ipOMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
C0M(94) 53 final 
Brussels, 25.02.1994 
Draft 
concerning the conclusion, by the Commission, of Protocol 2 to the Agreement among the 
European Atomic Energy Community, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian 
-ederation, and the Government of the United States of America on cooperation in the 
Engineering Design Activities (EDA) for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor 
<ITER). 
(presented by the Commission) 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 
1. The Agreement among the European Atomic Energy Community, the Government 
of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the 
United States of America ("the Parties") on cooperation in the Engineering Design 
Activities (EDA) for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) 
("the ITER EDA Agreement"), under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy 
Agency (IAEA), concluded among the Parties on 21 July 1992 (as far as the 
Community is concerned, in accordance with a Commission Decision of 
22 April 1992 1 following a Council Decision of 6 April 1992), is due to remain in 
force for six years. 
Pursuant to Article 3 of the ITER EDA Agreement, the EDA are implemented by two 
or more protocols, as appropriate, according to the progress of work. Protocol 1 to 
the ITER EDA Agreement ("Protocol 1"), also concluded among the Parties on 
21 July 1992, will terminate upon entry into force of Protocol 2, but not later than 
on 20 March 1994. 
2. Pursuant to Section 4 of Protocol 1, a draft Protocol 2 to the ITER EDA Agreement 
("Protocol 2") and draft accompanying documents have been prepared, taking into 
account the items set out in that provision, and submitted to the ITER Council by 
a Special Working Group established pursuant to Section 1 of Protocol 1. On 
22 April 1993, the ITER Council accepted for submission to the Parties' authorities 
the draft Protocol 2 and draft accompanying documents prepared by the Special 
Working Group for completion of the EDA under Protocol 2, with a view to 
negotiating and concluding Protocol 2 as soon as possible. 
OJ n°L244, 26.08.92, p. 13 4 
3. In its Decision of 10 December 1993 the Council: 
- authorized the Commission to conduct negotiations on Protocol 2 on the basis of 
the draft Protocol 2 and draft accompanying documents referred to under 
point 2 above, it being understood that such draft accompanying documents have 
the purpose of setting out in detail, inter alia, the implementing measures deemed 
necessary by the Parties for jointly completing the activities identified in Article 2 
of the Agreement and that such draft accompanying documents shall be 
complemented by the Outline Design report as approved by the ITER Council and 
by an annex established along the lines set out in Attachment 4 to the Directives 
for the Commission; and 
- stipulated that it is not opportune that a proposal for a decision authorizing the 
signature of Protocol 2 be presented until the Commission, having submitted the 
Outline Design report to the Council of the European Union and the Consultative 
Committee for the Fusion Programme (CCFP) as soon as it is available, to make 
sure that the Outline Design is acceptable, has received the opinion of that Council 
and of the CCFP and the agreement of the ITER Council for the adoption of that 
report as an accompanying document to Protocol 2. 
4. In view of point 3 above: 
- on 19 January T994 in its opinion on the Outline Design report, the CCFP 
recommended that the Community members of the ITER Council support the 
approval by the ITER Council of the Outline Design report, which will become an 
accompanying document to the Protocol 2 package; 
- on 28 January 1994 the ITER Council considered that the Outline Design report 
constitutes an acceptable basis for consideration by the Parties to proceed toward 
the conclusion of Protocol 2; and 
- on 21 February 1994 the Council of the European Union considered that the 
Outline Design report constitutes an acceptable basis for future work which could 
be included as an accompanying document to Protocol 2. 
5. The quadripartite negotiations have resulted in the following documents (annexed 
to the enclosed proposal for a Council Decision): the draft Protocol 2 (ANNEX I) and 
the Co-Chairs' Summary of the Negotiation Meeting (28 January 1994) (ANNEX II): 
- the draft Protocol 2 is identical to the one attached to the negotiation Directives; 
- the Co-Chairs' Summary contains, besides the draft Protocol 2 (ATTACHMENT I), 
the Negotiators' Shared Views (ATTACHMENT II) which match the draft 
accompanying documents attached to the negotiation Directives except for the 
following modifications (upon EAEC negotiators' request to comply with the 
Council Directives): 
. a point "EL Monitoring of the ITER EDA" (referred to under point 3 above) has 
been added 
. a point "fL. Outline Design" (referred to under points 3 and 4 above) has been 
added together with the relevant attachment "NSV Attachment 4" 
. NSV Attachment 1 (ITER Detailed Technical Objectives) has been slightly 
reworded 
( . NSV Attachments 2 and 3 have not been amended) 
6. It is considered that the Community will have to continue to conduct its contribution 
to the ITER EDA in the context of its overall Next Step R&D activities so as to 
preserve its full capability to proceed towards the construction of a Next Step device 
either in the framework of an international collaborative programme or on its own. 
7. The intended cooperative activities are technically compatible with the guidelines 
relevant to controlled thermonuclear fusion specific objectives laid down in the 
Council political orientation of 22 December 1993 on the draft decision concerning 
a Framework Programme of Community activities in the field of research and training 
for the EAEC (1994-1998) and are financially compatible with the breakdown of the 
amount deemed necessary for Community financial participation in the field of 
controWed thermonuclear fusion in that draft decision. 
8. Protocol 2 will have to be concluded by the Commission in conformity with the 
second paragraph of Article 101 of the Treaty establishing the EAEC. 
9. The Commission proposes that the Council adopt, in application of Article 101 
second paragraph, second phrase, of the Treaty establishing the EAEC, the Council 
Decision attached hereto concerning the conclusion, by the Commission, of 
Protocol 2. 
1 
* > D ftlf T 
COUNCIL DECISION 
of 
concerning the conclusion, by the Commission, of Protocol 2 to the Agreement among the 
European Atomic Energy Community, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian 
Federation, and the Government of the United States of America on cooperation in the 
Engineering Design Activities (EDA) for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor 
(ITER). 
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in 
particular the second paragraph of Article 101 thereof, 
Having regard to the draft Decision submitted by the Commission, 
Whereas the Commission has, in accordance with the Council Directives of 10 December 1993, 
conducted negotiations on Protocol 2 to the Agreement among the European Atomic Energy 
Community, the Government of Japan, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the 
Government of the United States of America on cooperation in the Engineering Design Activities 
for the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, 
Whereas the conclusion, by the Commission, of Protocol 2 should be approved; 
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS: 
Sole Article 
The conclusion, by the Commission, for and on behalf of the Community, of Protocol 2 to the 
Agreement among the European Atomic Energy Community, the Government of Japan, the 
Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the United States of America on 
cooperation in the Engineering Design Activities for the International Thermonuclear Experimental 
Reactor is hereby approved. 
The text of Protocol 2 is annexed to this Decision, together with the text of the Co-Chairs' 
Summary of the Negotiation Meeting. 
Done at , 
For the Council 
The President 
ANNEX I 
DRAFT PROTOCOL 2 
TO 
THE AGREEMENT AMONG THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY, THE GOVERNMENT 
OF JAPAN, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE 
UNTIED STATES OF AMERICA ON COOPERATION IN THE ENGINEERING DESIGN ACTrvrnES FOR 
THE BNIERNATIONAL THERMONUCLEAR EXPERIMENTAL REACTOR 
The European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)» the Government of Japan, the 
Government of the Russian Federation, and the Government of the linked States of America 
("the Parties"), 
HAVING REGARD to the Agreement on Cooperation in the Engineering Design Activities 
(EDA) for as International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), conchided among 
the Parties on July 21,1992 ("the Agreement"), and in particular to Article 3 thereof, 
HAVING INTTIATED the EDA under Protocol 1 to the Agreement, also conchided among the 
Parties on July 21,1992, and having the intent to complete jointly the EDA under Protocol 
2, 
HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS: 
Section 1 - Scope 
The Parties shall complete jointly the activities identified in Article 2 of the Agreement. These 
activities shall be conducted in accordance with detailed technical objectives of ITER adopted 
pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement 
Section 2 - Special Working Group 
A Special Working Group shall be established which, assisted by the Drrector, shaH submit 
proposais to the Council on approaches to joint implementation for decisions by the Parties 
on future coHStruetiGn, operation, exploitation and decommissioning of ITER, as specified in 
Article 2(e) ©f the Agreement. 
Section 3 - Implementation of the Work Program 
(1) The Director shall implement the Work Program and its updatings after approval of 
the Council in accordance with the schedules provided therein for the various tasks. 
(2) The technical description of a task, the task assignment, and the terms and 
conditions of its execution, developed in conformance with guidelines for 
implementation of task assignments established by the Council, shall form the 
subject of a Task Agreement. The Task Agreement shall be drawn up by the 
Director and signed by the Director and the Leader of the Home Team to whom the 
task has been assigned. Task Agreements shall be concluded in accordance with the 
approved Work Program and its updatings. 
(3) Each Home Team Leader shall ensure that access, for the purpose of interaction, 
monitoring of work in progress and evaluation of quality control, to the sites and 
premises where a task assigned to a Home Team is being carried out, as well as to 
the personnel performing and documents concerning the task, is not unreasonably 
denied either to the Director or to members of the Joint Central Team authorized 
by the Director. The Home Team Leader shall be notified in a timely fashion of 
such intended access. The detailed arrangements for this access shall be specified 
in the Task Agreement. 
Section 4 - Secondment Agreements 
(1) For the purposes of this Section, 
"Seconding Party" means the Party which makes a person available to the Joint 
Central Team in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Agreement, irrespective of 
whether that Party is the employer or not of that person; 
"Seconded Person" or "Seconded Personnel" means one or several persons made 
available by the Seconding Party to the Joint Central Team. 
(2) After the selection of a person in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Agreement, the 
employer of that person shall second such person without any undue delay to the 
Joint Central Team. In respect of each Seconded Person a specific Secondment 
Agreement shall be drawn up by the Director and signed by the Director, the 
Seconded Person, that person's employer and the entity operating the Joint Work Site 
to which that person shall be assigned. If the employer and the Seconding Party arc 
different entities, the Seconding Party shall endorse the Secondment Agrecmcnt(s) 
to indicate it has made the Seconded Personnel available to the Joint Central Team 
as described in Article 8(2) of the Agreement. The Secondment Agreement for the 
Director shall be co-signed by the Chair of the Council. 
The Secondment Agreement shall state the work and the Joint Work Site to which 
the Seconded Person shall be assigned, that person's reporting responsibility, and that 
the Seconded Person and that person's employer will comply with the provisions of 
Articles 8(2) and 15 of the Agreement and of this paragraph to the extent they 
concern the secondment, and that the Seconded Person will comply with the internal 
rules regarding safety and security to be observed on the premises of the Joint Work 
Site. The duration of a Secondment Agreement may not exceed that of this Protocol. 
Section 5 - Termination of the Work and Final Reporting 
When approving the Work Program and its annual updatings, the Council, assisted by the 
Director, shall provide for a timely and coordinated termination of the work to be carried 
out under the Agreement including the final reporting; if actions by the Parties are needed 
or otherwise appropriate, then the Council, assisted by the Director, shall make suitable 
proposals. 
Section 6 - Resources 
The resources required for the implementation of this Protocol shall be made available by 
the Parties in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Agreement. 
Section 7 - Duration 
This Protocol shall enter into force upon signature of the Parties and shall remain in force 
for the duration of the Agreement 
Done at , on in quadruplicate. 
For the European Atomic Energy Community: 
For the Government of Japan: 
For the Government of the Russian Federation: 
For the Government of the United States of America: 
ANNEX H 
Co-Chairs' Summary of the Negotiation Meeting. 
The four ITER delegations, pleased to hear statements from all sides with expressions of 
willingness to conclude the negotiation, agreed to submit to their authorities the two 
attachments with a view to concluding Protocol 2 of the ITER EDA Agreement as soon as 
possible . 
Negotiators' Initials: 
pf ev 
Date _JAt?.?...^©.,....\H^H 
Place li^ASSAAJNL^... 
DRAFT PROTOCOL 2 TO THE ITER EDA AGREEMENT 
AS GIVEN IN ANNEX I TO THE PRESENT COUNCIL DECISION 
NEGOTIATORS' SHARED VIEWS 
At the conclusion of their work on the final draft of Protocol 2 on this date, the 
negotiators shared the following views: 
JL Detailed Technical Objectives 
Detailed technical objectives of ITER referred to in Section 1 of Protocol 2 arc 
adopted by the Parties acting through the Council. The Council adopted those detailed 
technical objectives on December 15-16, 1992. (Attachment 1) 
__, Guidelines for Implementation of Task Assignments 
The Guidelines for Implementation of Task Assignments referred to in Section 3 of 
Protocol 2 are adopted by the Council. The Council adopted such Guidelines on April 22, 
1993 . (Attachment 2) 
l_ Secondment Agreements 
The Secondment Agreements referred to in Section 4 of Protocol 2 should be as 
uniform as practicable and reflect the Guidelines for Secondment Agreements, set forth in the 
attachment hereto. (Attachment 3) 
If the Seconding Party is not the employer of the Seconded Person, it will use its best 
efforts to ensure that the employer of the said Seconded Person complies with the provisions 
of Section 4 of Protocol 2 and the Guidelines. 
4. Financing 
With regard to Section 6 of Protocol 2: 
(1) each Party will bear its costs relating to: 
a) the participation of its members and experts in the work and the meetings of 
the Council, the TAC, the MAC, and the SWGs, including the costs for travel 
and subsistence; 
b) the secondment of its personnel to the Joint Work Sites; 
c) the execution of tasks assigned to its Home Team in accordance with Section 
3 of Protocol 2; and 
d) the organization of workshops taking place on its territory and the participation 
of its Home Team personnel in workshops, including travel expenses and 
subsistence; 
(2) in applying Article 14 of the Agreement, the Council will take account of the overall 
level of resources that each Host Party has offered as support for its Joint Work 
Site; 
(3) other expenditures, considered by the Council to l>e necessary for the satisfactory 
completion of Protocol 2, will be financed through the Joint Fund. 
•11 
5. Monitoring of the ITER EDA 
— •• •! —• «•»• i- 11—* 
The coherence between the general constraints set out in Section 1 of 
Attachment 1 and progress of work shall be validated on a yearly basis, pursuant to 
Article 16 of the Agreement. In particular, the technical approaches and the accuracy 
of the assessment of the cost of construction of ITER shall be verified, as foreseen at 
point 1(0 of Annex A to the Agreement, also on the basis of domestic data related to 
the main components of the facility. These evaluations may lead the ITER Council to 
readjust, if necessary, the constraints or the technical solutions. 
6. Outline Design 
The Council has endorsed the TAC-4 response that "the outline design 
[Attachment 4] will provide a sound basis for continued engineering design work 
after (1) modest further optimization of the major machine parameters to provide a 
reserve against cost increases, (2) modification of the engineering approache in 
certain areas, and (3) a broadening of technical capabilities so as to achieve greater 
operational flexibility." 
NSV Attachment 
ITER Detailed Technical Objectives 
1- General Constraints 
The ITER detailed technical objectives approaches, including appropriate 
margins, should be compatible with the aim of maintaining the cost of the 
device within the limits comparable to those indicated in the final report 
of the ITER CDA as well as keeping its impact in long-range fusion 
research and development. 
ITER should be designed to operate safely and to demonstrate the safety 
and environmental potential of fusion power. 
2. Performance and Testing 
Plasma Performance 
ITER should have a confinement capability to reach controlled ignition. 
The estimates of confinement capability of ITER should be based, as in 
the CDA procedure, on established favourable modes of operation. 
ITER should 
* demonstrate controlled ignition and extended burn for a duration 
sufficient to achieve stationary conditions on all time scales 
characteristic of plasma process and plasma wall interactions, and 
sufficient for achieving stationary conditions for nuclear testing of 
blanket components. This can be fulfilled by pulses with flat top 
duration in the range of 1000s. For testing particular blanket 
designs/pulses of approximately 2000s are desirable. 
* aim at demonstrating steady state operation using non-inductive 
current drive in reactor-relevant plasmas. 
Engineering Performance and Testing 
rniR should 
demonstrate the availability of technologies csscniial for a fusion reactor (sue: .?• 
superconducting magncis and remote maintenance); 
test components for a reactor (such as systems to exhaust power and panic!'-5 from 
the plasma); 
test design concepts of tritium breeding blankets relevant to a reactor. The tests 
foreseen on modules include the demonstration of a breeding capability that would 
lead to tritium self-sufficiency in a reactor, the extraction of high-grade heat, and 
electricity generation. 
3 Design Requirements 
The choice of parameters of the basic device should be consistent with margins that give 
confidence in achieving the required plasma and engineering performance. The design should 
be sufïïcicntfy flexible to provide 2xxcss for the introduction of advanced features and new 
capabilities, and to allow for.oprimising plasma performance during operation. The design 
should be confirmed by the scientific and technological database available at the end of the 
EDA. 
An inductive pulse flat-top capability, under ignited conditions, of approximately 1000s 
should be provided. In view of the ultimate goal of steady state operation, ITER should be 
designed to be compatible with non-inductive current drive, and the heating system required 
for ignition in the first phase of operation should have current drive capability. 
To carry out nuclear and high heat flux component testing at conditions relevant to a fusion 
power reactor 
the average neutron wall loading should be about 1 MW/m2-. 
the machine should be designed to be capable of at least lMWa/m2to carry out 
longer-time integral and materials tests. 
It is desirable to operate at higher flux and flucncc levels. Within the engineering margins, 
the ITER designers should examine the implications and possibilities of exploiting a wider 
range of operational regimes. The design of the permanent components of the machine 
should not preclude achieving flucncc levels up to 3 MWa/m2. For the second phase of 
operation, the design should include the capability of replacing the shield with a breeding 
blanket. * ' 
4 !IoixalLoji_K£ojiiixin^^ 
"HJC ITER operation should he divided into two phases: 
llic first phase. the Basic Performance Phase, is expected to last a decade including a 
few thousand hours of full DT operation. This phase should address the issues of 
controlled ignition, extended burn, steady state operation, and the testing of blanket 
modules. It is assumed that for this phase there will be an adequate supply of tritium 
from external sources. 
Controlled ignition experiments in ITER will address confinement, stability 
and impurity control in alpha panicle heated plasmas. Extended burn 
experiments will address, in addition, the control of fusion power production 
and plasma profiles, and the exhaust of helium ash. 
The aim of current drive experiments in this phase should be the 
demonstration of steady state operation in plasmas having alpha panicle. 
heating power at least comparable to the externally applied power. Using the 
heating systems in their current drive mode, non-inductive current drive 
should be implemented for profile and burn control, for achieving modes of 
-improved confinement, and for assessing the conditions and power 
requirements for the above type of steady state operation. Depending on the 
outcome of these experiments, additional current drive power may have to be" 
installed. 
Functional tests of blanket modules in this phase should consist of a few 
thousand hours of integral burn time, in parallel with the physics programme, 
including continuous test campaigns of 3-6 days at a neutron wall loading of 
about 1 MW/m2. 
The second phase. Enhanced Performance Phase, is also expected to last a decade, 
with emphasis placed on improving overall performance and carrying out a higher 
flucncc component and materials testing programme. This phase should address high 
availability operation and advanced modes of plasma operation, and may address 
reactor-relevant blanket segment demonstration. Operation during this phase should 
include continuous testing campaigns lasting 1-2 weeks, and should accumulate a 
flucncc of at least iMWa/m*. 
A decision on incorporating breeding for this phase should he decided on the basis of 
the availability of tritium from external sources, the results of breeder blanket testing, 
and experience with plasma aad machine pcWoflmance. 
The impkriKfltation of the Enhanced Performance Phase should be mapç following a review 
of the results from the Basic Performance Phase and an assessment of the relative value of 
the proposed elements of the programme. 
NSV AU:»chiitv!i 
Guidelines for 
Implementation of Task Assignments 
A, Approval and Revision of Task Agreements 
(1) Each Task Agreement exceeding 300 IUA in value shall be concluded only after the 
task with its technical description and assignment to a Party has been approved by the ITER 
Council. 
(2) Task Agreements equal to or below 300 IUA in value may be concluded directly 
between the Director and the Home Team Leader concerned. The Director shall promptly 
inform the other three Home Team Leaders of such Task Agreements. 
(3) The total value of Task Agreements equal to or below 300 IUA assigned by the 
mechanism established in paragraph (2) above should not exceed 3,000 IUA in any period 
between meetings of MAC. 
(4) Revisions to Task Agreements to incorporate minor technical changes within the scope 
of work already approved by the Council may be implemented upon agreement of the 
Director and the affected Home Team Leader. Task scope changes up to a limit of +/- 300 
IUA or 20 %, whichever is smaller, per task may also be implemented upon agreement of the 
Director and the Home Team Leader. Tasks concerning work whose results are no longer 
required may be terminated by mutual consent of the Director and the Home Team Leader 
affected; the ITER credit for such tasks must be revised appropriately. All revisions other than 
1) minor technical changes, 2) scope changes less than or equal to 300 IUA, and 3) 
termination as defined above must be approved by the Council through procedures defined 
in the Agreement for new task assignments; in these cases, the Director shall adjust the ITER 
credit as appropriate. 
(5) All revisions or Task Agreements not requiring Council approval must be reported to 
the Council. . .. 
B. Task Identification, Definition and Valuation 
In identifying and defining tasks, the following guidelines shall apply: 
(1) While acting in close interaction with the Home Team Leaders to identify tasks, the 
Director shall also establish the ITER credits that the Parties undertaking the tasks would 
receive, litis interaction should, as far as possible, lead to a common understanding on 
feasible, effective approaches to identification and definition and the valuation of the tasks. 
4> 
(2) Before the list of these tasks is sent to the Home Team Leaders for formal response, 
the Director should inform the Home Team Leaders of the list of tasks together with the 
credits the Party undertaking each of the tasks would obtain; any Party with an interest in 
performing a task should rapidly inform the Director so that if more than one Party expresses 
such an interest, the Director shall, in close interaction with Home Team Leaders, identify 
how these interests could best be taken into account, either through splitting into smaller 
tasks, parallel efforts or joint efforts. 
(3) Within two months after receipt from the Director of the list and technical description 
of tasks, each Party shall for those tasks in which it has an interest, make a formal response 
providing the following information: 
(a) a description of its capability to meet the specifications and schedules as well 
as the availability of necessary resources, facilities and know-how, 
(b) an indication of where the work would be performed; however, where it is not 
possible to provide such information due to the iterative nature of a Party's 
contracting procedures, the Party shall give the Director an indication of the 
type of performing institutions likely to be involved with final notification 
immediately upon selection of the performing institutions, 
(c) an evaluation of the technical risk and, in case of high technical risk, possible 
suggestions for parallel efforts. 
(4) On the basis of the above information and of the guiding principles set out in 
Annex B,1(Q to the Agreement and these guidelines, the Director shall propose in the 
Work Program to be submitted periodically by the Director to the Council pursuant to 
Article 11 of the Agreement, the assignment of tasks to each of the Home Teams. 
(5) In concluding particular Task Agreements, consideration will be given by the 
Director to including in the ITER credit the relevant work that pertains to those tasks and 
was initiated by the Party after the signature of the ITER EDA Agreement and Protocol 
1. -
(6) Within each-task system area, there should be a reasonable balance of tasks shared 
among the Parties. In assessing this balance, the qualitative characteristics of the tasks to 
be assigned, e.g., the nature of test facilities and the level of technology, should be.taken 
into account. 
(7) Where no Party expresses an interest in performing a patticular task, the Director 
shall, through close interaction with the Home Team Leaders, attempt to interest at least 
one of the Parties. If the Director fails to interest one of the Parties, he may appeal to the 
ITER Council, in accordance with Article ?A (1). 
(8) For some individual tasks, parallel efforts by more than one Patty may be justified 
because of high perceived technical risk or uncertainty, which could involve staged 
assignments. 
# 
(9) The ITER Director shall, in close interaction with the Home Team Leaders, ensure 
that the disaggregation of work into tasks covered by Task Agreements docs not exceed 
what is necessary to ensure an efficient execution of the work, bearing in mind the need 
to ensure a reasonable sharing of the work between the Parties. Each Task Agreement 
shall describe a reasonable, coherent, self-contained scope of work wan well defined 
interfaces. 
(10) The distribution of design work between the JCT and the Home Teams should, in 
general, respect fee principle that the JCT should perform only that work which can be 
more appropriately performed by a central team. The total ITER credit for design tasks 
assigned to the Home Teams is understood to be the equivalent of about 500 Professional 
Person Years. 
C Selection Criteria 
(1) Expressions of interest to perform a task should be considered for selection only 
if they document the capability to meet the specifications and schedules as well as the 
availability of accessary facilities and know-how. 
Before rejecting any expression of interest on the grounds that the technical requirements 
axe not satisfied, the ITER Director shall inform the relevant Home Team Leader, who 
for a short period will be given the opportunity to revise the Party's proposal. 
(2) The selection from among those expressions of interest mat meet these technical 
requirements shall be based primarily on : 
(a) technical experience and capability of the proposed implementing institutions, 
(b) technical risk of the proposed approach, and 
(c) demonstrated understanding of the technical and managerial requirements. 
Other factors, such as the need to maintain a reasonable balance of tasks in a task system 
area, the priorities -assigned by the Parties to the work, or the quality of the proposed 
approach, should be taken into account as appropriate. J 
D. Role of MAC 
MAC shall meet as frequently as necessary to ensure that the Director's proposals arc 
acted upon quickly between Council meetings. Electronic and other communications 
should be used to ensure rapid approval by the Council of MACs unanimous 
lecomrociidations; other cases require Council approval according to the normal Council 
Rules of Procedure-
M 
E. Inadequate Performance by a Party on Design and R&D Tasks 
(1) Inadequate performance by a Party on a task assigned to it is defined as the Home 
Team's inability to make adequate progress toward completing the task as specified 
in the Task Agreement or the Home Team's inability to achieve an adequate standard 
of design or workmanship in performing the task. 
Each Task Agreement should contain a standard article describing the broad 
principles concerning inadequate performance contained herein. 
(2) When a Home Team Leader becomes aware of the possibility of inadequate 
performance on a task assigned to his Party, he shall immediately notify the 
Director. 
(3) If the Director considers there to be a likelihood of inadequate performance on a 
task, the Director shall issue a formal "notice of inadequate performance" to the 
Home Team Leader concerned specifying: 
- why the Director considers there might be inadequate performance, on the task; 
and 
a reasonable period within which the Home Team concerned should 
demonstrate, to the Director's satisfaction, that adequate performance can be 
achieved. 
For tasks assigned to the Parties whose credit is equal to or below 300 IUA, the 
Director may then proceed directly to reassign the task to another Party. 
(4) For tasks whose credit exceeds 300 IUA, a copy of the formal notice of inadequate 
performance shall be sent to the Council for information. 
If, at the end of the period specified in the notice, adequate performance cannot be 
demonstrated, the Director shall make a proposal concerning the future of the task 
to the Council. 
(5) When the, Director, having followed the procedure in (4), proposes to re-assign part 
or all of a task to another Party, his proposal to the Council'shall identify the 
following: 
the work to be re-assigned, and its relationship to the original task; 
- the Party to whom the work will be re-assigned; 
- the number of ITER credits to be re-assigned; 
- the information and hardware and equipment to be provided by the inadequate 
performing Party relative to the work completed; business confidential 
information that had already been provided to the JCT with an obligation 
concerning its confidentiality shall be provided to the Party taking over the 
task; business confidential information that had not been provided to the JCT 
need not be transferred to the Party taking over the task. 
49 
(6) Where a task has been reassigned or cancelled in whole or in part following 
inadequate performance, the Director shall make every effort to assign remaining 
ITER task in a manner that maintains the principle of approximately equal sharing 
of tasks as defined in Annex B. In doing so, no work will be withdrawn from a 
Party performing that work satisfactorily. 
F. Reuse of Facilities and Other Assets Resulting from a completed Task Agreement 
In his call to the Parties for expressions of interest in a task, the Director shall include, 
when appropriate, an element dealing with any reuse for the facilities and other assets 
resulting from completion of such a Task Agreement within the EDA period. Any specific 
article within the Task Agreement shall be negotiated by the Director and the Home Team 
Leader(s) concerned. 
Terminology 
The following definitions arc used in the development of the guidelines for the 
implementation of task assignments. 
Task - that work which is performed by the Joint Central Team (JCT) or a Home Team. 
A task which is assigned to a Home Team is the subject of a Task Agreement, of which 
there may be hundreds. A task assigned to one Home Team may involve other Home 
Teams. 
Task System Area - a group of tasks that comprise a natural ITER system, of which there 
may be ten(s). 
Task Assignment - the process by which tasks are assigned to each of the Home Teams 
and the JCT. 
Task Agreement - the agreement document that contains the technical description of the 
task, the results of the task assignment process, and the terms and conditions of its 
execution. 
Staged Assignment— an approach to assigning those tasks whose technical complexity or 
risk warrants a step-by-step assignment process in which conceptualising, designing, 
developing, and testing (or other steps) may be successively assigned either to the. same 
Party or multiple Parties or to a narrowing set of Parties in which case the initial tasks 
involve multiple Parties but subsequent tasks are refined to involve fewer Parties. 
Design Tasks - those tasks needed to carry out the design (both engineering and physics 
design) activities to be assigned to both the JCT and Home Teams, and whose cost 
estimate was included within the estimated 250 million January 1989 US$ for design work 
in the Final Report of the ITER Conceptual Design Activities (CDA). 
TgclmoLogy R&D Tasks - those tasks supporting the design which include the Basic 
Technology R&D and the Specific Engineering R&D as defined in the above mentioned 
Final Report and whose total cost was estimated to be about 750 million January 1989 
US$ (400 and 350 million respectively) in that Report. 
so 
Work Program - introduced in Article 11, the Work Program is understood to be an 
evolving document receiving regular refinement throughout the EDA. 
ITER Credits - the value in ITER Units of Account (IUA) [equivalent to 1000 US$ at 
January 1989 values] attributed to a particular design or technology R&D task by the 
ITER Director at the time the task is sent to the Home Team Leaders with a request for 
expressions of interest. The only corrections to this value will be those related to changes 
in the scope of the task. The sum of all such credits should be comparable with the 
estimates in the Final Report of the CDA. 
Adopted by the Council 
April 22,1993 
M 
NSV Attachment 3 
GUIDELINES FOR SECONDMENT AGREEMENTS 
(a) The Seconded Personnel shall remain employees of their existing 
employers and the contract of employment between the Seconded Personnel 
and its employer shall subsist during the secondment. The employer 
shall continue to pay its Seconded Personnel their salaries and other 
related expenditure such as social charges, allowances, fees and cost 
reimbursement according to the legislation and rules applicable to the 
employer; 
(b) The employer shall ensure that accident insurance and other insurance in 
favor of the Seconded Person which exist by virtue of the conditions of 
employment remain valid during the secondment to the Joint Central Team. 
The employer will immediately inform its responsible departments and its 
insurers of the secondment. If an existing insurance protection of the 
Seconded Person is affected, the employer will be responsible for re­
establishing an equivalent insurance protection; 
(c) During the secondment, the leave regulations of the employer will be 
valid and shall be ocronunicated to the Director. The timing and 
duration of leave during the secondment shall be arranged with the 
Director who shall notify the employer. In accordance with paragraph 
(b), the regulations of the. existing employer in regard to sick leave 
shall remain valid during the period of the secondment; and, 
(d) The employer of the Seconded Personnel shall, with regard to the 
careers of its Seconded Personnel, give due consideration to the 
performance of these Seconded Personnel during their secondment to the 
Joint Central Team. 
a 
NSV Attachment 4 
OUTLINK DESIGN 
The Council took note of the TAC Report on the Outline Design and, by endorsing a 
recommendation made by TAC, considered that the Outline Design Report constitutes an 
acceptable basis for consideration by the Parties to proceed toward the conclusion of Protocol 2, 
although it is recognized that the detailed technical design will have to evolve in order to address 
the concerns that have been identified by TAC. 
Consequently, the Council asks the Director to address each of the recommendations on the 
Outline Design in the TAC Report. 
In particular, as recommended by the TAC, the Council requests the Director and JCT to conduct 
a sensitivity analysis to determine the optimum way to achieve a reduction in cost while 
minimizing the impact on the performance margin. 
JB 
ITER OUTLINE DF.SIGN 
I INTRODUCTION 
This report describes the Outline Design for ITER developed during the first 
eighteen months of the ITER EDA. A coherent design has been developed which 
satisfies with appropriate safety margins the agreed programmatic and detailed 
technical objectives of ITER. The estimated cost of constructing ITER for the Basic 
Performance Phase is within limits comparable to those indicated in the final report of 
the ITER CDA. , 
The Outline Design now provides a basis for the continued engineering design 
work, for focusing ITER research and development and for other related activities 
within the scope of the ITER EDA Agreement. 
II PROGRAMMATIC AND TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES 
The overall programmatic objective of ITER, as defined in the ITER EDA Agreement, 
is to demonstrate the scientific and technological feasibility of fusion energy for peaceful 
purposes. ITER would accomplish this by demonstrating controlled ignition and 
extended burn of deuterium-tritium plasmas, with steady state as an ultimate goal, by 
demonstrating technologies essential to a reactor in an integrated system, and by 
performing integrated testing of the high-heat-flux and nuclear components required to 
utilize fusion energy for practical purposes. 
Detailed technical objectives along with the technical approaches to determine the 
best practicable way to achieve the prograrrimatic objective of ITER have been adopted 
by the ITER Council, under the terms of Protocol 1 of the ITER EDA Agreement. 
The main characteristics and parameters of the Outline Design for ITER follow from 
the agreed programmatic and detailed technical objectives. The statement of detailed 
technical objectives establishes two phases of operation as necessary to meet the 
programmatic objective, the Basic Performance Phase and an Enhanced Performance 
Phase. The Outline Design provides the design for Basic Performance and allows for a 
future incorporation of features which could be needed to achieve the objectives of the 
Enhanced Performance Phase. 
The size, configuration and performance of the plasma in the Outline Design are set 
to meet the objective of demonstrating controlled ignition providing an inductive pulse 
flat-top capability, under ignited conditions, of approximately of 1000s. The 
characteristics of the in-vessel components and the overall scale of the Tokamak follow 
from this objective and from the design objectives set for carrying out nuclear and high 
heat flux component tests at conditions relevant to a fusion power reactor. 
The Outline Design incorporates safety and technical margins consistent with this 
major step in Fusion development. 
V» 
Ill MAIN ELEMENTS OFTHE OUTLINE DESIGN 
///.I Principal Parameters 
The principal parameters of the Outline Design for ITER are listed in Table 1: 
Table 1 Principal Parameters of the ITER Outline Design 
Fusion Power (nominal) 1.5 GW 
Burn Time (nominal) 1000 seconds 
Plasma Current 24 MA 
Major Radius (nominal)* 7.7 m 
Plasma Minor Radius (maximum) 3.0 m- ' 
Elongation 1.6 
Divertor Configuration Single Null 
Toroidal Field (at nominal major Radius) 6 Tesla 
Toroidal field ripple at plasma edge ±2% 
(maximum) 
* The nominal major radius is the barycenter of the standard plasma configuration. 
The main features of the Outline Design are shown in cross-section and in 3-D in 
Figures 1 and 2 below. 
III.2 Physics Basis 
Physics studies of the core of the plasma, based on statistical analysis and scaiings of 
experimental results from leading fusion devices, indicate that the Outline Design 
provides good assurance of sustained and controlled ignition under a range of 
conditions and operating scenarios. The ignition domain is resilient to the key areas of 
physics uncertainties - achievable plasma confinement, plasma impurity levels and 
thermal helium removal. The overall machine parameters are set at the minimum size 
necessary to provide reasonable safety margins and to avoid the risk of harm from 
instabilities or disruptions. 
IIL3 Superconducting Coils and Meclmnical Structure 
The ITER objectives dictate the use in ITER of Superconducting magnet technology. 
The design of the. overall magnet system is integrated with that of the mechanical 
structure in order to minimize stress under the planned operating conditions. The 
system comprises 24 toroidal field coils, a central solenoid and six external poloidal field 
coils. The toroidal coils are bucked on the central solenoid in order to provide the 
maximum volt second capability and a balance of electromechanical forces. The toroidal 
field coils are layer wound allowing for structural stiffness to be provided by steel shear 
plates between each conductor layer. The central solenoid is also layer wound with a 
thick-walled conductor which provides the necessary structural strength. The poloidal 
coil system is flexible enough to accommodate a wide variety of plasma configuration 
which could be of interest in the Enhanced Performance Phase. 
ÀÏ 
CenIrai 
Solenoid 
CS 
10-\ 
-5H 
-10 
-15\ Toroidal Field 
Coi I 
Upper Port 
Closeout 
Poloidal Field 
Coil PF3 
Shield 
Mechanical 
Structure 
Removable Shield 
for R.H Access 
Removable 
Shield module 
Vacuum Vessel 
Poloidal Field 
Coil PF4 
Divertor 
Poloidal Field 
Coil PF5 
Poloidal Field 
Coil PF6 
Machine Support 
Structure 
~20 
METRES 
Figure 1 
f**wre 2 
IUA Vacuum Vessel 
The Vacuum Vessel is a double wall structure fabricated from 24 toroidally 
continuous segments, welded between ports and filled with metal balls and coolant. It 
also acts as a shielding component and containment structure. Access ports are 
provided at three levels, upper (for shield/blanket installation and replacement) 
equatorial (for hearing and current drive, blanket module testing, remote handling and 
diagnostics), and lower (for divertor operations, pumping). 
UIJ5 . First Wall and Shield-Blanket 
The First Wall forms a part of a low temperature (< 200° C), water-cooled shield-
blanket using conventional structural materials. The principal material is stainless steel; 
copper is used for the high heat flux surfaces so as to ensure good safety margins at the 
reference wall loading for the Basic Performance Phase. The shield-blanket is divided 
into separate inboard and outboard components and subdivided toroidally to allow 
installation and replacement through the upper access ports. The first wall is coated 
with low-Z material. 
The test blanket modules are installed through the outer port. They are operated 
separately from the shield-blanket and could be removed independendy. 
Provision is made in the Outline Design for a future incorporation of a breeding 
blanket which could be needed to meet the objectives of the Enhanced Performance 
Phase. The shield aitd blanket are both self supporting, independent components. 
JIf.6 Divertor- -
The Outline Design incorporates an advanced divertor concept in which power is 
transferred from the plasma edge to the walls of the divertor chamber before it reaches 
the divertor plates. The divertor comprises a modular structure with each module 
containing a cooled array of baffles to intercept the power. The coolant used is 
compatible with that of shielding blanket 
UIJ Heating and Current Drive 
About 50 MW of additional heating is provided in the Outline Design. The design is 
based on Ion Cyclotron Radio Frequency waves but is compatible with other forms of 
heating and current-drive such as Electron Cyclotron waves and Neutral Beam 
Injection. ICRF design is such that the antenna is able to launch a travelling wave (fast 
wave) with current.drive capability. The total power could be increased up to 100 MW 
or more without changing the antenna. 
UlS Cryostat 
The cryostat is a filled, double-walled steel structure which acts also as a shielding 
component and containment structure. 
l\ -r i 
III.1.) Safely and environment 
The ITER experimental device will be the first fusion facility integrating major 
elements of a thermonuclear reactor. ITER is designed to operate safely and to 
demonstrate the safety and environmental potential of fusion power. Specific features 
of the Outline Design include: 
- fast fuel recycling to minimize tritium inventory; 
- several barriers of confinement for radioactive materials including the 
blanket-shield, the Vacuum Vessel and the Cryostat; 
- incorporation of technical and physics margins. 
Analysis to date shows that the the Outline Design is consistent with the anticipated 
regulatory limits for routine as well as accidental exposure to the public. 
XV ESTIMATED COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION 
On the basis of work done to date, the costs of constructing ITER according to the 
Outiine Design are estimated at 5.6Bn US Dollars (Jan 1989 values). A preliminary cost 
breakdown in main components are listed in Table 2. 
Table 2 ITER Outline Design - Estimated Costs of Construction 
% in Million US Dollars Qan 1989 values) 
Superconducting Magnet Systems 1733 
Vacuum vessel, blanket, divertor 495 
Cryostat, cryoplant, vacuum and heat transport 580 
Heating, fuelling, power supply and other plant 799 
Buildings and Structures 590 
Assembly Equipment and Assembly 470 
Sub-Total 4667 
Contingency p^jj ^ 
Total 5600 
The cost estimate is based on the specific features of the design which meets the 
technical objectives of the Basic Performance Phase and does not include the ITER 
Team. The estimates are indicative at at this early stage of the Project and will be 
updated as the work of the EDA proceeds. Firm cost data can only be determined when 
the detailed design, including industrial cost estimates, is complete. 
is 
FICHE SME 
Impact on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) 
The Community R&D contribution envisaged under Protocol 2 will be implemented through 
work placed through the Contracts of Association and the NET Agreement as foreseen in 
the proposed Commission Decision concerning the implementation of the Fusion 
Programme. 
Where it is necessary for industry to supply equipment and services required for the 
implementation of the Contracts of Association or the NET Agreement, the Associations 
and NET have procedures for inviting European firms to tender for such supplies. For large 
contracts, firms from all Member States (plus Sweden and Switzerland) are invited to 
tender, the eventual contractor being selected as the tenderer with the lower cost capable 
of meeting the technical specification. 
There are, in general, no specific provisions for SMEs in these calls for tender, since 
technically competent SMEs are invited to participate to each call for tender as appropriate. 
Recently, however, in the system of qualification of European firms within technologies 
specific to fusion and essential for the Next Step in fusion research (OJ N° C 68, 
11.03.93, p. 15), it has been agreed that due regard to SMEs will be taken when 
establishing the lists of firms or grouping of firms to be invited to tender for work in the 
Next Step technologies. 
The Commission is currently setting up a Fusion Industry Committee, consisting of 
representatives from within the Fusion programme and from European industry, to act as 
a point of contact between the Programme and industry and to advise the Commission 
through the Consultative Committee for the Fusion Programme, on fusion-industry matters. 
The interests of SMEs will be represented on this Committee. 
lo 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(94) 53 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 11 12 14 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-94-061-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-65624-7 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
lw-2985 Luxembourg