25.6.2008   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 162/88

A.

The EESC is satisfied that the proposed revision of the technical guidelines on the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) research programme, submitted by the European Commission for a Council Decision, looks to further improve the good results already achieved to date. No major overhaul is needed, taking into account the position of the Commission, which is keen to make the programme as straightforward for its participants as possible.

B.

The EESC agrees with Commissioner Potočnik that the RFCS research programme remains separate and complementary to the Research Framework programme and covers all aspects related to coal and steel.

C.

The EESC welcomes the fact that the proposed Decision simplifies administrative procedures, inter alia by deleting some accompanying measures since they are already covered by the 7th Framework Programme (RTD FP), increasing financial support from 40 to 50 % for pilot and demonstration projects, and allowing dedicated calls on priorities identified by the coal and steel industries on the basis of their strategic needs that converge with the 7th Research Framework Programme and dovetail with the strategic research agendas of the relevant European Technology Platforms.

D.

The EESC stresses the need to meet the request from the industrial sectors concerned to give a more important and proactive role to both the CAG (Coal Advisory Group) and the SAG (Steel Advisory Group) in the management of the RFCS research programme, enabling them to:

E.

The EESC calls on the Commission to re-insert into the rules of procedure for the consultation of the Coal and Steel Programme Committee (COSCO) the comments and proposals concerning the evaluation of research and pilot/demonstration projects from both the CAG and SAG.

1.1

On 1 July 2004 the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an own-initiative opinion on

The Perspectives of European Coal and Steel Research.

1.2

The Consultative Commission on Industrial Change, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion (CCMI/018 — CESE 845/2005) on 13 June 2005. The rapporteur was Mr Lagerholm and the co-rapporteur was Mr Gibellieri.

1.3

At its 419th plenary session, held on 13 and 14 July 2005 (meeting of 13 July 2005), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the above mentioned opinion by 57 votes to none with 3 abstentions.

1.4

More than two years since the publication of the above mentioned EESC opinion, some changes to the RFCS research programme are under way. In fact, on 10 July 2007, after consultation with the Coal and Steel Programme Committee (COSCO), the European Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Decision on a revision of the technical guidelines on the RFCS research programme for spending funds on coal and steel research.

1.5

This revision is required by Council Decision 2003/76/EC, 2003/77/EC, 2003/78/EC of 1 February 2003, which created the RFCS. It should be recalled that Council Decision 2003/76/EC also transferred the assets and liabilities of the ECSC to the European Community and allocated the net worth of these assets to research in the sectors related to coal and steel.

2.1

The Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) has an annual budget of between EUR 50 million and EUR 60 million for research in these two areas, financed by interest on the assets of the now-expired European Coal and Steel Community Treaty. The RFCS programme is a separate, complementary programme to the Research Framework programme and covers all aspects of coal and steel, from production processes to application, looking at the utilisation and conversion of resources, safety at work and environmental protection by improving the use of coal as a clean energy source and reducing CO2 emissions from coal use and steel production.

2.2

The proposed Decision simplifies some administrative procedures, inter alia by:

2.3

Participation is simple: proposals can be submitted any time with a cut-off date of 15 September each year. There is no ceiling either for the project budget or for the number of participating partners in each project. Third countries may participate, but do not receive any European financial support. Projects are evaluated by external experts and selected based on the quality of the research proposed. The monitoring of projects is done according to an annual ‘peer review’ process.

2.4

It has also been necessary to make some changes to the rules governing membership of the advisory groups and the role of Member States in the Coal and Steel Programme Committee (COSCO), particularly in the light of recent enlargements of the European Union (periodicity of revisions, duration of mandates, system of selection of proposals and monitoring of projects to avoid conflicts of interest, etc.).

2.5

This revision is required by the legislative Decision that created the RFCS. In the Commission's view the RFCS has so far worked well and so a major overhaul is not required.

2.6

In the meantime the European Steel Technology Platform (ESTEP) has continued its own work. The ESTEP press release of July 2007 shows the first results of its long-term commitment to a sustainable future. ESTEP proposed a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) in December 2003 and was then inaugurated in March 2004.

2.7

ESTEP was among the first technology platforms to step forward and publish its vision of the future. The priorities of its SRA are focused on sustainable growth: they emphasise the enduring competitiveness of the industry based on innovation, cooperation with partners, keen environmental awareness and its strong connection with steel producers; this is how it contributes to the EU's research programmes.

2.8

In line with the proposed priority on ‘Near Zero Emission Power Generation’ (ZEP) in FP7, the initial scope of the Platform aims at identifying and removing the obstacles to the creation of highly efficient power plants with near-zero emissions which will drastically reduce the environmental impact of fossil fuel use. This will include CO2 capture and storage, as well as clean conversion technologies leading to substantial improvements in plant efficiency, reliability and costs.

2.9

As regards the industrial side, there are references to the time of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC, ended in July 2002) where the R&D projects covered by the relevant R&D support programme were largely evaluated and chosen with a significant input from the steel producers involved. The coal part of the programme was handled along the same lines as the pertaining technical guidelines. This role of the industry was legitimated by the fact that the ECSC funds came exclusively from the levy on the coal and steel industry.

2.10

The situation greatly changed when the Research Fund for Coal and Steel (RFCS) was established in 2003 (Council Decision 2003/76/EC, 2003/77/EC, 2003/78/EC of 1 February 2003, published in OJ L 29/22, OJ L 29/25, OJ L 29/28 of 5 February 2003). At that time the remaining ECSC funds were transferred to the new fund and the Commission was charged with administering the funds and the pertaining R&D programme in line with the essential elements of the previous ECSC research programmes.

2.11

The Commission's conception of the influence of the coal and steel industry on the RFCS programme is different from that of the industry. In keeping with the provisions of Decision 2003/78/EC, COSCO and the two advisory groups CAG and SAG should be enabled to fully exercise their allocated roles, which should not be curtailed by shifting their influence from direct evaluation only to the aspects before the call for proposals.

2.12

By means of the recent proposal to revise the technical guidelines for the RFCS programme, the Commission is seeking to adapt, wherever deemed beneficial, the formal procedures and structures to those in use in the 7th Research Framework Programme (FP7) of the EU. Therefore, any harmonisation with rules and procedures of the FP should be strictly limited to areas where a genuine simplification and/or increased effectiveness can clearly be demonstrated. Whilst advantage should be taken of existing synergies between FP 7 and the RFCS where possible, the role of the RFCS as a complementary and independent programme needs to be preserved (see Part one — B).