# Presentation: 327581

## Presented at theFPA Annual Meeting
19 November 2003

**Interests in ITER**

**Presented at the****FPA Annual Meeting**
**19 November 2003**

**Bob Iotti**

## “Who” Was U.S. Industry?

## “Who” Now is Interested U.S. Industry?

## U.S. Industry Then and Now

**Fewer Large Corporations**
**Drop-outs.**
**Consolidation.**
**Liquidation.**
**More Smaller Corporations**
**Industrial enthusiasm for fusion business has significantly waned – but this may dramatically change due to **

## Extraordinary Administration Support

_**Statement by Spencer Abraham, DOE Secretary, on 10 November 2003 – 20 Year Facility Priorities**_
**“****So, let me now profile some of our top priorities ... First on our list is fusion. The prospect of a limitless source of clean energy for the world leads with our commitment to join the international fusion energy experiment known as ITER.”**
**Not since the early 1970s has there been such a supportive Administration policy on fusion energy.**
**The implications are striking for Industry supporting fusion energy.**

## U.S. Industry Objectives

**Shareholder Value**
**Equity Appreciation and Profits.**
**Value Metrics**** **** **
**Business Base (Business Fit).**
**Business Growth into New Markets (e.g., Spin-offs).**
**New Skill Acquisition.**
**Business Image.**
**Fusion Energy Science Offers**
**Science.**
**Engineering.**
**Technology.**
**Applications.**

## Fit of Industry Objectives and Fusion Energy Science

## Industry Interest in ITER is Unique in Fusion Energy Science

**It is a Fusion Science **_**and a Fusion Energy Project**_
**It will be the first **_**major**_** fusion project in over 20 years.**
**It will absolutely require major Industry participation.**
**As an Energy Project, it will:**** **** **
**Enhance virtually all Industry Business Value Metrics.**
**Be professionally relevant to Industry (Engineering) staff.**
**Appeal to society in general and funders in particular.**

## Industry Views on International ITER Organization and Procurement Approaches

**Discussion of “Best Value” for the U.S. from the US Industry Perspective.**
**Potential impacts of Licensing and Regulatory requirements on U.S. Industry contributions**
**How can Industry best support the Negotiations in the context of the “likely” International ITER Organization?**

**Industry Views on *****International***** ITER Organization and Procurement Approaches**

## Possible Management Structure

- ITER
- Director General

- Deputy
- Director General

- Deputy
- Science

- Deputy
- Administration

- Deputy
- Construction &
- Integration

- Deputy
- Commissioning &
- Operations

- Deputy
- ESH&Q &
- Regulatory

- Parties
- Project Managers

- Parties
- Resident Reps.

- Configuration
- Control Board

- First decide on optimum organization to run project,
- then determine best way in which the Parties can interface and
- support the project.

## What is “Value?”

**Obvious Metrics:**
**U.S. Cost = Full scope of R&D + Design + Fabrication + Installation + Check-out/Startup + Contingency.**
**Credit  = kIUA’s assigned (or negotiated) by ITER.**
**“****Best” is Cost = Credit.**
**Not Obvious:**
**Research participation may have linkage to type of contribution (not level) to construction activity.**
**Extent to which activity increases industrial capability in fusion and related technologies.**
**Extent to which activity builds a U.S. fusion technology work force. **

## Industry Interest is Different than the BP PAC

## U.S. Industry Must be More Involved

**In 1994, the DOE’s Fusion Energy Advisory Committee (FEAC) had 7 of its 15 members from Industry. Today the DOE Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) has 2 of its 17 from Industry.**
**From 1994 to 1998 there was an industry-organized independent Fusion Industrial Council, U.S. (FICUS) with members from 17 industries.**** **
**Until the U. S. withdrew from ITER, there was an ITER Industry Council (IIC), set up and managed by the U.S. ITER Home Team.**
**U.S. Industry now should decide how to increase involvement in ITER/Fusion advisory activities.**

## Industry Support of Negotiations 

**Suggestion of the most “effective project organization”**
**Suggestions of the “most desirable” packages?**
**Development of industrial estimates?**
**Development of management plans?**
**Development of procurement plans?**
**Development of risk mitigation plans?**
**Liaison with Industries of other Parties?**
**Keep out of the way?**
**Other?**

## Translating Interest into Involvement

**Formally participate in the selection of preferred U.S. ITER procurement packages.**
**Needed are DOE request and form of Industry response.**
**Form a confederation of U.S. companies to:**
**Respond to DOE requests,**
**Offer specific and timely Industrial expertise to the U.S. and to the ITER Organization, and**
**Advise the U.S. Government on demonstrated industrial methods to achieve ITER project objectives.**
**Actively support the ITER in U.S. Government agencies.**
**Achieve these goals while avoiding Conflict of Interest.**