1. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 1 The In-Kind Process at ESS Håkan Danared Lund, 15 October 2014

2. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 2 In-kind Contributions An in-kind contribution is by definition a non-cash contribution by a member country to ESS It can be in the form of: Technical components for the facility (also personnel needed to perform the testing, installation and/or integration) R&D work (also personnel needed to perform the work) Personnel made available for specific tasks during the construction phase Other products and services relevant for the completion of the facility ESS being a “green-field organization at a green-field site”, it would not be possible to build the ESS accelerator in-house. Instead we must rely on our collaboration partners to design, build and deliver most of the components.

3. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 3 Target station 154 M€ Accelerator 522 M€ NSS/Instruments 350 M€ In-kind Cash Total construction cost: 1.843 billion € From G. Nemeth ESS In-kind Contributions Potential

4. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 4 Suitable in-kind contributions are defined by ESS Programme Plan Values laid down in the cost-book Each IKC is subject to a written contract between ESS and delivering partner Each contract to follow a fixed structure The delivering party is wholly responsible for the contribution (technical, financial, commercial perspective) In-Kind Review Committee to evaluate and recommend all IKC contract proposals ESS Council to approve all in-kind contracts Based on final approval Member Country gets accredited the value of the contract From G. Nemeth General Principles

5. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 5 1 Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) Signed only once with each partner 1 Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) Signed only once with each partner 1. Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) 2. Framework for handling in-kind contributions 1. Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) 2. Framework for handling in-kind contributions STC approved STC approved 1 Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) Added separately for each WP/WU 1 Agreement (General Terms and Conditions) Added separately for each WP/WU 3. Schedule (Technical Annex) IKRC reviewed IKRC reviewed IKC Agreement with 3 sections Contract Structure From G. Nemeth

6. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 6 Cost, Scope, Schedule ESS Cost Book ACCSYS Requirements Level 1 ACCSYS High Level Master Schedule Deliverables within a technical appendix defined, as usual, by cost, scope and schedule

7. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 7 In-Kind Potential for Accelerator WBS items can bedivided into four catogories: Planned IKC: Partners have been identified and technical and/or contractual discussions are taking place Planned cash contributions: Partner have been identified as for true IKC, but they are in countries that provide cash to ESS, such as host states. Potential IKC: Items that could be IKC but where no partner is identified. These are mainly large commercial items where financial risk is larger than academic interest. Not IKC: Items not suitable for IKC. A major task during the coming year is to convert ”planned” (and if possible ”potential”) contributions into ”agreed”. Not IKC, 22% Planned IKC, 47% Potential IKC, 29% Cash ”IKC”, 2%

8. H. Danared | Cryomodule Workshop | Page 8 Collaboration Partners Discussions going on with 22 organizations. Out of these, 16 could deliver in-kind contributions, while 6 are from the host countries of from countries proposing cash contributions. CEA CNRS Cockcroft Inst Daresbury Lab Elettra ESS-Bilbao Huddersfield Univ IFJ PAN Cash in-kind Aarhus Univ DESY GSI/FAIR Lund Univ PSI Uppsala Univ INFN Catania INFN Legnaro INFN Milan NCBJ RAL Tallinn UT Warsaw UT Wroclaw UT True in-kind Discussions relating to cryomodules: CEA: Elliptical cavities, cryomodules CNRS: Spoke cavities, cryomodules Daresbury Lab: Elliptical cavity procurement and tests DESY: Nb testing (?) IFJ PAN: Installations INFN Milan: Elliptical cavities prototyping, production follow-up (?) Uppsala Univ: Spoke testing