Good morning everyone and welcome to our webinar on the IPCEI Important Projects of Common European Interest. For the session we'll be covering what IPCEI  is, how it works and how your company can get involved. As a short introduction, my name is Marianne and I will be your host for today. I'm joined with some amazing speakers and colleagues here. So firstly we have Tanja who is a partner here at Implement with extensive experience with supporting clients with public funding and project development. Then we have Lenka who is our external senior advisor for IPCEI  projects. She's supported over 20 IPCEI  projects over projects across various topics in Europe. And then finally we're joined with David who is also a partner here at Implement with over 20 years of experience with a background in public funding and project financing. Before we jump into the webinar, there are some engagement guidelines. So number one, you can add in your questions continues in the Q&A. There will be some time at the very end for us to address some of the questions there. And you can do that anonymously if you prefer. Secondly, please stay focused and refer to relate to the project, to your project, but we won't be taking any project specific questions. So make sure that if you do ask any questions, it is generalized. And then finally, we are continuously running webinars for this purpose. So if you have any feedback for future sessions, please feel free to reach out and share that with us. So on the topic of IPCEI , the question is, is IPCEI  the launchpad for your next project? IPCEI  is a great opportunity for funding large scale and cross border projects, and especially around significant contribution towards the economic growth, jobs, clean and digital transition for Europe in the future. And IPCEI  is really make it possible for us to bring different knowledge together, the expertise as well as financial resources. And it's really a very important funding instrument to help a lot of these large scale projects to get off the bat and running. So let's explore this question together, whether or not IPCEI  will be kind of the launchpad for your project coming forward. For today's agenda, this is what we will cover. We will cover the basic question of what is IPCEI , which projects are suitable for IPCEI . So looking a bit at the eligibility and understanding what projects would be the most best fit. Then we also have around the process of how IPCEI  actually works. And then the final section around the upcoming IPCEI  and the different topics that will be covered in that funding instrument. Then we'll wrap it up with a short Q&A as well. And by the end of today, we want to be able to cover these four topics. One, for you to get an understanding and overview of the EU IPCEI , the purpose, policy context, as well as the design. Two, understanding whether you can qualify for the IPCEI  and whether your project is a good fit. Number three, understanding what that process looks like in terms of applying for the IPCEI  application. And finally, knowing the upcoming IPCEI  rounds and what you can do next practically. So on that note, I will pass it over to my colleague Tanya, who will be taking you through the question of what is IPCEI . Good morning. Let me start by giving you an explanation what EPCEI actually is and why it is relevant. IPCEI  also, as Marianne said, IPCEI or sometimes even pronounced as IPCEI stands for Important Projects of Common European Interest. It is not a regular EU funding program, but it is a state aid framework that allows member states to jointly support very large strategic industrial projects and to build up the respective value chains in Europe. The key idea is that the projects are too big, too risky or too systemic for a standard funding instrument. And that is exactly then why the IPCEI  has become so increasingly important over the past years, because many of the transitions we have to do in Europe right now fall into this category. So let's have a look at the underlying problem the IPCEI  is trying to solve. Europe is undergoing massive transformations across the energy industry and digital systems. This requires huge investments in new technologies and they need to be deployed at industrial scale. Many of these projects simply don't happen through the market forces alone because they are capital intensive. The technology is still risky and they very often require cross -border coordination to build up the respective value chains. And this is where IPCEI then steps in because it allows the member states to jointly support these projects. It is intended then to bridge the valley of death and close the funding gap of these projects where private investors will not step in. And enabling these projects that have a European wide impact. There are three different types of projects in the IPCEI framework. The first one is R&D projects where they have to be of a major innovative nature, really go beyond incremental improvements and beyond the current state of the art in the respective sector. The second category is then the first industrial deployment. This is about bringing innovation to the industrial scale for the first time. What is important here is that it's not just scaling what already exists, but to really support true first of its kind deployments of new products that have a high research content. The third category are infrastructure projects. And these are projects that enable the build up of strategic systems, for example in energy or digital, in principle also in transport. And these infrastructures have to have European relevance and not just a national benefit. The majority of IPCEIs combine the R&D and FID phases of the projects or type of projects. And we will get to that in a moment. The major justification for why state aid is required, as already mentioned, is the failure of the market to bring these capital intensive and risky projects to life. And the state then subsidizes to enable to have this cross-border collaboration, to build up the strategic value chains in Europe and to help bring these positive impacts for Europe and the society, or as they are also referred to as spillovers in the EU. IPCEIs is then not about the commercial rollout or mass production. It stops at the point where the market then should take over. So since around 2018, we have seen what is referred to as the modern IPCEIs. In total, there have been more than 37 billion in public funding approved in this instrument. A few key examples is hydrogen, which is by far the largest with almost 19 billion euros. Microelectronics with around 10 billion euros. Batteries with around 6 billion euros. There are also other areas like cloud, health and infrastructure. Just to share some more information and observations here. The IPCEI is applied to various sectors and it is always focused on strategic value chains. There is a forum called the Joint European Forum for IPCEI. We will also refer to it later as the JEF Forum. Where the working groups from the member states meet to identify and develop the topics for the IPCEIs. The member states then decide if they want to become part of an IPCEI and dedicate some national budget to it. We see then a lot of different sizes of IPCEI with at least four member states being involved. But usually quite a number of more. And the member states interact to coordinate on a time measure, but also on the content and how it really could serve to build up the value chains. This is then referred to integrated IPCEIs. As already mentioned, the existing IPCEIs are mainly about a combination of R&D and first industrial deployment. Hydrogen is the exception here where we had all three types of projects represented. The R&D, the first industrial deployment and the infrastructure. There are more IPCEIs coming and we see quite a lot in the pipeline. We observe that the EU is making more and more use of this instrument in the times where Europe is under pressure to really help the strategic transformations in Europe. And now finally, let's have a quick look at how IPCEI compares to other EU funding instruments. Most funding instruments like the EIC accelerator, which is dedicated to startups, Horizon Europe or LIFE, they have grant sizes of between 1 to 15, sometimes 25 million euros. That is for the entire consortium, not for the single company. And even if you move on to the Connecting Europe facility, which is a funding program for trans-European infrastructures, or the EU Innovation Fund, which is also considered a quite large scale funding instrument, they usually have grant sizes of around 40 to 100, 150 maximum million. The IPCEI then clearly operates at a different level, with grant sizes between 60 to 145 or even larger per company, covering up to 100% of the funding gap. The funding amount depends on the sector and the project, but of course also on the budget that the respective member states can make available for this topic. It is sometimes a bit tricky to understand. It is not as transparent as other EU funding programs. And at this point, I will hand over to Lenka, who will go into a bit more detail about what type of projects are suitable for IPCEI. Good morning, everyone. Thank you, Tania. So I will continue with a little bit more explanations, which projects are suitable for IPCEI, whether your project potentially fit one of the upcoming IPCEI topics. So this will give you a little bit of more, I would say, information and explanations on the core criteria that are set by IPCEI communication, which is a stated framework that actually sets, I would say, the major criteria for the IPCEI projects. So specifically, we are talking about R&D and FID projects and their breakthrough innovations, which means that your project really needs to be extremely innovative and going with the innovations beyond global state of art in the sector concerned, which means that the commission usually checks whether your project really is pushing your KPIs or innovation KPIs and parameters really beyond the global state of art. So you really need to do your own benchmark with the current available technologies in the market. And you really need to clearly describe the innovation gap that your project is bringing. And also, these innovations needs to be provided with a specific KPIs that needs to be delivered within the project. And they really need to be measurable, concrete and within, let's say, FID phase, even tested until they are ready for the commercialization phase or mass production phase. Another criteria apart from innovation is this is kind of a funding gap, a proof of the funding gap, which means that you need to prove the commission that your project would not be actually realized or will not happen if the state aid is not provided for the projects. So, which means that the commission will not finance any project that would commercially be viable, which means that it would bring actually a positive funding gap or positive NPV for the whole project. Also, the funding gap is checked by the commission specifically whether it is really necessary, whether the aid is appropriate instrument, state aid appropriate instrument and also whether the aid is proportionate. This is also checked by the commission in various manners, but I will talk about it later. Also, the EPCI approaches really require cross-border collaborations, which means that all the direct participants, they need to collaborate together. They need to have cross-border collaborations, we call them like effective collaborations, where what means that they need to have a certain common objective, they need to share certain risks, share certain labor, and they need to actually come to certain particular innovation together. Also, the EPCIs need to have positive spillovers, which means that apart from the bringing the innovations within the project, the companies need to basically disseminate the knowledge they have obtained within the EPCI. They need to basically open certain innovation platforms, they need to basically grant access to certain IP rights that they are going to assess within the project and within either the upstream or downstream within the concerned sector. The EPCIs, I would say, are not particularly tied to TRL level, but we are using or I'm presenting this TRL level just a little bit better understand where we stand with the R&D projects and where we stand with FID projects. In general, within the TRL level, I would say, are not only the TRL level, but the TRL level is excluded from the EPCIs, while also the TRL level where we talk about the operational part, basically mass production or commercialization part where it starts, is also excluded from the eligible cost of the EPCI. But it is important part of the EPCI. But it is important part of the entire funding gap and basically creation of the positive or negative cash flows that are part of the calculations of the missing funding. In general, the companies within the EPCI projects, they can submit a purely R&D project or FID project. But it has to prove the commission that there was some R &D completed before at really very high innovative level. So again, going with the innovations beyond global state of art or but usually or majority of the projects means combinations of R&D and FID projects. For infrastructure projects, like my colleague Tania said, we are here more talking about some strategic significant infrastructures that the Europe is trying to build around, for example, hydrogen or around cloud edge infrastructure services. There are those two EPCIs in the past that address these infrastructure projects. Even there is one upcoming for cloud infrastructures that my colleague Tania will talk about. But usually there is not a necessary breakthrough innovations to be provided, but still the infrastructure projects need to have certain level of innovations. So when it comes to, I would say, justification of the aid for the projects, I was talking about this proof of the funding, missing funding for the projects, which is actually the funding I'm standing for. On the other side, what justifies the aid is the market failure itself, like my colleague Tania said. Normally, we are talking about the projects where there is really very high technical risk. There is not enough will from the private investments to step into these projects and finance these projects because, like I said, it's just too risky and not enough big or created market for these products or innovations that are part of these projects. So that's why the aid and the public support needs to come and needs to help these breakthrough innovations or innovative projects to happen. So funding gap is usually calculated for the overall project life cycle, which means that the eligible costs are formed within the R&D and FID phase, which usually represent negative cash flows. And at the same time, the funding gap also needs to capture the cash flows, which are post R&D and FID phase and are bringing revenues from the market until the project, until the product or the service actually ends or needs again significant innovations to be made. And also including certain terminal value from the project. So basically said, the funding gap is determining the maximum aid that can be provided for the project. But it cannot be more than 100% of the eligible costs that are calculated for the R&D and FID phase. So at really specific or exceptional cases, the state aid intensity can go to 100% of the eligible costs for the project. But normally the funding rate is somewhere between 50 to 90%. The European Commission is also checking what would happen if the project will not be carried out. Is there any alternative scenario that the company will make? If yes, then this alternative scenario, we call it as a counterfactual scenario, needs to be submitted with the project documentation to the commission as well. This counterfactual scenario needs to be real, needs to be verified, needs to be supported with some board documentations that are approved and signed by representatives of the company. In case the counterfactual scenario would have some positive MPV would have some positive cash flows, this needs to be taken into consideration. And basically these are offset, offsetted from the funding gap and basically lowering the missing funding and also decreasing the aid intensity. A lot of projects, especially small startups or small SMEs don't have a counterfactual scenario. So in this case, they need to clearly and I would say justifiably explain the commission why they don't have any counterfactual scenario or alternative scenario, which is actually acceptable for the commission, but needs to be really proved and and good explained. When it comes to further core criteria, I was talking in the beginning that the companies needs to or direct participants needs to have cross-border collaborations. As my colleague Tania said, to form EPCI in certain areas or certain sector, at least four member states need to be signing certain manifesto on starting of a certain EPCI, which means that the collaborations and certain cross -linking of the projects need to be among four member states. And also this somehow flows into cross-border collaborations and effective collaborations among companies as well. Within the EPCI, there are different partners, which I will talk about later, but these partners specifically, the most, I would say, important partners in the whole EPCI process are direct participants who really need to collaborate among each other. They need to have common objectives, they need to have cross-linked projects or integrated projects, but also they need to collaborate with others like associated partners whose roles I will explain on the next slide. Then from the perspective of the partners, which I was talking about, the selection process, which are usually run at member state level upon a certain manifesto on EPCI signed at higher level and discussed with the commission, the national selection procedure is usually open for different partners. So the most, I would say, important partners which contribute to the EPCI ecosystem are direct participants who usually have large projects. So we are also talking about large companies. They significantly contribute to objectives of the EPCI, but also of other European frameworks and, I would say, policies. Also those projects need to prepare project portfolio and funding gap and counterfactual scenarios. And these documentations are the notified to the commission. These direct partners need to have as many collaborations as possible with other direct partners selected at national level from other member states, which are participating in this EPCI. Usually the level of the aid that is provided or being assessed within the commission is above 50 million euro, which is the notification threshold for a notifiable aid within the commission. So the other part of the partners that are selected at the national level are associated partners. These associated partners are, I would say, usually smaller companies or SMEs or it can be even large companies, but with smaller projects, usually a lot of startups provide and submit projects as an associated partner. The aid for associated partner is usually smaller than 50 million euro, which means that this aid can be provided by the member state without a notification of aid to the commission, because there are certain, I would say, instruments that the member states have in hand and they can use it like a general block exemption regulation, and they can use it for approving of the aid. So associated partners also need to have collaborations among each other, but specifically with a direct partner as well, at least with one direct partner so that it justifies their, I would say, importance and relevance in the entire EPCI projects. Then we have indirect partners. I would say that's the type of partners who are not usually part of the EPCI ecosystem or SHAPO document, but they rather cooperate with associated partners and direct partners through certain contract researches or certain supplies. And they don't even have to submit usually any project documentations unless they will be supported by state aid also under the national schemes. But their commitments to EPCI, I would say, are really from those other partners very easy. So in terms of the criteria relating to spillovers, like I said in the beginning, the spillovers are commitments for both the direct partners and also for associated partners. The associated partners need to have at least three spillovers. Direct partners also need to have definitely at least three, but would be ideal to have more spillovers in different areas. I would give you certain examples on spillovers specifically for either IP protected or non IP protected spillovers. As within the IP protected, they really need to provide access to any IP rights they are able to assess within the EPCI project to any interested third party under the front terms. So they cannot really keep their IP rights like patent just for themselves, but they really need to share this knowledge and I would say don't know how they obtain within the EPCI with others. Also knowledge transfer and reuse is very important. So basically the Commission is really keen to see any knowledge transfer through creating different innovation clusters or through giving access to infrastructure or to know knowledge and know how through open data sources to any third parties. Education and ecosystem building. Yes, this is also very important in case they will be able to create some PhD programs or support universities with creation certain chairs. These are also counted as spillover effects, including some regional and other benefits for the for the least developed regions with creation of new jobs, highly skilled people and sharing the knowledge among also other institutions. As the very last slide, I would like to share some specific example on one project that I was supporting within the EPCI on hydrogen. Just to give you a real example of one hydrogen storage that was that that received kind of kind of really nice 836 million euro with the funding rate somewhere between 80 to 90 percent. This project was about was about inventing a new technology for putting hydrogen into the gas power structures either in a pure hydrogen structure or in a combination with gas. This project has just completed its R&D phase and is now waiting for the next funding for the FID phase. So yeah, so otherwise this project would not happen if the aid was was not there. And it's a very positive example of how EPCI can support very innovative projects and bringing innovations farther specifically in the hydrogen sector. Yeah, if there are any questions, we definitely to answer them. So please post them and we'll be happy to do them and answer them in the Q&A sections. And now I will try to hand over to my colleague David, who will talk a little bit more about the process EPCI itself and will give you a little bit more deep dive into this. Thank you. Thank you Lenka. And now let's take a look together and about the process of the EPCI. So let's run together. Here you see an overview of what's going to happen. You as a company, what you need to know how this will process be run and what are the documentation and the steps that you will face until there is a notification from the commission to approve the state aid. So, of course, there is a political will. And IPCI will be launched. And for that, the member states, especially one that is coordinating all the member states that form the IPCI, all of them will launch a national call for expression of interest. This is where, you know, the member states will invite you to be part of the IPCI. The idea is that there will be a preselection and companies, of course, will need to submit a proposal. This is where the design phase of the IPCI starts, right? The member states will see which projects are coming in. They will analyze them. And then we start with the process of designing the overall IPCI. That's why there will be a national selection of the projects that might be part of the IPCI. The national authority, of course, will start this assessing procedure, meaning that those projects need to fulfill the criteria as per the national call that has been released before. Something that is very special in the IPCI is what we call the European matchmaking or national matchmaking as well. Here, the idea is in this design phase is that not only single projects fulfill the requirements or the objectives of the IPCI, but also an objective of the IPCI is to form an ecosystem of companies across border interaction among the companies. That matchmaking process will take place, was organized by the member states to make sure that companies, you know, see how they can collaborate together. Then we have the pre-notification phase. Here is where the member state will receive detailed information about your projects. There is a project portfolio. There is a funding gap that determines the state aid you are looking for. And this is a CHAPO input, which is the umbrella document that describes not only the single project, but also the storyline of all of these project participants working together. And fulfilling the objectives. Here there is an interaction actively from the commission with the member state, potentially also directly with the company supplying. And this will end in a notification process where the commission will formally, you know, accept and confirms that the IPCI fulfilled the criteria. And after that, of course, there will be a legally binding decision. And this is where the implementation of IPCI starts. And of course, the aid will be, of course, paid out against verified milestones. So this is the oral process. And as you can see here, there are some examples from a biotech IPCI. This process can take between 12 and 24 months. You will know this, of course, very in detail when you see the national call of your respective member state. So let's dive into that a little bit. This is the national call for expressions of interest. So in this call, the member state will, of course, tell you the scope and the sectors, the eligibility criteria to be part of the IPCI. There will be a deadline, of course, to submit the initial documentation for this pre-screening. Don't miss it. If you miss it, you will not have the chance to participate in the IPCI process anymore. You will need to wait for second round, if at all. Then, of course, there will be instructions of how to submit this information and what is the criteria to select or to pre -select the project that might be part of the IPCI. So what you need to do is obviously you have a project under development. You submit a project concept. There is a preliminary cost estimate. Obviously, that shows that you need the aid that shows how you will finance the project. And at the end, to have an idea of the funding gap that will give the members an idea of the aid that you are looking for. Innovation is very important, especially for R&D and FID projects. This is something that you will also need to show and give information about. Then you can also, at this stage, you know, identify or pre-identify the potential partnerships that you are looking for to be part of the IPCI. And then obviously, in this expression of interest, it's important that the project that you have, of course, is aligned with the IPCI scope. Excellent. So this is stage one. Now let's take a look at something that is also important here, which is the matchmaking process. As you can see here, the idea is that single projects in the memory states collaborate with other projects. And on the value change, it has to be cross-border. You need to form an ecosystem that fulfills the objectives of the IPCI. So here, the member state will organize a matchmaking initiatives and events to make this happen. There will be a clustering if needed. So the companies in a specific topic are put together in order for them to look for potential collaboration. There will be a screening based on the project scope and maturity and relevance. So you can enhance this matchmaking process. And then at the end, there is an identification of those partnerships across countries and roles. So this is what the matchmaking process look like organized by the member states. And what you need to do obviously is in such a matchmaking process, as you can imagine, is of course you have your own search profile. What is the kind of project that you are doing? What is your role? What is the scope? What is the partnership that you are looking for? You are required to participate actively, actively in this matchmaking process organized by the member states. And eventually, you know, in order to form this consortia, in order to form this ecosystem of projects, it might be that the participants need to show a degree of flexibility in order to, you know, adjust the scope to too much, you know, a potential collaboration with other partners. So this is key in an IPSAI process. And essentially, for an IPSAI to work, there is a need to show evidence of collaboration, value change integration, and spillover effects, as we explained before, that is required by the IPSAI. Let's move on. And now we are now entering into the assessment phase. What you will do normally is, after the pre-selection of the projects, you will also have a second deadline to submit documentation in detail, where there will be a review process by the member state for the IPSAI and for the pre-qualified companies participating in this process. So there will be a lot of guidance for you in order to fulfill this documentation. There will be an integration and alignment between the member states and the companies participating in IPSAI. And this is the assessment phase where the quality of the single projects and the integration of those projects in the overall picture will be done. The quality here will be taken into account by the member state and the selected experts. So what you need to do, as we mentioned before, is of course you need to prepare a project portfolio with a full project scope, the deployment plan and integration into the blockchain. The funding gap, obviously very important, that will determine the state aid, what you are looking for. Then what are the spillovers of the project that are measurable. So you position your project inside the IPSAI universe. And then the integration, obviously out of this much-mashping process, how do you will integrate yourself, your companies in the overall IPSAI cross-border architecture. Very good. And let me do a deep dive about the funding gap. This is where you will spend a lot of time and potentially also there will be a lot of iterations with the member state or even with the commission. Sometimes we have seen that the commission address this issue directly with the companies in order to understand, you know, the rationale for the funding gap calculations. And as Lenka said before, this has to be substantiated. You need evidence. You are taking, you know, assumptions, why and how and what are the sources of that. So, it's very important that, you know, you justify very well the funding gap because this will again justify the aid that you are looking for. So let's take a look at this together. What you see here is a generic example, right? And the funding gap is the target. The funding gap will be calculated as follows. You will use a discounted cash flow where you have your negative cash flows and positive negative capex, opes, positive the benefits or revenues that you may generate with your project. In this case, you will see that if you calculate the net present value, you will have a gap, right? In present terms of minus 70 million. This is the gap. Then in the IPSAI, it's also important to know that terminal value is something that you need, also need to team to account for. Potentially you have a project that will continue operating more than the expected lifetime. You will do investments and, you know, the business will continue generating revenues. So this terminal value should be calculated. Maybe not, but maybe you have a residual value of the assets and that will be the terminal value of your project. That will make a correction of the initial 70 million gap that you have out of the negative net present value. Then we have what we discussed also, my colleague Lenka before, the counterfactual MPB. What is the alternative project scenario? And eventually you have state aid, you will have another project that you will do without aid. Another scope, another size, another timeline. And potentially if you do that without state aid, you have a positive MPB. This will be also considered by, you know, calculating the funding gap. In this example, you will see that, yes, if you have an alternative scenario, you will have a positive MPB. There will be a correction. It means that at the end you will have a funding gap of 60 million. Here it is important to know that this funding gap, that the aid that you are, the discounted aid that you are requesting cannot be higher than the funding gap, obviously. The cap here in this case discounted is 60 million. Now let's go to the nominal side. The nominal side means that you will make a correction of the funding gap, which is discounted into a nominal term, because you will receive the grant, of course, or the aid among the milestones in the construction phase, for example. And so there is a nominal conversion. In nominal terms, then the grant will be, in this case, 77 million. This is the aid that you are looking for in nominal terms. And the second requirement that you need to fulfill is that this nominal grant cannot exceed the eligible cost. And here you see that the total eligible cost in this example is 90 million. You are requesting nominal 77. It means you are under the eligible cost. In this case, the aid intensity in this example will be 85%. You are fulfilling the requirement for state aid. So this is a very quick overview of the funding gap and the process. And now I'm very happy to hand over to my colleague Tania. Thank you. Right. So now the next point are the upcoming Ipsace. I will go through the pipeline of what is coming. And we see on the left the those that have already been launched, then the endorsed ones. So the ones that are starting now, the ones that are under discussion in the next part, and then those that might be coming up on the very right of this. I would like my speaker notes back if I can. So this is, you know, the part that is actually quite exciting because this is where you will know and learn is my topic relevant and or is something coming up where I need to screen what is happening and going on. So the ones that are already launched, they have not yet been notified, but the national selection is ongoing or has already been closed. This is the advanced semiconductors and AI and then compute infrastructure continuum, which has the abbreviation SIC. In the middle section, those initiatives that are already endorsed and are now starting or very soon starting is the biobased chemicals and materials, biotechnology for food and feed and innovative nuclear technologies, circular advanced materials. Moving then further right, you see topics under discussion and this is quantum computing and clean, connected and autonomous vehicles as well as critical raw materials. And finally, you have the most speculative ones, which are CCUS and low carbon industries. So also super important, but not yet clear whether or when they will come. So what I would like to highlight is that we have a pipeline that clearly shows that the IPSE instrument is expanding into new industrial domains. And it is following the already discussed logic. So we have strategic value chains that need to be built up in Europe. They have a system relevance and they have high investment needs. And I will now zoom into the IPSEs that are in the design phase and starting to have a closer look at this. The first one here is the biotech IPSEs. They have three areas. It is not yet completely known whether it will be one or three. And the first one is the biobased chemicals, which focuses on biobased building blocks from alternative feedstocks like biomass or waste. Then you have the biobased material one, which is turning biogenic and recycled inputs into high value materials. And then you have the biotech for food and feed, which includes, for example, alternative proteins and industrial biotech processes at scale. Across all three, the focus will be very clearly put on the first industrial deployment, not just R&D. In terms of geography, there is quite a large group of participating member states, including some major countries like Germany, Finland, France, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands, amongst others. From a timeline, this is now key because we are right at the beginning of this process. This means national calls are about to open any day. They have been, as you could see on the slide from David, announced for June. But now we have almost July and we expect that the calls for expression of interest will be published any time. The national selection process will then take place until autumn. The aim is to have all projects selected and confirmed by the member states until the beginning of 2027. So it's a very narrow window to get engaged. The other two that are upcoming are the innovative nuclear technologies and circular advanced materials. So if we look at the nuclear technology topics, it is about reactors. It is about nuclear fuels and materials, components and services. There is a quite large group of member states that is going to participate. It is coordinated jointly by Italy, France and Romania. And then also on the circular advanced material topics, it covers the whole value chains of the circular materials. From extraction over recovery into reintegration and innovative processing technologies. The same here, it is a quite large group of member states. Since we don't have that much time in this webinar, I would like to offer you the possibility we will get in touch with you afterwards. So you have our contacts. And in case you have specific questions on one of these IPSEs that are now starting, we are super happy to guide you and to answer your questions. And with this, I would like to hand over back to our host, Marianne, to do the wrap up. Thank you. All right. So that was a lot of good information on the IPSE across the speakers that we've had. And so let's just wrap it up with some of the key takeaways for IPSE. And I've seen also a lot of questions in the chat. So we'll be addressing them right after this. If you have any further questions, feel free to populate it in the next minute or so, so that we can address them. But back to the takeaways. Number one, identify and qualify project concepts. So make sure that you're assessing your project portfolio and understanding which concepts are sufficient with scale, innovation and the funding gap that is IPSE relevant for the project. Number two, shape the project value project as well as the value chain. So it's important to also define your role in the European value chain and engage with the relevant cross border partners early on to be prepared for the process. Number three, develop a strong IPSE application. A lot easier said than done and preparing a strong project narrative funding gap logic and clearly defining what the spillovers are aligned with the EU expectations. And finally, navigating the process of secure approval. So engaging with the national authorities and partners throughout the overall selection, pre-notification and notification period. On that note, I will just move on to the Q&A and there is quite a lot of questions there. So I will just invite Lenke back onto the stage with me. Thank you. And the first question was around what happens if a project with over 50 million euros is notified, but the member state then decides to provide less grants. So, for example, only 50%. Is it expected that the project will deliver 50% less? Or is it that they have to deliver the full 100%? Yes. Thank you, Marianne. So my response to these questions would be case the member states post-EC decision decides to provide less intensity or lower intensity that was approved within the EC decision. Then the company has option to, let's say, look for some other funding instruments to add up on 50% up until the approved intensity. So basically look for other funding instrument because a PCI instrument can be combined with some other funding instruments. Also what I experienced with some other projects in some other countries, usually the funding is not provided in one shot. Usually it's divided in phases, which means that the member state can provide certain money for, let's say, R&D phase and then it will continue with a second funding contract, let's say, for FID phase. So this is also possible to combine different phases and different funding contracts. Yeah, super. Next question being, in which documentation is the limit of 50 million for direct participants defined? Yes, this 50 million threshold is actually given by the general block exemption regulations for R&D projects. It's actually related to Article 26, specifically for those projects that create cross-border collaboration. So basically it's integrated projects. So then this threshold was uplifted to 50% recently in the amendment of the GBR. Super. Next question is, will the associate partners be notified only after the decisions on direct partners are made? Usually the associated partners are not notified. I mean the project portfolio and funding gap are notified only for the direct participants. Associated partners, like I'd explained in my section, are supported via national or regional schemes. So this can be a little bit independent from the notification. So there are member states that even provide funding sooner for associated partners. So they don't wait for the easy decision. So this very much depends on the, I would say, governance or procedural rules in a particular member state country. But for associated partners, it's usually faster track, I would say. Yeah. Perfect. And the last question that we'll address is, in the absence of a counterfactual scenario, for example, the company will not proceed with the project at all. Is that credible and defendable for a large company towards the commission? Yes. My experience is that I had extremely, exactly the same situation that there was no counterfactual scenario for a large company. But this was really scrutinized by the commission. So they really asked for like meetings of board meetings or any documentation from the board or from certain state of representatives of the company where they confirmed that yes, in case they will not receive the aid, the project will not be realized. So they really need some proof, credible proof. Otherwise, the commission will really push companies to go into certain alternative scenario because it can offset and decrease the funding gap and also the aid requested. And the commission wants to keep the aid at minimum level as possible. Yeah. Perfect. Thank you. I think that's all we have time for questions. And with that, we would just like to extend a big thank you to all of you for joining. And if you do have any further questions or would like to speak to us further, you have our contact information. So feel free to reach out to us via email. Thank you so much and enjoy the rest of your day. Thank you.