1. Annual Review replies Accelerator Accelerator Management team April2016

2. Annual Review Expedite as much as possible the formal design review process across ACCSYS: both the horizontal WP reviews and the vertical integrated system reviews. In addition, consider adding a safety and QA rep to the design review committee and tracking all actions post-review until completion. We endorse the established process of the so-called Vertical Reviews followed by Critical Design Reviews. Ultimately, the goal is to get all requirements for IK contributions established and TAs signed before the end of this year. "Get your hands dirty!" -- the ESS/AD should start establishing some technical credibility and developing the technical workforce by getting their hands on relevant hardware systems as soon as possible. We endorse the so-called "Blinky Light Test", the rf test stand and the opportunity of early integration of the ion source, its control system and the beam diagnostics. Also, the Uppsala test stand should be used as an opportunity to train staff. Add risk assessment and risk impact to the overall risk register. This will help focus on the high impact risks and also provide an assessment of the adequacy of the 50M€ scope contingency. Add risks with positive impacts to the registry. For example, the new modulator topology under development may save costs. Another example is the proposed use of large-grain Niobium sheets for cavity fabrication. Consider writing the Technical Addenda at a high level while referencing the ACCSYS DOORS requirements database. Consider the following to optimize ACCSYS organization for executing a large science project – Review the authority of the Work Package Leaders to ensure it is adequate to successfully execute their scope of work – Employ centralized common project tools across ESS (Lund and in-kind partners) to minimize to the extent possible the institutional boundaries between ESS partners. – Liberally use telecons to improve communication and coordination amongst all the ACCSYS institutional partners. – Add a high-level ESH person to AD. The AD Head should be able to delegate some of his functions to this person. For example, procurements of hazardous materials, such as compressed gas cylinders. Also, this person would help AD Head to review and approve various AD activities, e.g. test facilities operations start. Investigate options to improve the commissioning plan (and schedule) particularly as it applies to the low energy front end. Review the ACCSYS spares policy and strategy. Some of the proposed spares may be spares needed for manufacturing, not for operations. We think that they should completely separate the diagnostic and the interlock functions of the BLMs. The hot cooling water should be seriously evaluated. It seems that this idea has many caveats, including risk for personnel accidents and shorter lifetime of expensive components, such as klystrons. We doubt that it is really environmentally friendly. 2

3. Sub-committee Accelerator AreaRecommendatio n ESS responseDeliverableStatusDue date/Compl etion date Comments Top-10 and ACC 1.1 Expedite as much as possible the formal design review process across ACCSYS. Design reviews are scheduled and are being performed for all parts of the project Schedule for Design Reviews ClosedJ. Weisend Top-10 and ACC 1.2 Get your hands dirty! An integration test stand for an ESS RF cell is being set-up in Lund. It is co- located with the modulator development lab. Operation of the integration test stand ClosedD. McGinnis ACC 1.3 Add risk assessment and risk impact to the overall risk register. This has started and is an on- going activity. The bulk of the outstanding cost risks have been captured The risk register in ESS risk register EXONAUT On-going until 2019 J. Weisend 3

4. Sub-committee Accelerator AreaRecommendatio n ESS responseDeliverableStatusDue date/Compl etion date Comments ACC 1.4 Add risk with positive impact to the risk register This effort has started and will continue throughout 2015 Mechanism for adding positive risk is determined and will be continued throughout the project ClosedJ. Weisend ACC 1.5 Consider writing the Technical Addenda at a high level Guidelines for writing the technical annexes have been published by the ESS In- Kind Group (ESS- 0039570) ClosedH. Danared ACC 1.6 Re-organization to reinforce the role of WPs and strengthen safety organization AD has been re- organized to answer these needs 1 October 2015 ClosedM. Lindroos 4

5. Sub-committee Accelerator AreaRecommendatio n ESS responseDeliverableStatusDue date/Compl etion date Comments ACC 1.7 Improve commissioning plan Such a plan is being developed Updated Commissioning plan with the installation schedule. ClosedM. Munoz ACC 1.8 Review the ACCSYS spares policy and strategy Spares will be financed through initial operations, some prototypes and margin in construction can be used as spares Information to WPs ClosedM. Lindroos 5

6. Sub-committee Accelerator AreaRecommendatio n ESS responseDeliverableStatusDue date/Compl etion date Comments ACC 1.9 We think that they should completely separate the diagnostic and the interlock functions of the BLMs These functions will be separated within the BLM system, but all BLMs will be capable of both functions. Preliminary design review of BLM ClosedA. Jansson ACC 1.10 The hot cooling water should be seriously evaluated A group has worked on collecting the necessary info and a report has been written ReportClosedA. Sunesson 6

7. 1.1 Expedite as much as possible the formal design review process across ACCSYS 7 This has been done. The following major component design reviews were held in 2015 and Q1 2016 Design reviews are tracked in P6 & a significant number are planned for 2016 – Dates subject to change ComponentDate Ion Source & LEBT (CDR)February 10 CDS (PDR)April 20 DTL (CDR)June 22, 23 ACCP (PDR - 1)September 2, 3 L3 IOT (CDR)September 18 Beam Delivery (CDR)October 8 ACCP HAZOPOctober 20, 21 LWU (PDR)November 10 ACCP (PDR-2)November 17 - 19 RFQ (CDR -2)December 8 and 9 LLRF PDRJan 26, 27 2016 MEBT Buncher & MagnetsFeb 23, 24 2016 Cryogenic Distribution System- EL CDRApril 5,6 2016

8. View of the Current Review Page 8

9. 1.2 Get your hands dirty! Integration Test Stand

10. 1.3 Add risk assessment and risk impact to the overall risk register This is ongoing This recommendation specifically referred to the adding of cost risk to each risk item. This is underway and most risks at this point have a cost associated with them. There is an ongoing effort to improve the cost risks and this will continue throughout the project. An example is the addition of the following risk to the register: “The ESS designed 660 kVA modulator doesn’t meet specifications and more standard commercial items have to be purchased” – potential cost risk of up to 6 Meuro” 10

11. 1.4 Add risk with positive impact to the risk register This has been completed. It also referred principally to the cost risk Working with the ESS Risk Manager we have found that positive cost risks (i.e. opportunities) can be tracked by showing a negative cost risk in the register – this acts to lower the overall cost risk exposure. Such positive costs risks will be added in if they are identified Currently, the only possible candidate is the cost saved by the use of large grain Nb in the SRF cavities. However, given the R&D nature of this work, there is no reliable estimate of the cost savings. 11

12. 1.5 Technical Addenda for IK 12 Consider writing the Technical Addenda at a high level. Guidelines for writing the technical annexes have been published by the ESS In-Kind Group (ESS-0039570). It is agreed that requirements referenced from the DOORS database in many cases are a suitable way to provide the detailed technical information, and most technical annexes do contain DOORS references.

13. 1.6 Objectives of re-org The annual review recommended a re-org to: Further align line and project Strengthen the safety organization Strengthen the role of all WPs in the line organization Furthermore, I also think it is essential: To bring together lead engineers, liaison person and deputy WP leaders Establish clear line authority for the accelerator systems and the Work Packages Clarity regarding the responsibility for the development of interface requirements 13

14. New AD – Groups, sections and WP 14 ACCELERATOR DIVISION WP 1 Mats Lindroos Beam Physics, Operation & Beam Diagnostics WP 2,7 Andreas Jansson Beam Physics WP 2 M. Eshraqi Beam Diagnostics WP 7 T.Shea Engineering Resources WP 99 David McGinnis LINAC WP 3,4,5,6,14 Håkan Danared Linac hardware WP 3, 4 and 5 H. Danared Integration WP 6 S. Molloy Radio Frequency WP 8,17 Anders Sunesson Power Converters WP 17 C. Martins RF Sources WP 8 M. Jensen Safety WP 13 Lali Tchelidze Specialized Technical Services WP 10,11,12,15,16 John Weisend Cryogenics WP 11 P. Arnold Vacuum WP 12 M. Ferreira Admin & QAPlanning

15. Accelerator Division 15 ACCELERATOR DIVISION Mats Lindroos Beam Physics, Operation & Beam Diagnostics Andreas Jansson – GL Beam Physics Mamad Eshraqi - SL Marc Munoz Renato de Prisco Ryoichi Miyamoto Yngve Levinsen Saeid Pirani (S) (at INFN) Beam Diagnostics Tom Shea – SL Benjamin Cheymol Cyrille Thomas Hooman Hassanzadegan Hinko Kocevar Irena Dolenc Kittelmann Maurizio Donna Slava Grishin (at CERN) Rafael Baron Charlotte Roose Ebbe Malmstedt (C) Thomas Grandsaert (C) Johan Norin (C) Engineering Resources David McGinnis – GL Eugene Tanke Nick Gazis Carl-Johan Hårdh (C) Daniel Lundgren (C) Mats Pålsson (C) LINAC Håkan Danared – GL Linac Hardware Vacant - SL Christine Darve Georg Hulla Walter Wittmer Felix Schlander Nuno Elias (EIS) Peo Gustafsson (C) Frank Hellström (C) Fredrik Håkansson (C) Accelerator Integration Stephen Molloy – SL Aurélien Ponton Edgar Sargsyan I ñigo Alonso Radio Frequency Anders Sunesson - GL Power Converters Carlos Martins – SL Göran Göransson Marko Kalafatic Paulo Jose Torri (2 May) Anders Andersson (C) RF Sources Morten Jensen – SL Rihua Zeng Rafael Montano Bruno Lagoguez Chiara Marrelli Rutambhara Yogi Staffan Ekström Stevo Calic I ñigo de la Fuente Krisztian Löki (S) Miklós Boros (S) Safety Lali Tchelidze – GL Duy Phan Enric Bargalló Eder García Etxearte (I) Frank Kornegay (C 15%) Mikael Motyka (S) Spec. Technical Services John Weisend II – GL Wolfgang Hees Anton Lundmark Evangelia Vaena Frithiof Jensen Gunilla Jacobsson Cryogenics Philipp Arnold – SL Jaroslaw Fydrych John Jurns Xilong Wang Xiaotao Su Piotr Tereszkowski (C) Vacuum Marcelo Juni Ferreira – SL Hilko Spoelstra Simone Scolari Christophe Jarrige Fabio Ravelli (1 June) Kristell Barthélemy (20 June) Peter Ladd (C 50%) Admin & QA Caroline Prabert Inga Tejedor Matthew Conlon Planning Luisella Lari Lena Gunnarsson Håkan Danared – Deputy Head of Division John Weisend II – Deputy Head of the Project 63 employees (2016-04-01) Consultants, Students, Interns and empl from Eng Integr Sup Div, in Yellow + Planners = 21 people Caroline Prabert 2016-04-01

16. Linac Group 16 H. DanaredTAC 7 April 2016 LINAC Håkan Danared – GL Linac Hardware Vacant - SL Christine Darve Georg Hulla Walter Wittmer Felix Schlander Nuno Elias (EIS) Peo Gustafsson (C) Frank Hellström (C) Fredrik Håkansson (C) Accelerator Integration Stephen Molloy – SL Aurélien Ponton Edgar Sargsyan Iñigo Alonso “External section” with Deputy WP Leaders for work packages WP3-6 -Contract management -Contract follow-up -Documentation -Interfaces, Interface requirements “Internal section” for integration at ESS in Lund -Top-down requirements -Integration in gallery and stubs -Interfaces to ICS and Target -Interfaces to MPS, PSS and TSS -Installation planning

17. 1.7 Beam Commissioning planning Recent Achievements: Commissioning sequence align with staged installation (NC Linac described in ESS-0043907) and implemented in P6 planning. For NC beam commissioning up to DTL4: Temporary PSS (PSS1) agreed to support staged commissioning Single temporary shield was approved as baseline, does not change sequence given expected delivery dates Agreed to limit the rep rate for commissioning to 1Hz, hardware limited. Discussions started with CERN on linac4 dump copy Draft documentation for SSM produced Important issues identified during the SSM documentation: Temporary dump and shield wall design and build, including budgets, need to be understood Need to understand better the access hatch shielding, including procedures to open and close. Rate limiter box (for 1 Hz safe operation) needs to be built Expected radiation levels for tank4 commissioning too high for intermediate shield wall, plan to time share this part (100h over one month) Need search and secure procedures for administrative closure of tunnel for this (not expecting PSS available at that point). Air activation unknown, if an issue will limit power to mitigate No temporary diagnostics foreseen at this point (at the end of each section to commission). Would need to be defined very soon if needed to be possible in time.

18. 1.9 Options for separating monitoring and protection functions Physical separation of the system as a whole - build 2 separate systems. 2 options: –Duplicate the existing system: prohibited by cost constraints –Split the current system in 2: The processed data (all the running sums with different time constants) are there, so why not send it to EPICS? Also it makes sense to be able to monitor the RSs that can dump the beam also in the control room. If at some point we want to add any additional RSs for monitoring, this should be done on the EPICS and not FPGA level (or potentially in on the FPGA level in the Monitoring part of the code – RSBs) Make sure that the FPGA code connected to MPS functionality can not be changed whenever an update of monitoring functionality is needed. Again 2 options, we chose the 2 nd one: –Use 2 FPGAs (one on AMC, other on RTM), one for monitoring and the other for MPS. –Use 1 FPGA and make sure that after uploading new firmware version the MPS part of the code stays the same (routing and timing not changed). This can be done with the use of development floor planning tool. NB. Reliability of system is being studied as part of MPS reliability task force

19. 1.10 Hot cooling water The hot water cooling is a requirement imposed on RF Focus on operational and safety issues The status report has been updated, ESS-0044609 (Chess) Information gathered from SNS, PSI, Max 4 – no reported impacts on reliability or performance Information gathered from L3, Thales, CPI, and Toshiba as part of prototype tender returns No impact on warranty using hot cooling water No impact on efficiency using hot cooling water Operation using hot cooling water does not pose a problem. Allowed temperature 60-90 degrees depending on supplier No further update High power RF loads tendered with hot cooling water as specification All suppliers returned compliant tenders First load prototype passed hot cooling water (80 deg C) factory tests 19

20. 1.10 Hot cooling water Other impacts are being considered (maintenance, handling,…) Temperature has been lowered to return at 60 deg C to reduce risk All handling procedures will follow proper procedures to be safe A team has been set up to follow the issue. Members from RF group and safety/reliability group The team will work with and update report ESS-0044609 20