Submarine Cable Repair Capacities – Pilot Works

Both active and passive infrastructure components are eligible for funding under this call, if justified in the proposal. For further details please consult the call documentPDF, notably section 2.

This call is in principle restricted to EU-controlled entities. Non EU-controlled entities may exceptionally participate as subcontractors or associated partners under the conditions defined in the call text section 6. EligibilityPDF.

Any technology quoted in the textPDF is mentioned as a part of a non-exhaustive list of technological solutions that can be eligible. Naming a specific technology serves as an example. The call is technologically neutral, and any suitable solution is also eligible.

As mentioned in the call textPDF section 6. Eligibility, in order to be eligible, the applicants (beneficiaries and affiliated entities) must be legal entities established in EU Member States as public bodies. Other entities (subcontractors and associated partners) can participate subject to submitting ownership control declaration as defined in section 5. Admissibility and documents.

Control is defined as the possibility to exercise decisive influence on the participant, directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediate entities, ‘de jure’ or ‘de facto’. The fact that no influence is actually exercised is not relevant, as long as the possibility exists. For ownership control restrictions, a participant will be considered to be ‘non-EU controlled’ when a shareholder/partner/member/owner who is a non-EU country/non-EU entity/non-EU national — at any level in the chain of control (including intermediate layers) — has the possibility (‘de jure’ or ‘de facto’) to exercise decisive influence on the entity concerned, notably in relation to its strategic business decisions (such as appointment and removal of senior management, decisions regarding budget, investment business plans, market-specific decisions, etc).

The control analysis will examine all ownership layers until the ultimate owners, with complete ownership mapping to identify possible exposure to non-EU influence at any ownership layer and to determine all non-EU countries of control (comprehensive risk profile). If there is clear evidence of non-EU control at any ownership layer (intermediate and/or ultimate), the participant will be qualified as non-EU controlled.

For further information on this, please see the Guidance on Participation in EU calls with ownership and control restrictionsPDF

Public bodies, Member State organisations and international organisations are exempted from the financial capacity checks.

Applicants may submit more than one proposal for different projects under the same call (and be awarded funding for them).

Organisations may participate in several proposals. BUT: if there are several proposals for very similar projects, only one application will be accepted and evaluated; the applicants will be asked to withdraw the others (or they will be rejected).

Please, see p. 29 of theCall DocumentPDF under "Multiple Proposals".

Section 6 (eligibility) of the call documentPDF mentions that to be eligible, the applicants must be legal entities established in one of the eligible countries as public bodies. These public entities must have an “emergency response” mandate such as being entities active in the civil protection, national emergency response agencies, coastguards and military navies. Each Member State will have to confirm the nature of the applicant in the mandatory Letter of SupportWord.

Provided the proposal fulfils the scope of the call textPDF(see section 2), there are no restrictions on the composition or size of the consortium, according to the section 6 of the call text.

In principle, subcontractors are not considered as participants at submission phase and hence no related documents are necessary along with the application.

However, for selected projects, subcontractors will be subject to the same obligations and restrictions as the participants of the project. In particular the ownership and control of subcontractors will be assessed at a later stage during project implementation. Also, refer to point 6 of the corresponding call textPDF for the applicable call restrictions due to security reasons.

According to the call textPDF section 6 under Specific cases Exceptional funding - entities from countries associated to CEF and from non-associated third countries, are exceptionally eligible for projects of common interest if the granting authority considers their participation essential for the implementation of the action, on the condition that those entities provide security guarantees, approved, on the basis of national law, by the country in which they are established. Whether the participation of an entity is essential, will be assessed at evaluation stage.

Applicants may participate with associated partners, which must be entities from eligible countries. Please bear in mind that ownership control restrictions cover in principle all entities participating in the grant in any capacity, including as associated partners. However, if an associated partner is a public body (validated as such in the Funding & Tenders Portal Participant Register), it is exempted from the obligation to fill in the ownership control declaration because it is automatically considered as controlled by its country.

This call is subject to restrictions due to security reasons. This means that in order to be eligible, applicants must be legal entities established in EU Member States (including Overseas Countries and Territories). However, entities from other countries, namely entities from countries associated to CEF and from non-associated third countries, are exceptionally eligible for projects of common interest if the granting authority considers their participation essential for the implementation of the action, on the condition that those entities provide security guarantees, approved, on the basis of national law, by the country in which they are established.

According to thecall textPDFpage 17, the maximum requested grant amount should not be higher than EUR 20 000 000 per project. Knowing that this call plans a co-funding rate of 50%, no more than EUR 40 000 000 of costs will be co-funded.

A cost-benefit analysis, as defined in the "Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects" and the "Economic Appraisal Vademecum 2021-2027" by DG REGIO, is not a mandatory supporting document for CEF Digital calls for proposals, including this call.

VAT is not an eligible cost under the CEF programme. See Article 6.3 of the Model Grant AgreementPDF referring to “Ineligible costs and contributions”

The calculation methodology for personnel costs is described within article 6.2 the Model of the Grant AgreementPDF (see Portal Reference Documents). The calculation method depends on the type of cost and the provisions for each personnel cost category. Costs are in pro rata of the days worked on the project. Some detailed examples are available in the Annotated Grant AgreementPDF (see Portal Reference Documents).

Specific conditions for the use of average personnel costs (unit cost according to usual cost accounting practices) are listed in the Commission ‘DECISION authorising the use of unit costs based on usual cost accounting practices for actions under the Digital specific objective of the Connecting Europe FacilityPDF’ (see Portal Reference Documents).

Yes, provided that such purchases concern contracting costs that are necessary for the beneficiaries to implement the work but do not constitute an action task described in Annex 1 of the Grant Agreement, in which case it would be considered as subcontracting.

The call document does not contain an explicit prohibition for the applicants to use non-EU suppliers or use equipment or components that are not produced or assembled in the EU. However, since the call is subject to strict security measures, the applicants, through the security declarations and/or within the security section of the proposal, will need to describe and demonstrate compliance with all the security requirements of the call, including the assessment of the risk profile of suppliers and implementation of necessary restrictions concerning key network assets and other sensitive assets. This means that in a case of possible inclusion of non-EU equipment, the applicant should acknowledge and assess in the proposal the impact of such inclusion in the context of the security requirements of the call, specifically those mentioned on page 9 of the call document, under the paragraph “Security requirements”. Please note also that in the digital security section of the application form applicants must consider, amongst others, risk scenarios and mitigating measures as described in the EU toolbox for 5G security, notably the measures adopted to exclude or restrict the involvement of high-risk suppliers (such as those addressed in the Commission communication on the implementation of the EU toolbox for 5G security) insofar as they may affect critical and sensitive key assets, including measures to avoid dependency on such high-risk suppliers.

Moreover, please take note that the call specifies that: “Based on the security declarations in the proposal, as well as the evaluation carried out by independent experts, the granting authority, where appropriate, may carry out a security assessment, including the beneficiaries’ suppliers and sub-contractors, in accordance with Article 136 of the Financial Regulation. Funding for actions which do not comply with the conditions related to security issues may be suspended, terminated, or reduced at any time in accordance with the Financial Regulation”.

The costs related to the operation and maintenance of the modules are not eligible under the CEF grant and applicants are expected to demonstrate how they intend to cover them over the economic lifespan of the modules. In order to deliver the objective of the action, initial training and certification of beneficiary’s personnel is eligible under this call.

Normally the starting date and eligibility of costs will be after grant signature. Retroactive application can be granted exceptionally for duly justified reasons — but never earlier than the proposal final submission date.

No. Indirect cost flat-rate is 0% of the eligible direct costs under the CEF Digital programme.

No, security compliance declarations do not need to be approved by Member State authorities.

According to the call texts (see Language in Section 13): Language — You can submit your proposal in any official EU language (project abstract/summary should however always be in English). For reasons of efficiency, we strongly advise you to use English for the entire application.

There is no maximum or minimum fixed number required. It is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate cost effectiveness of their proposal. Overall, the call favors solutions that will ensure the maximum coverage while minimising response time.

Yes. As part of the mandatory supporting documents, applicants must provide a Member State support letterWord, stating the approval of the national government to the project. The MS must also confirm that the organisation has the mandate for emergency response. Applicants must use the template letter provided in the submission system. The list of National Contact Points for CEF Digital can be found on the HaDEA website.

Geographic complementarity between CEF-funded projects and projects identified under RRF or other national programmes in line with state aid rules, are particularly encouraged. Such synergies would increase the overall impact of the CEF-Digital supported project and will be taken into account during the evaluation of proposals.

There is no specific recommendation or guidance on having or not a specific work package on Project Management within CEF Digital calls. If included, it must be properly described, with relevant tasks and costs justified.

There is no ceiling for Project Management costs as a percentage of total costs, but the proposal must provide the justification for the resources needed and their connection to the project's scope, which will be evaluated under the Quality criterion (see section 9 "Award criteria" of the relevant call document).

Note that if there is no dedicated Project Management work package, applicants still need to explain how it will be ensured for the project, e.g. by internal resources of the beneficiary. To be noted that the coordination tasks as defined in the Model Grant Agreement may not be delegated or subcontracted to any other beneficiary or third party (including affiliated entities).

According to the call textPDF(see Duration in section 6): Projects should normally be up to 24 months (extensions are possible, if duly justified and through an amendment).

A second call, open to all European sea basins is foreseen later in 2026 as mentioned in the CEF-Digital Work Programme.

The call is designed to fill in possible gaps during crisis situations and does not serve as a regular backup. It should not interfere with the existing commercial repair market.

It is the responsibility of the public entity with the emergency mandate.

The trigger for this emergency is the responsibility of national authorities in charge of emergency response taking into account cable owners may have agreements with commercial repair companies.

Cost effectiveness is examined during the evaluation and during implementation. There are other criteria that are also important such as quality of the solution. This is without prejudice to the applicable procurement rules.

Applicants may use generative AI tools when preparing proposals, both regarding the structure of the proposals (e.g. generation of graphs/charts) and their substance (e.g. language review, development of narratives from a set of ideas, search for background information).

However, applicants remain fully responsible for the proposals they submit. They should be fully transparent and declare the use of AI tools in their application and the way the tools have been utilised.

They should, in particular:

− verify the accuracy, validity and appropriateness of content generated by AI tools and correct any errors/inconsistencies

− provide the list of sources, including AI tools used to generate content and citations, and double-check citations to ensure their accuracy and proper references

− be conscious of the risks of plagiarism when using AI tools which reproduce content from other sources; original sources may need to be checked and referenced to avoid plagiarism

− be respectful of personal data and confidential information by not entering these on AI platforms that are not managed on proprietary servers

− be aware of the limitations of AI tools, including their potential for bias, errors, and gaps in knowledge.

As a rule, the use of generative AI tools for drafting proposals will not be considered as a reason to penalise a proposal. However, where evaluators detect that the use of AI tools has led to inaccurate/erroneous data or that data/information is plagiarised from publications/articles/reports not duly acknowledged, this must be identified as a shortcoming and lead to a lower score.

The Baltic Sea area is defined in line with the Art. 1 of the Helsinki Convention (HELCOM, 1992): “For the purposes of this Convention the "Baltic Sea Area" shall be the Baltic Sea and the entrance to the Baltic Sea bounded by the parallel of the Skaw in the Skagerrak at 57°44.43'N.”

No. The modules are meant to be installed on marine vessels and deployed for the repair of submarine cables. The modules shall be hosted in shipyards or other facilities within the EU territory bordering the Baltic Sea area.

No. Proposals must provide repair modules to increase repair capacity for all subsea cable systems, serving EU Member States in the Baltic Sea area.

The pre-configured vessels are flat deck vessels that should be able to receive the modules with minor adaptation and operational preparation, and without regulatory or technical barriers. They need to be outfitted or equipped with the necessary tools, technology, and systems to undertake the task of repairing submarine cables. Specialised equipment may include e.g. cable handling gear, dynamic positioning systems to maintain a stable location in the sea, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) for underwater operations, and various other engineering systems needed to locate, retrieve, and repair damaged cables.

An emergency situation, as identified by the relevant Regional Cable Hub or any other entity declaring the emergency situation, occurs when the cut or the failure of the cable would cause severe damages to one or more Member States, and the service disruption cannot be fixed satisfactorily by commercial services.

This implies that the vessel requires minimal adjustments or set-up procedures before it can commence operations. There are no significant regulatory obstacles preventing the vessel from being adapted or deployed for its intended purpose. The vessel can already operate smoothly without needing additional permits or certifications. There are no substantial technical challenges hindering the vessel's use for cable repair operations.

It means providing sufficient evidence to facilitate the evaluation of the solution by a vessel architect or similar technical expert.

No studies are funded under this call, however final layout and design are eligible activities.

The requirement is to provide modules that can operate in waters from Member States bordering the Baltic Sea.

Solutions that include the possibility to also repair power cables does not represent a disqualifying element, however such costs are not eligible.

The estimated available call budget is EUR 20 000 000. Proposals will be ranked after evaluation of the quality of their content against the evaluation criteria described from page 20 of the call documentPDF onwards. The project will be supported according to available budget. Please note that a proposal will not be ranked better because their Grant request is close to the maximum available budget.

As a general rule, non-EU controlled entities are excluded to participate in this call and therefore all participants will be requested to submit an ownership control questionnaire for this purpose to determine their control status. This also includes subcontractors.

If not provided at submission stage, the ownership control questionnaire for subcontractors will be requested later during the grant agreement implementation in order to perform the ownership control assessment.

For Works proposals, according to the Digital security requirements of the call textPDF: "All the proposals submitted to this topic must include security declarations by the participating entities receiving funding for the deployment of equipment and technologies.[…] Finally, the declaration will confirm that the results of the CEF funded action shall remain within the beneficiary during the action and for 10 years after its completion."

The project can start before, with some conditions (see “Starting date and project duration” in section 10 of the call textPDF): The project starting date and duration will be fixed in the Grant Agreement (Data Sheet, point 1). Normally the starting date will be after grant signature. Retroactive application can be granted exceptionally for duly justified reasons — but never earlier than the proposal submission date.

In case of changes in the control/ownership status during the action, beneficiaries have the contractual obligation to notify it immediately via the coordinator to the granting authority (see art 19.3 of the Grant AgreementPDF). Following the notification of the change in the control/ownership situation, a new ownership control assessment will be carried out. If the assessment concludes that the beneficiary is ’non-EU controlled’, its related costs will become automatically ineligible as from the date of loss of eligibility and the impact on the project would differ depending on whether it is a mono beneficiary or a multi beneficiary:

For multi beneficiary projects, the consortium will be asked to terminate the participant concerned (Article 32.3) and replace it or redistribute the tasks between the other participants. If this is not possible and the consortium cannot propose any other acceptable solution, the proposal will have to be terminated. Only solutions that do not imply substantial changes to the proposal can be accepted.

For mono beneficiary projects, the Grant Agreement may have to be terminated.

HaDEA will calculate the amount due to the terminated beneficiary on the basis of the termination report submitted and taking into account the costs incurred and contributions for activities implemented before termination takes effect (see Article 22).

Note that if a beneficiary breaches its contractual obligations, the grant may be reduced (see Article 28). Breaches may also lead to other measures described in Chapter 5 of the Grant Agreement (i.e. termination of the grant agreement, rejection of ineligible costs, ...)

After the end of the action, HaDEA may carry out further checks, reviews or audits on the proper implementation of the action and compliance with the obligations under the Agreement. Other entities, as the OLAF (European Anti-Fraud Office), EPPO (European Public Prosecutor's Office) and ECA (European Court of Auditors) are also entitled to carry out audits and investigations. Findings in those checks, reviews, audits or investigations may lead to cost rejections or grant reductions.

Ownership control restrictions cover in principle all entities participating in the grant in any capacity - as beneficiary, affiliated entity, associated partner, subcontractor. However, public bodies (validated as such in the Funding & Tenders Portal Participant Register) are exempted from the obligation to fill in the ownership control declaration. They are automatically considered as controlled by their country and there is thus no need for an ownership control declaration. Please note that this is only valid for entities with a formal validation in the Participant Register as ‘public body’ and that draft (‘declared’) status is not sufficient.

Since the beginning of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021-2027, some basic acts (including Regulation (EU) 2021/1153 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2021 establishing the Connecting Europe Facility) specifically allow EU granting authorities to impose ownership control restrictions for participating entities in calls for proposals where this is necessary to protect EU interests.

Thus, in such calls, entities that would normally be eligible to participate will be ineligible, unless they comply with additional conditions regarding their ownership control situation. For these calls, the EU services will therefore verify the ownership control status of the participants (and, in some cases, also if the conditions for an exception apply, e.g. guarantee, etc).

‘Control’ means the possibility to exercise decisive influence on the participant, directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediate entities, ‘de jure’ or ‘de facto’. This includes not only ownership of more than 50% (shareholding), but also any other elements and/or rights that can amount to control.

The ownership control status is defined through the assessment conducted by the Central Validation Service of the European Commission, based on the documents and information provided by the applicant during and following the submission of the proposal. However, the requirement to comply with the eligibility condition must in principle be fulfilled already at proposal submission stage (call deadline) and changes that occour later or during evaluation or grant preparation will NOT be taken into account – unless agreed by the granting authority.