: "marine waters’ means: (a) waters, the

seabed and subsoil on the seaward side of the baseline from which the extent of

territorial waters is measured extending to the outmost reach of the area where a

Member State has and/or exercises jurisdictional rights, in accordance with the

Unclos, with the exception of waters adjacent to the countries and territories

mentioned in Annex II to the Treaty and the French Overseas Departments and

Collectivities; and (b) coastal waters as defined by Directive 2000/60/EC, their

seabed and their subsoil, in so far as particular aspects of the environmental status

of the marine environment are not already addressed through that Directive or

other Community legislation.

***

Q26: We are studying a transgenic organism for the assessment of the sea water quality. Could we

submit this project to this grant?

Answer to Q26: It seems that the proposed study (on a transgenic organism for the

assessment of the sea water quality), does not fall under the objective of this call

for proposals, which is "to support the development of (sub)regional action plans

and best practices for integrated monitoring programmes, coordinated

programmes of measures and the filling of data gaps for marine waters identified

in the Commission assessment and thereby improve implementation in the next

steps of the Directive, in particular in relation to the review of the initial

assessment, the GES definition and the environmental target setting in 2018"

(point 2.1 General objective).

***

Q27: Your instructions seem quite clear that you are not requiring receipt of all bids by 17:00 on 17th November, but only those delivered by hand.

For bids being posted to you or coming via courier, the dates of postmark or date of receipt by courier service must be by 17:00 on the 17th November, irrespective of when you subsequently receive the bid at the Commission central mail office.

Answer to Q27: Your understanding is correct.

Proposals must be submitted in accordance with the formal requirements and by the deadline set out under section 3 (17 November 2014, 17:00 Brussels' Time).

***

Q28: The question concerns how to fill in Section III (Information on the action for which the grant is requested) of Annex 1 (Technical Administrative Application form).

1) The intended application will consist of several specific work packages. Can Section III of Annex 1 be fully or partly repeated; or should it be filled in only once, answering e.g. question a) for all work packages at the same time?

[Rationale: For coherence, it would seem appropriate to keep together in particular questions a-d to for each individual work package – while the remaining questions could be responded for the application as a whole].

2) Is there any guidance on the length of Section III?

Answer to Q28:

1) The Section III should be filled once including information for all work packages

at the same time.

2) There is no special guidance on the length of Section III

***

Q29: Should the CVs be printed or can they be sent electronically?

Answer to Q29: The CV must be printed and be a part of the application. As

written in point 14 – Procedure for the submission of proposals: " Applications

shall be submitted on the correct form, duly completed, dated, showing a

balanced budget, submitted in 3 copies: 1 original clearly identified as such, plus

1 paper copy and 1 memory stick with electronic versions of the full application

forms (in format MS Word (.doc) / EXCEL (.xls)) and signed by the person

authorised to enter into legally binding commitments on behalf of the applicant

organisation. The electronic format must contain exactly the same proposal as

the paper version enclosed".

***

Q30: Should the Declaration be signed by the coordinator only or by the coordinator

and by the associated beneficiaries/partners?

Answer to Q30: As written in the footnote n°13 – "Declaration to be filled for each

members of the consortium".

***

Q31: I represent CoNISMa – National Inter-University Consortium for Marine

Sciences – I need some clarification about VAT issue.

We are technically a body governed by public law (as a consortium composed by

public body like university). We would like to apply to this call as coordinator (Public

Body).

We cannot recover VAT, as generally for the projects granted by the EU (which aims

to general/public purpose). Therefore I would like to know if VAT is not eligible cost

for us.

Then I need to know what form I must use to declare vat is not recovered.

Answer to Q31: Section 15 in the call states the following:

All amounts, where applicable, should be exclusive of VAT, for the activities which

fall within one of the following categories:

- taxed activities or exempt activities with right of deduction. For those activities,

VAT is deductible, hence ineligible;

- activities engaged in as a public authority by the beneficiary where it is a State,

regional or local government authority or another body governed by public law.

In the case were the applicant and/or relevant partner are unable to recover VAT

the amount should be inclusive of VAT. All costs should be in Euro (€) and the

amounts rounded to the nearest whole Euro (€).

***

Q32:

1. Can an NGO be leader of a consortium which includes Ministries and public bodies

if they agree with such option?

2. Are Ministries allowed not to send documents related to financial capacity?

As far as we are reading the rules under 8.1. - "The assessment of the financial

capacity does not apply to public bodies or international organisations, which are not

required to provide the above mentioned supporting documents." the answer is yes,

they do not need to submit that document

3. Can a Ministry be a partner without a budget request?

Answers to Q32:

1) This situation will be evaluated when receiving the application

2) Yes, no need to submit that document

3) No, then the Ministry would be a co-financer, or third party contribute.

***

Q33: What is the maximum euro amount for a sub-contract awarded based on a single

tender in this case?

Should we name a potential consultant already in the application?

As an intergovernmental organization we are interested in the specific rules that

European Commission sets out in this case

What is the maximum euro amount for a sub-contract that is based on a direct treaty?

We are looking for the lightest possible process to enter a possible sub-contract.

Answer to Q33: The Rules for sub-contracting can be found under:

- Page 28, Form F6 – Sub-contracting / external assistance costs

- ARTICLE I.9 – ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS ON AWARD OF CONTRACTS AND

SUBCONTRACTING

- Section 11.1.e) - Implementation contracts/subcontracting

***

Q34: In section III of the Technical Administrative Application form in section III we

have in the first box a ‘Title' and ‘Reference’. What is supposed to be inserted at

‘Reference'; is it just an internal project title or number we create for our own project

proposal or something else?

III. INFORMATION ON THE ACTION FOR WHICH THE GRANT IS REQUESTED

1 DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTION

Title:

Reference:

Answer to Q34:

Title: Title of the project submitted.

Reference: DG ENV/MSFD/Action Plans 2014

***