# AI Gigafactories tender, conditions extract (EUROHPC-2026-CEI-AIGF-01). Verbatim from Tender Specifications V1 and the model framework contract, read in full 23 Oct 2026.

Produced for `claude/gigafactories-bidder-economics-2026-10-23.md`. Quotes are verbatim from the pdftotext dumps; [paraphrase] and [derived] are marked. Section and page references are to the PDFs.


Conventions: text inside quotation marks is verbatim from the pdftotext dump (typos preserved); "…" marks omitted words; anything tagged **[paraphrase]** or **[derived]** is mine. "Spec" = Tender Specifications V1 (EUROHPC/2026/OP/0008 / EUROHPC-2026-CEI-AIGF-01); "FWC" = model framework contract (Ref. Ares(2026)7257863); "SC" = model Specific Contract (FWC Annex III, pp. 67–75); "App. II/III" = FWC Appendices (SLA, pp. 81–84; Service Reporting, pp. 85–86).

---

# What a bidder must deliver and what it gets — EuroHPC AI Gigafactories tender

## 1. Eligibility: who can bid

| Requirement | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Form of tenderer | "Economic operators can submit a tender either as a sole economic operator (sole tenderer) or as a group of economic operators (joint tender). In either case subcontracting is permitted." | Spec §8, p. 29 |
| SPV preferred, not mandatory | "it is the preferred option and can be anticipated that interested economic operators who are considering submitting a tender will establish a Special Purpose Vehicle prior to submission" … "if interested economic operators opt for the setting up of an SPV … such SPV needs to be established before the deadline for submission of tenderers and submit the tender as such." | Spec §8, pp. 29–30 |
| AIGF Coordinator — EU incorporation and control | "the AIGF Coordinator shall be a legal entity, duly incorporated in the Union and validly existing under the laws of the Member State in which it is established; … It shall be effectively controlled by entities of EU Member States or by natural persons who are nationals of Member States. Where the tenderer is a consortium, the AIGF Coordinator shall be designated from among its members. Where the tenderer is constituted as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), the AIGF Coordinator shall be either the SPV itself or one of its shareholders." | Spec §3.b, p. 8 |
| Coordinator must be real lead | "The AIGF Coordinator shall act as the strategic and operational lead of the tenderer and shall not serve merely as an administrative intermediary." | Spec §3.b, p. 8 |
| Coordinator = group leader, mandated by POA | "the AIGF Coordinator should serve as group leader and shall be appointed as such by the members of the Consortium." / "The AIGF Coordinator shall be duly mandated by all consortium members, including through a power of attorney, to act on their behalf, including for the signature and management of the Framework Contract and any Specific Contracts." | Spec §8.1, p. 31; §7, p. 28 |
| One Coordinator per Lot | "A legal person shall not participate as an AIGF Coordinator at the same time in more than one tender within the same Lot. In such case, all tenders in which that legal person is participating … will be rejected. However … an AIGF Coordinator for one tender under Lot 1 may concurrently act as AIGF Coordinator for another tender under Lot 2." | Spec §8, p. 30 |
| Hosting Entity | "'AI Gigafactory Hosting Entity' … means a legal entity which has been designated by an AI gigafactory Consortium to host and operate an AI gigafactory and its services, and which is established in a Participating State that is a Member State." | Spec §3.b, p. 9 |
| Facility location | "the Hosting Entity must ensure that the physical facilities designated to set up, host, and operate the AIGF are strictly located within a Participating State of the EuroHPC JU that is also a Member State of the Union." | Spec §7, p. 28 |
| Host-state commitment letter (mandatory) | "Only proposals submitted in respect of a host Member State that has provided a formal and explicit commitment letter from its NCA, as detailed in Annex 2 of the call, will be considered eligible and admitted to the evaluation procedure." | Spec §7, p. 28 |
| Annex 2 status in this version | "this annex providing the budgetary commitments of the Member States to AIGFs will be completed soon and will be published as part of the tender call, at its opening date." | Spec Annex 2, p. 126 |
| Access to procurement — eligible countries | "access to this procurement is granted, at the time of the submission deadline (and throughout the execution of the framework contract), to involved entities established in Participating States to the EuroHPC JU, in associated countries of Horizon Europe and of the Digital Europe Programme, or their successors, or in third countries which are members of the OECD or which have signed an AIGF Cooperation Agreement (i.e. Trade and Technology Council(s), Digital Partnerships, Digital Dialogues, Strategic Partnership on semiconductors or the Pax Silica initiative)." | Spec §7, p. 27 |
| Eligible country list | "Albania, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kosovo, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Marocco, Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea (South Korea), Romania, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, The Philippines, Tunisia, Türkiye, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, and the United States." (footnote: "Subject to change.") | Spec Annex 7, p. 133 |
| WTO GPA excluded | "The Agreement on Government Procurement concluded within the World Trade Organization does not apply." | Spec §7, p. 26 |
| Restrictive measures | "Tenderers must ensure that no involved entities nor any subcontractors, including those which do not need to be identified in the tender are subject to EU restrictive measures … The prohibition applies throughout the whole performance of the contract." | Spec §7, p. 26 |
| Control definition | "'Control' is defined as the capacity to exercise decisive influence, directly or indirectly, through one or more intermediate entities, de jure or de facto, including aggregate control of several third-country entities, and can take any of the following forms: (i) Majority ownership (cumulative on all ownership layers until the ultimate owners); (ii) Special voting rights (e.g. golden share, statutory voting rights, veto rights of any kind); (iii) Corporate governance (e.g. board and management composition); (iv) commercial links conferring control; (v) financial links conferring control; (vi) other sources of control." | Spec §3.b fn 3, p. 8 |
| Ownership Control Declaration | "To enable the Contracting Authority to verify the access of the AIGF coordinator, the latter must include, within the tender, an Ownership Control Declaration (see Annex 1F)." / "The assessment of control is part of the eligibility criteria." | Spec §7, p. 27–28 |
| Non-EU influence rule (strict) | "a participant will be considered 'non-EU controlled' if non-EU shareholders have the possibility to influence/block strategic decisions, (even if it is the EU shareholder(s) who have negative control)." / "Natural persons with dual nationality (EU and non-EU) will be considered as EU nationals." | Spec Annex 1F(a) §3.3, p. 117 |
| Control status must persist | "ownership control conditions must be fulfilled already at tender submission stage (call deadline) … the status must remain the same throughout the project implementation." / "If a contractor becomes controlled by an ineligible country/ineligible country entity during the implementation of the contract … the contract may have to be terminated." | Spec Annex 1F(a), pp. 113, 124 |
| Joint and several liability | "All group members assume joint and several liability towards the contracting authority for the performance of the contract as a whole." / "The tenderer shall assume full liability towards the EuroHPC JU for the performance of the agreement as a whole, including financial and operational liability." | Spec §8.1, p. 31; §7, p. 28 |
| Subcontracting of core ops offshore | "The subcontracting of core technical operations or data processing to entities established in non-EU third countries is strictly prohibited." | Spec §8.2, p. 33 |
| Cross-subcontracting | "cross subcontracting among tenderers is forbidden … In this case, both tenders A and B shall be rejected." | Spec §8, p. 30 |
| Exclusion grounds | "The objective of the exclusion criteria is to assess whether the tenderer is in any of the exclusion situations listed in Article 138(1) of the Financial Regulation." Declaration on Honour lists (a) bankruptcy, (b) tax/social security, (c) grave professional misconduct, (d) fraud/corruption/criminal organisation/money laundering/terrorism/child labour, (e) significant deficiencies in an EU-financed commitment, (f) irregularity, (g)/(h) circumvention entities, (i) resisting audits. **[paraphrase of list]** | Spec §9.1, p. 35; Annex 1A, pp. 96–98 |
| Financial capacity F1 | "Average yearly turnover of the last three financial years above EUR 200 million." Basis: "a consolidated assessment of the combined capacities of all involved entities". Evidence: "Copy of the profit and loss accounts and balance sheets for the last three years … The most recent year must have been closed within the last 18 months." | Spec §9.2.2, p. 38 |
| Experience T1 (build) | "Demonstrate experience in building at least one AI infrastructure and/or data centre with a minimum IT load of 5MW in the last three years preceding the tender submission deadline." | Spec §9.2.3, p. 38 |
| Experience T2 (operate) | "Demonstrate experience in operating and maintaining at least one AI infrastructure and/or data centre with a minimum IT load of 5MW in the last three years" | Spec §9.2.3, p. 39 |
| Experience T3 (commercialise) | "Demonstrate experience in serving and commercialising a diverse, multi-user client base in at least one AI infrastructure and/or data centre, with overall revenues of at least EUR 5 million in the last three years" | Spec §9.2.3, p. 39 |
| Reliance on third parties → guarantee | "If a successful tenderer intends to rely on another entity to meet the minimum levels of economic and financial capacity, the contracting authority may require the entity to sign the contract or, alternatively, to provide a joint and several first-call financial guarantee for the performance of the contract." | Spec §8.4, p. 34 |
| Bank guarantees under FWC | "Pre-financing is not applicable to this FWC." / "Performance guarantee is not applicable to this FWC." / "Retention money guarantee is not applicable to this FWC." | FWC I.6.2, I.6.5, I.6.6, pp. 11–13 |
| Foreign Subsidies Regulation | "Any economic operator participating in this public procurement procedure shall notify the contracting authority of all foreign financial contributions of at least EUR 4 million per third country received in the last three years" … "also applies to main subcontractors and main suppliers … in any case where the economic share of their contribution exceeds 20 % of the value of the submitted tender." | Spec §4, p. 25 |
| Scale eligibility | "tenderers must demonstrate that their proposed full-scale AIGF will possess a total minimum capacity of 75,000 (Lot 1) or 100,000 (Lot 2) H100-equivalent advanced AI processing units by Phase 2 … for the initial Phase 1 deployment, the proposed facility must feature a minimum capacity of 25,000 H100-equivalent units for Lot 1 and 40,000 H100-equivalent units for Lot 2." | Spec §7, p. 29 |
| Deadline | "Tenders must be sent no later than 12 November 2026 at 16:00 Luxembourg time." Questions by 4 November 2026. | Spec §6.2, p. 26; §11, p. 64 |
| Page limit | "page limit: 300 pages" | Spec §13.1, p. 67 |

## 2. Technical minimums per lot

| Requirement | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Lot 1 accelerators | "Phase 1 … a minimum of 25,000 advanced AI accelerators (H100-equivalent GPUs)" / "Phase 2 … a minimum of 75,000" | Spec §3.d, p. 12 |
| Lot 2 accelerators | "Phase 1 … a minimum of 40,000" / "Phase 2 … a minimum of 100,000" | Spec §3.d, p. 13 |
| H100-equivalence is a benchmark, not a target | "The reference to NVIDIA H100-equivalent units serves exclusively as a standardised performance benchmark for scale normalisation and calculation purposes. It does not indicate a target hardware generation for deployment." | Spec §3.a, p. 6 |
| Normalisation | "Total 'H100-Equivalent Units' (Total AI accelerators x Performance scores)." Index scores: "NVIDIA H100 SXM5 1.00; NVIDIA RTX 6000 Blackwell Server Edition (single) 0.68; NVIDIA B200 GPU (single) 3.20; NVIDIA B300 GPU (single) 3.02; NVIDIA Rubin GPU (single) 7.27; NVIDIA GB200 NVL72 3.44; NVIDIA GB300 NVL72 4.55; NVIDIA Vera Rubin NVL72 7.26; AMD Instinct MI355X 2.32; AMD Instinct MI455X (2500W TDP) 6.80; Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) 3.34" **[table flattened]** | Spec §9.3.2.2, Fig. 2, p. 54 |
| Multi-site single-country | "Lot 1: a minimum of 75,000 AI accelerators located at a single site; Lot 2: a minimum of 75,000 AI accelerators located at a single site, and a cumulative minimum of 100,000 AI accelerators overall" | Spec §3.d, p. 14 |
| Multi-country | "at least one primary site must reach the required minimum technical scale of AI accelerators, i.e., a minimum of 75,000 AI accelerators." / "a maximum of one site per country will be eligible under a single project consortium." | Spec §3.d, p. 14; §3.e, p. 15 |
| IT load Phase 1 | "the selected AIGF should have the power capacity to support a minimum IT load specific to its targeted Lot sustaining the minimum number of AI accelerators … fully operational and ready for use by Milestone T0" ; fn 8: "As an indicative reference for Phase 1, this corresponds to a power capacity of 15–30 MW for Lot 1 and 20–50 MW for Lot 2." | Spec §3.f, p. 19; §3.g fn 8, p. 21 |
| IT load Phase 2 | "The AIGF must scale up to a minimum IT load of 120 MW for Lot 1 and 150 MW for Lot 2, fully operational within Phase 2." fn 6: "If the bidder considers a lower minimum IT load to be sufficient, this must be justified accordingly." | Spec §3.g(b), p. 21; fn 6, p. 19 |
| IT load definition | "IT load broadly refers to the electrical power capacity dedicated primarily to the active computing and data processing equipment … inclusive of the fully operational facility infrastructure required to safely and continuously sustain this computing capacity." | Spec fn 7, p. 21 |
| Performance benchmarks (scored) | "GPU/TPU Utilization During Training: Average percentage of GPU/TPU capacity used (target: >85%)" ; "Time to First Token (TTFT, e.g., < 2s …) and Time Per Output Token (TPOT, e.g., <200ms). Measured under 99% percentile latency" ; "QPS … (e.g., 270k queries over 60s)" ; "FID <23.95 and CLIP >31.68" ; MLPerf Training v5.1 / Inference v5.1 | Spec §9.3.2.1(a)(viii), p. 45 |
| Networking | "ultra-fast data access (around 5–10 Tbps from day one with a plan to scale quickly as demand grows)" ; "at least three separate fibre routes into the site" ; "Segregation of training traffic, storage traffic, and management traffic" | Spec §13.2(1)(iii)C, p. 82 |
| Storage | No quantitative minimum. Acceptance tests verify "storage input/output performance under high-concurrency AI workloads". | FWC I.13.4(d), p. 18 |
| Rack densities | "which halls/aisles are designed for 20–30 kW, and which zones can host 60–100 kW+ racks" | Spec §13.2(1)(iii)B, p. 81 |
| Availability SLA | "Minimum 99.5% for general compute and AI Training workloads. Minimum 99.9% for AI Inference workloads (excluding scheduled maintenance)." / "Recovery Time Objective (RTO) of ≤ 4 hours, and a Recovery Point Objective (RPO) of ≤ 1 hour." / "no more than 3 days of maintenance per year" for external connectivity | FWC App. II §1, p. 81 |
| Performance retention | "benchmarks must be executed regularly (at least every 1 year), achieving at least 90% of the performance measured at the system's initial installation." | FWC App. II §2, p. 81 |
| Inference latency SLA | "P95 latency ≤ 300 ms for standard workloads." | FWC App. II §2, p. 81 |
| Support | "Standard support … 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM (Hosting Entity local time), Monday through Friday … maximum response time … 30 min. For agreed critical inference services, 24/7 extended support must be provided. The maximum response time during shall be 10 minutes." Incident matrix: "Critical … Response ≤ 15 min / Resolution ≤ 4 hours. High … ≤ 1 hour / ≤ 8 hours. Medium … ≤ 4 hours / ≤ 2 business days. Low … ≤ 1 business day / ≤ 5 business days." | FWC App. II §3, pp. 82–83 |
| Certifications | "Minimum requirements include ISO/IEC 27001 certified (or certification in progress with a dated plan." ; "certifications (e.g., EN 50600, ISO 22301 if available)" ; "Compliance with NIS2, Cyber Resilience Act, AI Act; includes confidential computing and data isolation features." ; "post-quantum cryptography (PQC) roadmap" | Spec §13.2(1)(iv), pp. 82–83 |
| Personnel qualification | "Such personnel shall hold and maintain appropriate professional qualifications and certifications aligned with recognised international standards (including, where relevant, ISO/IEC frameworks such as ISO/IEC 27001)" | Spec fn 4, p. 9 |
| EUCS | Not mentioned in either document. | — |
| Data residency | "The entire data lifecycle within the AIGF's core activities (including operational data, metadata, logs, and any surrogate data) shall be stored and processed exclusively within the territory of the EU" | Spec §3.g(a), p. 19 |
| Anchor-customer carve-out | "an exception applies to anchor customers, such as global service providers and international off-takers, that may maintain operational autonomy over the specific compute capacity and value-added services they provide to their respective end-users, and such specific services are not subject to the overarching AIGF sovereignty and data residency conditions" | Spec §3.g(a), p. 20 |
| Sovereign operations | "Critical service provisioning … shall be performed within the territory of the Union by duly qualified personnel of the Hosting Entity and/or the AIGF Coordinator." | Spec §3.g(a), p. 20 |
| Hardware origin | No EU-origin requirement. Encouraged: "Tenderers are also encouraged to consider the introduction of European sovereign hardware solutions by Phase 2." Supplier eligibility: "The Contractor shall ensure that its suppliers of core infrastructure … fulfil the same eligibility conditions as the ones applicable for participation in the AIGF Consortium" | Spec §3.b, p. 10; FWC I.12.1, p. 16 |
| US-chip conditions | "In case where processing units are acquired from the United States of America (US), the Contractor shall implement all measures deemed appropriate to guarantee compliance with any restrictions imposed by the US on the use of advanced US AI processing unit technology by the AIGF in line with the EU-US Joint Statement" | FWC I.14.3, p. 19 |
| Software stack obligation | "proposals should put into operation a European-based and controlled software stack (cloud and AI) that will be integrating, as much as possible, open-source solutions" … "at the latest, within year 4 after the milestone T0" | Spec §3.g(a), p. 20; §3.b, p. 10 |
| L1/L2/L3 service layers | L1 "Infrastructure and Orchestration Services" (bare metal, Kubernetes/Slurm/Flux); L2 "Managed MLOps and Development Platforms" (PyTorch, Jupyter, MLOps, inference endpoints, RAG); L3 "High-Value Integrated AI Services" (MaaS, cognitive APIs, "AI guardrails … auditing tools"). **[paraphrase]** "Proposers must demonstrate that the services offered to EU/MS users correspond to at least Layer 3 (L3) by the start of operations." | Spec §3.e, pp. 16–17; §9.3.2.2(a)(ii), p. 56 |
| EuroHPC interoperability | "the strategy and pathway to develop or integrate an EU-controlled software environment interoperable with the EuroHPC Federation Platform." ; scored: "Degree to which any potential plans to interconnect with EuroHPC AI Factories provide added value" | Spec §13.1 Sec 1, p. 70; §9.3.2.1(b)(i), p. 47 |
| Technical Readiness Report / acceptance | Contractor must certify deployment per tender and provide "hardware configuration (including GPU/CPU types and quantities); storage architecture and capacity; networking architecture and bandwidth; cluster orchestration …; monitoring …"; JU runs "Technical Validation Tests" and signs a "Technical Validation Certificate". "The Contractor shall not commence to provide access time services under a specific contract before the signature of the Technical Validation Certificate" | FWC I.13, pp. 17–19 |

## 3. Site and energy

| Requirement | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Grid-to-IT ratio | "Proposals must demonstrate the ability to deliver 85–90% of grid capacity to IT (net of auxiliaries) at each phase" | Spec §13.2(1)(iii)B, p. 80 |
| Interconnection agreements | "interconnection agreements covering, within Phase 2, firm capacity and phased expansions (to 120/150 MW and onward including POI voltage, allocated MVA, and energization milestones)" ; "system impact/feasibility studies confirming available capacity, required network reinforcements, protection coordination, and power‑quality compliance" | Spec §13.2(1)(iii)B, p. 80 |
| Backup power | "fuel and service agreements have to guarantee operation for around 48–72 hours without the grid." | Spec §13.2(1)(iii)B, p. 80 |
| PUE scoring | "PUE (25%): ≤1.10 (excellent), 1.10–1.15 (good), 1.15–1.25 (acceptable), >1.25 (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| WUE scoring | "WUE (15%): ≤0.20 near‑zero/dry (excellent), ≤0.40 hybrid low‑water (good), water‑cooling with mitigation (acceptable), high potable use (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| Renewables share | "Renewables share (20%): 100% with hourly matching (excellent), ≥80% annual (good), 50–79% (acceptable), <50% (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| PPAs | "PPAs maturity (15%): signed multi‑year with additionality (excellent), term‑sheet (good), MOUs only (acceptable), none (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| Heat reuse | "Cooling/heat reuse (15%): DLC + heat reuse ERF >0.20 (excellent), efficient cooling (good), basic containment (acceptable), no plan (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| Grid flexibility | "Grid flexibility (10%): demand response + time‑shifting + storage (excellent), partial measures (good), minimal (acceptable), none (poor)." | Spec §13.2(1)(vi), p. 84 |
| No hard PUE/WUE/renewable limit | These are scoring guides only (sub-criterion worth 10 points, threshold 5). **[observation]** | Spec §9.3.2.1(a) table, p. 46 |
| EU Taxonomy / EED | Not mentioned. The only legal hook is general: "tenders must comply with applicable data protection, environmental, social and labour law obligations established by Union law" | Spec §9.3.1, p. 40 |
| Land status at bid | "Documentary (preliminary) evidence proving legal control over the land, (e.g., deed/ownership, long‑term lease agreements, exclusive negotiations, or executed option agreements), including parcel maps, boundaries, and any encumbrances." ; extensibility "to accommodate the Phase 2 expansion in the next 5-7 years" | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 68 |
| Permits at bid | "Documentary evidence of the status of planning, zoning, and environmental approvals already completed or in progress, for industrial use with explicit use for advanced data centre/AI infrastructure development." | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 68 |
| Permits during contract | "The Contractor shall be fully and exclusively responsible for … all required licenses and permits" ; termination ground "(b) if the contractor is unable to obtain any permit or licence required" | FWC I.11.1, p. 15; II.18.1(b), p. 53 |
| Hazards | "low exposure to natural hazards (e.g., flooding, wildfire, seismic activity, hurricanes/cyclones)" with "flood maps with return periods, wildfire risk indices, seismic zone classification" | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 69 |
| Water | "Sustainability plan, including annual targets and a clear path for running the AIGF efficiently, using clean low carbon energy, and minimizing water use and emissions." | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 72 |
| Gantt | "Detailed Gantt chart showing design, procurement (long‑lead items like transformers, switchgear, generators, CDUs/chillers), construction, commissioning (FAT/SAT/IST), and energisation dates" | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 69 |

## 4. Timeline

| Item | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Set-up period | "This period begins immediately upon the signature of the FWC and SC1. It has a maximum duration of 18 months." | Spec §3.f, p. 17 |
| T0 | "T0 marks the end of the Set-up Period and the start of the operational delivery. It is defined as the moment the AIGF is initially configured, deployed (with initial GPUs/TPUs required for Phase 1), and ready to start operations, subject to the acceptance of a prior technical audit. This date is defined by the AIGF Consortium in its tender but must occur no later than 18 months after the signature of the FWC and SC1." | Spec §3.f, pp. 17–18 |
| Phase 1 payments | "Public periodic payments … should commence at T0 and continue for a fixed period of 5 years." | Spec §3.f, p. 18 |
| Phase 2 execution | "Upon the availability of these additional funds and the formal initiation of Phase 2, the consortia shall have a maximum period of up to 12 months to execute the project expansion" | Spec §3.f, p. 18 |
| T1 | Only in FWC: "Milestone T1 (operational readiness for Phase 2)" | FWC I.23.3 / II.15.1, p. 28 |
| T2 | Does not appear in either document. | — |
| FWC duration | "The envisaged duration of the FWC is 6.5 years as of signature" ; fn 12: "This includes de maximum duration of the initial set-up phase (up to 18 months) plus 5 years" / "The maximum duration of this FWC is 78 months from the date this FWC enters into force." | Spec §4, p. 24; FWC Main cond. Art. 3, p. 3 |
| SC tail | "The services relating to such specific contracts must be performed no later than twenty-four (24) months after the expiry or termination of the FWC. At the end of this period, all remaining specific contracts are automatically terminated." | FWC I.3.3, p. 8 |
| SC duration | "The maximum period of provision of the services [must not exceed [number] [days/months/years]]" — left blank in model. Service start "[upon achievement of Milestone [x] … and following the signature of the Technical Validation Certificate …]" | SC Art. 2.2–2.3, p. 68 |
| Phase 2 funds timing | "may be awarded after 31 December 2027, subject in particular to the adoption of the Multiannual Financial Framework for 2028-2034 … the establishment of a successor to the EuroHPC JU …" | Spec §4, p. 24 |
| LD for T0/T1 delay | "0.001 x V, where V is the value of the relevant specific contract capped at 5% of the value of the specific contract." per week | FWC II.15.1 (as replaced), p. 28 |
| LD for late reports | "EUR hundred (100) for each day of delay per report capped at EUR twenty-five thousand (25.000)." | FWC II.15.1, p. 28 |
| Scheduled access delay | "fails to provide the agreed AI Compute Capacity within seventy-two (72) hours of the confirmed commencement date, the Contracting Authorities may claim service credits equal to one percent (1%) of the affected scheduled capacity for each completed day of delay, up to a maximum of twenty percent (20%)" | FWC II.15.2, p. 28 |
| Other delays | "0.3 x (V/d)" per minute/hour/day | FWC II.15.4, p. 29 |
| Global LD cap | "The maximum amount of liquidated damages payable per each contract year will be limited to 10% of the yearly value of the specific contract." | FWC II.15.5, p. 30 |
| Termination for late start | "(a) if provision of the services under an on-going specific contract has not actually started within 15 days of the scheduled date and the contracting authority considers that the new date proposed, if any, is unacceptable" | FWC II.18.1(a), p. 53 |
| Reserve list | "The reserve lists will remain valid for 12 months from the date of its formal approval by the Governing Board … may decide to extend the validity of the reserve lists by up to 12 months." | Spec §9.3.2.2, p. 62 |
| Procedure dates | Publication 30 July 2026; deadline 12 November 2026; questions by 4 November 2026. **[paraphrase]** | Spec §11, p. 64 |

## 5. Money mechanics (exhaustive)

| Item | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| What is bought | "The ultimate goal of this procurement is the acquisition … of a guaranteed share of AI compute access time from the selected AIGF(s)." / "This joint procurement is not intended to cover raw, unmanaged AI compute access time (e.g., bare-metal GPU-hours) alone." | Spec §3.c, p. 11 |
| Off-take model | "The Union contribution shall take the form of periodic payments over a defined term (e.g. 5 years) at a pre-agreed price ('Off-take model')." | Spec §3.e, p. 14 |
| Unit of sale | "'AI Chips-hours': means the use of one (1) Artificial Intelligence processing chips/accelerator for a period of one (1) hour." / "'Compute Unit': a measurable unit of computing capacity defined as GPU- hour." | FWC I.24.1(e),(h), p. 31 |
| How price is bid | "A price for L2 (including Layer 1) and a price for L3 services must be submitted for each AI chip technology type offered to the EuroHPC JU/Participating States for the entire duration of the FWC." / "Bidders must provide a distinct Price for each AI service layer per hour per AI chip for each different acceleration technology" / "For each technology, the offered prices must explicitly be different for each of the layers of service" | Spec §3.e, p. 17; §9.3.2.2(b), p. 58 |
| Pricing posture expected | "the financial offers should reflect the highly competitive pricing and exceptional volume discounts standard in the industry for such large-scale, long-term off-take agreements." / "This price should be designed as a sustainable 'anchor customer' rate that ensures the long-term financial viability of the AIGF without requiring public subsidies for operational costs." | Spec §3.e, p. 17; §13.1 Sec 5, p. 77 |
| Pricing assumptions to disclose | "They must also detail all underlying assumptions used for their pricing, including guaranteed uptime percentages within the financial support window." | Spec §13.1 Sec 5, p. 77 |
| L1 billed at L2 price | "Regardless of the chosen mix of Layer 1 and Layer 2 services within this allocation, all such capacity shall be procured at the Layer 2 price offered by the successful tenderer." | Spec §4, p. 23 |
| Basket mix SC1 | "Lot 1 … 50% … Layer 2 services (including also Layer 1 services), and 50% to Layer 3 services. Lot 2 … 60% … Layer 2 … and 40% to Layer 3." ; "reserve the right to deviate from this initial mix by up to 10% in the first Specific Contract." Later SCs: "this proportional mix … is not fixed; it may be dynamically adapted" | Spec §4, p. 23; §3.d, p. 13 |
| 17% cap | "the procurement volume purchased by the EuroHPC JU is calculated net of Value Added Tax (VAT), and shall cover a pre-agreed guaranteed purchase of AI compute access time to the AIGF, limited in purchase costs to up to 17% of the CAPEX of the overall computing infrastructure of the AIGF (see Annex 4 for definition of eligible IT CAPEX)." | Spec §4, p. 22 |
| 17% applies per phase | "In each Phase, the Union contribution shall be limited up to an amount of 17% of the IT CAPEX (See Annex 4) of the respective AIGF project." / "The maximum cap of 17% of the IT CAPEX still applies in Phase 2." | Spec §3.d, p. 13; §4, p. 24 |
| Phase 1 amount formula | "the Union's financial contribution is EUR 100 million per AIGF project in Lot 1, and EUR 200 million per AIGF project in Lot 2, or an amount of 17% of the IT CAPEX of the respective selected AIGF project, whichever is lower. For the application of this budgetary limit, multi-country or multi-site proposals will be treated as a single, integrated AIGF project." | Spec §4, p. 24 |
| Phase 2 amount | "estimated at up to EUR 400 million per AIGF project in Lot 1, and up to EUR 800 million per AIGF project in Lot 2." | Spec §4, p. 24 |
| Ceilings | Lot 1: "EUR 500 million per AIGF" ; Lot 2: "EUR 1 billion per AIGF" ; "subject to the availability of next MFF funds" | Spec §3.d, pp. 12–13 |
| No extra money for extra scale | "they will not receive any additional EU funding beyond the maximum amounts specified for their targeted Lot, irrespective of the final size of the facility." | Spec §3.d, p. 14 |
| IT CAPEX definition (included) | "the CAPEX of the overall computing infrastructure refers to the costs, excluding VAT, directly associated with the acquisition and initial installation of the core computational and data handling systems of the AI Gigafactory. … IT equipment including: AI accelerators/GPUs, CPUs, TPUs, memory, and high-performance storage systems, cloud storage systems; associated high-performance networking fabric (interconnects, switches); Networking Fabric, such as interconnects, switches, routers, media converters... It includes the one-off cost for the connectivity (fibre deployment to the Internet Exchange Point connection). Supporting Hardware and rack-level power components: Physical housing for the equipment (racks); the dedicated cooling systems required for the stable operation of the compute hardware; and the electrical installation and components and stabilizers required to power the entry-level racks of the IT compute infrastructure. Essential system software and licenses necessary for the initial deployment and operation of the infrastructure, including operating system, cluster management tools, file systems, core programming environments, and software stack (including the cloud stack) to provide AI services to targeted customers." | Spec Annex 4, p. 128 |
| Excluded from IT CAPEX | "The remaining costs related to the construction of the hosting site per se (i.e., costs related to the building infrastructure that will host the new AIGF), general utilities, or site preparation, as well as the operational expenditure (OPEX) of the AIGF and any other costs not explicitly mentioned in the definition of IT CAPEX, shall be covered by the AIGF Consortium." | Spec §4, p. 22 |
| Implied CAPEX to unlock full EU amount | **[derived, not in document]** 100m/0.17 ≈ EUR 588m IT CAPEX (Lot 1 P1); 200m/0.17 ≈ EUR 1.18bn (Lot 2 P1); 400m/0.17 ≈ EUR 2.35bn (Lot 1 P2); 800m/0.17 ≈ EUR 4.7bn (Lot 2 P2). | — |
| Matching | "All European Union (EU) contributions should be at least matched by contributions from the Participating States of the EuroHPC JU." / matching "may be provided collectively by multiple states" (example 120m + 80m) | Spec §3.d, pp. 12, 14 |
| Over-matching trimmed | "In cases where the aggregate financial commitments from all Participating States within a specific territory exceed the Union contribution, the final aggregate contribution from those Participating States shall be adjusted to match the Union contribution." / "Alternatively, in the case where Participating States decide to exceed the Union contribution for the purpose of securing additional AI compute access time, all those contributions exceeding the Union contribution have to abide by State aid rules." | Spec §4, pp. 22–23 |
| Phase 2 planning assumption | "proposals should operate under the assumption of an EU financial contribution of EUR 400 million for Lot 1 and EUR 800 million for Lot 2. Furthermore, the projections must assume that Participating States will provide a financial contribution that at least matches" | Spec fn 24, p. 48 |
| Firm vs indicative | "the public financial contributions are firm for Phase 1 and only estimated (indicative) for Phase 2." / "The Contract legally commits only to a Union contribution under the current Multiannual Financial Framework for the execution of Phase 1." | Spec §4, pp. 23–24 |
| Phase 2 conditional on performance | "the activation of stages envisaged in the Contracts beyond the first phase will also be conditional on the achievement of contractual objectives and obligations of the AIGF Consortia" | Spec §4, p. 24 |
| FWC max amount | "The maximum amount covering all purchases (covering both Phase 1 and Phase 2 …) under this FWC is EUR [insert amount …]." / "this does not bind the contracting authority to order services for the maximum amount." | FWC Main Art. 2, p. 2; I.5.1, p. 10 |
| No obligation to order | "Signature of the FWC does not oblige the contracting authority to enter into a specific contract." | FWC II.4.1, p. 35 |
| SC1 simultaneous | "This phase is operationalised through the signature of the first Specific Contract 1 simultaneously with the FWC." | Spec §4, p. 24 |
| Multi-site allocation of EU money | single-country: "exclusively procured from the largest constituent AIGF site" ; multi-country: "from the largest single site … within each participating hosting Member State" ; two full-scale sites: "an equal share" ; full-scale + smaller: "pro rata based on the number of comparable advanced AI accelerators at each site" (example 4/5 and 1/5 of EUR 200m) | Spec §3.e, pp. 15–16 |
| Payment schedule — no advance | "Pre-financing is not applicable to this FWC." | FWC I.6.2, p. 11 |
| Quarterly interim payments | "The contractor may claim quarterly interim payment at the end of each quarter of service for the services (AI GPU-hours) … that have been reserved for that quarter (Confirmed Reserved Capacity …)" accompanied by "Accepted Quarterly Capacity Statement" | FWC I.6.3, p. 12 |
| Payment term | "The contracting authority must approve any submitted documents or deliverables and pay within 60 days from receipt of the invoice." | FWC I.6.3(2), p. 12 |
| Payment independent of use | "The Contractor shall invoice only the Confirmed Reserved Capacity identified in the relevant Quarterly Capacity Statement. Payment shall not depend upon actual utilisation by the Contracting Authorities." | SC Art. 14.3, p. 75 |
| Access time structure | "[x] number of AI Chips-hours for L2 services, the not taking into account downtime of the infrastructure, divided equally across the [maximum] period of provision of the services." (same for L3) | SC Art. 11.1, p. 70 |
| Annual forecast and ±10% | "The Contracting Authorities shall no later than ninety (90) days before the commencement of each service provision year, submit to the Contractor the annual forecast … may … adjust the above-mentioned baseline scenarios provided that such adjustment does not exceed ten (10) % of their annual baseline allocation or distribution between L2 and L3 services, without this modification requiring the prior approval of the Contractor." | SC Art. 11.3, p. 71 |
| Deemed Reserved Capacity (take-or-pay backstop) | "If, following expiry of the period referred to above, any portion of the Annual Access Entitlement remains unreserved solely due to the failure of the Contracting Authority(-ies) to submit scheduling requests, the Contractor may designate such Access Time as Deemed Reserved Capacity. Deemed Reserved Capacity shall: (a) be treated as Confirmed Reserved Capacity made available …; (b) be payable in accordance with this specific contract/ FWC; (c) expire at the end of the relevant service provision year, unless expressly carried forward" | SC Art. 12.6, p. 73 |
| Final Reservation Date | "with a cut-off date (Final Reservation Date) two (2) months before the end of the service provision year" ; CA then has "ten (10) business following such notification" | SC Art. 12.2, 12.6, pp. 72–73 |
| Carry-forward | "Any unused access time of the annual access entitlement shall be carried forward to the next year provided that it does not exceed 20% of the annual access entitlement." | SC Art. 13.2, p. 74 |
| Contractor-caused non-use credited | "Access time shall not be considered unused where utilisation was prevented by: (a) Contractor's or AIGF (infrastructure) unavailability; (b) failure to achieve the agreed Service Levels; … Such access time shall automatically be credited … and rescheduled without affecting the carry-forward allowance." | SC Art. 13.4, p. 74 |
| Less capacity delivered | Capacity Shortfall LDs: "95% or more of Committed Capacity — None; Less than 95% but at least 90% — 2% of the Annual specific contract Price; Less than 90% but at least 85% — 5%; Less than 85% — 10%" plus "make available … additional AI Compute Capacity equivalent to one hundred percent (100%) of the undelivered capacity" within 90 days, plus 5%/10% extra credits. | FWC II.15.3, p. 29 |
| Price reduction | "reduce the price in direct proportion to the difference … between the value of the unperformed obligations or low quality delivery and the value of the agreed services" | FWC II.16.1, p. 51 |
| VAT — EU share | "the amount to be paid by the EuroHPC JU, shall be exempt from VAT; the amount to be paid by each Participating States, shall [not] be subject to VAT, as per national legislation." / "The contracting authority is exempt from all taxes and duties, including VAT, in accordance with Articles 3 and 4 of the Protocol 7" | FWC I.6.3, p. 12; II.19.1, p. 55 |
| VAT — matching | "the corresponding procurement volume committed by any Participating State must also be calculated net of VAT; notwithstanding this, each Participating State shall ensure strict adherence to its applicable national VAT frameworks" | Spec §4, p. 22 |
| Currency | "The bank account is denominated in euro." / "Payments are made in euros" | FWC I.6.1, p. 11; II.21.2, p. 57 |
| Late payment interest | "interest on late payment at the rate applied by the European Central Bank for its main refinancing operations in euros (the reference rate) plus eight points." | FWC II.21.8, p. 60 |
| Indexation — first year fixed | "prices are fixed and not subject to revision during the first year of the FWC. At the beginning of the second and every following year of the FWC, the prices (baseline normalised prices for Layer 2 and Layer 3 services …) may be revised upwards or downwards at the request of one of the parties." | FWC I.23.2 (replacing II.20), p. 27 |
| Indexation — only new SCs | "Price revisions shall exclusively apply to the signature of new, future specific contracts. Under no circumstances shall a price revision apply retroactively to, or affect the prices of, specific contracts that have already been signed." | FWC I.23.2, p. 27 |
| Indexation formula | "Pupdated = 0.8 × Pbaseline × (Iinf,1/Iinf,0) × (Icompute,1/Icompute,0) + 0.2 × Pbaseline" **[formula transcribed from layout]** | FWC I.23.2, p. 28; Spec §9.3.2.2(b), p. 58 |
| Inflation index | "an equally weighted combination … (50% of the Eurostat PPI for 'computer, electronic and optical products' combined with 50% of the PPI for 'electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply')." | FWC I.5.2, p. 10–11 |
| Compute proxy index | "equally weighted basket (33.3% each) … The NVIDIA Blackwell GB200 … The AMD Instinct MI355X … The Google Cloud TPU v7." Sources: "(1) major hyperscalers (Amazon Web Services, Azure, Google Cloud Platform); (2) specialized AI cloud providers (CoreWeave, Lambda, RunPod, Spheron, Nscale); and (3) independent research benchmarks (SemiAnalysis)." | FWC I.5.2 & fn 3, p. 11 |
| Phase 2 price ceiling | "the prices in subsequent Phase 2 Specific Contracts will be normalised against hardware performance, ensuring that the cost per standard performance unit remains equal to or lower than the baseline established at the proposal stage." | Spec §3.e, p. 17; §9.3.2.2(b), p. 58 |
| In-kind public contributions | "Consortia are required to formally declare, in the tender proposal, any potential in-kind contributions provided by public entities to the project. This includes, but is not limited to, the provision of land, infrastructure, specialised equipment, or personnel. … in full compliance with current EU State aid rules." | Spec §9.3.2.1(c), p. 49 |
| InvestEU / EIB | "The Contractor shall respect its obligations under any specific agreements it has signed under InvestEU relating to the AIGF" ; bidder to outline "anticipated support required from the InvestAI Facility framework and the EIB Group" | FWC I.11.8, p. 16; Spec §13.2(3)(i), p. 88 |
| Extra SLAs at no cost | "the contracting authority (-ies) may request the Contractor to implement additional specific technical requirements/ SLAs … in case it agrees … it shall do so at no additional cost" | FWC I.4.3(a), p. 9; SC Art. 11.5, p. 72 |
| Expense reimbursement | "Reimbursement of expenses is not applicable to this FWC." | FWC I.5.3, p. 11 |
| Cost audit deliverable | "CR_year Yearly Audit report and data on the operation costs in the previous financial year. (Using agreed calculation method)" due "31st March" | FWC App. III Table 3, p. 86 |

## 6. Obligations on the consortium's use of the facility (exhaustive)

| Item | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Public share of capacity | No percentage of total capacity reserved for public users; public share = what the EU and PS buy ("Committed Capacity" in each SC). **[observation]** "the Contractor shall make available to the Contracting Authorities a minimum level of Compute Capacity as specified in each specific contract (the 'Committed Capacity')." | FWC I.17.1, p. 22 |
| Not dedicated | "the Committed Capacity shall not constitute dedicated, isolated, uninterrupted, or exclusive infrastructure access at all times. While the procured compute access time … will inherently be scheduled alongside the workloads of the other commercial customers, the Contractor shall, on a best-efforts basis and to the extent possible, provide concentrated computing resources as priority for exceptionally heavy computational workloads (such as the training of large-scale foundational models)" | FWC I.17.4, p. 23 |
| Scheduling veto | "The Contractor shall not implement scheduling changes or allocation measures without the prior agreement of the Contracting Authorities." | FWC I.17.5, p. 23 |
| Scheduling mechanics | Forecast 90 days before each quarter (non-binding); requests ≥30 working days ahead; contractor confirms within 5 working days; "Once confirmed, the corresponding AI compute capacity access time shall become exclusively reserved (Confirmed Reserved Capacity)." Rescheduling by CA on 15 working days' notice. **[paraphrase + quote]** | SC Art. 12.1–12.7, pp. 72–74 |
| Workload priority classes | "designate each submitted workload as Critical, High, Medium, or Low" | SC Art. 12.44 [sic], p. 72 |
| Public resale right | "The Contractor grants the Contracting Authorities the right to allocate, resell, sublicence or commercially redistribute the purchased compute access time to end users" | FWC I.15.1, p. 21 |
| End-user terms | "each end user shall sign terms of use agreements with the Contractor … However, unless otherwise expressly agreed in writing, the Contractor shall not be contractually be liable to any end users" | FWC I.15.2, p. 21 |
| Startups/SMEs/academia | No reserved quota. Bid must describe "access for SMEs and innovators to develop, test, and scale AI solutions" and a "clear, proportionate, and time-bound strategy to progressively diversify the AIGF customer base". L3 "particularly relevant for Public Administrations and SMEs". | Spec §13.1 Sec 1.2, p. 70; Sec 3, p. 75; §3.e, p. 17 |
| Anchor-customer concentration | "If a proposal relies initially on a concentrated group of large anchor clients or specialised cloud providers … it must include a clear, proportionate, and time-bound strategy to progressively diversify its users." | Spec §13.2(3)(ii)A, p. 88 |
| Third-party pricing | No cost-based or regulated pricing for commercial customers. Only: "Revenue Generation and Pricing: Robustness and credibility of the proposed outlined revenue and pricing models for the offered services for the different target customers" (scored). **[observation]** | Spec §13.2(3)(ii)A, p. 88 |
| Non-exclusive | "The FWC does not confer on the contractor any exclusive right to provide the services subject of this FWC." | FWC Main Art. 1, p. 2 |
| User eligibility (whole facility) | "access to the AIGF shall be allowed to users residing and/or established in eligible countries. Other users … may be granted access … prior to an approval of the Public Governance Body. … The Public Governance Body shall use its best efforts to respond in writing, within 20 working days." | FWC I.18, p. 23 |
| Screening applies to anchor-customer capacity | "These obligations relating to the supervision and screening of final end-users shall apply in full to the AIGF facility in its entirety, without exception. This explicitly includes any compute capacity managed, partitioned, or commercialised by potential anchor customers (e.g., hyperscalers, neoclouds, and other global service providers) … the Contractor shall pass on these obligations in writing to any third party that purchases or otherwise acquires access time from the AIGF" | FWC I.14.3(c), p. 20 |
| Export control / US restrictions | "All GPUs shall be used exclusively to build such AIGFs, excluding any possibility to transfer them to entities established by not eligible countries." / "Additional safeguards shall be applied at the end of the lifecycle of the acquired US processing units, in case these are transferred or resold to third countries, including but not limited to export control limitations on and/or prohibitions of such secondary sales" | FWC I.14.3(a), I.14.4, pp. 19–20 |
| Asset lock | "All processing units and associated advanced hardware shall be acquired and used exclusively to build the specific AIGF, excluding any possibility of transferring them without the explicit agreement of the Contracting Authorities." | FWC I.14.3, p. 19 |
| Data residency (contract) | "The Contractor shall ensure that all data is held, accessed and processed within the territory of the European Union." ; personal data: "no access shall be given to such data outside of the European Union; … may not change the location of data processing without the prior written authorisation" | FWC I.14.5, p. 20; I.8.2(b), p. 15 |
| Third-country disclosure requests | "The contractor shall notify the contracting authority without delay of any legally binding request for disclosure of the personal data … made by any national public authority, including an authority from a third country. The contractor may not give such access without the prior written authorisation of the contracting authority." | FWC II.9.2, p. 44 |
| Sovereign staff/operations | "Critical service provisioning (such as operating the IT hardware and software/cloud infrastructure, orchestration, MLOps, data handling, system administration, maintenance and disaster recovery and other critical functions) shall be performed within the territory of the Union by duly qualified personnel of the Hosting Entity and / or the AIGF Coordinator." | Spec §3.b, p. 9 |
| Separation from other systems | "the functional separation, and to the extent possible, the physical separation of the AIGF and any other computing systems the Contractor operates." | FWC I.14.2, p. 19 |
| Supplier eligibility / lock-in | "The Contractor shall to the extent possible pursue to avoid or limit any major dependency on a single supplier; this also requires avoiding any situations of lock-in" | FWC I.12.1, p. 17 |
| Public Governance Body — composition | "one representative from the Commission and one representative from each National Contracting Authority (-ies) . A representative from the Contractor shall be invited to attend meetings as an observer … no voting rights. The Union … shall hold 50% of the voting rights, which shall be indivisible. The remaining 50% … held by the National Contracting Authority (-ies) … in proportion to the total financial contributions committed in Specific Contract(s)". Decisions need "at least 75% of all voting rights, including the votes of members who are absent." | FWC I.16.2, pp. 21–22 |
| PGB prior approval | "(a) any proposed access agreements with entities from third countries that may raise concerns …; (b) substantial changes to the legal and financial structure or changes of control of the AIGF, such as a change in the ultimate ownership or control of the AIGF, any relocation of critical assets outside the Union or major financial restructuring decisions; (c) significant change in the strategic purpose of the AIGF." Breach → "right to terminate the FWC and/or a specific contract" | FWC I.16.5, p. 22 |
| Quarterly reporting to PGB | "at least on a quarterly basis information about the progress of the AIGF, including but not limited to the evolution of the project's financing and bankability of the operations and an inventory … of the assets and systems of the AIGF" and "information about the users accessing the infrastructure" | FWC I.16.3–4, p. 22 |
| Usage reporting | quarterly: "(i) the breakdown of access time allocated and used by the Union and by National Contracting Authority (-ies); (ii) categories of users and their country of establishment; (iii) the level of utilisation of the AI gigafactory resources" ; annual audit report "by 31 January" (App. III says 31 March) | FWC I.19.2–3, p. 24; App. III, p. 86 |
| Commercial-use reporting | Service Reporting must include "h) Information on commercial use of the AIGF" and yearly "Audit report and data on the operation costs" | FWC App. III, pp. 85–86 |
| Monthly SLA reporting | "the Contractor must provide monthly reporting covering SLA compliance metrics, usage statistics, and incident summaries." | FWC App. II §7, p. 84 |
| Audit rights | "Such checks and audits may be initiated at any moment during the provision of the services and up to five years starting from the payment of the balance of the last specific contract" ; access "to sites and premises" ; OLAF, Court of Auditors, EPPO, EDPS same rights | FWC II.24.1–6, pp. 62–63 |
| Audit logs | "full audit logs for AI inference use (access events, inference metadata, system changes) for a minimum of 12 months." | FWC App. II §6, p. 84 |
| Security breach notification | "Any security breach … even if not directly related to the Union/ Participating States-supported activities, shall be notified to the Contracting Authorities without delay" ; personal data breaches "at the latest within 48 hours" | FWC I.14.6, p. 20; II.9.2, p. 43 |
| Additional security measures on demand | "The Contracting Authorities may, at any time, request the Contractor to take additional appropriate measures to ensure that the Union's and National Contracting Authorities interest on grounds of security or public order are safeguarded." | FWC I.14.7, p. 20 |
| IP — users | "All intellectual property created by the users using the AI compute capacity of the AIGF shall remain property of each user." / "The Contractor retains all rights in its infrastructure, software and underlying technology." | FWC I.20, p. 24 |
| IP — general conditions (unmodified) | "The Union acquires irrevocably worldwide ownership of the results and of all intellectual property rights on the newly created materials produced specifically for the Union under the FWC" ; pre-existing rights licensed "royalty-free, non-exclusive and irrevocable" — note I.9 "Exploitation of the results … not applicable" but II.13 is not derogated. **[observation]** | FWC II.13.1–2, p. 45; I.9, p. 15 |
| Backups | "backup retention policy of at least 1 month to the users … the Contractor shall make available to the Contracting Authorities and its users an amount of access time equal to processing hours lost without extra cost." | FWC App. II §5, p. 83 |
| Annual service review | "hold annual service review meetings at least once every twelve (12) months" | FWC I.21, p. 24 |
| Subcontractor changes | "The Contractor must not subcontract … beyond the third parties already mentioned in its tender without prior written authorisation" | FWC I.23.1, p. 27 |
| Assignment | "The contractor must not assign any of the rights and obligations arising from the FWC or a specific contract." (exception only with prior written authorisation, "in duly justified exceptional circumstances") | FWC II.12, p. 45 |
| Confidentiality / tender reuse | "the contracting authority is entitled to make available (any part of) the tender to its staff and the staff of other Union institutions … including contractors or subcontractors" | Spec §15, p. 92 |

## 7. Risk allocation (exhaustive)

| Risk | Who bears it / verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| CAPEX and OPEX | Consortium. "The investment for setting up and establishing the AIGF as well as the operational expenditure (OPEX) of the AI Gigafactory shall be covered by the AIGF Consortium." / "these are envisaged to be established under a predominantly industrial, market-driven model … The role of the public authorities is intended to be limited to act as a strategic anchor customer" | Spec §3.e, pp. 14–15 |
| Performance at own risk | "The contractor shall perform the contract at its own risk. The contractor warrants and holds the contracting authority harmless against any action or claim brought by a third party" | FWC II.6.1, p. 39 |
| Liability cap | "only up to an amount not exceeding three times the total amount of the relevant specific contract. However, if the damage or loss is caused by the gross negligence or wilful misconduct … or an injury … or … breach of its intellectual property rights, the contractor is liable for the whole amount" | FWC II.6.3, p. 39–40 |
| CA liability | "The contracting authority is not liable for any loss or damage caused to the contractor … unless … wilful misconduct or gross negligence" | FWC II.6.6, p. 40 |
| Construction / readiness delay | Contractor. Weekly LDs 0.1% of SC value capped at 5% (II.15.1); termination if services not started within 15 days of scheduled date (II.18.1(a)); repeated acceptance failure → "provision of alternative infrastructure resources; postponement of the service commencement date" (I.13.9); "The Contractor shall be fully and exclusively responsible for the successful and timely set up" (I.11.1) | FWC pp. 15, 18, 28, 53 |
| Technology obsolescence | Contractor, with hardship renegotiation only: "A fundamental shift in the technical landscape … that renders the originally agreed technical specifications obsolete or disproportionately costly to maintain, particularly during Phase 2 … to such an extent that maintaining the originally contracted infrastructure would render the AIGF commercially uncompetitive." → duty to renegotiate; "it shall by no means constitute a general right to renegotiate, service levels, pricing or contractual obligations." | FWC I.22.1–2, pp. 25–26 |
| Energy price / input cost | Contractor (no pass-through in signed SCs), except hardship: "A sustained, extraordinary and significant change in compute capacity costs directly necessary for the provision of the services (energy, cloud infrastructure, semiconductor supply, advanced chips …) resulting in a severe and disproportionate increase or decrease compared to the baseline costs as documented at the tender submission (Annex II) … persists continuously for, at least, one hundred eighty (180) calendar days" | FWC I.22.2, pp. 25–26 |
| Hardship outcome | "If the parties fail to reach an agreement within sixty (60 days) of the hardship notice … either party may refer the matter to the competent court … which shall have the power to adapt the FWC and/or Specific Contract." Notice within 30 days; negotiations within 15 business days. | FWC I.22.3–5, pp. 26–27 |
| Export bans / sanctions | Hardship event: "Governmental export bans, export control restrictions, sanctions, or embargoes affecting critical technologies for which no functionally equivalent alternatives are commercially available." Otherwise compliance cost on contractor (I.14.3). | FWC I.22.2, p. 25 |
| Change in law | Hardship event: "A material change in applicable law or regulation or regulatory restrictions that renders in part or in full the contracted services unlawful or technically impracticable" | FWC I.22.2, p. 26 |
| Demand shortfall — public share | Mitigated for contractor: payment on Confirmed Reserved Capacity, "Payment shall not depend upon actual utilisation" (SC 14.3); Deemed Reserved Capacity (SC 12.6). But: CA may shift ±10% of baseline unilaterally (SC 11.3); 20% carry-forward delays revenue (SC 13.2); forecasts "shall not create any minimum usage obligation" (SC 12.1). | SC pp. 71–75 |
| Demand shortfall — commercial | Entirely consortium (market model); scored risk: "demand fluctuations, lower-than-expected demand, pricing pressure from competitors, and customer concentration risk" | Spec §13.2(3)(ii)C, p. 89 |
| Phase 2 non-appropriation | Consortium. "The Contract legally commits only to a Union contribution under the current Multiannual Financial Framework for the execution of Phase 1." ; "All appropriations as of 2028 are indicative." ; "Signature of the FWC does not oblige the contracting authority to enter into a specific contract." ; informal forecasts "shall neither constitute or be construed as a commitment" | Spec §4, p. 24; FWC II.4.1, I.4.3, pp. 9–10, 35 |
| Yet Phase 2 scale is binding on bidder | "the proposal must include a binding roadmap to reach a total minimum capacity of at least 75,000 … in Phase 2" ; LDs for "Milestone T1" | Spec §3.g(c), p. 21; FWC II.15.1, p. 28 |
| Force majeure | "If the contractor is unable to fulfil its contractual obligations owing to force majeure, it has the right to remuneration only for the services actually provided." Excludes "Breaches or negligence of subcontractors, defaults of service, defects in equipment or material or delays in making them available, labour disputes, strikes and financial difficulties" | FWC II.14.2, p. 50; II.1, p. 33 |
| Suspension | "The contractor is not entitled to compensation for suspension of any part of the FWC or a specific contract." | FWC II.17.2, p. 52 |
| Termination by CA — grounds | (a) late start; (b) no permit; (c) failure to perform / material breach / refusal to sign SCs ("Termination of three or more specific contracts … also constitutes grounds for termination of the FWC"); (d)–(e) exclusion situations; (f) irregularities/fraud; (g) environmental/social/labour law; (h) conflict of interest; (i) "a change to the contractor's legal, financial, technical, organisational or ownership situation is likely to substantially affect the implementation"; (j) force majeure; (k) "if the needs of the contracting authority change and it no longer requires new services under the FWC; in such cases ongoing specific contracts remain unaffected"; (m)–(n) data protection; (o) anticipatory breach; (p) security/confidentiality breach. **[paraphrase with quotes]** Plus I.16.5 (PGB consent). | FWC II.18.1, pp. 53–54; I.16.5, p. 22 |
| Termination by contractor | "if the contracting authority materially fails to comply with its obligations" or force majeure | FWC II.18.2, p. 54 |
| Compensation on termination | "The contractor is not entitled to compensation for any loss resulting from the termination of the FWC or a specific contract, including loss of anticipated profits, unless the loss was caused by the situation specified in the first subparagraph of Article II.18.2." Contractor liable for "the additional cost of appointing and contracting another contractor" except (j),(k),(l),II.18.2. | FWC II.18.4, p. 55 |
| Step-in / substitution | "the contracting authority may … decide to have these obligations performed by a third party, at the contractor's expense." ; transition: "the contractor must provide all necessary assistance … to allow the contracting authority to complete, continue or transfer the services to a new contractor … at no additional cost" | FWC II.4.12, p. 37; II.18.3, p. 55 |
| Change of control | PGB prior approval (I.16.5(b)); termination ground (II.18.1(i)); eligibility: "If a contractor becomes controlled by an ineligible country … the contract may have to be terminated." | FWC pp. 22, 53; Spec Annex 1F(a) §5, p. 124 |
| Insurance | "If required by the relevant applicable legislation, the contractor must take out an insurance policy against risks and damage or loss relating to the implementation of the FWC. It must also take out supplementary insurance as reasonably required by standard practice in the industry." | FWC II.6.2, p. 39 |
| Performance guarantees | None under FWC (I.6.5/I.6.6). Possible first-call guarantee from third parties relied on for financial capacity (Spec §8.4). General conditions cap any such guarantee: "The performance guarantee must not exceed 10 % of the total price of the specific contract." | FWC I.6.5–6, p. 13; II.21.5, p. 58; Spec §8.4, p. 34 |
| Recovery / offset | "by offsetting them against any amounts owed to the contractor by the Union" | FWC II.23.2, p. 61 |
| Joint and several (group) | "they are all jointly and severally liable" ; CA "may terminate … with each member of the group separately" on certain grounds | FWC II.6.5, p. 40; II.18.4, p. 55 |
| Subcontractor default | "Even if the contracting authority authorises subcontracting, the contractor remains bound by its contractual obligations and remains entirely responsible" | FWC II.10.2, p. 44 |
| Governing law / forum | "The FWC is governed by Union law, complemented, where necessary, by the law of [Member State where the Hosting Entity is established] … in the case where the Hosting Entity is established in Germany: Luxembourg" ; "The General Court or, on appeal, the Court of Justice of the European Union shall have exclusive jurisdiction" | FWC I.10, p. 15 |
| Contractor T&Cs void | "By submitting a tender, the contractor waives its own terms and conditions." | FWC I.2, p. 8 |
| Order of precedence | "a. Main conditions; b. Special conditions including the appendices; c. General conditions; d. Tender specifications (Annex I); e. Contractor's tender (Annex II)." | FWC I.1, p. 7 |

## 8. Award criteria and weights

| Item | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Two-part evaluation | Part 1: "1. Technical evaluation [40%] 2. Potential impact [20%] 3. Financial Feasibility [40%]" ; "minimum quality threshold of 60 points (out of a maximum of 100) for the evaluation of Part 1" | Spec §9.3.2, pp. 41–42 |
| Technical sub-criteria (max/threshold) | "Objectives and technical quality 8/5; Quality of the workplan 8/5; Adequacy of proposed location and infrastructure site 8/5; Adequacy of power infrastructure 8/5; Adequacy of the IT infrastructure and networking infrastructure 8/5; Quality of service … 15/9; Supply chain security 8/4; Sustainability and energy efficiency 10/5; Consortium experience, know-how, and governance 12/7; Technical performance analysis … 15/10" **[table flattened]** ; total 100/60 | Spec §9.3.2.1(a), p. 46 |
| Impact sub-criteria | "Impact on the EU AI ecosystem … 40/25; EU Added Value, including contribution to strategic autonomy and technological sovereignty 60/35" ; total 100/60 | Spec §9.3.2.1(b), p. 48 |
| Financial sub-criteria | "Investment commitment … 25/15; Business Model and Market Strategy 25/15; Financial Plan, TCO & Budget Plausibility 40/25; Risk Management and Scalability 10/5" ; total 100/60 | Spec §9.3.2.1(c), p. 50 |
| Independent financial assessment | "A critical component of this process will be a comprehensive financial assessment, carried out by independent financial entities. This assessment will rigorously evaluate the viability, bankability and long‑term sustainability" ; panel of "3 to 6 financial experts from an accredited financial entity" | Spec §9.3.2, p. 40; §10.1, p. 63 |
| Part 2 formula | "Total score of a proposal for Part 2 is: 0.5 X1 + 0.25 X2 + 0.25 X3" | Spec §9.3.2.2, p. 61 |
| X2 scale formulas | Lot 1 P1: "P = 0.0008 ⋅ A − 15, for A ∈ [25,000, 50,000]" ; Lot 1 P2: "P = 0.0008 ⋅ A − 55, for A ∈ [75,000, 100,000]" ; Lot 2 P1: "P = 1/1,500 × A − 65/3, for A ∈ [40,000, 70,000]" **[transcribed]** ; Lot 2 P2: "P = 0.0002 × A − 15, for A ∈ [100,000, 200,000]" ; each 5–25 points | Spec §9.3.2.2(a), pp. 52–53 |
| X2 service layers | "Layer 1 + Layer 2 … 0-25; Layer 3: Added-value services 0-25" | Spec §9.3.2.2(a)(ii), p. 55 |
| X3 | "Normalised Price = Price for layer L2, L3 services per hour per AI chip (€) / Performance Benchmark Score" ; aggregated with Lot ratios; "ScoreX3 = 100 × Lowest Aggregated Normalised Price / Bidder's Aggregated Normalised Price" | Spec §9.3.2.2(b), pp. 57–60 |
| X3 perimeter | "shall apply exclusively to the constituent sites … for which public procurement … will be provided" | Spec §9.3.2.2(b), p. 57 |
| Benchmark binding | "By submitting a tender, applicants explicitly acknowledge to be bound by this methodology in its entirety, which shall not be subject to negotiation, contestation, or legal claims" | Spec §9.3.2.2(a), p. 54 |
| Tie-breaks | X1, then X3, then X2, then "the highest combined total number of Advanced AI accelerators across Phase 1 and Phase 2" | Spec §9.3.2.2, pp. 61–62 |
| Awards per Lot | Lot 1 "4 awarded consortia" ; Lot 2 "3 awarded consortia" ; "contracts will be awarded to projects from the ranking list until the total combined budget of the Union and the Participating States is exhausted." | Spec §3.d, pp. 12–13; §9.3.2.2, p. 62 |
| Reserve list | 12 months + up to 12 months extension; "if the available additional funds fall between EUR 100 million and EUR 200 million, the next highest-ranked Lot 1 project shall be selected, bypassing any higher-ranked Lot 2 project." | Spec §9.3.2.2, p. 62 |
| Sites per state | "If a Member State indicates in its formal commitment that its financial contribution is restricted to only the highest-ranked AIGF proposal within its territory, or if the committed national budget is fully exhausted by higher-ranked proposals, any lower-ranked AIGF proposals located in that same territory cannot be selected for award" ; "a maximum of one site per country will be eligible under a single project consortium." | Spec §9.3.2.2, p. 62; §3.e, p. 15 |
| State aid references | Section title "STATE AID BUDGET AVAILABLE -VOLUME AND VALUE OF THE CONTRACT" ; STEP Regulation 2024/795 ; PS over-contributions "have to abide by State aid rules" ; in-kind contributions "in full compliance with current EU State aid rules" | Spec §4, pp. 22–23; §9.3.2.1(c), p. 49 |
| Abnormally low tenders | "Tenderers must be aware of Point 23 of Annex I to the Financial Regulation on abnormally low tenders and of the possibility for rejection" | Spec §9.3.2.2, p. 62 |
| Timing scored | "the availability of state-of-the-art AI accelerators as early as possible in the life-time of an AIGF" | Spec §9.3.2, p. 42 |
| Multi-country bonus | "A proposal that convincingly demonstrates that its multi-country nature will serve and strengthen a larger number of distinct national or regional ecosystems will be considered as having a greater potential impact" | Spec §9.3.2.1(b), p. 47 |

## 9. Every stated number on cost, GPU count, capacity, market assumptions

| Number | Verbatim text | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Per-site investment | "In view of the very significant investment required to develop, deploy and operate AIGFs across the EU (indicatively estimated at least EUR 4–5 billion per AIGF)" | Spec §3.e, p. 14 |
| Benchmark AI Factory | "the benchmark for the most powerful existing AI Factory is JUPITER, which currently features an estimated capacity of around 24,000 H100-equivalent AI Accelerators." | Spec fn 2, p. 6 |
| Scale multiple | "at least three to four times the number of the most advanced AI processors currently available in the most powerful European AI factories" | Spec §3.a, p. 6 |
| Minimum GPU counts | 25,000 / 75,000 (Lot 1); 40,000 / 100,000 (Lot 2) | Spec §3.d |
| Scoring caps | "beyond 100,000 units for Lot 1, and beyond 200,000 units for Lot 2) will not receive any additional points" | Spec §9.3.2.2(a), p. 53 |
| EU money | Phase 1: EUR 100m ×4 = "EUR 400 million"; EUR 200m ×3 = "EUR 600 million"; Phase 2: "up to EUR 1.6 billion" (Lot 1), "up to EUR 2.4 billion" (Lot 2); total "up to EUR five billion, of which up to EUR 1 billion is available under the current Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027" ; "indicatively estimated at EUR 4 billion, may be awarded after 31 December 2027" | Spec §3.d, pp. 12–13; §4, p. 24 |
| 17% | "17% of the IT CAPEX" | Spec §3.d, §4 |
| Phase 1 power | "15–30 MW for Lot 1 and 20–50 MW for Lot 2" (indicative) | Spec fn 8, p. 21 |
| Phase 2 power | "120 MW for Lot 1 and 150 MW for Lot 2" | Spec §3.g(b), p. 21 |
| Site horizon | "Phase 2 expansion in the next 5-7 years" | Spec §13.1, p. 68 |
| Illustrative prices (examples only) | "The Price for L2 services per hour per AI chip €2.50, for L3 services is €3.50, and the Performance Benchmark Score … is 125." ; Example 2: "L2 Price: €2.00, L3 Price: €2.80" and "L2 Price: €2.00, L3 Price: €3.00" | Spec §9.3.2.2(b), p. 61 |
| H100 baseline GP | "The calculated baseline GP score for the NVIDIA H100 is explicitly set at 501.08." ; memory efficiency "f = 0.001" ; weights "FP32 0.05 BF16 0.175 FP16 0.175 INT8 0.1875 FP8 0.1875 INT4 0.1125 FP4 0.1125" | Spec Annex 6, pp. 131–132 |
| EU–US statement | "The European Union intends to purchase at least $40 billion worth of US AI chips for its computing centres." | FWC fn 5, p. 19 |
| TCO horizon | "5-year Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)" ; sensitivities "energy price changes ±20%, hardware lead-time delays, utilization variance" | Spec §9.3.2.1(c), p. 50; §13.2(3)(ii)C, p. 89 |
| Selection thresholds | turnover "above EUR 200 million"; experience "5MW"; commercial revenues "EUR 5 million" | Spec §9.2 |
| Indices basket | GB200 / MI355X / TPU v7, 33.3% each; PPI 50/50 | FWC I.5.2 |
| Market assumption on hyperscalers | "specialised cloud providers (e.g. hyperscalers, neoclouds, etc), can participate since they can support early operational readiness and commercial viability of an AIGF, particularly in Phase 1." | Spec §3.b, p. 10 |
| No stated public volume | The SC leaves "[x] number of AI Chips-hours" blank; no expected chip-hours or utilisation figure anywhere. **[observation]** | SC Art. 11 |

## 10. Gaps — what a bidder's finance model needs that the documents do not specify

1. **Public volume and price are both bidder-defined.** The documents fix the money (EUR 100m/200m, ≤17% of IT CAPEX) and the L2/L3 split, but not the number of chip-hours, the utilisation assumption, or whether price is per physical chip-hour by technology (yes, per Spec §9.3.2.2(b)) while the 17% is tested against IT CAPEX — so the public chip-hour volume = budget ÷ bid price, which the bidder itself sets. Annual Access Entitlement, "Annual specific contract Price" and "Committed Capacity" (FWC II.15.3, I.17.1) are undefined in quantity terms.
2. **Participating State commitments (Annex 2) are blank** in this version: "will be completed soon" (p. 126). Matching amounts, which states, whether restricted to the top-ranked proposal per territory, and national VAT treatment ("shall [not] be subject to VAT") are all unknown.
3. **Appendix 1 (List of Services and schedule of prices) is empty** in the model FWC (p. 80).
4. **Payment profile within SC1.** Payments start at T0 and run "a fixed period of 5 years", chip-hours "divided equally across the [maximum] period" (SC 11.1); no ramp, no treatment of partial deployment at T0, no milestone payment during the 18-month build (no pre-financing). Revenue only begins after the Technical Validation Certificate.
5. **Nominal fixity for ~6.5 years.** Price revision "shall exclusively apply to the signature of new, future specific contracts" (I.23.2) — SC1 prices are fixed nominal for the whole Phase 1 window; the only escape is the Hardship clause (180-day sustained cost shock). The spec simultaneously says Phase 2 normalised price must be "equal to or lower than the baseline" while the FWC says revision may be "upwards or downwards"; not reconciled.
6. **IT CAPEX verification method.** How and when the JU audits IT CAPEX for the 17% cap is unspecified; App. III's cost audit uses an "agreed calculation method" that is not in the documents. Treatment of leased hardware, GPU-as-a-service, cloud-provided capacity, hardware refresh within Phase 1, residual value, and depreciation is absent.
7. **Milestones.** T1 appears only in the LD clause; T2 does not exist; the Phase 2 trigger date is unknowable ("as soon as additional funds become available"), yet the 12-month expansion and T1 LDs attach to it. SC maximum duration is a blank placeholder.
8. **Phase 2 capacity obligation vs. funding.** The 75k/100k roadmap is "binding" at proposal stage, but no clause states what happens to that obligation if Phase 2 funds never appear (whether the bidder must still expand, or is released).
9. **Commercial side entirely unspecified.** No pricing rules, no quotas for SMEs/startups/academia, no limit on anchor-customer share beyond a "time-bound diversification strategy"; but screening/PGB approval obligations extend to anchor-customer capacity, whose commercial cost is not addressed.
10. **Energy.** No energy price pass-through, no PUE/WUE hard limit, no renewable mandate (scoring only), no treatment of grid-connection cost (building/utilities excluded from IT CAPEX).
11. **Liability exposure.** 3× SC value cap (II.6.3) and 10%/year LD cap exist, but "Annual specific contract Price", "value of the specific contract" (for T0/T1 LDs) and the interaction between service credits in kind and cash LDs are not defined; II.15.5 says LDs "may" be in capacity "if so agreed".
12. **IP ambiguity.** I.20 says contractor retains infrastructure/software rights and users own their IP, but the unmodified II.13 grants the Union ownership of "results" and royalty-free licences on pre-existing materials; which prevails for e.g. the EU-controlled software stack delivered under the contract is unclear (special conditions prevail by I.1, but I.9 "not applicable" is about exploitation, not ownership).
13. **Multi-site allocations.** The "equal share" / "pro rata by accelerators" rules fix EU money split across sites but not how PS money follows, nor how a smaller site's share interacts with the 17% cap applied to the "single, integrated AIGF project".
14. **Financing instruments.** InvestAI / EIB support is referenced as expected but no terms, amounts or sequencing; "obligations under any specific agreements it has signed under InvestEU" (I.11.8) are undefined.
15. **Deemed Reserved Capacity** gives a take-or-pay backstop, but the CA's unilateral ±10% rebalancing (SC 11.3), 20% carry-forward (SC 13.2), and "good faith" extra carry-forward (SC 13.3) make annual public revenue variable by roughly ±10–30% of entitlement; the model must stress this.
16. **Governing law placeholder** depends on hosting-entity state (Luxembourg if Germany) — relevant to security/insolvency structuring but unspecified for other states.
17. **Deadline discrepancy outside the two files:** the spec says 12 November 2026 (§6.2, §12), while `/tmp/claude-0/-home-claude/41c480b0-b7c6-5a7d-b0fa-20e9e1f11c34/scratchpad/dl2/eurohpc_call.html` in the same folder shows "Deadline dates 3 Dec 2026, 17:00 / 4 Feb 2027, 17:00 (CET)". Worth verifying which call that page refers to.

---

## Defined terms (verbatim)

- **T0**: "Milestone T0 (Operational Readiness): T0 marks the end of the Set-up Period and the start of the operational delivery. It is defined as the moment the AIGF is initially configured, deployed (with initial GPUs/TPUs required for Phase 1), and ready to start operations, subject to the acceptance of a prior technical audit. This date is defined by the AIGF Consortium in its tender but must occur no later than 18 months after the signature of the FWC and SC1." — Spec §3.f, pp. 17–18.
- **T1**: no stand-alone definition; only "Milestone T1 (operational readiness for Phase 2)" — FWC I.23.3 replacing II.15.1, p. 28. **T2**: not defined or mentioned in either document.
- **AIGF**: "AIGF refers to state-of-the-art large-scale facility with sufficient capacity to handle the complete lifecycle, from development to large-scale inference, of very large AI models and applications, providing a supercomputing service infrastructure which is composed of AI-optimised computing capacity, a supporting data centre infrastructure including high-capacity storage and networking, dedicated secure cloud user access environments, and specialised secure AI-oriented support services for its advanced operations, all of which are supported by an environmentally sustainable infrastructure, in particular for energy and water supply systems." — Spec §3.a, p. 6. FWC: "'Artificial Intelligence Giga Factory', or 'AIGF' means the AIGF that is the subject matter of this FWC." — FWC I.24.1(c), p. 31.
- **NCA**: "a number of National Contracting Authorities of the Participating States (hereinafter 'NCA'), listed in Annex 2 of this document. Collectively referred to as 'Contracting Authorities' or 'Contracting Authority'." — Spec §1, p. 5.
- **JPA**: "The contracting authorities listed in Annex 2 have concluded a Joint Procurement Agreement (JPA) with the EuroHPC JU prior to the launch of this Call, which includes, inter alia, a financial commitment of the respective Member States and Participating States to procure a share of the compute access time to the selected AIGFs." — Spec §1, p. 5.
- **Participating State**: not defined in either document; FWC I.24.2: "Terms not defined herein will have the same meaning as in the Regulation." (i.e. Council Regulation (EU) 2021/1173 as amended by 2026/150). Related: "'Eligible countries': eligible countries are Member States, Participating States to the EuroHPC JU, associated countries of Horizon Europe and of the Digital Europe Programme and of any subsequent relevant Union funding programmes, OECD countries, or that have signed an AIGF Cooperation Agreement" — FWC I.24.1(i), pp. 31–32.
- **Specific Contract**: "'Specific contract': a contract implementing the FWC and specifying details of a service to be provided." — FWC II.1, p. 35. Spec: "Subsequent Specific Contracts will lay down the specific terms and conditions, the services to deliver, and the specific budget for each of those contracts." — Spec §3.c, p. 12.
- Also useful: **"Committed Capacity"** — "a minimum level of Compute Capacity as specified in each specific contract" (FWC I.17.1); **"Capacity Shortfall"** — "where the aggregate AI Compute Capacity made available by the Contractor during a service provision year is less than the Committed Capacity for that service provision year" (I.24.1(g)); **"Service provision year"** — "each consecutive period of 12 months commencing on the effective date" (I.24.1(n)); **"Unused Access Time"** — capacity that "was made available…; complied with the applicable Service Levels; was capable of being used…; and was not utilised before expiry of the applicable service provision period" (I.24.1(q)); **"AIGF Coordinator"** and **"Hosting Entity"** — see Section 1 rows (Spec §3.b, pp. 8–9).

Source files: `/tmp/claude-0/-home-claude/41c480b0-b7c6-5a7d-b0fa-20e9e1f11c34/scratchpad/dl2/spec.txt` and `/tmp/claude-0/-home-claude/41c480b0-b7c6-5a7d-b0fa-20e9e1f11c34/scratchpad/dl2/fwc.txt`.