tender document 1 marine-eo request for tender · tender document 1 – marine-eo ... provides an...

Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP)

Tender Document 1 – MARINE-EO

Request for Tender

Deadline to submit an offer: 9th April 2018 at 12 p.m (CET)

Document Dissemination Level:

P

CΟ

This document was prepared by DGPM with the valuable contribution of all partners.

Public

Confidential, only for members of the Consortium (including the Commission Services)

☒

☐

This procurement receives funding under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under

the grant agreement No 730098. The EU is however not participating as a contracting authority in this procurement.

Copyright Marine-EO Consortium. All rights reserved. 2

This Request for Tenders, designated as Tender Document 1, should be read in conjunction with other

documents related to this Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP), listed hereunder:

Tender Document 2: PCP Challenge;

Tender Document 3: Forms;

Tender Document 4: Framework Agreement;

Tender Document 5: Specific Contract Phase 1;

Tender Document 6: Annexes.

All documents are available on the MARINE-EO website as well as on the “Annexes Section” inside the

MARINE-EO Procurement Area.




Preface

This MARINE-EO Request for Tenders invites all interested parties to present their offers to bridging

innovative downstream earth observation and Copernicus enabled services for integrated maritime

environment, surveillance and security.

MARINE-EO is a research & development (R&D) project, which takes form as a Pre-Commercial-

Procurement (PCP).

Section 1 describes the PCP approach and how it differs from traditional procurement. This Section also

provides an overview of the timeline, budget, and contracting approach. In addition, a general introduction

to the procurers involved (also referred to as Buyers Group) is provided.

Section 2 presents the Procurers and Other Parties involved in the PCP, their roles and responsibilities.

Section 3 introduces the overall challenge this PCP must address and the motivation behind it. It explains

the different phases of the PCP and the expected outcome of each phase. Finally, Intellectual Property

Right (IPR) considerations are addressed. You can find more information about the technical functionalities

of the challenge in the “Tender Document 2: MARINE-EO PCP Challenge”.

Section 4 explains the preconditions for submitting your Tender, and an overview of the criteria to be used

in the evaluation of the Tenders. The process for the evaluation of the Tenders and how to communicate

with the Buyers Group, namely putting forward your questions, is detailed in Section 5.

Section 6 explains the conditions of the contracts between the winning Tenderers and the Buyers Group,

including the monitoring process, results evaluation, and payment conditions. This is followed up by a

payment schedule outlined also in Section 6.

This Request for tenders should be read jointly with the rest of documents prepared for this Pre-

Commercial procurement (PCP) and annexes:

Tender Documents (TD)

TD 1 – Request for Tenders

TD 2 – PCP Challenge

TD 3 – Tender Forms

TD 4 – Framework Agreement

TD 5 – Specific Contract Phase 1

TD 6 - Annexes

Please, find below the list of forms that you will encounter in the TD3 – Forms:

TD 3 – Tender Forms

Form 1. General Tender Submission Qualification Envelope

Form 2. Exclusion Criteria Qualification Envelope




Form 3. Selection Criteria Form Qualification Envelope

Form 4. Compliance Criteria Form Qualification Envelope

Form 5. Traceability Matrix Technical Envelope

Form 6. Technical Offer Form Technical Envelope

Form 7. Financial Offer Form Financial Envelope

The Annexes that are included in the TD6 – Tender Annexes document must be completed, signed and

uploaded in the https://www.dgpm.mm.gov.pt according to the instructions given in TD6 (Annex K:

Application guidelines). Find below the list of the different Annexes required:

TD 6 – Tender Annexes (Qualification & Technical Envelopes)

Annex A: Subcontractor Information

Annex B: Power of Attorney

Annex C: Subcontractor Declaration

Annex D: Exclusion Criteria

Annex E: Selection Criteria

Annex F: Compliance Criteria

Annex G: Technical Offer

Annex H: Traceability Matrix

Annex I: Financial Offer & Cost Breakdown

Annex J: Financial Offer Phase 1

Annex K: Application guidelines

All documents can be downloaded from the MARINE-EO Procurement Area on the website https://marine-

eo.eu/call-tender.

Please, note that Forms will be part of the different responses envelopes from the MARINE-EO

Procurement Area.




Table of Contents 1. General Context.............................................................................................................................. 9

1.1 Pre- Commercial Procurement ......................................................................................................... 9

1.2 Exemption from EU Procurement Directives, the WTO Government Procurement Agreement

(GPA) and EU State Aid Rules ..................................................................................................................... 11

1.3 EU Funding ..................................................................................................................................... 11

1.4 Overview: Contracting, Budget and Schedule ................................................................................ 12

1.4.1 Total Budget and Budget Distribution (per phase) ................................................................. 12

1.4.2 Contracting Approach ............................................................................................................. 14

1.4.3 Time Schedule ........................................................................................................................ 15

2. Procurers and Other Parties involved in the PCP ............................................................................ 19

3. Description of Services to be procured .......................................................................................... 24

3.1 Motivation for the PCP ................................................................................................................... 24

3.1.1 COPERNICUS and relevant initiatives ...................................................................................... 24

3.1.2 MARINE-EO Overview ............................................................................................................. 25

3.1.3 Thematic Area 1 – Marine Environment Monitoring .............................................................. 27

3.1.4 Thematic Area 2 – Security ..................................................................................................... 30

3.2 Preparation for the PCP .................................................................................................................. 32

3.3 PCP Challenge ................................................................................................................................. 35

3.4 Expected Outcomes (per phase) ..................................................................................................... 41

3.5 IPR – Commercial Exploitation of results – Declaration of Pre-existing Rights ............................... 48

4. Conditions of the Tender............................................................................................................... 52

4.1 Eligible Tenderers, Joint Tenderers and Subcontracting ................................................................. 52

4.2 Exclusion Criteria ............................................................................................................................ 53

4.2.1 PART A: Description ................................................................................................................ 55

4.2.2 PART B: Description ................................................................................................................ 55

4.2.3 PART C: Description ................................................................................................................ 56

4.3 Selection Criteria ............................................................................................................................ 56

4.4 Compliance Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 57

4.4.1 A) Compliance with the definition of R&D Services ................................................................ 58

4.4.2 B) Compatibility with Other Public Financing ......................................................................... 59

4.4.3 C) Compliance with the requirements regarding the Place of Performance of the contract .. 59

4.4.4 D) Compliance with Ethics Requirements ............................................................................... 60

4.4.5 E) Compliance with Security requirements ............................................................................. 61

4.5 Award Criteria................................................................................................................................. 62




4.6 Submission Content and Format .................................................................................................... 67

4.6.1 Submission and format of tenders, tender closing time ......................................................... 67

4.6.2 Administrative section of the Tender ..................................................................................... 67

4.6.3 Technical section of the Tender .............................................................................................. 68

4.6.4 Financial section of the Tender ............................................................................................... 69

4.7 Other Tender Conditions ................................................................................................................ 70

4.7.1 Signed Tenders ....................................................................................................................... 70

4.7.2 Confidentiality ........................................................................................................................ 70

4.7.3 Language................................................................................................................................. 71

4.7.4 Cancellation of the Tender procedure .................................................................................... 71

5. Process Rules and Information ...................................................................................................... 72

5.1 Opening of Tenders ........................................................................................................................ 72

5.2 Evaluation of Tenders ..................................................................................................................... 72

5.2.1 Committees ............................................................................................................................ 73

5.2.2 Evaluation Process .................................................................................................................. 75

5.3 Communication Q&A ...................................................................................................................... 78

5.4 Procedures of Appeal ..................................................................................................................... 78

6. Conditions of the Contract ............................................................................................................ 80

6.1 Monitoring ...................................................................................................................................... 80

6.2 Payments based on satisfactory completion of Milestones and Deliverables for the Phase .......... 80

6.3 Eligibility for the next phase based on successful completion of the phase ................................... 84

6.4 Finalization of Phase 3: Link with possible follow-up PPI Procurement .......................................... 95




Table of Figures Figure 1: DIAS Concept (source: EC) ............................................................................................................... 25

Figure 2: MARINE-EO Overview ...................................................................................................................... 26

Figure 3: Copernicus Services List (obtained from: http://copernicus.eu/main/services) ............................. 28

Figure 4: CMES Areas of benefits (Source: CMEMS Website) ......................................................................... 28

Figure 5: MARINE-EO thematic areas of proposed downstream services and their connection to existing

Copernicus Services which they can support ................................................................................................. 30

Figure 6: MARINE-EO thematic areas of proposed downstream services and their connection to existing

Copernicus Services which they can support. ................................................................................................ 31

Figure 7: MarketPlace Tier with EOMALL (Source: EARSC) ............................................................................. 33

Figure 8: Generic use case model for the thematic area 1: Copernicus MARINE monitoring ......................... 37

Figure 9: MARINE-EO environment Services and Scenarios ........................................................................... 37

Figure 10: Service operational workflow model ............................................................................................. 40

Figure 11: Workflow description example ...................................................................................................... 40

Figure 12: Evaluation Process ......................................................................................................................... 76




1. General Context

1.1 Pre- Commercial Procurement

MARINE-EO pre-commercial procurement (PCP) challenge is being conducted by Direção Geral de Política

do Mar (DGPM), Lisbon, Portugal.

Marine-EO aims at procuring the development of demand-driven EO-based services, adopted on open

standards, bringing incremental or radical innovations in the field of maritime awareness and leveraging on

the existing Copernicus Services and other products from the Copernicus portfolio.

This procurement is a pre-commercial procurement (PCP).

PCP means that public procurers challenge innovative players on the market, via an open, transparent and

competitive process, to develop new solutions for a technologically demanding mid- to long-term challenge

that is in the public interest and requires new R&D services.

PCP is characterised by the following four features:

Competitive development in phases to identify the solutions offering the best value for money

PCP targets situations that require radical innovation or R&D and for which there are typically no solutions

on or close to the market yet. Different competing providers may have different ideas for solutions to the

problem. As R&D is yet to take place, there is not yet any proof as to which of these potential alternative

solutions would best meet customers' needs.

PCP therefore awards R&D contracts to a number of competing contractors at the same time, in order to

compare different approaches to solving the problem stated. It thus offers innovators an opportunity to

show how well their solution compares with others. It also allows procurers entities to conduct a first test

reference.

The R&D is split into three phases (solution design, prototyping, original development and testing of a

limited set of ‘first’ products or services). Evaluations after each phase progressively identify the solutions

that offer the best value for money and meet the customers’ needs. This phased approach allows

successful contractors to improve their offers for the next phase based on lessons learnt and feedback from

procurers in the previous phase. Using a phased approach with gradually growing contract sizes per phase




also makes it easier for smaller companies to participate in the PCP and enables SMEs to grow their

business step-by-step with each phase.

Depending on the outcome of the PCP, procurers may or may not decide to follow-up the PCP with a public

procurement to deploy the innovative solutions (PPI).

Public procurement of R&D services

PCP addresses mid- to long-term public procurement needs for which either no commercially stable

solutions yet exist on the market, or existing solutions exhibit structural shortcomings that require further

R&D to resolve. PCP is a way for procurers to trigger the market to develop new solutions that address

these shortcomings. PCP focuses on specific identified needs and provides customer feedback to businesses

from the early stages of R&D. This improves the likelihood of commercial exploitation of the newly

developed solutions.

PCP is explained in the PCP communication COM/2007/7991 and the associated staff working document

SEC/2007/16682. The R&D services can cover research and development activities ranging from solution

exploration and design, to prototyping, right through to the original development of a limited set of ‘first’

products or services in the form of a test series. Original development of a first product or service may

include limited production or supply in order to incorporate the results of field-testing and demonstrate

that the product or service is suitable for production or supply in quantity to acceptable quality standards.

R&D does not include quantity production or supply to establish the commercial viability or to recover R&D

costs. It also excludes commercial development activities such as incremental adaptations or routine or

periodic changes to existing products, services, production lines, processes or other operations in progress,

even if such changes may constitute improvements.

Open, transparent, non-discriminatory approach — No large-scale deployments

PCP is open to all operators on equal terms, regardless of the size, geographical location or governance

structure. It is, however, mandatory to locate the majority of the R&D activities for the PCP contract,

including in particular the principal researcher(s) working for the PCP contract, in the Member States or

Associated Countries.

Any subsequent public procurement of innovative solutions (PPI), for the supply of commercial volumes of

the solutions, will be carried out under a separate procurement procedure. Providers that did not take part

in this PCP (or were not chosen to go through as far as the last phase) will thus still be able to compete on

an equal basis in any subsequent procurement looking for contractors to provide a solution on a

commercial scale.

Sharing of IPR-related risks and benefits under market conditions

PCP procures R&D services at market price, thus providing contractors with a transparent, competitive and

reliable source of financing for the early stages of their research and development. Giving each contractor

the ownership of the IPRs attached to the results it generates during the PCP means that they can widely

exploit the newly developed solutions commercially. In return, the tendered price must contain a financial

compensation for keeping the IPR ownership compared to the case where the IPRs would be transferred to

the procurers (the tendered price must be the ‘non-exclusive development price’; see section 4.6.4).

1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0799:FIN:EN:PDF 2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007SC1668:EN:HTML

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0799:FIN:EN:PDF

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52007SC1668:EN:HTML


http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0799:FIN:EN:PDF





Moreover, Contractors for pre-commercial procurement must comply with Horizon 2020 rules for

implementation of the action task established in H2020 Work Programme 2016-2017 and with mandatory

articles regarding contractors included in Marine EO Grant Agreement.

Contractors must provide for the right of the buyers (procurers) to access results - on a royalty free basis -

for their own use and the right of the buyers to grant (or to require the contractors to grant) non-exclusive

licenses to third parties to exploit the results - under fair and reasonable conditions - (without the right to

sub-license). Where, Results (i.e. foreground) means any data, knowledge, information, software, source

code, physical material, whatever their form or nature, whether or not they can be protected, which are

generated in the PCP third phase as well any attached rights, including intellectual property rights

For more information, see https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/wp/2016-

2017/annexes/h2020-wp1617-annex-ga_en.pdf.

1.2 Exemption from EU Procurement Directives, the WTO Government

Procurement Agreement (GPA) and EU State Aid Rules

This procurement procedure is exempted from the EU public procurement directives because procurers do

not retain all the benefits of the R&D (the IPR ownership stays with the contractors)3.

It is also exempted from the WTO Government Procurement Agreement (GPA) because this Agreement

does not cover R&D services4 (the PCP being limited to such services — and any subsequent PPI

procurements relating to commercial-scale supply of such solutions not being part of the PCP

procurement).

The procurement does not constitute state aid under the EU state aid rules5 because it follows an open,

transparent, competitive procedure with risk- and benefit-sharing at market price. (The division of all rights

and obligations (including IPRs) and all selection and award criteria for all phases are published at the

outset; the PCP is limited to R&D services and clearly separated from any potential follow-up PPI

procurements; PCP contractors are not given any preferential treatment in a subsequent procurement for

provision of the final products or services on a commercial scale.)

1.3 EU Funding

This PCP procurement is part of a project that is funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research

and Innovation Programme, under grant agreement No 730098 — MARINE-EO (see https://marine-eo.eu).

The procurement must therefore comply with the rules imposed by the EU Horizon 2020 grant agreement.

For more information, see ‘innovation procurement’ and ‘links to regional policy’ in the Participant Portal

Online Manual6.

The EU is not participating as a contracting authority in this procurement.

3 See Article 16(f) of Directive 2004/18/EC (Article 14 of Directive 2014/24/EU), Article 24(e) of Directive 2004/17/EC (Article 32 of

Directive 2014/25/EU) and Article 13(f)(j) of Directive 2009/81/EC. 4 See the EU’s Annex IV of Appendix I to the WTO GPA.

5 See Point 33 of the Commission Communication on a framework for state aid for research and development and innovation

(C(2014) 3282). 6 http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/funding/guide.html

https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/wp/2016-2017/annexes/h2020-wp1617-annex-ga_en.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/wp/2016-2017/annexes/h2020-wp1617-annex-ga_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/funding/guide.html


http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1444899032362&uri=CELEX:32004L0018





https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/appendices_e.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/modernisation/rdi_framework_en.pdf





1.4 Overview: Contracting, Budget and Schedule

1.4.1 Total Budget and Budget Distribution (per phase)

The total budget for the PCP is 2.769.106€ (VAT excluded) or 3.406.000€ (VAT included). The total budget

is divided in two lots:

Lot 1: Thematic Area 1 - Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring and Climate Change:

SATOCEAN – 1.550.699€ (VAT excluded) or 1.907.360€ (VAT included)

Lot 2: Thematic Area 2 - Copernicus Security: SATSURVEILLANCE – 1.218.406€ (VAT excluded) or

1.498.640€ (VAT included)

LOT 1 - Thematic Area 1:

Copernicus Marine

Environment Monitoring and

Climate Change: SATOCEAN

Expected

minimum

number of

contractors

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

included)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

included)

Phase 1 Solution Design 4 38.767€ 155.069€ 47.684€ 190.736€

Phase 2 Prototype

Development 3 206.759€ 620.279€ 254.314€ 762.944€

Phase 3

Pre-

Commercial

development

and testing

2 387.674€ 775.349€ 476.840€ 953.680€

TOTAL 1.550.699€ 1.907.360€


Copernicus Security:

SATSURVEILLANCE

Expected

minimum

number of

contractors

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

included)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

included)





Copernicus Security:

SATSURVEILLANCE

Expected

minimum

number of

contractors

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

excluded)

Maximum

budget per

contractor

(VAT

included)

Maximum

total

budget per

phase

(VAT

included)

Phase 1 Solution Design 4 30.460€ 121.840€ 37.466€ 149.864€

Phase 2 Prototype

Development 3 162.454€ 487.362€ 199.818€ 599.456€

Phase 3

Pre-

Commercial

development

and testing

2 304.601€ 609.203€ 374.660€ 749.320€

TOTAL 1.218.406€ 1.498.640€

IMPORTANT NOTICE: In case of not reaching the minimum numbers of 3 contractors in phase 1 – as per

the Marine EO grant agreement, the call for tender will be cancelled. For the subsequent phases there

should be 3 subcontractors for phase 2 and a minimum of 2 for phase 3.

PCP phase 1: Solution Design (5 months including 1 month for evaluation):

Each solution design contract will last for a maximum of 5 months and are valued up to 38.767€ (VAT

excluded) and 30.460€ (VAT excluded) each, for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively, against a total budget of

155.069€ and 121.840€ for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively. An expected minimum of 4 suppliers, per lot,

would be awarded the contract. All phase 1 contracts will start at the same date and time which will be set

by the Buyers Group. The start date selected will not be later than 18th June 2018.

This phase is a feasibility study of the selected technologies and proposals, which aims to verify the

technical, economic and organizational feasibility of each company’s offer. The expected output from

participating companies is a report describing the results of the feasibility study, a solution design and the

conclusions for the start of the development activities in Phase 2, as well as a business/commercialization

plan. The offers for the phase 2 will be requested together with the end-of phase deliverables.

PCP Phase 2 – Prototype Development (9 months including 1 month for evaluation):

Each Prototype development contract will last for a maximum of 8 months and are valued up to 206.759€ (

VAT excluded ) and 162.454€ (VAT excluded) each, for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively, against a total budget of

620.279€ and 487.362€ for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively. An expected minimum of 3 suppliers, per lot,

would be awarded the contract.




Selected companies will each develop a prototype based on the results of their feasibility study. The aim is

to verify to what extent the prototype’s main features meet the functional and performance requirements

set in the challenge. Participating companies are expected to deliver a prototype and outcomes of testing

processes carried out, as well as a plan for original development of a limited volume of first solutions and

field-testing, and an updated cost/benefits evaluation including a preliminary business plan. The offers for

the phase 3 will be requested together with the end-of phase deliverables.

PCP Phase 3 – Original Development and testing (13 months including 1 month for evaluation):

Each Pre-commercial development contract will last for a maximum of 13 months and are valued up to

387.674€ ( VAT excluded) and 304.601€ (VAT excluded) each, for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively, against a

total budget of 775.349€ and 609.203€ for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively. An expected minimum of 2

suppliers, per lot, would be awarded the contract.

This phase aims to verify and compare the full feature set and performance of different solutions in real-life

operational conditions. The aim is to verify to what extent the prototype’s main features meet the

functional and performance requirements set in the challenge.

Testing will occur as follows per lot:

Lot 1 - Thematic Area 1 Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring and Climate Change:

SATOCEAN – Different AOIs will cover participating countries, according to the specifications

presented in TD2.

Lot 2 - Thematic Area 2 Copernicus Security: SATSURVEILLANCE - Specific ports around two areas

(Gulf of Cadiz and Alboran Sea) and North Coast of Africa are considered test areas. All over these

big zones, specific scenarios will be operationally validated. Different test levels and environments

will be handle. Simulation to carry out specific evaluations on planning and service performance

(detection, identification, behavior capabilities). Real time simulation where data and results are

known and time line is equivalent to actual operation. Finally real trials should validate how daily

work can be supported by Marine-EO.

The total budget for the 3 phases and for the two lots of MARINE-EO PCP is fixed at 2.769.106 € (VAT

excluded) and will not be increased. Any surplus at the end of the PCP will be returned to the EU

Commission.

For phases 1 and 2, contracts are funded until the remaining budget is insufficient to fund the next best

tender. The exact number of contracts finally awarded will thus depend on the prices offered and the

number of tenders passing the evaluation. As leftover budget from the previous phase will be transferred

to the next phase, the total budget available for phases 2 and 3 may eventually be higher than stated here

(but the maximum budget per contractor for phases 2 and 3 will remain the same). The lower the average

price of tenders, the more contracts can be awarded. The total value of the contracts awarded can also be

lower than initially expected if there are fewer tenders than expected that meet the minimum evaluation

criteria.

1.4.2 Contracting Approach

The PCP is implemented by means of a framework agreement with specific contracts for each of the R&D

phases (altogether ‘contracts’).




Following the tendering stage, a framework agreement and a specific contract per lot for phase 1 are

expected to be awarded to a minimum of 4 contractors.

A call-off will be organised for phase 2, with the aim of awarding a minimum of three (3) phase 2 contracts

per lot. Only offers from contractors that successfully completed phase 1 will be eligible for phase 2. The

procurers will validate the phase 2 prototypes in the contractors' lab.

A second call-off will be organised for phase 3, with the aim of awarding a minimum of two (2) phase 3

contracts per lot. Only offers from contractors that successfully completed phase 2 will be eligible for phase

3. Phase 3 field-testing is expected to take place in AOIs described above.

The framework agreement sets all the framework conditions for the entire duration of the PCP (covering all

the phases). There will be no renegotiation. The framework agreement remains binding for the duration of

all phases for which contractors remain in the PCP. Tenderers that are awarded a framework agreement

will also be awarded a specific contract for phase 1 (evaluation of tenders for the framework agreement

and phase 1 are combined). Tenderers are therefore asked not only to submit their detailed offer for phase

1 in their tender, but also to state their goals, and to outline their plans (including price conditions) for

phases 2 and 3, thus giving specific details of the steps that would lead to commercial exploitation of the

R&D results. DGPM as lead procurer will sign the framework agreement in the name and on behalf of the

buyers group.

A brief overview of the overall timing of the MARINE-EO PCP (including the expected start and finish dates)

and of the individual phases is presented as follows (applied to both lots):

Phase Start Date End Date

Duration including

evaluation period

(months)

1 18-06-2018 15-11-2018 5 months

2 16-11-2018 15-08-2019 9 months

3 16-08-2019 15-09-2020 13 months

The offers for the next phase will be requested together with the end-of phase deliverables for the previous

phase. All contractors of the previous phase will be invited to make offers for the next phase, successful

completion of the previous phase is evaluated before evaluating the offers for the next phase, to determine

which offers are eligible to proceed to the evaluation of offers for the next phase.

1.4.3 Time Schedule

The planned time schedule for the MARINE-EO phases and for the two lots is the following:

Planned time schedule

Date Activity

First tender procedure (framework agreement and phase 1 contracts)




06.02.2018 Publication of contract notice in TED

17.03.2018 Deadline for submitting questions about tender documents

24.03.2018 Deadline for lead procurer to publish replies to questions (Q&A document)

09.04.2018 Deadline for submission of tenders for the framework agreement and phase 1

10.04.2018 Opening of tenders

29.05.2018 Tenderers notified of decision on awarding contracts

30.05.2018 –

04.06.2018 Stand-Still period: Rejected tenderers have 5 working days to contest the decision

08.06.2018 Signing of framework agreements and phase 1 specific contracts

12.06.2018 Publication of contract award notice in TED

Implementation of phase 1

18.06.2018 Start of phase 1

18.06.2018

Names of winning phase 1 contractors and their project abstracts sent to EU and

published on MARINE-EO PCP project website.

Kick-off meetings take place around this date.

20.08.2018 Deadline for phase 1 interim report

30.08.2018 Feedback from phase 1 interim report

05.09.2018 Interim payments (if applicable)

02.10.2018 Deadline for phase 1 final milestone/deliverable(s)

08.10.2018 Questions from general review are referred to contractors

15.10.2018 Deadline for contractors documentation update according to questions from general

review

05.11.2018 Assessment from review update based on updated documentation

07.11.2018 Phase 1 contractors notified as to whether they have completed this phase satisfactorily

and successfully

15.11.2018 End of phase 1

17.12.2018 Payment of balance for phase 1 to contractors that completed this phase satisfactorily

Second tender procedure (call-off for phase 2)

19.09.2018 Deadline for submitting questions on phase 2 call-off documents

26.09.2018 Deadline for lead procurer to circulate replies to questions to phase 2 bidders

02.10.2018 Deadline for submitting phase 2 offers

03.10.2018 Opening of phase 2 offers

07.11.2018 Contractors notified of decision on awarding phase 2 contracts

http://ted.europa.eu/TED/main/HomePage.do




08.11.2018 –

14.11.2018 Stand-Still period: Rejected tenderers have 5 working days to contest the decision

15.11.2018 Signing of phase 2 specific contracts

Implementation phase 2


16.11.2018

Names of winning phase 2 contractors and their project abstracts published on MARINE-

EO PCP project website and sent to EU.


19.11.2018

Visit of phase 2 contractors to the premises(s) of the procurer(s), where applicable (it will

depend on how the prototype will be implemented…it can be revisited after Phase 2 has

already started).

15.03.2019 Deadline for phase 2: M2.2) Preliminary Critical Design Review Documentation delivery

02.04.2019 Feedback from phase 2 supervisor/monitoring team on phase 2: M2.2) Preliminary Critical

Design Review Documentation delivery


30.05.2019 –

17.06.2019 Visits for prototype validation in lab conditions during phase 2 M2.3)

25.06.2019 Feedback from phase 2 supervisor/monitoring team on prototype validation in lab

conditions

16.07.2019 Deadline for submission of phase 2 M2.4 Final Critical Design Review (CDR)

documentation delivery and for submitting call-off for phase 3 offers

17.07.2019 –

02.08.2019 Factory Acceptance Tests of phase 2 (including demonstration to EU)

06.08.2019 Consortium review meeting and final Factory Acceptance Test Review


and successfully



Third tender procedure (call-off for phase 3)

20.06.2019 Deadline for submitting questions about phase 3 call-off documents

01.07.2019 Deadline for lead procurer to circulate replies to questions to phase 3 bidders

16.07.2019 Deadline for submitting phase 3 offers

17.07.2019 Opening of phase 3 offers

07.08.2019 Contractors notified of decision to award phase 3 contracts

08.08.2019 – Stand-Still period: Rejected tenderers have 5 working days to contest the decision




14.08.2019

15.08.2019 Signing of phase 3 specific contracts

Implementation phase 3


16.08.2019

Names of winning phase 3 contractors and their project abstracts published on MARINE-

EO PCP project website and sent to EU.


28.01.2020 –

07.02.2020

Visit(s) of the phase 3 /monitoring team to the contractor's premises to check completion

of phase 3 M3.2) Operational solution demonstrations

10.02.2020 Feedback from phase 3 monitoring supervisor/monitoring team on phase 3 M3.2)


16.03.2020 Deadline for phase 3 M3.3 final solution readiness

17.03.2020 –

15.06.2020

Lot 1 and 2 - Set-Up phase (see TD2 – PCP Challenge – sections 4.1.2.8 and 5.37

respectively) M3.4) Set-up Phase Readiness

16.06.2020 –

06.07.2020

Lot 1 and 2 - Training End-Users about the exploitation of the solution(see TD2 – PCP

Challenge – Sections 4.1.3.6 and 5.5.6 respectively) M3.5) Train end users completion

16.07.2020 –

05.08.2020

M3.6 Operation Result testing and System Acceptance Review (SAR). End user facilities

testing of products/services developed during phase 3 with procurers support.

17.08.2020 –

04.09.2020 Final demonstration to EU

07.09.2020 M3.8) End of phase 3 report


and successfully


06.10.2020 Summary of the lessons learnt and the results achieved by each contractor during the PCP

sent to EU for publication purposes.


The MARINE-EO Buyers Group reserves the right to adjust the time schedule under specific and fully

justified conditions. This will be communicated in a timely manner to all Tenderers.




2. Procurers and Other Parties involved in the PCP

This procurement relates to a joint PCP that will be carried out by the following lead procurer:

DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR MARITIME POLICY (DGPM) from Portugal.

The Lead procurer is beneficiary of the EU grant that represents the buyers group for the funded

procurement and is also part of the ‘buyers group’ since it contributes to the PCP procurement budget.

The lead procurer is appointed to coordinate and lead the joint PCP, and to sign and award the framework

agreement and the specific contracts for all phases of the PCP, in the name and on behalf of the following

buyers group:

DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR MARITIME POLICY (DGPM) – Rua Alfredo Magalhães Ramalho 6,

Lisbon 1459, Portugal

MINISTERIO DEL INTERIOR (GUCI) – Calle Amador de los Rios, 7, Madrid 28071, Spain

HELLENIC CENTRE FOR MARINE RESEARCH (HCMR) – Leoforos Athens Sounio 46 7KM, Attikia

Anavissos 19013, Greece

REGIONAL FUND FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FRCT) – Rua Do Mercado 21, Ponta Delgada

9500 326, Portugal

NORWEGIAN COASTAL ADMINISTRATION (NCA) - Flathauggata 12, Haugesund 5523, Norway

The Buyers group are beneficiaries of the EU grant that form the group of procurers that contribute to the

PCP procurement budget.

The procurers in the buyers group have the following background/profile/responsibilities in their respective

countries with regards to setting the acquisition and/or regulatory strategy for the innovative solutions:

BUYER’S GROUP RESPONSIBILITIES

DGPM (LEAD PROCURER)

Preparation of the Procurement

Procurement publication and proposals

evaluation

PCP Contract management

GUCI

PCP Stage 1 (Design) Solutions design

revision and technical evaluation

PCP Stage 2 (Prototype) Prototype

development verification

PCP Stage 3 (Operation) Solutions

operation and operational verification and

validation

Due to their intensive experience in

procurement procedures and their direct

interest in tenders’ results, they will

provide advices to DGPM in all preparation

procedures of the tender and the launch of

HCMR




BUYER’S GROUP RESPONSIBILITIES

FRCT

the prior information notice.

Due to their direct interest in MARINE-EO

services, they will participate in proposals

evaluation procedures and all evaluation

stages of the results and the selection of

companies who will be selected for each

Stage

NCA

DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR MARITIME POLICY (DGPM): has the mission to develop, evaluate and update

the National Ocean Strategy, to design and propose the national maritime policy, taking into account its

different aspects, to develop the maritime spatial planning and management considering its multiple uses

and activities, to monitor and participate in the development of European Union’s Integrated Maritime

Policy and to promote maritime affairs’ national and international cooperation. Additionally, the DGPM was

designated as "PT02 - Integrated Marine and Coastal Waters Management" Programme Operator, under

the EEA Grants 2009-2014, focused exclusively on marine and coastal areas, and has the main objective to

achieve good environmental status of marine and coastal waters in Europe, according to the Marine

Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Is was also designated Programme Operator of the Programme

"Blue Growth, Innovation and SMEs", under the new of the European Economic Area Financial Mechanism

2014-2021 in which about 70% will be dedicated to the area of business and innovation. This Program

covers three distinct areas: Business development, Innovation and SMEs; Investigation; Education,

scholarships, literacy and young entrepreneurship.

More information: https://www.dgpm.mm.gov.pt

MINISTERIO DEL INTERIOR (GUCI): The Spanish Guardia Civil (www.guardiacivil.es) is a law enforcement

agency of military nature. As one of the national agents with responsibilities on security, the Spanish

Constitution establishes as their prime mission to protect the free exercise of the rights and liberties of the

Spanish people and guarantee security of the citizenship, all of it under the responsibility of the Spanish

Government. The Guardia Civil is an institution which renders essential services to the community:

Protection of the Spanish economic interests; Public order; Assistance; Criminal investigation police;

Intelligence services; etc. In order to carry out all these functions, Guardia Civil has 80,000 officers (over

3,000 of them are women), who are deployed all over the national territory and territorial waters. Guardia

Civil carries out 3.9 million services per year, that is, approximately 10,000 a day; that amounts to 32 million

work hours and one million actions. Two million humanitarian activities (consisting in rescuing, aiding and

assisting citizens) are conducted every year. Guardia Civil constant work results in the fact that it

investigates nearly 300,000 crimes, over 274,000 minor offences and 380,000 infringements against public

safety; it solves over 200,000 criminal offence cases every year, and arrests almost 100,000 alleged

criminals, i.e., 308 arrests a day. In order to develop these services, the Guardia Civil vehicles cover more

than 350 million kilometers a year (enough to drive around the world almost 8,000 times). Guardia Civil is

tasked with the following functions related to maritime surveillance: preventing and fighting smuggling,

drug trafficking, fraud and other fiscal offences, preventing and fighting illegal immigration, environment

protection, fishery inspection and supervision and protection of the Spanish national sunken heritage.

Customs and Border Service is in charge of them.

https://www.dgpm.mm.gov.pt/




HELLENIC CENTRE FOR MARINE RESEARCH (HCMR): HCMR is a governmental Research Centre operating

under the auspices of the General Secretariat for Research and Technology (Greek Ministry of Education). It

has the mandate to promote basic research in all fields of the aquatic environment and to deliver

comprehensive scientific and technical support to the public. It is composed of three institutes:

Oceanography, Marine Biological Resources & Inland Waters, Marine Biology, Genetics & Aquaculture.

HCMR operates the 62m R/V Aegaeo, the 23m R/V Filia, four ROVs, the manned submersible THETIS, as

well as two aquariums in Crete and Rhode Islands. The Centre has been involved in all EU Framework

Programs and participated in numerous EU-funded RTD projects, either as coordinator or partner. (e.g.

CINCS, MTP-II MATER (Coordinator for East Med), METROMED (Coordinator), KEYCOP, INTERPOL

(Coordinator), FATE, ADIOS, BEEP, IASON (Coordinator), MERSEA-IP, HERMES Coordinator for East Med),

SESAME-IP (Coordinator), HERMIONE, EUR-OCEANS, ECOOP, CIRCE, SPICOSA, MESMA, MARIFISH, PEGASO,

MedSEA, MyOcean,, PERSEUS (Coordinator), COCONET, etc. It is an active member of EuroGOOS &

MedGOOS by developing a national monitoring/forecasting programme through the POSEIDON program

and by participating in EC and ESA funded research projects (MFSPP, MFSTEP, MERSEA_S1, ROSES,

MERSEA_IP, MARCOAST, ECOOP, MyOcean, BOSS4GMES, EuroSITES, EuroARGO, JERICO, FixO3) to develop

European capacity in operational oceanography under the GMES and GEOSS umbrella. HCMR participates

as full member in 4 ESFRI research infrastructures (Lifewatch, EuroArgo, EMSO, EMBRC). The Institute of

Oceanography has been awarded a National Excellent Award in Greece in 2005 and in 2014 after

assessment from an International Committee. At national level, HCMR is involved in many national research

and monitoring programs, including the national WFD and MSFD programs (coordinator) as well as in the

implementation of other European Directives such as the Habitat Directive, Natura2000, etc. At

international level HCMR has been involved in studies in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and recently

(since 2011) in the Red Sea, with all its gear (boat, submersible and ROVs).

REGIONAL FUND FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FRCT): is an administratively and financially

independent public institute in the sphere of the Regional Secretariat for the Sea, Science and Technology

(SRMCT), Regional Government of the Azores. FRCT was created in order to coordinate and manage

financial resources available for scientific research, technological development and innovation from

Regional, European and International programs. As such, it is a privileged channel for the participation in

projects and collaborative activities with entities that are external to the Regional Government. With an

annual turnover of about 2M€, it is run by a board of three members, with administrative support from the

Regional Directorate of Science and Technology. One of the main goals of FRCT is to facilitate the link

between regional public entities and the scientific community in order to improve the performance of

regional participation in European programs and thereby promote the excellence of research and

innovation in the Azores. The main areas were FRCT develops its activities in the Azores comprehend:

Support to advanced training, through the attribution of research grants;

Financing and/or organization of international events relevant to the regional scientific community;

Participation in regional, national and international projects, as coordinator or partner;

Support to the participation of other regional public entities and the scientific community in

funding programs external to RAA, among which HORIZON 2020 stands out.

To enhance its international networking capability, FRCT became a member of the Macaronesia Marine and

Maritime Cluster and of the Smart MED Cluster (Smart Cities). The Azores region is also a founding member

of NEREUS (Network of European Regions Using Space Technologies), namely via the Regional Directorate

for Science and Technology that shares its presidency with FRCT.




NORWEGIAN COASTAL ADMINISTRATION (NCA): is headed by the Director General, and the head office is

the agency's highest governing body. As can be seen from the organization chart below, The NCA has seven

operative units: 5 regions, the shipping company and the head office. The agency has around 50 operative

units. The NCA has around 1000 employees in total, and around 700 of these employees are engaged in

operative activities. The NCAs areas of expertise include maintaining high level of safety and accessibility

along the Norwegian coast by the development and maintenance of a maritime infrastructure, in addition

to providing various maritime services. The NCA provides the national Ice Service, which has two main

tasks: Provision of ship traffic with updated information on ice conditions in Norwegian waters from the

Swedish border to Kristiansand, and Icebreaking in main and secondary fairways outside port areas. NCA’s

activities encompass the maritime sector of the National Transport Plan (NTP), as well as exercising

authority and administrative tasks related to the laws and regulations for ports, fairways and compulsory

pilotage. The NCA currently operates 5 maritime traffic control centres located at Horten, Brevik, Kvitsøy,

Fedje and Vardø. The maritime traffic control centres engage in civil traffic monitoring, traffic regulation,

traffic control and other maritime traffic services. The purpose is to increase safety and the navigability of

fairways with relatively congested and complex traffic patterns. The control centre in Vardø has an area of

responsibility covering (NAVAREA XIX). The NCA also uses the AIS network for purposes other than pure

traffic monitoring. Data from the AIS network is distributed to government agencies. Among other can be

cited: Norwegian Armed Forces; Joint Rescue Coordination Centres; Norwegian Maritime Directorate;

Customs; Police; Ports; Climate and Pollution Agency (KLIF). A combination with data from the reporting

system SafeSeaNet Norway (SSNN) can provide information on the vessel's destination and estimated time

of arrival, and whether the vessel is carrying hazardous or polluting cargo. This is, for example, important

information for the NCA's maritime traffic control centres and oil pollution preparedness. In addition, SSN

information provides information on the number of persons on board, which is important information for

search and rescue operations. The NCA is the National Competent Authority for SSN Norway and for LRIT in

Norway and manages the Norwegian part of the LRIT database on behalf of the Norwegian authorities. The

regulatory framework for safety at sea and maritime transport is formulated to a great extent

internationally, and binding international cooperation and the international development of regulations are

of great importance to safety at sea in Norwegian waters. Much of the work that takes place

internationally, especially in the EU and IMO, has a direct impact on the services that the NCA provides. The

NCA therefore attaches a great deal of importance to participation in international forums to make a

contribution to future developments in accordance with the Norwegian wishes and needs.

The following entities are participating as preferred partners, having a special interest in closely following

the PCP, but without being part of the buyers group or giving in-kind contributions for carrying out the PCP:

NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH “DEMOKRITOS” (NCSR “DEMOKRITOS”),

INTEGRATED SYSTEMS LABORATORY (ISL) - Patriarchou Gregoriou Str., AGHIA PARASKEVI 15310,

Greece

NATIONAL OBSERVATORY OF ATHENS (NOA) – Lofos Nymfon, Athina 11810, Greece

EUROPEAN UNION SATELLITE CENTRE (SATCEN) – Agency of the Council of the European Union -

Avenida De Cadiz ED 457-Base Aerea De Torrejon, Torrejon De Ardoz 28850, Spain

NORWEGIAN MARINE TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE (SINTEF) - Otto Nielsens Veg 10,

Trondheim 7052, Norway

The preferred partners will be informed of all aspects of the MARINE-EO PCP and will be afforded access to

all information concerning the PCP as they will support the buyers group regarding the scope management,

the collection of requirements, and the translation of requirements into tender specifications and




evaluation criteria / KPIs, the evaluation of interim deliverables, the validation of the outcomes in the last

PCP phase. However, they will not assume to results or IPRs.

The roles of the preferred partner are the following:

PREFERED PARTNERS ROLES

NCSR

The Project Coordinator:

Directs the project and is responsible for achieving

the project results according to the Grant

Agreement.

NOA Technical Advisors:

They do not constitute a decision body. They

support the buyers group regarding the scope

management, the collection of requirements, and

the translation of requirements into tender

specifications and evaluation criteria / KPIs, the

evaluation of interim deliverables, the validation of

the outcomes in the last PCP phase.

SATCEN

SINTEF




3. Description of Services to be procured

3.1 Motivation for the PCP

3.1.1 COPERNICUS and relevant initiatives

It all started during the ‘90s, when sequences of R&D activities in the field of Earth observation resulted in

notable achievements and breakthroughs, having also insurmountable problems, in the sense, that within

the context of R&D initiatives, long-term viability of such achievements would be impossible. Hence, a new

idea was born, that focused on a global and continuous European earth observation system and was named

as the Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES). At the end of 2012, EC decided to change

the name of GMES to Copernicus, as it became involved in financing and development. In 2014, EC

announced the budget (€4.3 billion) for the Copernicus Programme covering a duration of 6 years (2014-

2020). A lot of activities took place during the decade of 1998 – 2008 that guided Copernicus from R&D to

an operational phase, which actually means the provision of services capable to support governance and

business model structure. To this end, and as it is stated in Copernicus official website, “Copernicus,

previously known as GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security), is the European Programme

for the establishment of a European capacity for Earth Observation”.

The Earth Observation (EO) is using important means such as Satellites, Ground Stations & Segments that

provide EO data, derived from seven Sentinel missions, contributing mission data from numerous existing

or planned space missions and in-situ data coordinated by the European Environment Agency (EEA). Based

on the above, Copernicus developed value-added information by processing and analysing the data to

monitor and forecast Earth’s subsystems. These are value-adding activities streamlined through six

thematic streams of Copernicus services: Atmosphere (CAMS), MARINE (CMEMS), Land (CLMS), Climate

(C3S), Emergency (EMS) and Security. Thus, MARINE-EO will base the development of the downstream

services both from EO data streams and Copernicus services (mostly MARINE & Security).

What was mainly achieved, as a first step on the abovementioned, is pure availability and accessibility -

both legally and practically - of the plain raw data and some dedicated services. The EO data gains value

only once it is analyzed, correlated and enriched (and/or fused) with other data sources, and turned into

information and knowledge. Currently, EO Supply capacity is 200 - 300 times larger than the previous levels

of service delivery. Yet, the sheer volume of the data - both per time and aggregated over time – generated

by the Copernicus program poses data management and analysis challenges that exceed the capabilities of

current data management and analysis solutions for EO data. In this context, the EC, in collaboration with

ESA have undertaken several initiatives to bridge the technological gap for the effective processing of big

Copernicus data (e.g. the Thematic Exploitation Platforms) towards setting up value chains and engage the

larger user communities, in order to foster new users’ uptake.

The dissemination of Copernicus data and products is currently done via the Copernicus Distribution

Services:

1. The Sentinel Data Distribution Services. In this category are included the National Collaborative

Ground Segments (CGS) initiatives, that have been assuming a role of Sentinel data distributor, and

tailored services and products provider, to serve specific user communities.

2. The Copernicus Information Distribution Services, for accessing thematic products from the Core

Services.

3. The Data Distribution Service for accessing Copernicus Contributing Mission satellite data.




4. The Copernicus in-situ data component.

This configuration is about to change though. With the 27 January 2017 Invitation to Tender ESA AO/1-

8854/17/I-LG, a second pillar is added to the Copernicus Distribution Services, the Data and Information

Access Services (DIAS), which is the new “game changer” element of the overall architecture. The two

pillars constitute the concept of the Integrated Ground Segment (IGS). DIAS will address a common need

for online data storage, performance computing resources & network bandwidth, to allow value extraction

and inter alia be offered on a commercial basis.

In a nutshell, the DIAS objective is to become the “breeding grounds” for innovative applications or

"algorithm factories" that would help propel Europe to the forefront of global competition fueled by

Copernicus (data and services). DIAS implementation will enable the availability of back office services and

make sure - through appropriate functional and operational specifications of the service - that front office

applications can be built on top of this layer by third parties.

All the above activities are giving profound means to the industry for the development of value-added

downstream services and applications, which require continuous and sustained access to space-born data.

Therefore, within the context of MARINE-EO, both the End-Users and the industry shall take into

consideration all those critical factors and accomplishments for the downstream services as it may ease the

process of both developing and maintaining the services.

Figure 1, below, is the formal DIAS - Data and Information Access Services concept where it is primarily

focused on bringing users to the data by allowing easy access and providing all resources enabling

application development, whilst targeting to a new market creation.

Figure 1: DIAS Concept (source: EC)

3.1.2 MARINE-EO Overview

MARINE-EO pre-commercial procurement (PCP) seeks to establish EO-based services, covering sea-basins

of Mediterranean, Atlantic and Arctic, adapting Copernicus data and information on the Marine




Environment, in order to meet the demand of the procurers in the thematic areas of Marine monitoring

and Maritime Security.

MARINE-EO overall idea is the use of PCP schema in the development of innovative, beyond the-state-of

the art, downstream applications which meet the demand of maritime authorities and stakeholders,

leveraging on the existing Copernicus Services and other products from the Copernicus portfolio.

The aim of this procurement is to trigger new solutions to be developed and tested to address the following

common challenge: develop, test and validate a bundle of COPERNICUS-based services, bringing

incremental or radical innovations in the field of maritime awareness, accompanied with “support” services

that will standardize the way EO is used for maritime awareness, in regards of operational, technological,

semantic and legal interoperability issues. The majority of the R&D work done in the PCP will be located in

EU and H2020 Associated Countries.

Figure 2: MARINE-EO Overview

MARINE-EO teams up a group of 5 maritime authorities (the buyers’ group) and a group of 4 prestigious

scientific and technical organizations with significant experience in EO and maritime matters (the technical

advisors) to achieve the following objectives:

Objective 1: Develop, test and validate two sets of demand-driven EO-based services, adopted on open

standards, bringing incremental or radical innovations in the field of maritime awareness and leveraging

on the existing Copernicus Services and other products from the Copernicus portfolio:

Thematic Area 1 – Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring and Climate Change: SATOCEAN

service provides information about ocean parameters variability in time and space, best probable

fishing areas, fish farm locations, and water quality. It also incorporates sea ice extent for safe

navigation and maritime operations in the Arctic.

Thematic Area 2 – Copernicus Security: SATSURVEILLANCE service contributes to the development

of EUROSUR regulation, by providing services in response to Europe’s security challenges in the

domains of Border Security.




Objective 2: Propose a set of “support” / “envelop” services which will better integrate the

abovementioned EO and Copernicus-enabled services to the operational logic and code of conduct. Such

services shall also bring “closer” the demand side (Public Authorities) with the EO data providers

(COPERNICUS-contributing missions) and EO data experts and analysts (Service providers/ industry and

SMEs) creating a dynamic environment for a single digital market to grow.

Objective 3: Strengthen transnational collaboration in maritime awareness sector by facilitating

knowledge transfer and optimization of resources for the public authorities participating in the buyers

group. This shall bring together the supply and demand side, in order to foster the development of

innovative solutions in response to the increasing demand for strengthening Earth Observation and

Copernicus capabilities. In order to accomplish the aforementioned, an experienced group of partners will

observe the problem from different perspectives, including an operational and a technical view, while

working together for the development, integration and validation of innovative solutions in the field of

Earth Observation, the harmonization of tools and methods for the EU wide testing and validation of

systems, and the facilitation of public-private cooperation for the sake of market visibility.

3.1.3 Thematic Area 1 – Marine Environment Monitoring

Copernicus, previously known as GMES (Global Monitoring for Environment and Security), is the European

programme, coordinated and managed by the European Commission, for the establishment of a European

capacity for Earth Observation.

Copernicus consists of a complex set of systems, which collect data from multiple sources: earth

observation satellites and in situ sensors such as ground stations, airborne and sea-borne sensors. It

processes these data and provides End-Users with reliable and up-to-date information through a set of

services related to environmental and security issues.

The main End-Users of Copernicus services are policymakers and public authorities. They need the

information to develop environmental legislation and policies or to take critical decisions in the event of an

emergency, such as a natural disaster or a humanitarian crisis. Based on the Copernicus services, on the

data collected through the Sentinels and the contributing missions, many value-added services can be

tailored to specific public or commercial needs, resulting in new business opportunities.

The Copernicus programme is coordinated and managed by the European Commission. The development

of the observation infrastructure is performed under the aegis of the European Space Agency for the space

component and of the European Environment Agency and the Member States for the in situ component.

The services provided by Copernicus are addressed in six thematic areas (Figure 3):




Figure 3: Copernicus Services List (obtained from: http://copernicus.eu/main/services)

These services support a wide range of applications, including environment protection, management of

urban areas, regional and local planning, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, health, transport, climate change,

sustainable development, civil protection and tourism. In particular, from 2015 the Copernicus MARINE

Environment Monitoring Service (CMEMS) follows MyOcean demonstration phase and offers a unique

access to oceanographic products through an online catalogue. End-Users can download products

according to their needs in a unique format (NetCDF) and benefit from quality and validation information

for each of them7. The CMEMS provides access to various oceanographic data and products through an

online catalogue related to 4 areas (Figure 4): Maritime Safety, Coastal and MARINE Environment, MARINE

Resources, and Weather, Seasonal Forecasting and Climate activities.

Figure 4: CMES Areas of benefits (Source: CMEMS Website)

Maritime Safety

CMEMS Maritime Safety mainly supports three (3) key areas of operations that include 1) ice shipping route

that uses accurate information on sea current and ice-free region enhancing security, reducing fuel

consumption, time and environmental impact, 2) assisted search and rescue operations with a combination

7 http://marine.copernicus.eu/about-us/about-your-copernicus-MARINE-service

http://copernicus.eu/main/services

http://marine.copernicus.eu/about-us/about-your-copernicus-MARINE-service




of MARINE and weather forecasts that improve efficiency and response time, 3) offshore operations

dealing with oil spill and polluter detection through EMSA’s CleanSeaNet Service8.

Coastal and MARINE Environment

Costal and MARINE Environment contributes to water quality monitoring and to environmental risk

assessment. Specifically, CMEMS provides long time-series of in-situ (physical and biochemical) and remote

sensing (ocean colour and SST) products and data that feed coastal areas with important information. This

information is vital for monitoring the status of coastal areas, adhering to MSFD (MARINE Strategy

Framework Directive), and other related products like selecting optimal locations for offshore wind farms

and forecast energy performances.

MARINE Resources

CMEMS contributes to the protection and the sustainable management of living MARINE resources in

particular for aquaculture, fishery research or regional fishery organizations. In this sense, it is considered

imperative to use qualified data, models that reflect environmental conditions and pressures, for

identification of suitable sites for fish farming, for fish farm monitoring, for assessing impact of aquaculture

based on a set of parameters.

Weather, Seasonal Forecasting and Climate activities

CMEMS delivers reliable and robust data to the European and national meteorological services thus

improving short, medium and seasonal weather forecasting and delivering data for Climate Change

Scenarios. Those services include but are not limited to: high temporal and spatial resolution of SST, ocean

currents that can improve medium range weather and wave forecast, predictability of climate anomalies

based on seasonal prediction system, effect of snow/ice melting to the Global Mean Sea level rise.

Considering the thematic areas of MARINE-EO and the existing Copernicus Services, the following possible

contributions to the services can be schematically observed in Figure 5. The SATOCEAN services cover the

thematic areas of MARINE environment monitoring and maritime security, while the border monitoring

scope of SATSURVEILLANCE is planned to build on the existing Border Surveillance services.

8 http://www.emsa.europa.eu/csn-menu.html

http://www.emsa.europa.eu/csn-menu.html




Figure 5: MARINE-EO thematic areas of proposed downstream services and their connection to existing Copernicus Services which they can support

3.1.4 Thematic Area 2 – Security

The Copernicus programme counts with a space component supported by (1) a dedicated set of EU-owned

satellites (the Sentinels) providing a consistent and independent source of high quality data for the

Copernicus services and (2) a set of contributing missions providing satellite data when required,

specifically, high resolution data for Emergency or Security applications. Moreover, the Copernicus

Programme also counts with an in situ component feeding data from ground, airborne and seaborne

sensors. In situ data is key for calibration, verification and provision of supplementary information adding

data reliability and consistency over time. All the collected data is processed, providing users with reliable

and up-to-date information through a set of services related to environmental and security issues.

As mentioned, the Copernicus services are grouped into six thematic areas (Figure 3). In particular, the

Copernicus Security Service aims to support EU policies, by providing information in response to EU

security challenges and so improving the crisis prevention, preparedness and response capacities in three

key areas: border surveillance, maritime surveillance and Support to EU External Action (SEA).

Border Surveillance

In the area of border surveillance, main objectives are to reduce the number of irregular immigrants

entering the EU undetected, to reduce the death toll of irregular immigrants by rescuing more lives at sea

and to increase internal security of the European Union as a whole by contributing to the prevention of

cross-border crime.

With the delegation agreement finalised on 10 November 2015, the European Commission entrusted

FRONTEX with the border surveillance component of the Copernicus Security Service. The objective is to

support the EU’s external border surveillance information exchange framework (EUROSUR) by providing

real time data on what is happening on land and sea around the EU’s borders.

Maritime Surveillance




In the area of maritime surveillance, the overall objective of the European Union is to support Europe's

maritime security objectives and related activities in the maritime domain. The corresponding challenges

mainly relate to safety of navigation, support to fisheries control, combatting marine pollution and law

enforcement.

With the delegation agreement signed on 3 December 2015, the European Commission entrusted EMSA

with the operation of the maritime surveillance component of the Copernicus Security Service. Under the

agreement, EMSA uses space data from Copernicus Sentinel-1 satellites combined with other sources of

maritime information to effectively monitor maritime areas of interest.

Support to EU External Action

As a global actor, Europe has a responsibility to promote stable conditions for human and economic

development, human rights, democracy and fundamental freedoms. In this context, a key objective of the

EU is to assist third countries in crisis situations or emerging crises and to prevent global and trans-regional

threats leading to destabilisation, such as the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. EU peace-

keeping or humanitarian operations, evacuation of EU citizens in crisis areas, EU and Member States crisis

monitoring activities etc. will benefit from Copernicus products and services.

With the delegation agreement signed on 6 October 2016, the European Commission entrusted SatCen

with the operation of the Support to EU External Action component of the Copernicus Security Service.

It is important to note that Copernicus is a user-driven programme, therefore significant effort and

attention is given to the evolving nature of user requirements in order to capture new emerging needs or

even to improve current services. MARINE-EO targets specific Copernicus downstream components and

aims to bring derived services inside the Public Authorities operational structures, structuring the demand.

Taking into account the MARINE-EO thematic areas and the existing Copernicus Services, the possible

contributions to the services can be observed in Figure 6. SATOCEAN services cover the marine

environment monitoring area, while the border monitoring and maritime security scope of

SATSURVEILLANCE is planned to build on the existing Border and Maritime Surveillance services.

Figure 6: MARINE-EO thematic areas of proposed downstream services and their connection to existing Copernicus Services which they can support.




Generic Maritime Border Surveillance Missions

The Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council9 defines "external

borders" as the Member States' land borders (including river and lake borders), sea borders and their

airports, river ports, sea ports and lake ports, provided that they are not internal borders. Accordingly, this

regulation defines "border surveillance" as the surveillance of borders between border crossing points and

the surveillance of border crossing points outside the fixed opening hours, in order to prevent persons from

circumventing border checks3.

On the other hand, the Integrated Maritime Policy for EU10 clearly identifies the activities for which security

bodies and Member State Governments are responsible:

Mission 1: Irregular migration: Activities carried out by border surveillance authorities at the

unregulated maritime borders in order to prevent persons from circumventing border checks.

Mission 2: Crime and illegal trafficking: Activities carried out at sea by law enforcement authorities

while combating organised crime, drug trafficking, smuggling, fight against terrorism, etc.

Mission 3: Pollution response: Actions carried out in order to eliminate impact to the maritime

environment resulting from accidental or deliberate sea pollution.

Mission 4: Fisheries control: Activities conducted by a competent body or organisation in order to

combat illegal fishing.

Mission 5: Maritime safety: Activities that seek to save human lives, to ensure ships and cargoes

safety, to protect the marine environment and to safeguard the maritime economic and social

assets.

Mission 6: Vessel traffic management: Measures to improve vessel traffic safety and efficiency and

to protect the environment within designated service areas.

Mission 7: Search and rescue: Actions to provide assistance to people in distress at sea by using

surface and air mobile facilities as well as specialised rescue teams and equipment.

Mission 8: Accident and disaster response: Actions to eliminate/palliate impact from disasters

occurred at sea, other than those related to marine pollution.

These missions cover important and enduring activities from a very diverse nature, including crime

prevention, border safety maintenance, natural resources protection and facilitation of the legitimate

movement of goods. Considering the EUROSUR Regulation, several missions appear to be of special

interest: irregular migration, cross-border crime and contribution to the migrants’ lives protection,

therefore, these missions are considered as MARINE-EO “focus missions”.

3.2 Preparation for the PCP

In preparation of the PCP call for tender, an open dialogue with potential tenderers and end-users was held

to broach the views of the market about the intended R&D scope. Data warehouse requirements were

included as a topic in the open dialogue. The results of this Open Market Consultation (OMC) were duly

9 Regulation (EC) No 562/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:105:0001:0032:EN:PDF 10 Integrated Maritime Policy for the EU: Working Documents on Offshore activities of coastal EU Member States and cross border cooperation. EC/DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs/Maritime Policy Task Force. Nov. 2007. https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/sites/maritimeaffairs/files/docs/body/offshore-activities-cross-border-cooperation_en.pdf

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:105:0001:0032:EN:PDF

https://ec.europa.eu/maritimeaffairs/sites/maritimeaffairs/files/docs/body/offshore-activities-cross-border-cooperation_en.pdf




taken into account to fine-tune the tender specifications, so that the gap between state-of-the art industry

development and the procurement needs justifies the need to procure R&D services.

a) Market Analysis

The current picture to what concerns the competitive exploitation of EO platforms shows a complete

fragmentation of the different value propositions (e.g. NextGEOSS, FABSPACE2.0, Space2iD, BigDataValue,

EO Big Data shift forthcoming projects, TEP platform, EUGenius, Copernicus World Alliance). Against this

backdrop and in order to complete this “jigsaw puzzle”, the European Association of Remote Sensing

Companies (EARSC) has put forward the establishment of a marketplace for European EO Services

(eoMALL11). eoMALL (1st release to become available in early 2018) is an industry-led initiative that aspires

to become the foremost web-site to find EO on-line services. eoMALL will lie at the knowledge tier (Figure

7), presenting products and services from any third-party platform. To that end, eoMALL will enable EO

service providers to promote their services online and will help their customers to easily search and

compare the offered services online. This is an initiative supported by the EU EO industry and shall be rolled

out in close relation to DIAS. It is important that MARINE-EO shall stay tuned on the evolution of this

activity as all services can be part (e.g. a dedicated “floor”) of eoMALL’s Front-Office products and benefit

by attracting both more end-users and service providers.

Figure 7: MarketPlace Tier with EOMALL (Source: EARSC)12

b) Prior Information Notice (PIN)

The prior information notice (PIN) for the open market consultation was promoted and advertised widely

using in particular also Horizon 2020 Internet sites and National Contact Points.

11

http://earsc.org/news/study-to-establish-a-marketplace-alliance-for-eo-services-maeos 12

http://earsc.org/file_download/427/EARSC+%40+Eurogi+MM+31032017.pdf

http://earsc.org/news/study-to-establish-a-marketplace-alliance-for-eo-services-maeos

http://earsc.org/file_download/427/EARSC+%40+Eurogi+MM+31032017.pdf




The purpose of this PIN was to:

1) Create awareness and knowledge about the project among relevant bidders;

2) Allow the consortium to gain better insights on the market, such as the state-of-the-art technology

and future developments;

3) Engage the market stakeholders in the procurement preparation phase in order to increase the

probability of a successful procurement procedure.

The PIN was published in the TED Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union on 5th of May

2017 under the publication number 2017/S 087-170832.

c) Industry Day

In preparation for this PCP, all interested operators were invited to take part in an open market

consultation (regardless of their geographic location, the size or governance structure of their

organisation). The “industry day”, included in the open market consultation, provided an overview on the

procurement objectives, the PCP process and the main clauses of the contract.

The “industry day” was organized in order to develop awareness on the target industry, regarding the

tender to be launched and to collect insights on industry expectations and skills which can be used to

perfect the tender.

The MARINE-EO "Industry Day and Brokerage Event” held on 12th July 2017 in Lisbon, was organized in

order to inform the industry for the PCP procedure of the project and the project requirements regarding

the implementation phase. This was an important opportunity to industries across Europe to engage with

this project and to start preparing a bid for the Pre-Commercial Procurement by themselves or in a

Consortium.

d) Request for Information (RFI)

The Request for Information has been launched by the MARINE-EO Project as part of the Market Study

to be conducted under WP2 (User Requirements) and WP3 (Preparation of the procurement).

The scope of this consultation is to get insight on the following issues:

What is currently available on the market (state of the art);

What are the current developments and their maturity levels;

Whether the obstacles faced by the Users can be addressed with these developments;

To what extent can MARINE-EO contribute to pre-operational validation of technologies of Satellite

Downstream Services given the time frame, budget and business model proposed;

Whether the market companies are available to exploit some kind of partnership, when incapable

of responding themselves to the full range of solutions requested by MARINE-EO;

Which companies would be ready to participate in the tendering process.

e) Questions and Answers (‘Q&A’)

All Questions and Answers resulting from the “industry day” have been published on the website:

https://marine-eo.eu/event/open-market-consultation-brokerage-event-videos-and-presentations and

were shared also with other potentially interested bidders.

https://marine-eo.eu/event/open-market-consultation-brokerage-event-videos-and-presentations




The RFI was also very important to fine-tune the Tender documents, because of the technical comments

that were made and the market insights brought by the industries, SMEs and Start-up companies.

During this process, the consortium collected several suggestions that are listed below, including the

Consortium measures to include them:

1. A clear approach of what is expected after the PCP phase 3. The Consortium will target to follow up

with a potential PPI project, assuring a market deployment of the PCP results;

2. The industries also emphasized the importance of identifying the role of the buyers as potential

users of the services. It is expected that the buyers group, and also other Public Procurers across

Europe, will use the new downstream services. It is also clear that the Buyers Group will be actively

involved in the whole process, especially focusing on phase 3 of the PCP, in order to assure a

combination of their needs and the final services presented;

3. The industry also highlighted the importance to rapidly define the exclusion criteria in the PCP;

4. The industry also showed some concerns about the required services, regarding what is already

available in the market and if they should be integrated in a coherent way. The Consortium

objective is to build upon existing services that the industry can leverage and provide innovative

downstream services to the end users;

5. A critical issue for the industries was regarding the budget for each phase. All efforts will be made

to assure a fair distribution between sub-challenges and PCP phases;

6. It was stressed to the industries, SME’s and Start-Up companies the importance of responding to

the RFI; The R&D centers showed some concerns about the access to data. It was clarified that the

biding budgets should comprise all the financial needs to operationalize their projects;

7. It is also important, for both the Public Procurers and the companies to assure a clear ownership of

the results. The Consortium foresees to follow the PCP on IPR issues;

8. Taking into account all of the above, it is critical that the Tender process assures a clear explanation

of operational and financial aspects of the procurement, in order to avoid any misunderstanding

during the implementation process. This will be of utmost importance as to assure a smooth

implementation of the project and their use by the Public Procurers.

In conclusion, all the market consultation activities carried out, helped target the correct supplier market

and guaranteed a varied participation of different European countries entities, SMEs, large enterprises,

startups, etc. All the engaged market suppliers have demonstrated interest in MARINE-EO PCP by

contributing valuable feedback to better address the PCP Challenge and the preparation of the PCP call for

tender document.

The results of the OMC and the initial needs assessment review formed the basis of this PCP and related

tender documents. The full OMC report is available on the MARINE-EO website: https://www.MARINE-

EO.eu.

3.3 PCP Challenge

This procurement is dealing with R&D services to be developed by the industry in order to tackle the

following challenge:

Bridging Innovative Downstream Earth Observation and Copernicus enabled Services for Integrated

maritime environment, surveillance and security,




…and the following sub-challenges: a service that provides information about ocean parameters variability

in time and space, fish farm locations, and water quality. It must also incorporate sea ice extent for safe

navigation and maritime operations in the Arctic; and a service that contributes to the development of

EUROSUR regulation by providing services in response to Europe’s security challenges in the domains of

Border Security.

This is a common challenge shared by all members of the buyers group.

The overall concept of MARINE-EO’s services under the thematic area 1 (MARINE monitoring) shall provide

the buyers group (e.g. MARINE -EO’s partners & other MARINE Authorities/Agencies) with a common web

based platform that will allow the use and submission of requests for EO-based services.

For MARINE-EO’s purpose, these services shall be only those procured through the tender (with an

exception for additional features that could be proposed from the contractors) but in the future, the

MARINE-EO component will have to be extensible and interoperable to accommodate new providers and

service needs. The overall strategy then shall adhere and make use of international standards with respect

to the operational, technological, legal and semantic widely accepted trends.

The optimal goal under this PCP project is to fund robust innovative solutions that will serve not only

MARINE-EO’s Public Authorities (PAs) but other parties such as civil protection, decision makers, and

individuals. This is expected to improve COPERNICUS visibility in the EU level (Figure 8) and eventually

through the PCP mechanism will strengthen the collaboration between the supply (i.e. SMEs, industries)

and the demand side (PAs).

Based on feedback received from MARINE-EO’s PAs, we concluded:

With the set of three (3) features (for the thematic area 1 – SatOcean) that will be qualified for the

procurement phase,

That some of the features (that have been qualified) are based on common information/data, thus

the development of a common platform with the same user interface will optimize not only the use

of MARINE-EO’s services but will also even add new services after the end of the project,

The downstream services will not only serve the needs of MARINE Authorities but also other types

of End-Users such as fish farmers, thus the services have to be as simple as possible and contribute

further to Copernicus user uptake.

The expected outcome under SATOCEAN is to provide three (3) downstream feature services:

Ocean biotic and abiotic parameters, climatological information and historical statistics –

SATOCEAN-UCS-1: MARINE environmental status in hot spots (AOIs e.g. Gulfs, MPAs etc.)

Fish farm monitoring – SATOCEAN-UCS-2: Fish Farms: Detection of Fish farms threats

Arctic based services – SATOCEAN-UCS-3: Detection of vessels and icebergs in Arctic areas

Feature services will have to apply specific operation scenarios serving needs of End-Users (storing of

historic data, data acquisition, data analysis etc.) and exploit already developed data and services (e.g.

Sentinel data, CMEMS data, services and products), thus overcoming limitations (obstacles) related to

storing, searching, acquiring and processing of data.




Figure 8: Generic use case model for the thematic area 1: Copernicus MARINE monitoring

The following use case model (Figure 9) gives a generic view of the Public authorities’ needs that were

identified during the Phase 0 of the PCP project. The decreased number of services and scenarios was a

“clear message” from the industry during the OMC (Open Market Consultation) that was taken into account

during the tender preparation process. The figure illustrates all MARINE-EO’s feature services and the

proposed scenarios that were detected. Scenarios and services that are highlighted in red were agreed

among the end-users to be developed and be validated in areas of interest (AOIs) presented in the

following section.

Figure 9: MARINE-EO environment Services and Scenarios

Regarding security issues (but not only) in the field of maritime surveillance, European policies are driven

by interoperability, information sharing and exchange. Here, CISE roadmap is the key point. Several ongoing




projects are currently funded by European Commission funding programs. These projects take into account

many sources of information of many different types and formats that can be included in different ways. In

this environment, public authorities will gather and analyse sources of data and provide other authorities

with valuable information, at national and international levels. Earth Observation data and information

arising from data analysis, fusion, etc., should be a main contribution to the foreseen European maritime

framework.

Currently, access to Copernicus program data and services focused on security needs is not being as

complete and objective as desirable. On the other hand, Earth observation capabilities are required to be

handled by each public authority means and staff in order to be used for their own purposes and for

sharing purposes. MARINE-EO is intended to cover these gaps. MARINE-EO will provide the buyers group

(e.g. MARINE-EO’s partners & other Marine Authorities/Agencies) with a common web-based platform that

will allow obtaining data and services tailored to Public Authorities needs and built on the existing

Copernicus data and services. MARINE-EO outputs shall be ready to be introduced for use in European

maritime surveillance environment.

For MARINE-EO’s purpose, these services will be only those procured through the tender. However, in the

future, the MARINE-EO component will have to be scalable and interoperable to accommodate new

providers and services. Therefore, the overall strategy will adhere and use international standards with

respect to the operational, technological, legal and semantic widely accepted trends.

In this framework, SATSURVEILLANCE shall provide new capabilities for users to improve their awareness in

maritime environment. Products and services based on Earth observation are the key point in this project,

and are intended to fulfill gaps that other types of information cannot cover. Within SATSURVEILLANCE

thematic area, two downstreaming feature services have been selected:

1) Unusual/Irregular activity monitoring around a Critical Infrastructure

2) Enhanced Change Detection

The first service is initially foreseen to cover requirements, which respond to operational or possibly tactical

deployments, while the second service aims to provide information useful for strategic operational

purposes.

In order to ensure sustainability, Marine EO outcomes shall fit the current infrastructure and operational

framework of the maritime environment. Enhanced and new capabilities shall be covered by functional

module developments and by proper input data selection.

Regarding integration, Marine EO SATSURVEILLANCE services shall be interoperable with different legacy

systems and national-transnational current infrastructures. Therefore, they should be accessible through

current communication networks, deployed at authorities’ premises and compatible with models/formats

agreed by user communities, particular data and the CISE service model.

Operationally Marine EO services shall be merged with other data/services in order the users to get a

complete picture at once. Likewise, Marine EO data and services could be inputs for specific products and

services provided within a national authority environment. In daily work basis, three main types of

surveillance are handled: monitoring, alert management and intelligence. An analysis determining how

suitable are space based sensors, in general, and Copernicus data, in particular, for any type of surveillance,

is recommended. In SATSURVEILLANCE thematic area, legal, security and timing constraints are critical.

Some services will be required to be planned and generated within each authority premises to safeguard




sensitive or private information. On the other hand, timeline shall be minimized. Finally, agreements with

data/service providers shall be made between the authority and each one of them.

Functionally, a group of needs and improvements have been identified. Capabilities related to critical

infrastructure surveillance could include:

Areas of interest management. Areas where geo-referenced polygons are processed independently

and then information is merged to extract global analysis.

Non-collaborative vessels detection, features extraction and behavior analysis based on EO data

and other auxiliary data, for instance AIS (spoofing, shutdown).

Suspicious vessel back-tracking in time series of images, AIS analysis and other possible sources of

information.

Periodic reporting based on intelligence tools.

Any other identified by procurers.

Regarding change detection intended to irregular migration surveillance:

Departure sites vessels detection/no detection taking into account targets of interest specification.

Evidence identification based on change detection analysis by using a group of EO products

properly selected and scheduled.

Target(s) tracking estimation from EO data analysis. Adrift vessels detection and tracking estimation

in a large area shall be included.

In terms of input data versus capabilities, Marine EO has to implement a design that will take into account

the fields selected and the surveillance types identified. A complete procedure to optimize data collection-

cost trade-off shall be made available to end users including performance assessments per target type and

input EO data. As far as possible, specific data-sets shall be avoided and their cost shall be minimized by

using Sentinel data. The main goal from this point should be Sentinel data processing optimization in

detection and target feature extraction. The solution should include performance dependencies, for

instance, weather conditions, movement, etc. Support or envelop services should include a planning

service that will allow the PAs to place a request for EO and non-EO data taking into account type of

surveillance, targets of interest, cost, revisit time, weather forecast, etc.

Finally, research and innovation should be focused at least on two issues. Firstly, optimization of

performance through cutting-edge algorithms implementation should be achieved, in order to provide

operational services, mainly intended to maximize detection and target feature extraction on Sentinels

data. Secondly, support or envelop services should be matched to Copernicus missions planning and

characteristic and to end user’s needs, meaning, tools covering request to delivery phases including control

and monitoring.

Given these basic assumptions, MARINE-EO SATSURVEILLANCE services shall embed a set of operational

workflows, including data collection planning, data acquisition, data preparation, product interpretation

and analysis and report production, amongst others. The underlying idea is to provide services built as

operational workflows capable to exploit Electro-Optical and SAR-satellite data, as well as to deliver added-

value products to End-Users. The provision of outcomes, through operational workflows, facilitates the

users access to information, hiding the complexity of the whole process (including image collection,

acquisition, data preparation, automatic interpretation, analysis and production processes).




Figure 10: Service operational workflow model

Figure 11: Workflow description example

A set of services are proposed below for the SATSURVEILLANCE Services, nevertheless a different services

list could be conveyed if complying with the existing challenge:

Optical and multispectral methods include unsupervised approaches, supervised and knowledge

based approaches, pixel-based and object-oriented approaches, multivariate alteration detection,

hyperspectral approaches and approaches that deal with changes between optical images and

existing vector data, man-made object recognition, crowdsourcing features extraction, etc.

Radar methods include constant false-alarm rate detection, adaptive filtering, multi-channel

segmentation, hybrid methods and coherent detection, edge detection and features extraction,

uncoherent change detection, MTC and classification, Radargrammetric digital modelling, SAR

Signature analysis, SAR polarimetric and intereferometric methods for detection and modelling,

etc.

It is worth mentioning again that the employment of the technologies cited above is not mandatory, but

presents a comprehensive reference list of technologies considered by the Users as most relevant for

overcoming the operational obstacles present in the MARINE-EO scenarios.




3.4 Expected Outcomes (per phase)

All the milestones and deliverables are required to be met in a preceding phase for progression into

subsequent phases. The following table contains the description of the objectives, the associated output

and results and the tasks to be carried out in each of the three phases, per lot:

Expected outcomes

Phase 1 - Solutions Design

Objective:

During this Phase 1, the selected Contractors are asked to provide a solution design that

will address the challenge along with the functional and non-functional requirements.

The purpose is to elaborate the solution design and determine the approach to be taken

for developing the new solutions as well as for demonstrating the technical, financial and

commercial feasibility of the proposed concepts and approach to meet the procurement

needs.

Output and

results:

A final solution design which includes evidence of having met the specification outlined in

the PCP challenge in section 3.3 of this document.

A complete assessment of each proposed design and comparison between different

solutions.

Milestones and deliverables By when?

(See section 1.4.3

- Time Schedule)

How? Output and results

Milestones:

M1.1) Kick-off

meeting(s)

Start of Phase

1 (close to

18.06.2018)

Physical and/or

online meeting

Presentation of Phase 1 action

plan between monitoring team

and contractors and Q&A

M1.2)

Preliminary

Design Review

document

delivery

End of month

4, final delivery

02.10.2018

By electronic

means

D1.1

Executive summary

Operational, functional and data

workflows

Data and service models

System/Subsystem Design

Description (SSDD)

Interface Design Description (IDD)

Traceability Matrix

TRL assessment and exploitation

plan at this level (maturity

analysis)

Phase 2 offers - feasibility analysis

for next PCP stages

D1.2

D1.3




M1.3) End of

phase 1 Review:

delivery of

solution design

End of Phase 1,

November

2018

15.11.2018

By evaluation

report

communication

to contractors

Designs

Evaluations reports per contractor

Deliverables:

D1.1) Phase 1

project abstract 30.04.2018

Abstract in the

format required

by the EU for

publication

D1.2)

Preliminary

Design Review

(PDR)

documentation

02.10.2018 By electronic

means

Document(s)

(see M1.2)

Preliminary design and basic

system architecture

Technical confidence that the

needed capability can be satisfied

within cost and schedule goals

D1.3) Space

Data Provision

Estimation for

PCP Stages 2

and 3 and Data

Management

Plan


means

Required Space Data quota per

dataset required for the next PCP

D1.4) Summary

of the main

Results

achieved

End of Phase 1

Summary in the

format required

by the EU for

publication

Summary of the main Results

achieved

D1.5) PCP Phase

1 contractors’

report

02.10.2018

By electronic

means in the

format required

by the EU for

publication

It will include a business and

exploitation plan and compliance

with the ethics requirements,

completion of the innovation

impact evaluation form.

It will also include an explanation

about the IPR measures that will

be taken in order to protect the

project results and a detailed list

with the personnel that carried

out the R&D activities.

Phase 2 - Prototypes Development

Objective: At the end of phase 2, R&D providers will have to:




Transform their solution design plans into prototypes.

Develop, demonstrate and validate prototypes in lab conditions which meet the challenge of the PCP call

Present advanced plans for conducting field testing in phase 3, including application for ethical approval if required.

To monitor the progress and facilitate the dialog, the phase will have two iterations, each

ending with a monitor briefing, where the contractor presents the current status and

testes of the prototype to the buyers group, and receives feedback on the current status.

Output and

results:

Prototypes demonstrated and validated in lab conditions containing the potential to meet

the specification of this PCP.

Documentation of the implemented prototype covering actual implementation of the

design, prototype testing processes and TRL assessment at this point.

A complete assessment of each prototype and comparison between different solutions.


(See section 1.4.3

Time Schedule)


Milestones:

M2.1) Kick-off

Phase 2

meeting

Start of Phase

2

(around

16.11.2018)

Physical and / or

Online meeting

Reviewing Action Plan between

monitoring team and contractors /

Q&A

M2.2)

Preliminary

Critical Design

Review (CDR)

documentation

delivery (see TD2

– PCP Challenge)


means

D2.1


Description (SSDD)

Database Design Description

(DBDD)


Traceability Matrix

Software Validation Specification

(SVS) including Test Plans for the

FAT

TRL Assessment

D2.6) Space Data Provision

Estimation for PCP Stages 3 and

Data Management Plan

M2.3)

Prototype

validation in lab

conditions

30.05.2019 -

17.06.2019

Physical

Demonstration

(in contractors’

facilities) or

online

Demonstration

D2.2

Evaluation of the whole Prototype

phase in a presentation and

report, including Prototype lab

test results

M2.4) Final

Critical Design 16.07.2019 By electronic D2.3




Review (CDR)

documentation

delivery (see TD2

– PCP Challenge)

means Final System/Subsystem Design

Description (SSDD)

Final Database Design Description

(DBDD)

Final Interface Design Description

(IDD)

Final Software Validation

Specification (SVS) including the

final Test Plans for the FAT

Final Traceability Matrix

TRL Assessment

Final D2.6) Space Data Provision

Estimation for PCP Stages 3 and

Data Management Plan

Phase 3 offers

M2.5) Factory

Acceptance

Tests (FAT)

17.07.2019 –

02.08.2019

Tests in lab

conditions for

Final Acceptance

of the prototype

and

demonstration

to the EU

Prototype

D2.4

Acceptance tests results included

in:

• Prototype Software & Hardware

Test Plan (STP) - A plan for

conducting qualification testing


Test Description (STD) – Test

cases/procedures for qualification

testing

•Prototype Software & Hardware

Test Report (STR) - Test results of

qualification testing

• Traceability Matrix

M2.6) End of

phase and

Factory

Acceptance

Tests (FAT)

Review

15.08.2019

By CDR

documentation

demonstration

results and

Acceptance test

results review

Prototype delivery

Evaluation report per contractor

M2.7)

Submission of

Research

Protocol for

Phase 3 Field

Test

2 months

before ending

Phase 2

Proposal for

field test Proposed protocol for field testing




Deliverables:

D2.1) Phase 2

project abstract 17.12.2018

Abstract in the

format required

by the EU for

publication

D2.2)

Preliminary

Critical Design

Review

document


means


Description (SSDD)

Database Design Description

(DBDD)


Traceability Matrix

Software Validation Specification

(SVS) including Test Plans for the

FAT

TRL Assessment

D2.3) Prototype

validation in lab

conditions

report

30.05.2019 -

17.06.2019

By electronic

means

Evaluation of the whole Prototype

phase in a presentation and

report, including Prototype lab

test results

D2.4) Final

Critical Design

Review

document


means

Final System/Subsystem Design

Description (SSDD)

Final Database Design Description

(DBDD)

Final Interface Design Description

(IDD)

Final Software Validation

Specification (SVS) including the

final Test Plans for the FAT

Final Traceability Matrix

TRL Assessment

D2.5) FAT

results 02.08.2019

By electronic

means and

demonstration

to the EU

Acceptance tests results included

in:


Test Plan (STP) - A plan for

conducting qualification testing


Test Description (STD) – Test


testing

•Prototype Software & Hardware

Test Report (STR) - Test results of





• Traceability Matrix

D2.6) Space

Data Provision

Estimation for

PCP Stages 3

and Data

Management

Plan

To be provided

in M2.2 and

M2.4 (final)

Report Required Space Data quota per

dataset required for the next PCP

D2.7) Data

provision status End of Phase 2 Report

Report with the data quota

consumed for each dataset

D2.8) Summary

of the main

Results

achieved

End of Phase 2

Summary in the

format required

by the EU for

publication


achieved

D2.9) PCP Phase

2 contractors’

report

End of Phase 2

By electronic

means in the

format required

by the EU for

publication












Phase 3 – Operational Solutions Developments

Objective:

In this final Phase, the prototypes are developed further into solutions that are piloted and

validated in real-life settings.

The objective is to provide the Buyers Group with operational solutions with the required

capabilities and maturity for the vendor to provide a solution that can work in a real-life

environment.

Output and

results:

The output is the operational solution per contractor where the successful completion of

all field-testing in a real environment ensures operational requirements compliance.

A complete assessment of each operational solution and comparison between different

solutions.


(See section 1.4.3

Time Schedule)


Milestones:

M3.1) Kick-off

meeting Phase

3

Around

16.08.2019 Physical meeting

Reviewing Action Plan between

monitoring team and contractors /

Q&A




M3.2)

Operational

scenarios and

environment

28.01.2020 -

07.02.2020

Visit to each

contractor's

premises

D3.2 Definition of the operational

scenarios and environment

M3.3) Final

solution

readiness


means

D3.3 Software Operational

Solutions (SOS)

M3.4) Set-up

Phase

Readiness


means

•Software & Hardware Test Plan

(STP) - A plan for conducting


• Software & Hardware Test

Description (STD) – Test


testing

•Traceability Matrix

M3.5) End-

Users Training

16.06.2020 –

06.07.2020

Training sessions

and workshops User/operator manuals

M3.6)

Operation

Result Testing

and System

Acceptance

Review (SAR)

16.07.2020 –

05.08.2020

Buyers will start

the field testing

Software & Hardware Test Report

(STR) - Test results of qualification

testing

•Integration Test Reports.

•Traceability Matrix

End-user first tests results

M3.7) Final

demonstration

to EU

17.08.2020 -

04.09.2020

Physical

demonstration

M3.8) End of

phase 3 report 07.09.2020

By electronic

means Report

Deliverables:

D3.1) Phase 3

project abstract

End of Month

1 of Phase 3

Abstract in the

format required

by the EU for

publication

D3.2) Definition

of the

operational

scenarios and

environment


means TBD

D3.3) Software

Operational

Solutions (SOS)


means

Installation procedures and

software




D3.4) Software

User Manual 15.06.2020

By electronic

means Manuals

D3.5) System

Acceptance

Review (SAR)

05.08.2020 Written Report

The analysis of the outcomes of

the project and results of the

physical tests

D3.6) Data

provision status End of Phase3 Report

Report with the data quota

consumed for each dataset

D3.7) Summary

of the main

Results

achieved

End of Phase 3

Summary in the

format required

by the EU for

publication


achieved and summary of overall

lessons learnt from the PCP

D3.8) PCP Phase

3 contractors’

report

End of Phase 3

By electronic

means in the

format required

by the EU for

publication












Main milestones and deliverables description is included in section 7 of Tender Document 2 – PCP

Challenge.

Milestones and Deliverables for the Phases 2 and 3 are indicative at this stage and could be subject to

change. Any changes will be included in the respective Phase’s call-off stage.

Besides deliverables included in the table above, some tender documents presented in Tender Document 6

– Annexes are mandatory, specifically annexes M and L.

A report including the IPR measures taken by the contractor to protect the results and lists of names and

location of personnel that carried out the R&D activities should be provided at the end of each phase.

At the end of the PCP phase 3, contractors must agree on the text for a summary of overall lessons learnt

and results achieved from the PCP, for publication. It should be delivered by 12th September 2020.

3.5 IPR – Commercial Exploitation of results – Declaration of Pre-existing Rights

Ownership of results (foreground)

By results, the parts agree that they mean any data, knowledge, information, software, source code,

physical material, whatever their form or nature, whether or not they can be protected, which are

generated in the PCP third phase as well any attached rights, including intellectual property rights.




Each Contractor that generates results owns the attached IPRs and will own results that are not IPRs.

Each Contractor is responsible for the management and protection of its IPRs and bears the costs

associated with this.

The Lead Procurer and the Buyers Group have the right to monitor the management of the IPRs.

The Contractors must inform the Buyers Group (via the Lead Procurer) of results that can be exploited,

regardless of whether they can be protected or not, within ninety (90) days from when they are generated.

The information submitted to the Lead Procurer must include information about the contents of the

results, the confirmation by the Contractor to protect them and the planned timing for protection.

If a Contractor does not seek protection for results that should be protected, the Buyers Group has the

right to request that the results are transferred to them.

IPRs rights ownership, access rights and call-back provisions have to be in accordance with Work

Programme Annex E and Grant Agreement Terms and Conditions point 13.1.1 signed by European

Commission and Marine-EO Consortium. On this basis, specific periods of time and clarifications on non-

explicit conditions are included here, in order to avoid uncertainties or misunderstanding on rights and

obligations of the Parties.

The contracts for Marine-EO pre-commercial procurement must provide for the following:

the ownership, by the subcontractors, of the intellectual property rights on the results that they

generate;

the right of the buyers to access all the results — on a royalty-free basis — for their own use;

the right of the buyers to grant (or to require the subcontractors to grant) non-exclusive licenses to

third parties to exploit the results – under fair and reasonable conditions – (without the right to

sub-license). For Affiliated Entities, as defined in 2.1, the members of the Buyers Group shall be

granted with 5 licenses for the SatOcean Services and 5 licenses for the SatSecurity Services (from

each service provider) on a royalty-free basis, until 10 years have elapsed from the end of the

project, with the possibility to transfer those licenses to any Affiliated Entity. The Affiliated Entities

do not have any rights to exploit commercially the IPR’s neither grant access to other entities or

sublicense the use of the services.

the obligation of the subcontractors to transfer back to the buyers the ownership of intellectual

property generated by subcontractors during the PCP, if subcontractors fail to commercially exploit

the results within 4 years after the finalization of the Contract;

the right of the buyers to publish — at the time of the contract award notice — the identity of the

winning tenderers and a project summary provided by the winning tenderers, and to publish —

after R&D has finished and after consulting the subcontractors — summaries of the results as well

as the identities of the subcontractors that successfully completed the last phase of the PCP.

The Contractors may transfer ownership of their Results — unless this is prohibited (or restricted) by the

security obligations and provided that they ensure that their obligations (in respect of the results) apply to

the new owner and that this new owner is obliged to pass them on in any subsequent transfer.

In that situation, the Contractor must give them at least ninety (90) days advance notice of its intention to

transfer ownership of the results and that this notification must include sufficient information on the new

owner to enable the members of the Buyers Group to assess the effects on their access rights. Any member

of the Buyers Group may object within forty-five (45) days of receiving notification, if it can show that the




transfer would adversely affect its access rights. Should an objection be raised, the transfer may not take

place until agreement has been reached between the parties concerned.

The Tenderers and the Contractors are required to set both price with the acquisition of IPR and price

without the acquisition of IPR.

To ensure that a fair market price is offered, Tenderers must state two prices:

The hypothetical price that they would have quoted if all Intellectual Property Rights, including the

ownership of Results under the PCP, would have been fully retained by the Buyers Group and Tenderers

would not have the possibility to exploit the Results (the “Virtual Price”); and the price that takes into

account the fact that they keep ownership of the Intellectual Property Rights attached to the Results under

PCP, in accordance with the provisions of the contracts, and that they can exploit these Results (the “Actual

Price”).

Commercial exploitation of results

The Contractor shall, for at least four (4) years after the end of the Framework Agreement, take measures

to ensure that its results are exploited commercially (directly or indirectly, in particular through transfer or

licensing).

If the contractor fails to commercially exploit the results within this period (or uses the results to the

detriment of the public interest, including security interests), the Buyers Group has the right to require that

ownership of the results be transferred to them.

“Failure to commercially exploit results” means not marketing a commercial application of the results

(directly or indirectly, through a subcontractor or Licensee).

The feasibility of the business plan to commercially exploit the R&D results will be assessed as part of the

award criteria (see section 4.5).

Declaration of pre-existing rights (background)

The ownership of pre-existing rights remains unchanged by the PCP.

In order to be able to distinguish clearly between results and pre-existing rights (and to establish which pre-

existing rights are held by whom):

contractors are requested to list the pre-existing rights for their proposed solution in their offers

(see section 4.6.3)

contractors will have to precisely identify if any of their Background has a Restriction on the

Freedom to Operate. All RFO will have to be specified in the Background list. If no RFO is specified

to a Background in the Background list, it will be conclusively deemed that no Restriction on the

Freedom to Operate exists on this Background;

Contractors shall grant access to procurers to their relevant pre-existing rights and sideground for carrying

out the tasks assigned to them in the PCP, in order to allow procurers to use the Marine EO solutions

developed for internal use (for non-commercial purposes outside the scope of this PCP).

The Parties must inform each other about the generation of changes in Pre-existing rights and sideground

within 15 days from the generation of the change and whether they rely on Pre-existing rights for each

phases of the PCP.




The Contractors introducing background must within 2 weeks of the signing of the PCP Framework

Agreement provide the Lead Procurer with a list of the pre-existing rights it holds and/or has access.

in order to be able to distinguish clearly between results and pre-existing rights and to establish

which pre-existing rights are held by whom:

tenderers are requested to list the pre-existing rights for their proposed solution in their offers;

procurers and contractors will establish a list of respective pre-existing rights to be used — before

the start of the contract.

The Parties grant each other to each other’s pre-existing rights and sideground for carrying out the tasks

assigned to them in the PCP, for exploitation of results generated in the PCP and for using the results for

their own purposes.

The Contractors are required to give a declaration of Background IPR in the technical offer, including its

value at market price.

The Lead Procurer and other members of the Buyers Group, Preferred partners and Third parties and

providing in-kind contributions to the PCP do not hold any Pre-existing rights relevant to the PCP contracts.

The framework agreement contains a provision that describes in more detail the rights and obligations of

the different parties regarding the pre-existing rights and results.




4. Conditions of the Tender

4.1 Eligible Tenderers, Joint Tenderers and Subcontracting

Participation in the tendering procedure is open on equal terms to all types of operators from any country,

regardless of their geographic location, size or governance structure. However, there will be a requirement

relating to the place of performance of the R&D services, described in section 4.4.3.

For phases 2 and 3, participation is limited to tenderers that successfully completed the preceding phase.

Tenders may be submitted by a single entity or in collaboration with others. The latter can involve either

submitting a joint tender or subcontracting, or a combination of the two approaches.

Joint tender submissions

Consortium:

According the Portuguese applicable law, a consortium of entities requires a prior procedure for drafting

the consortium agreement where the principles governing the activities, duties and obligations that legally

and jointly bind the consortium participants are established. The members of the consortium may elect an

operational coordinating entity among the participating members. The commitment regime contracted

between members of the consortium contract and a third party will be established in a proper legal

instrument and not in the consortium agreement, which does not bind the third party.

A joint tender must specify the role, qualification and experience of each member of the consortium. The

consortium members must select a ‘Lead Contractor’ who will have the power to sign the Framework

Agreement and specific contracts provide in the name and on behalf of the consortium and will be the

responsible for the contracts without prejudice to the existence of joint powers that they may grant for

receiving and making payments of a significant amount. All members of the consortium shall be jointly and

separately bound to fulfill the terms of the contracts.

The consortium members shall sign the administrative documentation that binds the members to the bid(s)

submitted to the tender.

The composition of the consortium cannot be altered without the consent of the lead procurer.

Joint tender submissions should indicate in the Tender:

Each organization/member name

The percentage split per group/consortium member

How the group/organization will work in respect of this tender

Full contact details of the single point of contact of the 'lead contractor'.

Contact details of the tenderers must be stated in Form 1 Section of the Qualification envelope. See TD3 -

Forms to obtain more information.

Group of Bidders:

According the Portuguese applicable law, the group of bidders may not have any legal relationship.

When the bid is submitted by a group of entities, the administrative documentation binding the members

of the group to the bid must be signed by the joint representative of the members of the group. In this case




should be attached to the administrative documentation the instruments of mandate issued by each

member of the group. In the absence of a common representative this documentation shall be signed by all

members or their representatives.

A joint tender must specify the role, qualification and experience of each member. The members must

select a ‘Lead Contractor’ who will have the power to sign the Framework Agreement and specific contracts

provide in the name and on behalf of the members and will be the responsible for the contracts without

prejudice to the existence of joint powers that they may grant for receiving and making payments of a

significant amount. All members shall be jointly and separately bound to fulfill the terms of the contracts.

Subcontracting

According with Portuguese applicable law the administrative documentation biding the Tenderer shall only

be signed by the bid submitting entity.

As defined in the Framework Agreement, subcontracting refers any contract or agreement between the

tenderer and any Third Party whereby that Third Party agrees to provide Services to the Tenderer to enable

or assist the Tenderer to provide the Services or any part thereof to the Buyers Group.

Tenderers must state in the tender submission if they intend to subcontract any part of the PCP obligations

to other suppliers and indicate in which extend. Subcontracting must not exceed the 40% of the contract.

Tenderers will identify in the offer who the subcontractors are and which parts of the contract they will

deliver in the project in the technical offer. Furthermore, the tenderer shall describe its approach in

selecting and managing its sub-contractors.

Subcontracting is permitted in each Phase of the MARINE-EO PCP procedure.

The Contractor must have adequate processes and procedures in place for managing and monitoring all of

the sub-contractors which the Contractor proposes to use in the delivery of this Contract. The Contractor

will be responsible for the acts and omissions of its sub-contractors as though those acts and omissions

were its own.

Contractors remain fully liable to the buyers group for the performance of the contract. Contractors must

therefore assure that subcontractors are aware of the provisions set out in the tender documents including

the related to IPRs.

If the contractor needs to change or add new subcontractors, these new subcontractors must provide a

statement declaring that is aware of the provisions set out in the tender documents, that it meets the

qualification requirements for the subcontracted service and that it has its resources at the tenderer’s

disposal for the full duration of the contract.

The execution of the tasks assigned to a subcontractor shall not be the subject of further subcontracting.

Participation in the open market consultation is not a condition for submitting a tender.

4.2 Exclusion Criteria

The exclusion criteria determine the situation of the Tenderers and subcontractors.

These criteria described below will be assessed based on the responses to questions in Form 2 section of

the Qualification envelope on a pass/fail basis. See TD3 – Forms to obtain more information.




Exclusion Criteria Evidence

PART A

Bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, receivership, composition with

creditors, or subject to relevant proceedings.

A conviction (or convictions) for a criminal offence related to business or

professional conduct.

Legal or administrative finding of a commission of an act of grave misconduct in

the course of business.

Failure to fulfil obligations related to payment of social security contributions.

Failure to fulfil obligations related to the payment of taxes.

Failure to provide information required or providing inaccurate / misleading

information when participating in procurement exercise.

Failure to obtain and maintain relevant licensing or membership of an

appropriate trading or professional organization where required by law.

Shown significant or persistent deficiencies in the performance of a substantive

requirement under a prior public contract, a prior contract with a contracting

entity or a prior concession contract which led to early termination of that prior

contract, condemned for damages or other comparable sanctions.

Declaration of Honor

(Form 2: Exclusion

Criteria Part A)

PART B

Criminal offences referred to in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision

2008/841/JHA of 24 October 2008 on combating organized crime.

Corruption as defined in Article 3 of Council Act of 26 May 1997 preparation on

the basis of Article K.3.2 c Treaty on European Union, the Convention on the fight

against corruption involving officials of the European Communities or officials of

Member States of, and Article 3.1 Council Joint Action 98/742/JHA of 22

December 1998 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty

on European Union, on corruption in the private sector.

Money laundering as defined in Article 1 of Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10

June 1991 on measures to prevent the financial system for money laundering,

amended by European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/97/EC.

Fraud within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention drawn up on the basis of

Article K.3 of the Treaty on European Union for the Protection of the

Communities' financial interests.

Terrorist offences or offences linked to terrorist activities as defined in Articles 1

and 3 of Council Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism.

Child labour and other forms of trafficking in human beings as defined in Article 2

of Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April

Declaration of honor

(Form 2: Exclusion

criteria Part B)




Exclusion Criteria Evidence

2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its

victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA.

Is guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying the information required under

this section or has not supplied such information.

PART C

Conflict of Interest

Declaration of honor

(Form 2: Exclusion

criteria Part C)

Tenderers that do not comply with these criteria (Part A, Part B and C) will be excluded.

4.2.1 PART A: Description

A tenderer will be excluded from further participation in the MARINE-EO if it or any subcontractor on

whose resources it relies upon in this procurement, does not meet one or several of the exclusion criteria.

(See TD3 - Form 2 “Exclusion criteria part A”)

The exclusion criteria are as follows:

Bankruptcy, insolvency, compulsory winding up, receivership, composition with creditors, or

subject to relevant proceedings.

A conviction (or convictions) for a criminal offence related to business or professional conduct.

Legal or administrative finding of a commission of an act of grave misconduct in the course of

business.

Failure to fulfil obligations related to payment of social security contributions.

Failure to fulfil obligations related to the payment of taxes.

Failure to provide information required or providing inaccurate / misleading information when

participating in procurement exercise.

Failure to obtain and maintain relevant licensing or membership of an appropriate trading or

professional organisation where required by law.

Shown significant or persistent deficiencies in the performance of a substantive requirement under

a prior public contract, a prior contract with a contracting entity or a prior concession contract

which led to early termination of that prior contract, condemned for damages or other comparable

sanctions.

Tenderers must confirm, by completing the Form 2 of the Qualification envelope that they are not

subject to any of the exclusion criteria listed below; see TD3 - Form 2 “Exclusion criteria Part A” for more

details.

4.2.2 PART B: Description

If the Lead Procurer becomes aware that a tenderer, a representative of the tenderer, or subcontractor,

under a judgment that has entered into final legal force has been sentenced for a criminal offence listed

below, such tenderer will be excluded from the PCP (See TD3- Form 2 “Exclusion criteria Part B”):

Criminal offences referred to in Article 2 of Council Framework Decision 2008/841/JHA of 24

October 2008 on combating organized crime.




Corruption as defined in Article 3 of Council Act of 26 May 1997 preparation on the basis of Article

K.3.2 c Treaty on European Union, the Convention on the fight against corruption involving officials

of the European Communities or officials of Member States of, and Article 3.1 Council Joint Action

98/742/JHA of 22 December 1998 adopted by the Council on the basis of Article K.3 of the Treaty

on European Union, on corruption in the private sector.

Money laundering as defined in Article 1 of Council Directive 91/308/EEC of 10 June 1991 on

measures to prevent the financial system for money laundering, amended by European Parliament

and Council Directive 2001/97/EC.

Fraud within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention drawn up on the basis of Article K.3 of the

Treaty on European Union for the Protection of the Communities' financial interests.

Terrorist offences or offences linked to terrorist activities as defined in Articles 1 and 3 of Council

Framework Decision of 13 June 2002 on combating terrorism.

Child labour and other forms of trafficking in human beings as defined in Article 2 of Directive

2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and

combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework

Decision 2002/629/JHA.

Is guilty of serious misrepresentation in supplying the information required under this section or

has not supplied such information.

Tenderers must confirm, by filling the Form 2 section of the Qualification Envelope that they are not

subject to any of the exclusion criteria listed below, See TD3 - Form 2 Exclusion criteria Part B for more

details.

4.2.3 PART C: Description

Tenderers that are subject to a conflict of interest may be excluded. If there is a potential conflict of

interest, tenderers must immediately notify the lead procurer in writing.

A conflict of interest is any situation where the impartial and objective implementation of the evaluation of

tenders and/or implementation of the contract is compromised for reasons relating to economic interests,

political or national affinity, family, personal life (e.g. family of emotional ties) or any other shared interest.

If an actual or potential conflict of interest arises at a later stage (i.e. during the implementation of the

contract), the contractor must contact the lead procurer, who is required to notify the EU and to take steps

to rectify the situation. The EU may verify the measures taken and require additional information to be

provided and/or further measures to be taken.

Tenderers must confirm, by filling the Form 2 of the Qualification envelope that they are not subject to

any conflict of interest See TD3 - Form 2 Exclusion criteria Part C for more details.

4.3 Selection Criteria

The purpose of the selection criteria is to determine whether a tenderer has the financial, economic,

technical and professional capacity necessary to carry out and perform the work.

These selection criteria will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis.




“Fail” means that the evidence given does not provide sufficient indication of the Tenderer’s expertise,

ability and/or equipment to meet project’s objectives. Any Tenderer that cannot meet all requirements in

this Section will not be selected.

The selection criteria are as follows:

Selection Criteria Evidence

Demonstrate the Tenderers expertise and working

experience required to undertake an innovative

R&D project that entails software development,

integration and commercialization

Brief description of the profile of the key personnel

with competences and skills necessary to complete

the project.

CVs of key personnel (ZIP file with all CVs attached)

Tenderers that do not comply with this criterion will be excluded.

Tenderers must have:

The capacity, tools, material and equipment to:

o Carry out research and lab prototyping

o Produce and supply a limited set of first products or services and demonstrate that these

products or services are suitable for production or supply in quantity and to quality

standards defined by the procurers.

The financial and organisational structures to:

o Manage, exploit and transfer or sell the results of the PCP (including tangible and intangible

results, such as new product designs and IPRs)

o Generate revenue by marketing commercial applications of the results (directly or through

subcontractors or licensees).

Tenderers have to provide the necessary competences to ensure that they are able to complete this PCP

project.

Demonstrate the expertise and working experience required to undertake an innovative R&D

project by providing a number of CV of key personnel and competences, which they consider

necessary to complete the project.

Each Tenderer shall describe, present and confirm the required references and competences in Form 3

section of the Qualification envelope. Should there be any doubt as to any of these criteria; tenderers may

be requested to provide additional information (see TD3 – Form 3 Selection criteria for more details).

4.4 Compliance Criteria

The purpose of the compliance criteria is to determine whether the Tender is compliant with the principles

of PCP, public financing, place of performance, research integrity and security. These compliance criteria

will be evaluated on a pass/fail basis, based on the responses to the questions in Form 4 Compliance

Criteria of the Qualification envelope.

The offers for each phase will be evaluated against the compliance criteria A to E.




Tenders must comply with the following compliance criteria:

Compliance Criteria Evidence

A) Compliance with the definition of R&D services Declaration of Honor (Form 4 Compliance Criteria

Part A)

B) Compatibility with other public financing Declaration of Honor (Form 4 Compliance Criteria

Part B)

C) Compliance with the requirements regarding the

place of performance of the contract

Declaration of Honor (Form 4 Compliance Criteria

Part C)

D) Compliance with ethics requirements

Declaration of Honor (Form 4 Compliance Criteria

Part D) and further description of ethic assessment

required.

E) Compliance with security requirements Declaration of Honor (Form 4 Compliance Criteria

Part E)

Additional compliance criteria for the call-off for

Phase 2 Evidence

As required for Phase 1 As required for Phase 1

Additional compliance criteria for the call-off for

Phase 3 Evidence

As required for Phase 1 and 2 As required for Phase 1 and 2

Tenders that do not comply with these criteria will be excluded.

These compliance criteria are fully described below:

4.4.1 A) Compliance with the definition of R&D Services

Tenders that go beyond the provision of R&D services will be excluded.

R&D covers fundamental, industrial research and experimental development, as per the definition given in

the EU R&D&I state aid framework13. It may include exploration and design of solutions and prototyping up

to the original development of a limited volume of first products or services in the form of a test series.

Original development of a first product or service may include limited production or supply in order to

incorporate the results of field-testing and to demonstrate that the product or service is suitable for

production or supply in quantity to acceptable quality standards14. R&D does not include quantity

production or supply to establish commercial viability or to recover R&D costs. It also excludes commercial

development activities such as incremental adaptations or routine or periodic changes to existing products,

services, production lines, processes or other operations in progress, even if such changes may constitute

improvements. The purchase of commercial volumes of products or services is not permitted.

13

See Point 15 of the Commission Communication on a framework for state aid for research and development and innovation (C(2014) 3282) 14

See Article XV(1)(e) WTO GPA 1994 and the Article XIII(1)(f) of the revised WTO GPA 2014.




The definition of services means that the value of any products covered by the contract must be less than

50 % of the total value of the PCP Framework Agreement.

The following evidence is required:

the financial part of the offer for the framework agreement must provide binding unit prices for all

foreseeable items for the duration of the whole framework agreement

the financial part of the offer for each phase must give a breakdown of the price for that phase in

terms of units and unit prices for every type of item in the contract, distinguishing clearly the units

and unit prices for items that concern products

the offers for all three phases may include only items needed to address the challenge in question

and to deliver the R&D services described in the request for tenders

the offers for all three phases must offer services matching the R&D definition above

the total sum of the value of products offered in each phase and all previous phases must be less

than 50 % of the total value of the framework agreement

The evidence stated above demonstrating compliance with R&D services will be sought through the

breakdown of your financial offer as stated (For each of the PCP Phases). See TD3 – Form 7 Financial offer

for more details.

4.4.2 B) Compatibility with Other Public Financing

Tenders that receive public financing from other sources will be excluded if this leads to double public

financing or an accumulation of different types of public financing that is not permitted by EU legislation,

including EU state aid rules.

Tenderers must- for each of the phases- sign a declaration of honor stating the absence of other

incompatible public financing (See TD3 - Form 4)

4.4.3 C) Compliance with the requirements regarding the Place of Performance of the contract

Tenders will be excluded if they do not meet the following requirements relating to the place of

performance of the contract:

At least 50 % of the total value of activities covered by the framework agreement must be

performed in the EU Member States or H2020 associated countries. The principal R&D staff

working on the PCP must be located in the EU Member States or H2020 associated countries.

At least 50 % of the total value of activities covered by each specific contract for each PCP phase

must be performed in the EU Member States or in H2020 associated countries. The principal R&D

staff working on each specific contract must be located in the EU Member States or H2020

associated countries.

The percentage is calculated as the part of the total monetary value of the contract that is allocated to

activities performed in the EU Member States or in other countries associated to Horizon 2020. All activities

covered by the contract are included in the calculation, i.e. all R&D and operational activities that are

needed to perform the R&D services (e.g. research, development, testing and certifying solutions). This

includes all activities performed under the contract by contractors and, if applicable, their subcontractors.

The principal R&D staff are the main researchers, developers and testers responsible for leading the R&D

activities covered by the contract.




The countries associated to Horizon 2020 are those listed as associated countries in the Participant Portal

Online Manual15.

The following evidence is required:

the financial part of the offer must provide binding unit prices for all foreseeable items for the

duration of the whole framework agreement and give a breakdown of the price for the current

phase in terms of units and unit prices (hours and unit price per hour), for every type of item in the

contract (e.g. junior and senior researchers)

a list of staff working on the specific contract (including for subcontractors), indicating clearly their

role in performing the contract (i.e. whether they are principal R&D staff or not) and the location

(country) where they will carry out their tasks under the contract

a confirmation or declaration of honour that, where certain activities forming part of the contract

are subcontracted, subcontractors will be required to comply with the place of performance

obligation to ensure that the minimum percentage of the total amount of activities that has to be

performed in the EU Member States or in countries participating in Horizon 2020 is respected

Tenderers shall - for each of the PCP Phases - provide a financial offer and present a list of staff working as

well as a confirmation or declaration of honor for subcontractors as requested above.

4.4.4 D) Compliance with Ethics Requirements

Tenders will be excluded if they:

do not comply with the following rules:

o ethical principles (including the highest standards of research integrity, notably as set out in

the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity16 , and, in particular, avoiding

fabrication, falsification, plagiarism and other research misconduct)

o applicable international, EU and national law

include plans to carry out activities that are prohibited in all Member States or in a country outside

the EU (where those activities are allowed)

include activities whose aim is to:

o carry out human cloning for reproductive purposes

o modify the genetic heritage of human beings in such a way as could make such changes

heritable (with the exception of research relating to cancer treatment of the gonads)

o create human embryos solely for the purpose of research or for the purpose of stem cell

procurement, including by means of somatic cell nuclear transfer

include activities that do not focus exclusively on civil applications.

If the tender involves activities that raise ethical issues, the tenderer must submit an ethics self-assessment

that:

describes how the tender meets the legal and ethical requirements of the country or countries

where the tasks raising ethical issues are to be carried out

15

List of H2020 associated countries. 16

The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity of ALLEA (All European Academies) and ESF (European Science Foundation) of March 2011.

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/3cpart/h2020-hi-list-ac_en.pdf




explains in detail how the tenderer intends to address the ethical issues identified, in particular as

regards:

o objectives (e.g. dealing with vulnerable populations and dual-use goods )

o methodology (e.g. involvement of children and related consent procedure and protection

of data collected)

o the potential impact (e.g. issues relating to the dual use of goods, environmental damage,

stigmatisation of particular social groups, political or financial retaliation, benefit-sharing

and malevolent use of results).

For information on ethics issues, see the guidance for EU grant beneficiaries17 “How to complete your

ethics self-assessment”.

Call-offs for phases 2 and 3 may request that this information be updated in the offers submitted for these

phases.

Before starting the particular task that raises ethical issues, contractors must provide a copy of:

any ethics committee opinion required under national law; and

any notification or authorisation for activities raising ethical issues required under national law.

The framework agreement contains a provision on ethics.

4.4.5 E) Compliance with Security requirements

Tenders will be excluded if they do not comply with EU, national and international law on dual-use goods or

dangerous materials and substances.

Tenders themselves must not contain any classified information.

If the output of activities or results proposed in the tender raise security issues or uses EU-classified

information, the tenderer must show that these issues are being handled correctly. In such a case,

tenderers are required to ensure and to provide evidence of the adequate clearance of all relevant

facilities. They must examine any issues (such as those relating to access to classified information or export

or transfer control) with the national authorities before submitting their offer. Tenders must include a draft

security classification guide (SCG), indicating the expected levels of security classification.

If necessary for the tender procedure or for performing the contract itself, contractors will be requested to

ensure appropriate security clearance for third parties (e.g. for external experts needed to evaluate the

proposal).

Call-offs for phases 2 and 3 may request that this security information be updated in the offers submitted

for that phase.

Before starting the particular task that raises security issues, contractors must provide a copy of any export

or transfer licences required under EU, national or international law.

The framework agreement and/or the specific contracts contain a provision on security.

17

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/ethics/h2020_hi_ethics-self-assess_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/hi/ethics/h2020_hi_ethics-self-assess_en.pdf




4.5 Award Criteria

The award will be made on the most economically advantageous proposal based on the best quality price

ratio.

The evaluation will be assessed based on the following criteria:

Lot 1 - Thematic Area 1: Copernicus Marine Environment Monitoring and Climate Change: SATOCEAN

PHASE 1 & FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT, PHASE 2 AND PHASE 3

AWARD CRITERIA MAXIMUM

POINTS THRESHOLDS WEIGHTING

BUSINESS PLAN

A) Exploitation Plan - Short to Mid-Term

exploitation plan, including a commercialization

strategy

2

B) Commercial Viability 3

Total Business Plan 5 5%

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

A) Feasibility of the project plan and schedule 2

B) Methodology of the project, including risk

management and quality assurance 3

Total Project Management 5 5%

FUNCTIONAL QUALITY OF THE SOLUTION

A) Operation need

How well the proposed solution addresses the

identified general operational needs.

4

B) User request


user request requirements

3

C) Human Machine Interface / Interaction


HMI requirements

3

D) Performance & Monitor


trace of all requests through log files

1




E) Service Catalogue


service catalogue requirements

3

F) Service dissemination


service dissemination requirements

3

G) Data dictionary


data dictionary requirements

3

H) MARINE environmental status in hot spots

(AOIs e.g. Gulfs, MPAs etc)


Marine-EO Feature 1 specific requirements

10

I) Fish Farms: Detection of Fish farms threats



10

J) Detection of vessels and icebergs in Arctic

areas



5

K) Reference architecture


Marine-EO architecture specific requirements

and supporting services

5

Total Functional Quality Criteria 50 50%

NON-FUNCTIONAL QUALITY OF THE SOLUTION

A) Technology


software, hardware and technical architecture

requirements.

5

B) Integration


SOA, interfaces and other integration

requirements.

4

C) Availability and reliability 2





availability and reliability requirements.

D) Maintenance


maintenance requirements.

2

E) Training


training requirements.

2

F) Solution technology readiness

How well is demonstrated the evolution of

solution's TRL throughout the project lifecycle.

5

Total Non-Functional Quality Criteria 20 20%

PRICE

Total Price (Actual Price) 20 20%

Lot 2 - Thematic Area 2: Copernicus Security: SATSURVEILLANCE

PHASE 1 & FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT, PHASE 2 AND PHASE 3

AWARD CRITERIA MAXIMUM

POINTS THRESHOLDS WEIGHTING

BUSINESS PLAN

A) Exploitation Plan - Short to Mid-Term

exploitation plan, including a commercialization

strategy

2

B) Commercial Viability 3

Total Business Plan 5 5%

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

A) Feasibility of the project plan and schedule 2

B) Methodology of the project, including risk

management and quality assurance 3

Total Project Management 5 5%

FUNCTIONAL QUALITY OF THE SOLUTION

A) Operation Concept and General

Requirements 6





identified operational concept requirements

B) User request


user request requirements

3

C) GUI – GeoPortal


GUI requirements

5

D) Archived Imagery Search and new Acquisition

Planning Toll


imagery search and acquisition planning toll

requirements

3

E) Product Catalogue


product catalogue general requirements

5

F) Product dissemination


product dissemination requirements

5

G) Data dictionary


data dictionary requirements

3

H) Unusual / Irregular activity monitoring

around Critical Infrastructure downstreaming

service



10

I) Enhanced Change Detection downstreaming

service



5

J) Reference architecture


Marine-EO architecture specific requirements

and supporting services

5




Total Functional Quality Criteria 50 50%

NON-FUNCTIONAL QUALITY OF THE SOLUTION

A) Technology


software, hardware and technical architecture

requirements.

2

B) Integration


SOA, interfaces and other integration

requirements.

2

C) Availability and reliability


availability and reliability requirements.

2

D) Maintenance


maintenance requirements.

2

E) Training


training requirements.

2

F) Solution technology readiness

How well is demonstrated the evolution of

solution's TRL throughout the project lifecycle.

2

G) Operational suitability

How well the proposed solution addresses

operational approach general requirements

8

Total Non-Functional Quality Criteria 20 20%

PRICE

Total Price (Actual Price) 20 20%

Additional sub-criteria may be added for the call-offs for phases 2 and 3, as a way of making the award

criteria more precise, provided that they do not substantially change the existing criteria.

Should there be any doubt as to any of these criteria; tenderers may be requested to provide additional

information.

The awarded criteria will be evaluated by examining the response to the Technical envelope and the

Financial envelope (see TD-3 Form 6 Technical Offer and Form 7 Financial Offer for more details).




4.6 Submission Content and Format

4.6.1 Submission and format of tenders, tender closing time

In order to submit their bids, bidders must go to the website https://www.dgpm.mm.gov.pt.

Then, bidders must go to "Proposal“ tab and fill all the fields requested. Documents must be attached in

word, pdf or excel format (multiple files can be attached but each set of files cannot exceed 150Mb).

In Annex K - Application guidelines of TD6 - Annexes a more detailed explanation on how to submit the

proposals is provided.

4.6.2 Administrative section of the Tender

In order to be eligible, Tenderers shall submit the following documents and declarations as listed in the

indicated order below:

Qualification Envelope:

Form 1: General Tender Submission and power of attorney

Form 2: Exclusion criteria

Form 3: Selection criteria

Form 4: Compliance criteria

Technical Envelope:

Form 5: Technical offer

Financial Envelope:

Form 6: Financial Offer

In addition, the following Annexes should be completed, manually and / or digitally signed (as required):

Subcontractor Information (in case of Single / Lead Tenderers that involve any subcontractor)

Subcontractor Declaration (in case of Single / Lead Tenderers that involve any subcontractor). This

annex requires that each subcontractor complete the necessary information and manually signed

the document.

Single Tenderer Power of attorney (complete it only if you are a Single Tenderer)

Lead Tenderer Power of attorney (complete it only if you are a Lead Tenderer; complete it by the

Lead Tenderer, each consortium members. Finally, the Lead Tenderer will sign).

Framework Agreement and Specific Contract for Phase 1 (completed by the Single or Lead

Tenderer). Single / Lead Tenderer should complete the agreements with required information. The

Framework Agreement and the Specific Contract for Phase 1 templates are available in TD4 and

TD5.

Templates for completing this information are available in the TD6: Annexes.

The Tenderer is by its Tender bound by a validity period of 120 calendar days, starting from ultimate

deadline for submission, i.e. 9th April 2018.

https://www.dgpm.mm.gov.pt/




The Lead Procurer may request clarification or additional evidence or amplification of details provided. In

accordance with the principle of equal treatment, no alterations to Tenders are to be sought or accepted

through requests for clarifications. In case the provided clarification is found not compliant with what was

requested, the Tender will be excluded from further evaluation.

More detailed information for the Phase 2 and 3 offers will be provided in the Phase 2 and 3 call-offs.

4.6.3 Technical section of the Tender

Technical offer (Form 5) shall not exceed 75 pages (arial 10 or calibri 11). Annexes, including traceability

matrix, are out of this constraint. Technical offer shall cover all the three PCP Stages. Stage 1 Design should

be more detailed.

Tenders must include a detailed Technical Offer for Phase 1, containing:

A technical plan that outlines the Tenderer's idea for addressing all the requirements given in the

PCP challenge description, relating both to functionality and performance; and the technical details

of how this would be implemented. This technical plan must include an explanation of the method,

a work plan including time schedule, deliverables and milestones as detailed in the TD3 - Form 6

Technical offer.

o Executive summary

o Project Management Plan

o Service deployment lifecycle

o Software testing plan

o Quality Management Plan

o Configuration Management Plan

o Operational Concept Description

o System/Subsystem Specification

o Interface Requirements Specification

o TRL Assessment

The Tender must specify the plans and objectives of the subsequent Phases 2 and 3 and beyond.

A draft business plan that explains the proposed approach to commercially exploit the results of

the PCP and to bring a viable product or service onto the market.

A risk assessment and risk mitigation strategy.

A reply to the question "Does this tender involve ethical issues? (YES/NO)" and if YES, an ethics

self-assessment, with explanations how the ethical issues will be addressed.

A reply to the question "Does this tender involve: activities or results that may raise security issues

and/or EU-classified information18 as background or results?

A list of the pre-existing rights (Background) relevant to the Tenderer's proposed solution, in order

to allow IPR dependencies to be assessed.

ANNEX H. Requirement Traceability Matrix from offer to tender specification.

Tenders failing to meet these requirements will be excluded.

18

Commission Decision 2015/444/EC, Euratom of 13 March 2015 on the security rules for protecting EU-classified information




The information provided in the technical Sections of the tender will be used to evaluate the Tenders, on

the basis of the technical award criteria and the compliance criteria A (Compliance with the definition of

R&D services), D (Ethics and research integrity) and E (Security).

More detailed information for the Phase 2 and 3 offers (in particular on the technical implementation plan,

the updated business plan and the list of IPRs) will be provided in the Call-offs.

4.6.4 Financial section of the Tender

The tender must include a detailed financial offer specifying:

Binding unit prices for all items needed for carrying out Phase 1 and for items that are expected to

be needed for Phases 2 and 3 (given in euros, excluding VAT but including any other taxes and

duties). The Tenderers must quote binding unit prices/hourly rates for each category of R&D

resources (e.g. junior, senior researchers, developers, etc.) and specify other costs. The Tenderers

must also quote binding unit prices for their own resources for Phases 2 and 3 that are not

expected to be used in Phase 1 and quote estimated unit costs for resources of third parties to be

used in Phases 2 and 3;

A fixed total price for Phase 1 and an estimated total price for Phases 2 and 3, broken down to

show unit prices and the number of each unit needed to carry out phase 1 (given in euros,

excluding VAT but including any other taxes and duties).

In addition, the financial Section must include:

A price breakdown that shows the price for R&D services and the price for supplies of products (to

demonstrate compliance with the definition of R&D in compliance criterion A, Compliance with the

definition of R&D services);

A price breakdown that shows the location or country in which the different categories of activities

are to be carried out (e.g. x hours of senior researchers in country L at y euro/hour; a hours of

junior developers in country M at b Euro/hour) (to demonstrate compliance with the requirement

relating to place of performance in compliance criterion C, Compliance with requirements relating

to the place of performance of the contract);

In order to ensure compliance with the EU R&D&I state aid framework, the financial compensation

valuing the allocation of ownership of the IPRs generated during the PCP to the Tenderer, by giving

an absolute value for the price reduction between the price offered in the Tender compared to the

exclusive development price (i.e. the price that would have been quoted were IPR ownership to be

transferred to the Buyers Group).

The financial compensation for IPRs must reflect the market value of the benefits received (i.e. the

opportunity that the IPRs offer for commercial exploitation) and the risks assumed by the Contractor (e.g.

the cost of maintaining IPRs and bringing the products onto the market).

To ensure that a fair market price is offered, Tenderers must state two prices:

The hypothetical price that they would have quoted if all Intellectual Property Rights, including the

ownership of Results under the PCP, would have been fully retained by the Buyers Group and

Tenderers would not have the possibility to exploit the Results (the “Virtual Price”); and




The price that takes into account the fact that they keep ownership of the Intellectual Property

Rights attached to the Results under PCP, in accordance with the provisions of the contracts, and

that they can exploit these Results (the “Actual Price”).

The unit prices quoted for each category of items (e.g. hourly rates for junior and senior researchers,

developers and testers) remain binding for all phases (i.e. for the duration of the framework agreement).

Since all Contractors will be paid by the Lead Procurer (centralised payments) and as DGPM is the Lead

Procurer in the MARINE-EO PCP the Portugal VAT regime of 23% will apply.

In the Tenders for Phases 2 and 3, the Tenderers must also provide a breakdown of price, as in Phase 1.

The information provided in the financial Section of the Tender has to be submitted by means of Form 6 –

Financial Offer. The information provided in this Section of the Tender will be used to evaluate the Tenders

on the basis of the price award criteria and of the compliance criteria.

The Lead Procurer may reject a Tender if it has determined that the submitted price, in combination with

other constituent elements of the submission, is abnormally low in relation to the subject matter of the

procurement and raises concerns with the Lead Procurer as regards the ability of the Tenderer to perform

the contracts. If the Lead Procurer considers that a Tender may be abnormally low, he will request the

Tenderer to provide, in writing, details of the constituent elements of the tender, in particular with respect

to:

The economy of the services provided;

The technical solutions chosen;

Potential exceptionally favorable conditions available to the Tenderer for the execution of the

work;

The compliance with the provisions relating to employment protection and working conditions in

force at the place where the work is performed.

4.7 Other Tender Conditions

4.7.1 Signed Tenders

A signed Tender will be considered to constitute a firm, irrevocable, unchangeable and binding offer from

the Tenderer. The Tenderers signatory must have the proven power and capacity. A declaration of the

power and capacity of the authority's signatory is required, see Form 1 - General Tender Submission Form

of Tender Document 3. A signature of an authorised representative will be considered as the signature of

the Tender (and will be binding on the Tenderer or, for joint tenders, the group of Tenderers).

Each document, Tender Submission Form or Attachment, every correction, alteration and/or addition

which may impact the original conditions of the Tender must also be signed by the signatory or his

representative(s).

4.7.2 Confidentiality

Tenderers must keep confidential any information obtained in the context of the tender procedure

(including EU-classified information).




4.7.3 Language

English is the working language of the MARINE -EO Project Team and Buyers Group.

Publications on the project website http://www.marine-eo.eu and all communication relating to the

Tender procedure or the implementation of the Contract, before, during and after the procurement, will be

in English.

Tenderers shall submit their Tender by means of the predefined Tender Forms, Annexes and all related

correspondence. This applies to the Tenders for the Request for Tender and Phase 1, as well as for the

Tenders for the Phase 2 and 3 call-offs.

4.7.4 Cancellation of the Tender procedure

The Buyers Group may, at any moment, cease to proceed with the tender procedure and cancel it. The

Buyers Group reserves the right not to award any Contracts at the end of the Tender procedure. The Buyers

Group is not liable for any expense or loss the Tenderers may have incurred in preparing their Tender.




5. Process Rules and Information

There are two types of evaluations under the MARINE-EO PCP:

1) Evaluation process intended to rank the Tenderers in order to award Contracts to the best-ranked

Tenders;

2) Evaluation process intended to assess the outcome of the work executed in a particular Phase. This

evaluation will lead to the decision of payments and regarding the eligibility of a Contractor to bid

for the next Phase.

The deadline of the first tender submission is 9th April 2018 at 12 p.m (CET).

After this date and time no further submissions will be permitted. It is the responsibility of the Tenderer to

ensure they submit their response before the closing date and time as no submissions will be accepted

after the tender submission deadline.

Successful tenderers will be requested to sign both a Framework Agreement and a Specific Contract for

Phase 1. For the Phases 2 and 3, selected Contractors will be asked to sign a Specific Contract for the given

Phases.

5.1 Opening of Tenders

Expected date to convene Administrative committee to proceed with the opening of offers is 10th of April,

2018.

The Administrative Committee will perform the legal opening of the offers received from the tenderers.

The objective will be to check that each candidate has provided all the requested documents in his offer.

The Administrative Committee will be composed by DGPM, which can be assisted by one representative of

each Buyer Group.

Tenders that have been submitted before the deadline will be opened by the Administrative committee

following this procedure:

The Administrative Committee will be in charge of opening the tenders and checking their general

compliance with the conditions on the content and format of the tender as requested by the PCP

request for tender specifications (See section 4.6.1 “Submission and format of tenders, tender

closing time”).

A report with the results of the session will be compiled when the session ends including the

information about the opening. This report will be agreed and signed by all members of the

Opening Committee.

Tenders not complying with the formal and procedural requirements will be excluded from the Tender

evaluation.

The opening procedure will be repeated for all Phases of this PCP.

5.2 Evaluation of Tenders




5.2.1 Committees

The goal of each Evaluation Committee is to determine the relative merits of all proposals received in

response to the tender, in a fair and consistent manner.

Each Evaluation Committee shall respect the general principles set forth in the Legislative Decree law

no.111-B/2017, August, 3rd 2017 (Portuguese Law) according with the transposition of the EU Directive

2014/24/EC, February, 26th 2014 on public procurement, from and work in accordance with all the

provisions and content of the Contract Notice and also following the rules:

1) The evaluation of Tenders must be carried out in a non-discriminatory manner;

2) In order to guarantee fairness and transparency, the evaluator’s appointment and the

establishment of the Evaluation Committees shall take place after the expiry of the deadline for the

submission of tenders.

Evaluation Committee

The Evaluation Committee (EC) is a committee that analyses, makes proposals and sets guidelines for the

whole PCP tendering process. The Evaluation Committee monitors the elaboration and approves the tender

specifications, the evaluation criteria and award criteria prepared by the Verification and Validation

Committee along with all tender documentation and the IPR management. The EC will be evaluating the

tenders received and guaranteeing that the evaluation runs according to the scope of the project. The EC

decides on possible submitted complaints during the tendering process.

The EC can also seek clarifications from tenderers where the information submitted is not sufficiently

explicit and clear. Where clarifications are required, communication with tenderer(s) is to be done in

writing by the Chairman of the EC and response from tenderers to be addressed to the Chairman of the

Evaluation Committee.

The EC will be making proposals for the Contract drafting and approving the contracts that will be

concluded with the selected companies in all PCP Phases. On the basis of the evaluation of the Verification

and Validation Committee, the EC makes the formal acceptance of the milestones and gives the

authorization for the possible associated payment and continuation to the next phase.

The EC consists of at least one representative of the Buyers Group, one representative of the Project

Coordinator, External Experts representatives (External Experts shall be subject to approval in terms of

qualification, background, and affiliation), chaired by the Lead Procurer (DGPM) representative. The

decisions will be made based on the consensus principle.

Administrative Committee

The Lead Procurer will appoint and chair the Administrative Committee (AC) for the selection of requests to

participate or tenders based on exclusion criteria.

An odd number of evaluators, experts in procurement law, will compose the Committee. At least one

expert in Portuguese law will be attending and furthermore, each procurer is entitled to appoint a national

expert.

The AC will refer to the tender specifications included in the tender under review to ensure that all

administrative documents required have been included in the forms and documents submitted by each

tenderer in phases 1, 2 and 3.




Evaluators shall open requests to participate and/or bids for tenders. Only requests to participate or bids

for tenders that satisfy the provided requirements; i.e. that are not excluded on the basis of the exclusion

criteria and that meet the selection criteria shall be considered admissible for evaluation under the award

criteria.

The AC can also seek clarifications from tenderers where the information submitted is not sufficiently

explicit and clear. Where clarifications are required, communication with tenderer(s) is to be done in

writing by the Chairman of the AC.

When requesting clarifications, tenderer(s) are to be given ten (10) working days for receipt and reply.

Clarifications must not materially alter the tenderer’s original proposal.

In order to be able to ask for clarification each Buyer Group member shall be notified and agree before

such requests.

This committee will be led by the Lead Procurer, DGPM, which can be assisted by one representative of

each Buyer Group.

All decisions taken by the Administrative Committee will have to be approved by the Evaluation

Committee.

Verification and Validation Committee

The Verification and Validation Committee (VVC) will assess the technical outcomes of the work performed

by the contractors during the Solution Design, Prototyping and Operational Validation phases (Phase 1, 2

and 3) of the PCP, based on the tender specifications, the evaluation and award criteria.

The VVC reviews the technical documentation submitted by the contractors within PCP phases 1, 2 and 3,

verifies the compliance of the products with the technical requirements, expresses comments and, taking

into account the remarks of the industry, proposes to the Evaluation Committee the acceptance or the

rejection of the deliverables submitted by the industry. The VVC can also seek clarifications from tenderers

where the information submitted is not sufficiently explicit and clear. Where clarifications are required,

communication with tenderer(s) is to be done in writing by the Chairman of the VVC and response from

tenderers to be addressed to the Chairman of the VVC. The request shall be formal and each member of

the VVC shall be notified and agree of such requests.

The VVC consists of at least one representative of each Buyers Group and the Project Coordinator, chaired

by Ministerio de Interior (GUCI). The decisions will be taken based on the ¾ majority. The Technical

Advisors will assist VVC in their activities.

All members of the VVC cannot have conflict of interest in order to evaluate the technical and financial

outcomes of each PCP Stage.

All decision taken by the Verification and Validation Committee will have to be approved by the Evaluation

Committee.

Procurers Steering Committee

The Procurers Steering Committee (PSC) is the body responsible for the:

1) steering matters relating to the subject matter of the Procurement Agreement, including:

the Joint Pre-Commercial Procurement Procedure;

the approval of all the tender documents;




the carrying out of any necessary amendments to the Framework Agreement, where permitted;

any legal action under the Joint Pre-Commercial Procurement Procedure or the Framework

Agreement;

the process necessary to address any lack of compliance with the Procurers Agreement by a

Contracting Authority or breaches of the Framework Agreement by either the Tenderer or a

Contracting Authority;

the amicable settlement of disagreements between two or more Contracting Authorities

2) steering matters relating to the financial provisions between the Contracting Authorities, in

particular:

the continuous monitoring of the financial status, in order to properly sustain the procurement

process;

the definition and the approval of detailed cash flow plans, including dates and value of each

money transfer among the Lead Procurer and the Contactors;

the definition and the proposal of an amendment to the Procurers Agreement, in case the

constraints related to the Financial Provisions should be modified.

The composition of this Committee is as follows:

1) The Procurers Steering Committee is composed of one representative of the Project Coordinator

and one representative of each Contracting Authority and their alternates. Only staff of the Project

Coordinator and of a Contracting Authority (or their alternates) are entitled to participate. The Lead

Procurer shall chair the meetings of this body.

2) Advisers can also be appointed in order to assist members of the Procurers Steering Committee

and their alternates.

3) The Technical Advisor also follow the work of the PSC.

4) The Project Coordinator participating in the PSC meetings has the right to vote or to submit

proposals. Each member, advisor or observer who participates in the PSC meetings is bound by and

needs to sign a confidentiality obligation, annexed to the Procurement Agreement.

5.2.2 Evaluation Process

The Committees will evaluate the tenders, carrying out the following four steps:

1) Checking whether the tenderer is not in one of the situations covered by the exclusion criteria

(Administrative Committee)

2) For tenderers passing Step 1, assessing whether the tenderer has the capacities necessary to

perform the contract, on the basis of the selection criteria (Evaluation Committee)

3) For tenderers passing Step 2, evaluating the tender based on the compliance criteria (Evaluation

Committee)

4) For tenders passing Step 3, evaluating the tender based on the award criteria (Evaluation

Committee)

Tenders to the PCP Request for Tender, as well as the Tenders for the Phase 2 and 3 calls-offs, will

preferably be assessed and ranked by the same Committees. The MARINE-EO Buyers Group holds the right

to replace evaluators during the project provided that the replacement evaluator has the necessary skills

and represents the same member of the Buyers Group.




The evaluation process under the MARINE-EO PCP will follow different steps. In a first stage, the offers

received will be checked on the basis of content and format compliance with the requirements of the

tender. After that, the administrative section will be checked. Then, the technical section will be evaluated

and finally, only the offers that fulfill the functional specifications will be evaluated in the financial section.

During the Tender evaluation, the Evaluation Committee is responsible for the final approval of the 1st step

(administrative section) and for the evaluation of all other steps (technical and financial sections).

The Verification and Validation Committee is involved only during the implementation phase of the project

(and its members can differ from phase to phase) in order to assess the technical outcomes of the

contractors and propose to the Evaluation Committee the acceptance or rejection of the deliverables

submitted by contractors. The role of the VVC is to assist in their activities the EVC which again is the

ultimate decision body for the procurement.

Figure 12: Evaluation Process

The evaluation process will be performed as detailed below:

Qualification Envelope

Evaluation of the Step 1: Exclusion criteria

This step will involve checking whether the tenderer is not in one of the situations covered by the exclusion

criteria as detailed in section 4.2. The exclusion criteria will be scored as detailed in section 4.2. Only

tenderers who successfully pass all of the exclusion criteria questions will progress to Step 2 of the

evaluation.

This step will be evaluated by the Administrative Committee.

Evaluation of the Step 2: Selection criteria

This step will involve assessing whether the tenderer has the capacities necessary to perform the contract,

on the basis of the selection criteria as detailed in section 4.3. The selection criteria will be scored as

detailed in section 4.3. These will be evaluated on a pass/fail (yes/no) basis. Only tenderers who

successfully pass all of the selection criteria will progress to Step 3 of the evaluation.

This step will be evaluated by the Evaluation Committee.

Evaluation of the Step 3: Compliance criteria

This step will involve assessing the compliance criteria as detailed in section 4.4. The compliance criteria

will be scored as detailed section 4.4. Only tenderers who successfully pass all of the compliance criteria

will progress to Step 4 of the evaluation.

This step will be evaluated by the Evaluation Committee.

Step 1 - Exclusion Criteria

• Administrative Committee

Step 2 - Selection Criteria

• Evaluation Committee

Step 3 - Compliance Criteria


Step 4.1 - Award Criteria (Technical

Section)


Step 4.2 - Award Criteria (Financial

Section)





Evaluation of the Step 4: Award criteria

Step 4.1 Technical Envelope

The awarded criteria are weighted as detailed in section 4.5

Each question / criteria will be graded as an individual score. In order to ensure the same level of

appreciation from the members of the Evaluation Committee, a “Scoring Grid” will be used, giving

indicative appreciation of each grade. The scoring model that will be used by the evaluators to assess and

score the extent to which a Tender is meeting the award criteria is as follows:

Score Textual Description

0% Non-existent None of the aspects of the requirement are met.

20% Very weak Multiple important aspects of the requirement are missing.

40% Weak Multiple aspects of the requirement are present, but the provided explanation

may not convince.

60% Good All important aspects are present.

80% Very good All important aspects are present and the provided explanation is very

convincing.

100% Excellent There is significant added value to the required feature, which is described very

convincingly.

Step 4.2 Financial Envelope

The financial Section of Tenders passing this step will then be evaluated.

The bid with the lowest compliant tendered price will be automatically awarded the maximum % weighting

available for Price i.e. 20%

The Financial Offer will be assessed on the basis of the following formula:

The price that will be evaluated is the Actual Price.

The Evaluation Committee will assess the financial offers.

The more points a Tender scores in total, the higher it is ranked. Based on the evaluators’ individual

assessments, which are all equally weighted, a preliminary ranking of the Tenders will be made.

If deemed necessary, an online hearing will take place, where Tenderers will be asked to clarify aspects of

their Tender.

Percentage weighted score = Price of the lowest compliant tender submitted

Price of the tender being assessed x 20




Subsequently, the Evaluation Committee will meet to collect, compare and discuss the comments of each

evaluator for each Tender, and to review the preliminary scoring and ranking to ensure that the assessment

of all Tenders is consistent and non-discriminatory. By consensus or, if that fails, by a majority of two thirds,

the Evaluation Committee will make the final ranking of the tenders and the award of the contracts.

Large differences in assessment by the evaluators will be identified. If the reasoning given by the evaluators

requires further clarification, this is provided by them.

The final award will be made on the basis of the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT).

After the award decision has been taken, the Tenderers will be informed about their ranking. To the

selected Tenderers a Framework Contract and Specific Contract for Phase 1 will be sent shortly thereafter

signed by the Lead Procurer.

If the Contractor does not deliver the Phase 1 product in time by the end of Phase 1 (Oct 2018), the

Contractor will not be given the 50% final payment of Phase 1 and will not be eligible to submit a Tender for

the next Phases

Unsuccessful Tenderers, that have not been excluded and who comply with the selection criteria, may

contact the Lead Procurer, within 5 days, to obtain additional information about their Tender not being

selected for a contract. Tenderers will be given feedback on their tender.

The process will remain the same for the different call-offs, highlighting that the evaluation of offers for

phase 2 and phase 3 has only two steps: evaluating the offers based on the compliance and award criteria.

The Evaluation Committee will evaluate the tenders and offers for the call-offs for phase 2 and 3.

Potential conflicts of interest will be avoided.

5.3 Communication Q&A

The Q&A from the open market consultation can be found on https://marine-eo.eu/event/open-market-

consultation-brokerage-event-videos-and-presentations.

For further questions, you may contact the lead procurer via email: [email protected] in

English until 24:00 of 17 / 03 / 2018.

The summary of all questions and answers will be presented in an anonymised Q&A document that will be

published on https://www.marine-eo.eu in English (final version planned for 24th March 2018, the latest).

For phases 2 and 3, the answers will not be published, but distributed to all contractors that successfully

completed the previous phase.

Unless otherwise instructed, please do not use any other contact addresses or contact any other persons in

connection with this procurement.

5.4 Procedures of Appeal

Applicable Law

The Agreement is governed by the applicable Portuguese Law, supplemented if necessary by the EU

legislation.



mailto:[email protected]




Complaints Submission Process

All possible complaints during the tendering process shall be submitted to the Evaluation Committee (EC).

The EC is responsible to evaluate the complaints and to submit its opinion to the Steering Committee for

final decision. The complaints shall be submitted within 30 days following the notification of the final

decision of the EC in line with the Portuguese Administrative Law.

Appeal and Mediation Bodies

Possible complaints against any decision of the Steering Committee regarding the tendering process may

be reviewed by the Portuguese Administrative Courts.

Any dispute or claim arising in connection with the execution of the contracts shall be subject to be heard

by the Portuguese Administrative Courts. An arbitration clause will be provided in the contract. The arbitral

award decision will be binding to all parties and will not be subject to appeal. The arbitration proceedings

must take place in Lisbon.




6. Conditions of the Contract

Successful tenderers will be requested to sign both a framework agreement and specific contracts for

phases 1, 2 and 3 (see the template given in TD 5 – Specific Contract Phase 1).

6.1 Monitoring

During each phase, contract implementation will be monitored periodically and reviewed against the

expected outcomes (milestones, deliverables and output or results) for the phase.

Each contractor will be assigned a main contact person (their supervisor) from the monitoring team

appointed by the procurers.

There will be regular monitoring meetings between contractor and the supervisor/monitoring team.

Monitoring meetings can be held physically or online and will be subject to agreement between tenderer

and monitoring team. The contractors could be asked to discuss the results achieved in the preceding

period. The supervisor, or any party designated by it, is entitled to visit the premises of the contractor and

its subcontractor. The contractor can also visit the procurer’s premises, and must cover its own costs and

thus foresee personnel and travel budget in its offer.

The monitoring team and /or supervisor will provide regular feedback in writing or electronically to

contractors after meetings or visits. Detailed information on the role of the supervisor will be provided

after awarding of the contract. This will take place as indicated in the Table Expected Outcomes (estimated)

in section 3.4., and will allow the contractors to improve the way in which their solutions address the

problem set out in the PCP description.

6.2 Payments based on satisfactory completion of Milestones and Deliverables for

the Phase

50% of payments corresponding to each PCP phase will be subject to the satisfactory completion of the

deliverables and milestones for that phase.

Satisfactory completion will be assessed by the Verification and Validation Committee.

Satisfactory completion will be assessed according to the following requirements:

if the work corresponding to that milestone / deliverable has been carried out

if a reasonable minimum quality has been delivered

if the reports have been submitted on time

if the monies have been allocated to the planned objectives

if the monies have been allocated and the work has been carried out according to the compliance

criteria (place of performance, public funding and R&D definition criteria)

and

if the work has been carried out in compliance with the provisions of the contract (including in

particular verification if the contractor has duly protected and managed IPRs generated in the

respective phase)




‘Reasonable minimum quality’ of a report means that:

the report can be read by somebody who is familiar with the topic, but not an expert

the report gives insight in the tasks performed in and the results

the report is made using the end of phase report form or (if applicable) the milestone report form

and the requirements of this form have been met

‘Reasonable minimum quality’ of a demonstration (for phase 2 or 3) means:

the demonstration can be understood by somebody who is familiar with the topic, but not an

expert (for instance, somebody with operational but not technical knowledge)

the demonstration shows how the innovation works, how it can be used and (if applicable) how it is

operated and maintained

the demonstration is accessible to parties appointed by the procurers, unless these are direct

competitors of the contractor

Satisfactory completion in each of the phases does not mean successful completion.

The assessment will consider the efforts made by contractors to take into account the feedback from the

supervisor or the monitoring team. The buyers group will approve or reject the submitted deliverable as

‘satisfactory’ according to the calendar indicated in Table Time Schedule and never later than 15 calendar

days.

Where the Verification and Validation Committee judges the completion of deliverables or milestones to be

unsatisfactory, the Procurers Steering Committee may decide to reduce or withdraw payments for that

deliverable and/or may terminate the contract according to Article 22 of the framework agreement.

In order for the work developed by the contractor during a PCP Phase can be considered satisfactory, all

the following criteria must be met (these criteria will apply on the End of Phase Report delivered by

contractors).

Minimum requirements for SATOCEAN

No. Criterion Pass/Fail Criteria

1 The proposed solution/system cover all the services

Check whether the web interface of the solution allows access to the 3 services.

2 Be registered to the platform and to the relevant/interest services.

Make a registration.

3 Be capable of requesting the application of an area of interest.

Find an area of interest.

4 Use and submit requests for EO-based services

Post a request for a new service.

5 Solution adheres to current trends (e.g. EO Initiatives, Standards, Scalability, interoperability)

Check whether the solution is based on previous developments (thus not “reinventing the wheel”).

6

Does the proposed solution overcome limitations (obstacles) related to storing, searching, acquiring and processing of big (EO and not EO) data.

Check whether the solution is using a state-of-the-art solution for cloud based processing EO data; managing “big data” challenges; catalogue solution for searching and retrieving data/products.

7 For the SATOCEAN services, a diagram of the processing steps should be available

Visible diagram on demand





showing the current processing step.

8

Be capable of requesting the application of another area of interest.

The system will create a “ticket” to this request and inform him/her approximately about the response time (Less than 24 hours). Then the service provider (Administration) shall examine the request and revert back to the End- User about the availability of the service. When available, the relevant cost will also be provided.

9

Be able for a certain timeframe to request the availability of very high-resolution data (Data Acquisition Request) to the Copernicus DWH (Data WareHouse)

The system will create a “ticket” to this request and inform him/her about the response time. If available, the high-resolution data will be added to the system.

10 Ability to receive orders from customers (User Requests) through web interface (Supporting service).

The system will create a “ticket” to this request and inform him/her about the feasibility of the request.

11

The Service Provider shall allow the Administrator to perform feasibility analysis as a response to End-User requests.

Reporting on the feasibility analysis of the end-users.

Minimum requirements for SATSURVEILLANCE


1 Proposed solution covers service 1

Correct execution of service on a prototype platform, covering request, processing and deliveries according to a surveillance plan, test data sets and procedures agreed with Marine-EO consortium.

2 Proposed solution covers service 2

Correct execution of service on a prototype platform, covering request, processing and deliveries according to a plan, test data sets and procedures agreed with Marine-EO consortium.

3 User and administrator roles are handled by platform

Complete Service 1 and Service 2 definitions can be accessed from user role, and administrator role for a set of services agreed with Marine-EO consortium.

4 EO based detection capabilities for Sentinel 1 and Sentinel 2

Detection capabilities checked by using known targets (physical and movement characteristics) checked against expectations based on analysis.

5 EO based behaviour analysis capabilities

Behaviour capabilities must be checked using known targets (physical and movement characteristics). The expected behaviour capabilities are based on prior analysis.

6 EO Based position estimation capabilities

Position estimation capabilities checked using known targets (physical and movement characteristics). The expected positions are based on prior analysis. Targets adrift and en route.

7 Alert handling capabilities The correct alert trigger in several predefined situations. Correct new monitoring plan management based on





the alert.

8 Report generation capabilities Correct reports generation from service outputs and alerts checked against known situations.

9 Interoperability demonstration with CISE model and common commercial GIS standards

Correct communication of a service or part of the service by EU CISE 2020 or similar infrastructure. Correct handling of graphical outputs as layers in a GIS tool agreed with the consortium.

10 AIS (auxiliary data) use in service 1

AIS data use for detection, behaviour analysis and position estimation capabilities based on known targets (physical and movement characteristics). AIS data should be checked against service 1 outputs (without AIS data).

11 CMEMS and downstream services (e.g. portus.puertos.es) use in service 1

Data use for position estimation capabilities based on known targets (physical and movement characteristics). Data should be checked against service 1 outputs that was generated without these types of data.

12

The Service Provider shall allow the Administrator to perform feasibility analysis as a response to End-User requests.

Correct reporting of the feasibility analysis of the end-users.

Contractors that do not meet all of these criteria will be considered as “not satisfactory” and are not

eligible for payment and for being considered Successful (and will not be considered to continue for the

next phase of the PCP).

Invoices must be submitted to the Lead Procurer.

Contractors’ invoices must provide:

a price breakdown showing the price for R&D services and the price for supplies of products (in

order to demonstrate compliance with the definition of R&D in compliance criterion A)

a price breakdown showing the location or country in which the different categories of activities

were performed (e.g. x hours of senior researchers in country L at y euro/hour, a hours of junior

developers in country M at b euro/hour) (in order to demonstrate compliance with the

requirement relating to the place of performance in compliance criterion C).

Payment for Phase 1: 50% of the price offered by the contractor shall be paid at the beginning of Phase 1.

50% of the price offered by the contractor shall be paid after the date in which the lead procurer declares

the satisfactory completion of Phase 1, as described in ‘Expected Outcomes’.










Payments will be made to the bank account provided by the contractor within 30 days from the date of

receipt, by the lead procurer, of a correct and approved invoice.

6.3 Eligibility for the next phase based on successful completion of the phase

Eligibility for participation in the next phase will be subject to successful completion of the current phase.

Successful completion of a phase will be assessed by the Verification and Validation Committee against the

following requirements:

if all milestones have been successfully completed

if the R&D results meet the minimum functionality/performance requirements of the challenge

description (i.e. the minimum quality/efficiency improvements which the procurers set forward for

the innovative solutions to achieve)

if the results of the R&D are considered to be promising

‘Promising’ means:

for phase 1, that the feasibility is convincing

for phase 2, that the feasibility, the applicability in an operational setting and the potential impact

of the product is convincing

Only contractors classified as “satisfactory” are eligible to have their work produced during a certain phase

considered as “Successful”.

For a contractor to be considered Successful it must reach a minimum of 50 % in Phase 1, 60% in Phase 2

and 70% in Phase 3, on the following list of requirements:

Terms:

Element Meaning

KPA Key Performance Parameter

KPI Key Performance Indicator

MoP Measure of Performance

MoE Measure of Effectiveness

I Inspection

A Analysis

D Demonstration

T Test

SATOCEAN-UCS-1: MARINE environmental status in hot spots (AOIs e.g. Gulfs, MPAs etc).

KPA

FUNCTIONAL Service 1 definition

Sat Ocean 1 MARINE environmental status in hot spots

Inputs Assessment Score Requirements in TD2

KPI Inputs' suitability per service/subservice

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_IFR_10, 1_DR_1, 2_IFR_1

KPI Inputs' dependencies understanding I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_3

KPI AOIs versus EO products I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_AR_3




KPI Rules of behaviour suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_1

Outputs I,A,D ,T Score

KPI Output layers suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_7

KPI Output layers interoperability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_IFR_9

KPI Output deliveries schedule management

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_AR_4

KPI Quality measurements layer I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_AR_1, 1_AR_3, 1_AR_4

Process I,A,D ,T Score

KPI Algorithms suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_6, 1_AR_1

KPI Performance assessment I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_5, 1 _DR_6

KPA FUNCTIONAL Data availability for each oceanographic parameter


Capability Assessment Score Requirements in TD2

KPI Parameter definition I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_1-1DR_7

KPI Check data availability per parameter in satellite and in-situ data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_3, 1_DR_6, 1_DR_7, 1_AR_4

KPI Parameter identification in time series I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_2, 1_AR_1

KPI Determining data performance versus EO Copernicus input data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_2, 1_AR_1

KPI Use of current Copernicus services or data for each predefined parameter (e.g. CMEMS)

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_1, 1_DR_3, 1_DR_7

KPA FUNCTIONAL Data mining



KPI Data mining and tuning from available datasets per desired oceanographic parameter: In EO Copernicus input data In in-situ data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_AR_1, 1_AR_2, 1_AR_4

KPA OPERATIONAL Service continuity



KPI EO data source availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_2, 1_DR_5, 1_DR_6

KPI Auxiliary data availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_DR_3, 1_DR_7

KPA OPERATIONAL Scenarios



KPI Monitoring execution including product I,A,D ,T 0-5 2_AR_1, 2_AR_3, 2_DR_4







deliveries

KPI Alert handling I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_IFR_3, 1_IFR_10, 2_AR_4

KPI Planning update I,A,D ,T 0-5 1_IFR_1

KPI Debriefing and Ex-post analysis I,A,D ,T 0-5 All

SATOCEAN-UCS-2: Fish Farms: Detection of Fish farms threats

KPA


Sat Ocean 2 Detection of Fish farms threats



I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1 - 3_DR_5

KPI Inputs' dependencies understanding

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1, 3_DR_3,

KPI AOIs versus EO products I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_IFR_7

KPI Rules of behaviour suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1, 3_AR_3


KPI Output layers suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_IFR_7

KPI Output layers interoperability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_IFR_2,


I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_IFR_11, 3_IFR_12

KPI Quality measurements layer I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_3, 3_AR_4


KPI Algorithms suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_IFR_5, 3_IFR_6, 3_IFR_7, 3_IFR_12

KPI Performance assessment I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_IFR_8, 3_IFR_10, 3_IFR_11, 3_IFR_12

KPA FUNCTIONAL

Data availability for each oceanographic parameter

Sat Ocean 1 Detection of Fish farms threats


KPI Parameter definition I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_AR_2

KPI Check data availability per parameter in satellite and in-situ data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1, 3_IFR_6, 3_IFR_7,

KPI Parameter identification in time series

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_IFR_6, 3_IFR_7, 3_IFR_8, 3_IFR_12

KPI Determining data performance versus EO Copernicus input data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_4, 3_AR_1, 3_AR_2, 3_IFR_1, 3_IFR_7

KPI Use of current Copernicus services or data (e.g. CMEMS)

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_4, 3_AR_1, 3_AR_2, 3_IFR_1, 3_IFR_7




KPA OPERATIONAL Data Mining Sat Ocean 1 Detection of Fish farms threats


KPI Data mining and tuning from available datasets per desired oceanographic parameter: In EO Copernicus input data In in-situ data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1 – 3_DR_5, 3_ARE_3, 3_IFR_7

KPA OPERATIONAL Service continuity Sat Ocean 1 Detection of Fish farms threats


KPI EO data source availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1 – 3_DR_5

KPI Auxiliary data availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_5, 3_IFR_6

KPA OPERATIONAL Scenarios Sat Ocean 1 Detection of Fish farms threats


KPI Monitoring execution including product deliveries

I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_DR_1 – 3_DR_5, 3_AR_1 – 3_AR_3, 3_IFR_1 - 3_IFR_12

KPI Alert handling I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_IFR_5, 3_IFR_12

KPI Output layers interoperability I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_3, 3_IFR_6,

KPI Planning Update I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_1

KPI Performance I,A,D ,T 0-5 3_AR_3, 3_IFR_3

KPI Debriefing and Ex-post analysis I,A,D ,T 0-5 All

SATOCEAN-UCS-3: Detection of vessels and icebergs in Arctic areas

KPA


Sat Ocean 3 Detection of vessels and icebergs in Arctic areas



I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_IFR_1, 4_IFR_4, 4_IFR_5, 4_IFR_6

KPI AOIs versus EO products I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1, 4DR_5, 4_IFR_2, 4_IFR_3

KPI Rules of behaviour suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1 – 4_DR_5, 4_IFR_1-4_IFR-6


KPI Output layers suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2, 4_IFR_1 – 4_IFR_6

KPI Output layers interoperability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2, 4_DR_5


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2, 4_DR_5

KPI Quality measurements layer I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2,





KPI Algorithms suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_2

KPI Performance assessment I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2, 4_DR_5

KPA FUNCTIONAL

Detection capabilities



KPI Target detection and recognition I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2

KPI Increased reliability of target detection I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2

KPI Target physical parameters I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2

KPI Target dynamic parameters I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2

KPI Iceberg target classification I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_2

KPI Vessel target classification (including polar code / non-polar code certified vessels; vessels involved in dynamic positioning or seismic cable, drilling vessels, fishing vessels)

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_1, 4_AR_2

KPI Target identification in time series. I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_3, 4_DR_4

KPI Distinguish free-floating icebergs from human-controlled vessels.

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_2

KPI Determining capability performance versus EO Copernicus input data

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_5, 4_IFR_1


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1, 4_DR_2

KPA FUNCTIONAL

Behaviour analysis capabilities



KPI Meeting / approach identification I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_IFR_1, 4_IFR_2, 4_IFR_3, 4_IFR_4, 4_IFR_5, 4_IFR_6

KPI Suspicious voyage track is combining vessel and iceberg.

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_IFR_1, 4_IFR_2, 4_IFR_3, 4_IFR_4, 4_IFR_5, 4_IFR_6


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_5

KPI Monitoring of iceberg status in AOI over time


KPA FUNCTIONAL

Position estimation capabilities



KPI Location I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_2, 4_DR_4, 4_AR_1, 4_IFR_1

KPI Movement I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_2, 4_DR_4, 4_AR_2, 4_IFR_1

KPI Position estimation at time steps I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_2, 4_DR_4, 4_AR_1,




KPA FUNCTIONAL

Position estimation capabilities



4_IFR_1


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_3, 4_IFR_1


I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1, 4_DR_4, 4_DR_5, 4_IFR_1

KPA FUNCTIONAL

Image/video and data delivery



KPI Full motion video imagery collection on demand; high image resolution and quality. AIS data, SAR data.

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_3

KPA OPERATIONAL Service continuity



KPI EO data source availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_1, 4_DR_5

KPI Auxiliary data availability I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_2, 4_DR_3, 4_DR_4




KPI Monitoring execution including product deliveries while decreasing the time delivery of recent images

I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_DR_5, 4_IFR_5

KPI Alert handling I,A,D ,T 0-5 4_AR_2,

KPI Output layers interoperability


KPI Planning update


KPI Use case performance and IT performance


KPI Debriefing and Ex-post analysis


KPI Use case & Scenario database archiving with information retrieval on demand.


Sat Surveillance 1: Unusual/Irregular activity around a critical Infrastructure: functional and operational

aspects.




KPA FUNCTIONAL Service 1 definition

Sat Surveillance 1 Unusual/Irregular activity around a Critical Infrastructure



I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP12, OP15, SEV1, SEV2, SEV4, SEV11, SEV13


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP12,OP15, SEV1, SEV3, SEV11

KPI AOIs versus EO products

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10,OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP9, OP13, OP14, OP16, SEV1, SEV11

KPI Rules of behaviour suitability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP11, OP18, GEN5, GEN9, GEN10,SEV1, SEV2, SEV8


KPI Output layers suitability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6,GEN10, SEV1, SEV12, SEV22, SEV23, SEV34, SEV35


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN3, GEN7,GEN8, OP27, OP28, SEV1, SEV9, SEV14, SEV15, SEV23, SEV35


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, OP17, OP26, OP28, SEV1

KPI Quality measurements layer

I,A,D ,T 0-5 SEV1, SEV16


KPI Algorithms suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, OP16,SEV1, SEV6, SEV7

KPI Performance assessment

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP16, OP19, SEV1, SEV16

KPA FUNCTIONAL




KPI Target detection I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP20, SEV1, SEV13

KPI Target physical parameters

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP20, SEV1, SEV13

KPI Target movement parameters


KPI Target classification I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP20, SEV1, SEV13

KPI Target identification in time series




KPI Use of current Copernicus services or data (e.g.





KPA FUNCTIONAL




CMEMS)

KPA FUNCTIONAL Behaviour analysis capabilities



KPI Meeting identification

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP21, SEV1, SEV11, SEV13

KPI Suspicious track over a period of time

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP21,SEV1, SEV11, SEV13

KPI Repetitive behaviour identification

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP21,SEV1, SEV7, SEV11, SEV13


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, GEN5, GEN9, OP21, SEV1, SEV11, SEV13

KPA FUNCTIONAL Position estimation capabilities



KPI Location I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, SEV1, SEV12, SEV13

KPI Movement I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, SEV1, SEV12, SEV13

KPI Position estimation at time steps



I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, GEN5,GEN9,OP22, SEV1, SEV11


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, GEN5,GEN9, SEV1, SEV11

KPA OPERATIONAL Use cases Sat Surveillance 1 Unusual/Irregular activity around a Critical Infrastructure





KPA OPERATIONAL Use cases Sat Surveillance 1 Unusual/Irregular activity around a Critical Infrastructure


KPI Use case 1 performance

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN6, GEN10, OP20, OP21, OP22, SEV1, SEV11, SEV12, SEV13, SEV14, SEV15, SEV16, SEV17


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN6, GEN10, OP23, OP24, SEV1, SEV18, SEV19, SEV20, SEV25, SEV26, SEV27


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN6, GEN10, OP23, OP24, SEV1, SEV31, SEV32

KPI Improvement by using optical and radar EO products (e.g. revisit, detection, features extraction)

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN4, GEN5, GEN6, GEN9, GEN10, SEV1, SEV11

KPA OPERATIONAL Service continuity Sat Surveillance 1 Unusual/Irregular activity around a Critical Infrastructure


KPI EO data source availability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, SEV1

KPI Auxiliary data availability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN8, SEV1, SEV3, SEV4, SEV10

KPA OPERATIONAL scenarios Sat Surveillance 1 Unusual/Irregular activity around a Critical Infrastructure


KPI Surveillance planning in a critical infrastructure management from end-user facilities

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN5, GEN6, GEN10, SEV1, SEV2 SEV26, SEV28


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN10, OP17, SEV1

KPI Alert handling I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN8, GEN10, OP25, SEV1, SEV5, SEV9, SEV11, SEV12, SEV13, SEV14,SEV15, SEV16, SEV17,SEV18, SEV19, SEV20, SEV31, SEV32

KPI Planning update I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN8, GEN9, GEN10, OP26, SEV1, SEV27, SEV28

KPI Report generation I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, SEV1

KPI Debriefing and Ex-post analysis

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, GEN4, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN8, GEN9, GEN10,SEV1




Sat Surveillance 2: Change detection around coastal areas: functional and operational aspects.

KPA FUNCTIONAL Service 2 definition

Sat Surveillance 2 Change detection around coastal areas



I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP12, OP15, SEV1, SEV 55, SEV 58, SEV 59


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP12, OP15, SEV1, SEV 55, SEV 58, SEV 59

KPI AOIs versus EO products

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP9, OP13, OP14, OP16, SEV1, SEV56, SEV 59, SEV 66

KPI Rules of target types definition and characterization

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP3, OP4, OP5, OP8, OP11, SEV1, SEV 55


KPI Output layers suitability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6,GEN10, SEV1, SEV57, SEV 58, SEV 61, SEV 64, SEV 67, SEV73


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN3, GEN7,GEN8, OP27, OP28, SEV1, SEV57,SEV 58, SEV 61, SEV 62, SEV 63, SEV 67, SEV 76


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, OP17, OP26, OP28, SEV1, SEV 58, SEV 61, SEV 63, SEV 65, SEV77

KPI Quality measurements layer

I,A,D ,T 0-5 SEV1, SEV 58, SEV 64


KPI Algorithms suitability I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, OP16, SEV1, SEV 56, SEV57, SEV 58, SEV 59, SEV60

KPI Performance assessment

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, OP16, OP19, GEN10, SEV1, SEV 58, SEV 64

KPA FUNCTIONAL Change detection in harbours



KPI Area change detection

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP23, SEV1, SEV 57, SEV59, SEV60, SEV 67

KPI Specific target change detection

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP23, SEV1, SEV 57, SEV59, SEV60, SEV 67


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, GEN5, GEN9, OP23, SEV1, SEV 57, SEV 58, SEV59, SEV60, SEV 64, SEV 67

KPA FUNCTIONAL Change detection in coastal areas






KPI Area change detection

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP24, SEV1, SEV 57, SEV 58, SEV 59, SEV 60, SEV 67

KPI Extended target change detection


KPI Specific target change detection



I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, GEN5, GEN9, SEV1, SEV 57, SEV 58 SEV 59, SEV 60, SEV 64, SEV 67

KPA OPERATIONAL Use cases Sat Surveillance 2 Change detection around coastal areas


KPI Performance in regional change detection management

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN6, GEN10, OP24, SEV1, SEV 58, SEV 64, SEV 67

KPI Performance in targeted change detection management


KPI Performance in action mode change detection management


KPI Use case performance

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN4, GEN5, GEN9, GEN10, OP24,SEV1, SEV 55, SEV 56, SEV 57, SEV 58, SEV 59, SEV 60, SEV 61, SEV 62, SEV 63, SEV 64, SEV 65, SEV 66, SEV 67, SEV 76

KPA OPERATIONAL Service continuity Sat Surveillance 2 Change detection around coastal areas


KPI EO data source availability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, SEV1, SEV 56, SEV 58, SEV 59, SEV66

KPI Auxiliary data availability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, SEV1, SEV 56, SEV 58, SEV 59

KPI VDS service availability

I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN4, OP20, SEV1, SEV 58

KPA OPERATIONAL Scenarios Sat Surveillance 2 Change detection around coastal areas


KPI Regional change I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN5, GEN6, GEN10, SEV1, SEV 55,




KPA OPERATIONAL Scenarios Sat Surveillance 2 Change detection around coastal areas


detection planning in a suspicious area from end-user facilities

SEV 56, SEV 58, SEV 66,


I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN10, SEV1, SEV 55, SEV 56, SEV 57, SEV 58, SEV 59, SEV 60, SEV 61, SEV 62, SEV 63, SEV 64, SEV 65, SEV 66, SEV 67, SEV 76

KPI Alert handling I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, GEN5, GEN6, GEN7, GEN8, GEN10, OP25, SEV1, , SEV 61, SEV 62, SEV 63, SEV 64, SEV 65, SEV 66

KPI Report generation I,A,D ,T 0-5 GEN1, GEN2, GEN3, SEV1, SEV 58, SEV 61

The Verification and Validation Committee will only evaluate the Proposals for the next Phase of those

contractors that reach the minimum of 60% on requirements listed above. All contractors that do not reach

the minimum of 60% will not be considered successful and therefore are not eligible to continue to next

phase.

Proposals for the next phase of contractors that scored more than 60% will be evaluated by the Verification

and Validation Committee, taking in consideration the Compliance and Award Criteria defined for each

phase. This evaluation will then rank the proposals eligible for next phase and define which contractors will

be invited to sign a Specific Contract Phase and which contractor will be excluded from the PCP.

6.4 Finalization of Phase 3: Link with possible follow-up PPI Procurement

A new call for tenders may be launched for any follow-up public procurement of innovative solutions (PPI)

to deploy a commercial volume of innovative solutions.