Ref.

Ares(2013)1040184 Ares(2012)1526691 - 14/05/2013 19/12/2012

COMMISSION EUROPENNE
Di RECTORATE-GENERAL

REGIONAL AND URBAN POLICY Smart and Sustainable Growth and Southern Europe

Cyprus and Greece

Bruxelles, REGIO G5/MS

Dear Mr Chatziparadisi,

Subject: Major project application "Corfu water supply" CCI: 2012GR161POOG2

The "Corfu water supply" project is a project that has been repeatedly discussed among our services. It's recognized that the project cyclc of environmental interventions of this magnitude can prove extremely challenging. Our main concerns were raised in our letter of 13/09/2011. Even though some of them were taken in account, the submitted application in June 2012 had not sufficiently addressed all the issues and therefore, the project was deemed not admissible (letter of 04/07/2012). The rejection was based on two reasons: land acquisition and the phasing criteria. The application submitted and registered to our records on 26/11/2012 does not answer satisfactorily the risks stated in our rejection letter of 04/07/2012. The rejection was based on two reasons: land acquisition and the phasing criteria. Even though in the application you provide indicative timetables for land acquisition, wc note that there is no progress made. For instance, it is expected that the trial on the surface of 43.6ha (approximately 33% of the total surface) will take place on February 2013. However, the same trial was expected to take place on 8/5/2012 and then on 13/11/2012 according to the information received by your services. Therefore, we consider that this risk is still maintained. Experience showed that land acquisition is a high risk issue; similar projects that faced this problem encountered considerable delays to the implementation, entailing high risk of non-completion especially in touristic areas. As for the phasing criteria, the documentation provided in the application does not fully justify the division into phases. COCOF note 12-0047-00-EN states that project phase should be defined in such a way so that when effectively implemented it can fulfill a clear purpose and/or functionIn the timetables provided, the phasing is presented based on the anticipated contracts, but in the application, the function and or purpose of each phase is not clearly defined. We consider that this issue needs to be re-examined and full}7 justified.

Mr Xatziparadisis Managing authority OP Environment 34, Aeroporou Papanastasiou str. 11527 Athens

Commission europenne, 1049 Bruxelles, BELGIQUE - Tl. +32 22991111 http://ec.eijropa.eij/regionai__policy/

All the above have been also highlighted during the technical meeting that took place on 15lh November with the relevant services. Furthermore, there also two other issues that need to be re-examined: the division of the project in two projects (Al and A2) and the data concerning the feasibility studies (presented in C.1.2 section of the application form). I would like to remind you that according to art. 39 reg. 1083/2006, major projects are defined as ".... Series of works, activities or services intended in itself to accomplish an indivisible task...". In the submitted major project application, the project is split two projects (Al and A2) while the application concerns only project A2. It needs to be clear, if these projects (Al and A2) accomplish an individual task, or if they can function independently and or have complementary functions. Also, the data presented in the C.1.2 section of the application concerning feasibility studies needs to be updated. We understand the importance of this project for the island of Corfu. Our common goal is to avoid the risk of loss of EU Funds. Undoubtedly, the complexity of the said project, its size, maturity and environmental characteristics, make this project (and its application) a special case. I would like to remind you that similar co-financed projects, such as the Aposelemis and Gadouras dam are still to be completed and to be operational and face consequently the possibility of EU funds loss. In this context, the managerial and implementation capacity of the CORFOU project needs to be fully examined. Given that Jaspers will follow certain projects in Greece in the immediate future, we consider that this project should be included in Jaspers' action plan and therefore we suggest that you withdraw this application from SFC In case you consider resubmitting the project, I remind you that Jasper's technical report should be submitted as well. Our services consider that the successful project implementation will largely depend on resolving these issues in a solid and robust way and avoiding the mistakes made in the past. This, in turn, will consolidate and further increase the preparedness and maturity of the project.

.
Sabine OURDY Head of Unit

Copy: Ms E. Gioti, Ministry of Development, Competitiveness, Infrastructures and Networks, Mr Landabaso, DG Regional and Urban policy G l .