U.S. Department of Energy’sOffice of Science

Dr. Erol Oktay*Acting Director

ITER and International DivisionDecember 14, 2007

* (on behalf of Dr. Ray Fonck)

DOE Perspectives and PlansFor Engagement of ITER

www.science.doe.gov/ofes

for theNational Research Council Committee to Review U.S. ITER Science Participation

Planning Process (CRISPPP)

ITER – a bold and unprecedentedinternational scientific endeavor

• Mission: To demonstrate the scientific and technical feasibility of fusion power– Culmination of 50 years of international research effort on plasma physics and fusion– Explores new and complex science of burning plasmas– Integrates challenging enabling technologies

• A 35 year collaboration among seven ITER Members, representing more than half of the world population

– Joint design, construction, operation, and decommissioning– Common integrated research program

• U.S. Participation - a Presidential Initiative of January 30, 2003– Supported by technical accomplishments, and by community and NRC reviews– Highest priority in the Office of Fusion Energy Sciences programs

• Current ITER focus on design and construction– Extensive ongoing scientific support of design, and preparations for operations

Outline

ITER Overview• Progress on the International Front

– Establishment of ITER Organization (IO) – ITER Project Overview and Design Review (DR)

• Progress on the Domestic Front– US ITER Project Scope & Organization– Budget and Plans

U.S. activities and plans for ITER science• U.S. Burning Plasma Organization

– USBPO Energy Policy Act (EPAct) Plan • International Context

– Preparations for operational phase• Next Steps

Summary

Progress on the International Front

ITER Agreement Ratification Process Complete

• November 21, 2006 – the ITER Agreement was signed by the seven Members.

• October 24, 2007 – the ITER Agreement entered into force and the ITER Organization became a legal entity.

• November 27-28, 2007 - with completion of the above milestones, the first official ITER Council Meeting was held.

First Official ITER Council Meeting Highlights

• ITER Management Staff, Chairs/Vice Chairs of Council, and Subsidiary Bodies have been appointed.

• IO is staffed to a level of about 200 personnel, roughly 1/3 of that expected in the future.

• Project site in Cadarache, France is mostly cleared; site excavation to begin in mid-2008.

• Design Review has produced a reference design – still requires further optimization in the near future prior to construction start.

• IO to prepare an integrated Project Plan and Resource Estimates based on the optimized reference design for presentation to IC-2 in June 2008 – establishing new ITER Baseline.

• US ITER Project Office (USIPO) expects to place long-lead procurements in 2008-2009 once Procurement Arrangements are established with the IO.

• Council endorsed the proposal for development of guidelines for accession of new ITER Members. Kazakhstan has indicated serious interest.

Management Structure of the ITER Organization

• Will cover an area of about 60 ha• Large buildings up to 170 m long• Large number of systems

Tokamak Building

Tritium Building

Cryoplant Buildings

Magnet Power Conversion Buildings

Hot Cell

Cooling Towers

The ITER Site

ITER ITER –– Key FactsKey Facts

Present ITER Office Building

• Designed to produce 500 MW of fusion power (Q > 10)for at least 400 seconds (Achieved to date Q<1 for ~ a few seconds)

• Will optimize physics and integrate many of key technologies needed for future fusion power plants

• 10 years construction,20 years operation5 years deactivation

• Seven Members: EU (Host), China, India, Japan, Russia, South Korea, USA

The Core of ITER

Toroidal Field CoilNb3Sn, 18, wedged

Central SolenoidNb3Sn, 6 modules

Poloidal Field CoilNb-Ti, 6

Vacuum Vessel9 sectors

Port Plugheating/current drive, test blanketslimiters/RHdiagnostics

Cryostat24 m high x 28 m dia.

Blanket440 modules

Torus Cryopumps, 8

Major Plasma Radius 6.2 m

Plasma Volume: 840 m3

Plasma Current: 15 MA

Typical Density: 1020 m-3

Typical Temperature: 20 keV

Fusion Power: 500 MWMachine mass: 23350 t (cryostat + VV + magnets)- shielding, divertor and manifolds: 7945 t + 1060 port plugs- magnet systems: 10150 t; cryostat: 820 t

Divertor54 cassettes

Construction Phase Cost Sharing

Overall sharing:EU 5/11, other six parties 1/11 each. Overall contingency of 10% of total. Total amount: 3936 kIUA (>5B Euro-2007)

European Union

CN

IN

RF

KO

JP

US

Total procurement value : 3,021 kIUA

Staff: 477 kIUAR&D: 80 kIUA

Total: 3,577 kIUA

Central Reserve: 357.8 kIUA1 k ITER Units of Account (IUA) = $1M US in 1989

= 1.47 Euros in 2007

Integrated Project Schedule (Top Down)

10 years

2 years 8 years

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

ITER IO ESTABLISHED

LICENSE TO CONSTRUCT

START TOKAMAK ASSEMBLY

FIRSTPLASMA

Contract

EARTHWORKS

TOKAMAK BUILDING

OTHER BUILDINGS

TOKAMAK ASSEMBLY

COMMISSIONING

COILS

VACUUMVESSEL

InstallCryostat

1st VV/TF/TSSector

Complete VV

Complete BLK/DIV

1st PFC Install CS

First sector Last sector

Last CSLast TFC

1st PFC

1st TFC

Procurement & Fabrication

2016

Construction License Process

Last PFC

Procurement & Fabrication

Design Review to update Baseline 2001 -the basis for the ITER Agreement

• The first goal for 2007 has been to create a new Baseline Design (compared to 2001 Final Design Report) which:

– Confirms or redefines the physics basis and requirements for the project – Is the basis for the procurement of the long lead items (Vacuum Vessel, Magnets,

Buildings), – provides input for the Preliminary Safety Report

• The second goal is to broadly establish ITER design decisions by involving the worldwide fusion community (physics and engineering), and thus enable the Members to take ownership of the project

– ITER is being built for the Members’ fusion community for common exploitation– More than 150 scientists from ITER members participated in this activity; ~ 20% of this total

were from the U.S.

• The third goal is to broaden the knowledge base within each of the Members as needed for them to successfully procure their in-kind hardware

– Requires extensive coordination, integration, and management

For components and systems which are procured at a later date or for issues with lower priority, work will continue into the year 2008

Eight Design Working Groups dealt with ~ 65 high priority issues

Other Recent International Developments

• The Broader Approach Agreement has been signed by the European Union and Japan– Bilateral activities on a satellite tokamak in Japan, materials

(IFMIF/EVEDA), and International Fusion Energy Research Center

• ITER Members have established their Domestic Agencies (DA)– DOE is the U.S. DA, delegating most if its functions to U.S. ITER

Project Office (USIPO), led by Dr. Ned Sauthoff (ORNL)

• The IO has invited the International Tokamak Physics Activity (ITPA) to operate under the ITER auspices– ITPA has been coordinating international research on burning

plasmas and ITER physics support under the IAEA auspices

• An Ad-Hoc Group is developing proposals for a Test Blanket Module Program for Council approval in June 2008

Progress on the Domestic Front

US ITER Project Scope

• In-kind contributions of hardware and its delivery to France,

• In-kind contribution of staff (secondees) to IO

• Cash contributions for R&D and Common Fund expenses (e.g., direct staff, IO services, machine assembly/installation/commissioning)

• Cash contributions to the Central Reserve

• Operation of the US ITER Project Office at ORNL in conjunction with partner Labs PPPL and SRNL

US ITER In-kind Hardware Contributions

100% Ion Cyclotron transmission lines

100% Electron Cyclotron transmission lines

16% of port-based diagnostics

7 Central Solenoid windings

Cooling Water for divertor, vacuum vessel, …

20% First Wall/Shield

Pellet Injector Tokamak Exhaust Processing System

Roughing pumps, standard components

8% of Toroidal Field conductor

Steady-state power supplies

ORNLORNL

ORNL

ORNL

ORNLORNLORNL

ORNL

PPPL

PPPL

SRNL

USIPO Management Team

Ongoing US ITER Project Activities

• Emphasis is on assisting the IO with updating/ completing the overall ITER design and procurement specifications.

• USIPO is managing and funding the US participation (includes USBPO effort) in the eight Design Review Working Groups,

• WBS Managers are working closely with the IO to finalize Procurement Arrangements for US hardware

– Near-term focus is on the long-lead items: TF Magnet conductor materials, First Wall & Shield materials, Tokamak Cooling Water System piping

• Substantial R&D and design work in TF and CS Magnet Systems, First Wall, Tritium Plant, and Diagnostics

*

US ITER Project Initial Cost Estimate ($M)

Hardware 702

Staff (Support to International ITER)

94

Cash 69

U.S. ITER Contingency (26% of hardware and staff cost)

195

Central Reserve for ITER Organization

61

Total Project Costs 1,122.0

Preliminary US ITER Project FundingProfile for $1.122B TPC Cap

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

Budget request 0.00 19.32 60.00 160.00 214.50 209.32 181.96 130.00 116.90 30.00

FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14

US Contributions to ongoing ITER physics needs and

Planning for participation in ITER science

U.S. ITER Scientific SupportAn integral part of the Base Program

• A major part of U.S. ‘Base Program’ currently contributes to investigation of ITER physics issues

• Major facilities (DIII-D, C-MOD, NSTX)• Theory and modeling• Enabling technologies• Collaborations on foreign facilities

• Resources for these physics and technology activities are integral part of program funds

• No separate budget line for ITER physics support

• U.S. effort is coordinated with the international fusion programs -ITPA, IEA and bilateral agreements, and IAEA conferences and meetings

• No separate budget line for these collaborations except for a few special cases (< $ 5 M).

U.S. Burning Plasma Organization

• OFES established the USBPO in May 2005 to coordinate U.S. research effort on burning plasmas and support ITER physics needs;

• Prof. Ray Fonck was the first Director until February 2007, succeeded by Dr. Jim Van Dam

• More than 275 U.S. scientists are members of the USBPO

• VLT, directed by Dr. Stan Milora, provides a similar support in technology.

• One of the first major tasks of the USBPO was to prepare a Plan for US Participation in ITER Scientific Community.

Coordinating the US burning plasma effort

DOE Office of Fusion Energy SciencesR. Fonck, SC Assoc Director

• Research Division• ITER and International Division

US ITER Project OfficeN. Sauthoff, Director

US ITER Chief Scientist(USBPO Director)

US ITER Chief Technologist

(VLT Director)

USBPO DirectorateDirector

Deputy DirectorAss’t Director for ITER Liaison

Research Committee

USBPO Council(14 members)

Topical GroupMHD Stability

Topical GroupConfinement/Transport

Topical GroupBoundary

Topical GroupWave Interactions

Topical GroupEnergetic Particles

Topical GroupIntegrated Scenarios

Topical GroupFusion Engineering

Topical GroupModeling/Simulation

Topical GroupOperation/Control

Topical GroupDiagnostics

US Burning Plasma Organization

Virtual Laboratory for TechnologyITPA

The EPAct Plan - a product ofU.S. fusion community

• A Congressional condition for the U.S. to sign the ITER agreement in November 2006 - DOE to develop a Plan for U.S. participation in the ITER scientific program

• The OFES chartered the USBPO to develop this plan

• USBPO EPAct Task Group developed the Plan in about a 3- month period under the leadership of Prof. Ray Fonck

• a ‘living document’, developed in the absence of an ITER Research Plan (IRP); it is to evolve as the IRP is developed.

• Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee (FESAC) endorsed the Plan

Congressional Response to the Plan

• DOE forwarded the USBPO Plan to Congress in August 2006 for a 60-day review

• Congressional response, provided by Congressman Boehlert to Secretary Bodman stated the following:

• “…the Plan DOE submitted on August 10, 2006 for the participation of U.S. scientists in ITER is best viewed as the seed for a more in-depth planning process by the fusion research community. The August 10 plan rightly identifies development of a predictive understanding of the fusion plasma system as the central focus of the U.S. fusion research program. Articulating how that central focus informs the research agenda for participation of the United States in ITER requires additional consultation with the fusion research community – guided, in part, by ongoing feedback from the National Academy of Sciences. The Fusion Energy Sciences should be working to develop a research plan that shows how concrete scientific goals inform technical milestones. Congress will then be able to use that plan to evaluate whether ITER is promoting progress toward making fusion a reliable and affordable source of power and understand how work on ITER relates to other elements of the U.S. fusion program. I am confident that DOE will continue to work with the fusion research community to produce such a document”.

International context ITER-ITPA-USBPO

• The U.S. fusion program has been extensively collaborated with the international fusion program over decades• These collaborations provide a backbone to the ITER endeavor • J. Pamela (EU) and S. Matsuda (JA) will report on their programs

• ITPA has been the organizing element for international contributions to ITER physics needs since July 2001Under the IAEA International Fusion Research Committee (IFRC) • All ITER Members participate in ITPA• Conducts joint experiments (JointX), computer simulations, workshops,

maintains tokamak databases …• Published ‘Progress in ITER Physics Basis’ in Nuclear Fusion in June 2007 – a

five year effort• Major contributions to the ITER Design Review

• Discussions in progress between IO and ITPA Coordinating Committee (CC) to adapt the ITPA charter for operation ITER auspices

• US members of ITPA are members of USBPO - representing the U.S. views in international meetings– US fusion community is thus closely coupled to IO thru USBPO-ITPA-ITER

Annual international planning meetings for ITPA Joint Experiments

• ITPA Topical Groups (TGs) prepare annual proposals for JointX on world tokamaks to investigate ITER High priority Research Tasks

• Annual meetings to select and implement JointX proposals, with ~ 35 participants including leadership of – World tokamak programs– ITER Science and Technology Department– ITPA Coordinating Committee and Topical Groups– IEA Executive Committees of Large Tokamaks, Poloidal Divertors, and Plasma

Wall Interactions

• ~ 90 JointX proposals are active each year, mostly continuations and many new proposals, and some completions– World tokamaks incorporate these proposals into their programs thru their

internal processes– IEA provides implementing agreements to facilitate scientific exchanges

• The 6th annual meeting held at JET in UK on November 28-29, 2007

• A very productive opportunity for high level interactions among the tokamak leadership of ITER Members, IO, IEA,and ITPA

USBPO Integrates with Existing Activities:e.g., USBPO-ITPA coordination

• USBPO facilitates ITPA activities in U.S.– Topical Groups interface U.S. community to ITPA activities

– Provide participants to ITPA activities

– ITPA participants bring issues and info

– back to community via USBPO

– Engages broader US community

– Communicate ITPA activities in U.S.

• Expands access to ITER:

– USIPO as Domestic Agency

– Communication with ITER Team

– ITPA and IEA Agreements

Transport Physics

Confinement Databaseand Modelling

Edge Pedestal Physics

Scrape-off-layerand Divertor Physics

MHD, Disruption and Control

Steady State Operation

Diagnostics

Controls (Working Group)

Confinement Transport

Boundary

MHD

Energetic Particle

Plasma-Wave

Integrated Scenarios

Diagnostics

Engineering Science

Modeling & Simulation

Operations & Control

USBPO - US/ITPA Topical Group Mapping:

USBPO ITPA

ITER Agreement provision forCommon Understanding on Operations

General Principles Regarding Operations on scientific exploitation are developed: 1. ITER’s overall programmatic objective to “demonstrate the scientific and technological

feasibility of fusion energy” will be pursued by the ITER Organization through a common international research program organized around scientific and technological issues, developed and executed with participation of the best research personnel from all Parties.

2. Each party should be able to have broad scientific and technical participation in the common ITER Program to promote intellectual diversity and innovation. For this purpose,

1. It is anticipated that visiting scientists and engineers from each party will play an important role in the exploitation of ITER

2. Each Party will have remote access to ITER data, and remote participation in experiments will be facilitated.

3. Each party should be able to participate in accordance with its relative contributions, and is expected to participate in a balanced way between supporting the operation of ITER and exploiting its scientific and technological potential.

Other operation related topics such as preparation of operation during the construction phase, options for organizing the technical operation of the machine, etc. would be best discussed together with the DG nominee.

Cost Sharing and ManagementDuring ITER Operations

• It is expected that the ITER Organizational structure will be modified during the operational phase – subject to Council approval

• Cost sharing during operational phase is written into the ITER Agreement– Host, EU, will contribute 34% of the operational costs – United State and Japan will contribute 13%– Other non-Host Members of China, India, Korea, Russia will contribute 10%

• Operational costs include – commissioning, maintenance, repair, utilities, power, fuel…– improvements, and annual contribution to the decommissioning fund

• In the FY 2008 Congressional Budget, the estimate for the U.S. share of the annual facility operating costs for the period of 2015 to 2034 is $56.9M.

– This estimate is expected to be refined as ITER progresses– The budget includes cost of U.S. participants on the ITER physics team on site– The ‘Base program’ might include additional ITER physics activities such as U.S. remote

site, visiting scientists, and additional physics support activities at home

Next Steps

• USBPO Council - developing the next phase of U.S. Plans (Dr. Earl Marmar)

• A continuing iterative process

• IO – developing the ITER Research Plan (Dr. David Campbell)• Coordination within ITER Members

• OFES - planning for centrally managed ITER research team activity during ITER operational phase

• As an integral part of strategic planning of the FES program• e.g. central U.S. ITER remote control room and data access systems

• Your review of the USBPO Plan and advice on its further iterations is most welcome by DOE

Summary - 1

• ITER Organization now is a legal international entity

• Maximum effort by IO and Domestic Agencies of seven ITER Members to update scope, cost, and schedule for approval by ITER Council in June 2008

• Extensive ongoing coordinated scientific effort in ITER Members, especially in EU, JA, and the U.S., in support of ITER scientific issues

• Progress on the ITER Research Plan this spring will provide important guidance to ITER Members for preparing for ITER scientific operations.

• The USBPO is in the process of updating the EPAct Plan

Summary - 2

• ITER is an unprecedented scientific endeavor– An international entity to pursue large scale scientific research– Collective design, construction and operation– Common research program, not a ‘user facility’– Unique management and resources (in-kind hardware, staff, and cash)

• ITER success is essential– Explore new science of burning plasmas – Knowledge base to demonstrate feasibility of fusion energy

• Current focus is on design and construction of the facility– Strong dependence on physics input

• Operational scientific phase will require– Support from ongoing coordinated fusion programs now– Strong international scientific team on ITER site– Supported by a large community of scientists worldwide

• Sun never sets on ITER

Further Resource material available

• ITER Agreement– Signed Agreement and its associated papers– IAEA Declaration of IO– ITER Research Plan– TBM– VGs on comparison of ITER size and weight with common objects– Domestic Agencies

• ITER Design Review– Holtkamp presentation to Council– STAC Report to Council– U.S. contributions to Design Review and current Workplan

• USIPO– Details of Work Breakdown Structure– R&D Effort

• USBPO/ITPA– Organizational Structures– Membership rosters (Council, Research Committee)– Progress in ITER Physics Basis publication in Nuclear Fusion– ITPA JointX reports, proposals, master list

• VLT

Further Resource material available

• EPAct Plan– Plan– FESAC report– Transmittal letters to congress– Boehlert Letter to Bodman– Bodman Response– Transmittal Letter to NRC

• OFES Budget for FY 2007/08– ITER and Non-ITER components– International collaborations– ITER scientific support by facility programs

• Any other requests