——— question: “Introduction E. Integration of the construction, operation and maintenance phases; z.B. is used at all stages of the project the investigation period resulting from the evolution of the design studies (which is the result of the work package). Answer: Consortium members are free to adapt the draft consortium agreement available on SKA`s website for use as a certification body in the manner they deem appropriate, unless the certification body is in conflict with the moU`s conditions or intentions. [CA]. ——— question: “1. Definitions. The definition of SKA participants refers to an agreement to which the SKAO belongs. This could be an agreement between the SKAO and the Lead Institute Consortium, not a proposed consortium agreement in its current form. Answer: The definition of the SKA contributor would apply to a lead consortium organization under an agreement to which it and the SKA organization were the only parties. However, the SKA organization requires all consortium members to sign up for a certification body so that the definition of the SKA contributor also applies to them. ——— question: “As the leader of the consortium, we would expect to conclude a SKAO consortium agreement that defines: (a) the management of the means of delivery (product) – including the explicit indication that the SKAO – Consortium negotiates and defines the work before the contract is signed; (b) the processes that govern changes in the scope of results – including negotiations to stay within the scope, priorities, etc.; c) how the delivery element is tracked (progress) and is ultimately considered “complete” (by whom, how, etc.); the RfP lists many documents that a consortium must provide, but no contracting procedure.
Answer: (a) The performance of the work is determined at the level of the work statement. Upon entering the MoU, the members of the consortium jointly commit themselves to the SKA organization to carry out the tasks mentioned in the SOW. The members of the consortium assign responsibility for each means of implementation among themselves within the framework of the BOARD. [MoU and CA]. b) At the UNION level, the proposed changes to the results are subject to an impact assessment by the SKA organisation and, if necessary, accepted in accordance with the amending procedure set out in the treaty negotiation statement. Requests for amendments are evaluated by the SKA organization administratively, technically, scientifically, etc., and approved or rejected accordingly. [MoU]. At the CA level, changes to the delivery obligations of consortium members (i.e.
the allocation of responsibility for certain tasks between consortium members) are negotiated by and between consortium members according to the terms of their certification body.