D1.2 Project Management Plan

1 D1.2 Project Management Plan V0.3 Grant agreement: No. 101069689 From: TECNALIA Prepared by: Maider Epelde Date: 02/12/2022 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Objective of the deliverable .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2 Deliverable description ............................................................................................................................................ 4 1.3 Contribution of partners .......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Relation with other activities in the project ................................................................................................ 5 2. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1. Governing layer ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 2.2. Steering layer ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 2.3. Performing layer .......................................................................................................................................................... 8 3. COMMUNICATION CHANNELS ........................................................................................................................................... 9 3.1. Internal communication channels.................................................................................................................... 9 3.2. Communication with the Project Officer, European Commission .......................................... 10 3.3. Communication with the external audience ......................................................................................... 10 4. REPORTING PROCESS ............................................................................................................................................................... 11 4.1. Periodic Progress Reports ..................................................................................................................................... 11 4.2. Internal Reports .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 5. QUALITY PLAN FOR DELIVERABLES................................................................................................................................ 13 6. INNOVATION MANAGEMENT ............................................................................................................................................. 13 7. CONFLICT RESOLUTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 14 8. RISK MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Annexes ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 16 Annex 1: Consortium members .......................................................................................................................................... 16 Annex 2: Gantt chart of the PUSH2HEAT project .................................................................................................17 Annex 3: List of risks pre-identified the project ......................................................................................................18 3 ABBREVIATIONS CA Consortium Agreement EC European Commission GA Grant Agreement or General Assembly, on depend on the context PEB Project Executive Board PM Project Manager QAP Quality Assurance Plan WP Work Package WPL Work Package Leader LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Governance structure of the PUSH2HEAT Project .............................................................................. 6 Figure 4.1: Reporting process in PUSH2HEAT ................................................................................................................... 11 VERSIONS No. Name Partner Contribution Date 0.1 Maider Epelde TECNALIA First complete draft 02/12/2022 0.2 - ALL Checked by the partners 09/12/2022 0.3 Maider Epelde TECNALIA Format updated to the PUSH2HEAT report template 21/12/2022 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Objective of the deliverable The main objective of the WP1 is to develop an effective, transparent and comprehensive administrative, financial and legal management to ensure the successful execution of the project. The management WP consists of three tasks, that last the whole duration of the project: • T 1.1 Project coordination and quality assurance • T 1.2 Communication, reporting and monitoring • T 1.3 Data management plan This deliverable D1.2 is related to the task T1.1 and is aimed at defining the project management plant, in other words, establishing the management and working model to be followed in the PUSH2HEAT project. 1.2 Deliverable description The deliverable D1.2 is structured into several chapters explaining the following key aspects related to the project management in the project: • Governance structure • Communication channels • Reporting process • Quality plan for deliverables • Innovation management • Conflict resolution • Risk Management • Annexes Note: the PUSH2HEAT proposal was submitted with four demo sites but one of them (the pilot plant to be implemented at CAPSA) failed during the GA preparation phase. CAPSA is not officially a beneficiary of the PUSH2HEAT project and the consortium is looking for a demo site that will substitute it. Once the alternative demo site is confirmed the This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) responsibilities that should have been assumed by CAPSA will be transferred to the new partner. However, it has not been possible to find the alternative demo site yet, so for the sake of clarity ‘CAPSA’ and ‘demo site in Spain’ are used to refer to this demo site. 1.3 Contribution of partners The task T1.1 in WP1 is led by TECNALIA and participated by the WP Leaders, i.e. TECNALIA, FRAUNHOFER, POLIMI, OST and EHPA. Being so, TECNALIA, as the lead beneficiary of the project is the main contributor of the content provided in this deliverable. 1.4 Relation with other activities in the project This deliverable is related with each and all activities, tasks and work-packages in the project as this “Project management Plan” will be the basis for the procedures to be followed in the execution of the project to guarantee the success and the accomplishment of the challening objectives. 2. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE The PUSH2HEAT project governance is structured into 3 layers: • Governing layer • Steering layer • Performing layer In the next Figure 0.1, the governance structure of the PUSH2HEAT project is exposed: This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) Figure 0.1: Governance structure of the PUSH2HEAT Project 2.1. Governing layer In general terms, the Project Coordinator and the General Assembly are the key agents or bodies in the governing layer, which is the management layer operating at director level to determine the vision and strategy for the entire project. Project Coordinator (PC) - TECNALIA The main responsibility of the PC is to ensure the timely and effective overall progress of the project according to the Grant Agreement. The PC is the intermediary between the Consortium and the EC, dealing also with contractual, administrative and financial matters in addition to overall responsibility for project progress reporting. The PC ensures the timely and effective overall progress of the project, monitoring compliance by Parties with their obligations and will manage all the aspects connected with payment of financial contributions, administering the financial contribution of the EC. PC will be in charge of managing the preparation, signature and maintenance of a Consortium Agreement (CA) between partners. The Project Manager (PM) appointed by TECNALIA for PUSH2HEAT is Ms. Maider Epelde. The PM, assisted by the Project Support Team (PST) and supported also by the Project Executive Board (PEB), is responsible of the communication between the Consortium and the EC, as well as the day-to-day administrative, legal and financial issues. General Assembly (GA) The GA, participated by all the partners, is the highest-level decision-making body of the project, chaired by the Project Manager and composed by a senior representative from WP1 Leader Task leaders (TL´s) WP2 Leader WP3 Leader WP4 Leader WP5 Leader WP6 Leader DEMO COORDINATORS PROJECT EXECUTIVE BOARD EXPLOITATION & DISSEMINATION EUROPEAN PROJECT COORDINATION GENERAL ASSEMBLY Governing layer Performing layer Steering layer This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) each partner. The GA meets physically twice a year and it is responsible for the project overall strategy, in charge of all important decisions of general nature within the frame of the Grant Agreement (GA) signed with the EC and the Consortium Agreement (CA) signed among all partners, especially when such decisions may affect the agreements reached in these two contracts (examples: changes in the management structure, changes in the consortium composition, changes in the work plan, major technical decisions, contingency plans and planning decisions affecting the resources or the time for the implementation of the project, etc.). The GA is also responsible for ensuring that the project remains in line with the overall objectives and checks the progress according to the set of deliverables and milestones, based on regular updated reports of the project activities received from the Project Executive Board (‘Steering Committee’) and Project Coordinator. 2.2. Steering layer The Steering layer is composed by the Project Executive Board (PEB, also called ‘Project Steering Committee’ (PSC)), the Exploitation and Dissemination Team and the Demo Coordinators. This layer provides general project direction and guidance, keeping the project focused towards its objectives, mobilizing the necessary resources and monitoring the project performance. It reports to the governing layer bodies and focuses on day-to-day project operations. Project Executive Board (PEB) The PEB is the supervisory body of the advances of the project and is formed by WP leaders and chaired by the Project Manager. The WP Leaders are: TECNALIA (WP1, WP2), FRAUNHOFER (WP3), POLIMI (WP4), OST (WP5) and EHPA (WP6). The PEB, executive body of the project, is responsible for proposals and recommendations to the GA on the global steering, monitoring and management of the project, as well as for the execution of the GA decisions. Therefore, the PEB acts as a “core group” assuming the executive decision making and supporting the Project Coordination in relevant management aspects. The PEB manages all the technical activities outlined in the project’s work plan and is responsible for the day-to-day liaison between Consortium partners to consolidate inputs into project planning, progress monitoring and technical milestone reporting. Exploitation & Dissemination Team (EDT) The Exploitation and Dissemination Team or EDT is composed of three experts in the Consortium to assist to the PSC regarding exploitation, dissemination and innovation management issues. The Exploitation Manager (EM, TECV) is responsible for the exploitation plan and follow up on this plan, coordinating exploitation activities across partners. The Dissemination & Communication Manager (DM, EHPA), on the other side is This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) responsible for the dissemination plan, communication, and other communication mechanisms. The EM, in close collaboration with the DM, coordinates all the exploitation, dissemination, communication and training activities, and they are also responsible for IPR management. The Innovation Manager (IM, TECNALIA) is the responsible person for verifying that the development of the project is being done according to the innovation management process (see chapter “0 6. INNOVATION MANAGEMENT”). The IM assists to the PEB meetings in order to assure the innovation management plan is being followed into the work plan: the generation of innovative ideas, verification of the state-of-the-art evolution, the TRL status of the technology, the demands of the market, the state of patentability, the potential of business, etc. Demo Coordinators The demonstration nature of PUSH2HEAT determines the workplan and partners organisation. A Local Demo Team is formed for each demo site and the purpose of these working groups is to facilitate the implementation of the PUSH2HEAT system by dealing with case-specific issues, such as, local regulatory framework, etc. • Leader and members of the Local Demo Team in Germany: FRAUNHOFER, STC, SPH • Leader and members of the Local Demo Team in Italy: POLIMI, CDG, BONO, ENERTIME • Leader and members of the Local Demo Team in Spain: TECNALIA, CAPSA, BSNOVA 2.3. Performing layer In the performing layer, the WP Leaders and the Task Leaders oversee the execution of the work committed in the project. Work Package Leaders (WPL) The WP leaders are the partners responsible for managing the tasks grouped in the Work Packages (WP). The WPL reports to the PEB, ensuring the timely fulfilment of duties from the scientific and technical point of view. The WPLs assure the coordination between the different project teams that collaborate with the aim of exchanging intermediate results. They assure the timely execution of tasks included in each WP, stimulating the interaction between the various partners involved. They are also in charge of the consolidation of the reports and execution of the tasks within each WP. Task Leaders (TL) The TL is responsible of the technical follow-up of the specific task and the detailed coordination with the other tasks within the same work package. They assure the timely This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) and proper execution of their tasks and report to the WPL in case of any deviation or risk. They are also responsible for leading the preparation of the deliverables resulting from their tasks and the coordination with other tasks for their participation in the deliverable preparation, and for the preparation and delivery of internal task progress reports to the WP leader. Partner Representative (PR) In order to limit any duplication of information and to facilitate an efficient communication process by both face-to-face and virtual channels, the distribution of all relevant project information is channelled through the Project Manager to one key person for each partner (Partner Representative). The PR is member of the GA (in case of unavailability a deputy or assistant could be appointed) and acts as a switchboard thus ensuring that the concerned persons within the partner organisation are reached as required. 3. COMMUNICATION CHANNELS The fluent and continuous communication is one of the key pillars for success in the accomplishment of the ambitious goals of the PUSH2HEAT project. The communication occurs at different levels in the project: • Communication within the Consortium – Internal communication • Communication with the Project Officer, European Commission • Communication with the external audience 3.1. Internal communication channels For the communication between all the partners of the Consortium, several internal communication channels and tools are on disposal to the whole Consortium, such as: • SharePoint repository • Contact list and emails • Project meetings These internal communication channels and tools are explained in detail in the deliverable “D1.1 Quality Assurance Plan (QAP)”. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) Annexes Annex 1: Consortium members No Short name Legal name Country Type of organisation 1 TEC FUNDACION TECNALIA RESEARCH & INNOVATION ES RTD 1.1 TECV TECNALIA VENTURES SL ES SME 2 UPV UNIVERSITAT POLITECNICA DE VALENCIA ES RTD 3 BSNOVA BS NOVA APPARATEBAU GMBH DE SME 4 EHPA EUROPEAN HEAT PUMP ASSOCIATION BE Association 5 SPH SPH SUSTAINABLE PROCESS HEAT GMBH DE SME 6 VITO VLAAMSE INSTELLING VOOR TECHNOLOGISCH ONDERZOEK N.V. BE RTD 7 FRAUNHOFER FRAUNHOFER GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FORDERUNG DER ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG EV DE RTD 8 POLIMI POLITECNICO DI MILANO IT RTD 9 QPINCH QPINCH BE SME 10 ENER ENERTIME SA FR SME 10.1 ENCI ENERGIE CIRCULAIRE FR SME 11 TUB TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN DE RTD 12 STC SCHOELLER TECHNOCELL GMBH & CO KG DE Large company 13 CARTIF FUNDACION CARTIF ES RTD 14 CAPSA CORPORACION ALIMENTARIA PENASANTA – CAPSA ES - 15 BONO BONO ENERGIA S.P.A. IT SME 16 CDG CARTIERE DI GUARCINO SPA IT Large company 17 OST OST - OSTSCHWEIZER FACHHOCHSCHULE CH RTD This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101069689 (PUSH2HEAT) Annex 2: Gantt chart of the PUSH2HEAT project 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 WP1 Project Management & Coordination T1.1 Project coordination and quality assurance T1.2 Communication, reporting and monitoring T1.3 Data Management Plan WP2 Full Scale Development and Optimization of Heat Upgrade Techn MS T2.1 Full scale development of vapor compression heat pumps with T2.2 Full scale development of vapor compression heat pumps with T2.3 Full scale development of absorption heat pumps T2.4 Full scale development of thermochemical heat pumps T2.5 Process integration and steam production T2.6 Techno-economic map of heat upgrade technologies T2.7 Heat upgrade technologies: design tools & optimization WP3 Implementation of Demonstration Sites MS MS MS T3.1 Demo site 1 T3.2 Demo site 2 T3.3 Demo site 3 T3.X.1 Analysis and requirements for the demo sites T3.X.2 Planning and engineering T3.X.3 Manufacturing of heat upgrade technologies T3.X.4 System integration T3.X.5 Commissioning and first performance tests T3.X.6 Assessment on commissioning of Heat Upgrade Systems WP4 Monitoring & Performance Data Analysis MS MS T4.1 Monitoring plan T4.2 Monitoring system integration and validation T4.3 Monitoring, performance data analysis T4.4 Guidelines for heat upgrade technologies design & integration WP5 Heat upgrade systems Exploitation, Life Cycle & Impact Assessm MS MS T5.1 Business models and contractual agreements T5.2 Replication studies T5.3 Life cycle environmental and cost assessment (LCA/LCC) T5.4 Scenario-based Impact Assessment at EU level T5.5 Analysis of barriers and policy recommendations T5.6 Heat Upgrade Systems Exploitation Roadmaps WP6 Dissemination, Communication and Exploitation of Project Results MS MS MS T6.1 Communication and dissemination: planning and coordination T6.2 Stakeholders’ engagement and capacity building: conferences and T6.3 Communication and dissemination activation: creating impact and T6.4 External Advisory Group: Management and coordination T6.5 Exploitation of project results MS: Milestone Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 18 Annex 3: List of risks preidentified the project No Description of risk (Likelihood / Severity) WP(s) involved Proposed risk-mitigation measures 1 Critical partner leaves the consortium at a crucial point of the project (low likelihood, medium severity) 1 Critical overreliance will be identified and mitigated in a collaborative approach within the consortium. Consortium network will be relied on to identify alternatives. 2 An associated country leaves the consortium (low likelihood, medium severity) 1 Consortium network will be used to find another partner from the same country than the associated partner (or another country with same funding conditions) being able to perform the expected work. If this is not possible the consortium will find the best way of performing the planned work by project beneficiaries. 3 Unexpected delay and/or poor quality of the deliverables (medium likelihood, medium severity) 1 A continuous monitoring of the work will be carried out, leaded by each WP leader and by project coordinator. This will ensure rapid communication of delays within the consortium. The partners will be allocated responsibility for review of other partners’ deliverables 4 WP resources not well balanced (low likelihood, medium severity) 1 Monitoring of the work (WP leader and project coordinator) and reallocation of resources in other WPs where necessary. 5 The planned budget is too low (low likelihood, medium severity) 1 Careful planning and follow up of the budget during the implementation phase will be guaranteed by the Coordinator and WP leaders. 6 Partners are reluctant to IP sharing 1 The Consortium Agreement will govern the IPR by properly identifying the background, owners and potential foreground 7 Heat upgrade technologies’ not operating in their best conditions (temperature, flow rates, etc.) with regards to the demonstration sites working conditions (low likelihood, medium severity) 2, 3 The demonstration sites boundary conditions will be analyzed from the beginning, as the most important input for the adaptation of each of the technologies to maximize efficiency and profitability. 8 Difficulty in heat recovery for feeding the heat upgrade technologies (low likelihood/medium severity) 2 High focus on process integration and steam production as one of the main requirements in industrial processes. The project will ensure modularity and/or adaptability of the heat upgrade technologies to part load conditions. 9 Difficulty on cost reduction of the heat upgrade technologies (medium 2 The heat upgrade technologies will be developed focusing on cost reduction, by 19 likelihood/medium severity) means of modular design, minimization of auxiliary components, maximization of compactness. 10 Missing system monitoring data for technology implementation (medium likelihood, low severity) 3 Selective monitoring of the required process variables will be conducted by the corresponding research partner with adequate monitoring equipment, foreseen in budget for demo site partners. 11 Long-lasting and severe permission clearance processes medium likelihood, high severity) 3 Early identification of needed permission (levels) and strong coordination between related partners. 12 Delay in production/manufacturing of heat upgrade technologies (low likelihood, low severity) 3 Full-scale development of each of the heat upgrade technologies will be starting from the beginning of the project, also identifying in parallel the demo sites requirements. Early identification of possible delays will be carried out by involved partners. 13 Delay during planning and installation of heat upgrade system Delayed tendering and assignment processes (high likelihood, low severity) 3 Project timing has been adequately planned in order to include buffers for possible delays, ensuring a long monitoring time, which in case delays would occur, would represent enough time for adequate technologies evaluation. 14 Wrongly installed equipment and components (pumps, heat exchangers, sensors, etc.), (high likelihood, severity low-high depending) 3 High level of supervision by involved partners during technology implementation. Long enough timing allocated for system integration (T3.4) and commissioning and first performance tests (T3.5). 15 Additional investment costs coming out of unexpected additional safety and construction requirements (high likelihood, medium severity) 3 Adjustment on the budget, rededication of possible cost positions within the project. 16 Not fully commissioned monitoring system (high likelihood, high severity) 3 High level of supervision for implementation of monitoring system during system integration (T3.4). 20 17 Not fully operational heat upgrade system due to malfunctions, misplaced sensors/signals and identification of those (medium likelihood, high severity) 3 High level of supervision during T.3.4 & T3.5 and fast response on providing technical and personal support by involved partners. 18 The collected data are inconsistent across the demos (medium likelihood, medium severity) 4 The monitoring plan will be prepared in a uniform way, but considering the peculiarity of each demo to assure consistent data collection and KPI calculation. 19 The collected data are fragmented (medium likelihood, high severity) 4 The incoming data are continuously analyzed to assure their quality. 20 Interference of the installation of the monitoring equipment with the plant operation (high likelihood, medium severity) 4 The monitoring plan is starting early (T4.1, M7) following the analysis and requirements of the demo sites (T3.1), this will ensure all the plant constraints have been adequately addressed. The installation of the monitoring system will be done simultaneously with the system integration (T3.4). 21 The monitoring period is shortened due to delays in the system integration (medium likelihood, high severity) 4 The monitoring period is expected to be more than a year and half long, meaning that even with delays in the previous phases the actual data collection period will most likely exceed one year. 22 Business models do not match required profitability/ROI (unlikely, high severity) 5 Due to a preliminary research, some business case at industrial sector are known. 23 Legal barriers do not enable projects (likely, high severity) 5 Stakeholder management with political decision makers, guidelines for redesign for policy makers. 24 Carbon Reductions are not as expected (unlikely, medium severity) 5 In a preliminary research, a strong carbon reduction potential is identified, as well as measures for further reduction. 21 25 Contractual agreements are not scalable due to location-specific settings and requirements (unlikely, medium severity) 5 Application of new forms of cooperation like service level agreements, joint ventures, ecosystems etc. will overcome barriers. 26 Lack of data being available for assessing sustainability and carbon footprint (likely, medium severity) 5 Up-to-date scientific proven databases will be use. i.e. ecoinvent, in case where data is not available. 27 Technology readiness is not as expected, pilot projects do not match requirements (remote unlikely likelihood, high severity) All Based on the research and technology scouting, some projects and technological paths have been identified matching the proposed requirements. 28 Reduced stakeholder engagement (low likelihood, medium severity) 6 The project will take advantage of the extensive network of stakeholders brought by the consortium partners as well as outside networks, initiatives, likeminded projects, technology platforms etc. The capacity building and dissemination would be continual and highly adaptable/customizable. 29 Health restrictions on live gatherings and/or travel (low likelihood, low severity) 6 Using tested online platforms and procedures (e.g. Zoom, REMO, B2Match, Mural, MS Teams), all capabilities can be replicated (as well as offering several advantages (e.g. cost over and outreach) live events).