2\. The international setting surrounding the project. What is the
schedule for other competing experiments? By what date must the project
start? What is the minimum number of years of running that the
proponents would consider adequate? What is the projection for available
manpower for construction and then detector operation and physics
exploitation?

**What is the schedule for other competing experiments?**

The lab has provided a plan for its operation between now and 2012.

BTeV is undertaken in the context of a long program of B physics
explorations, which began in 1977 with the discovery of the Upsilon.
Enormous contributions were made by CLEO, ARGUS, CDF and groups at PEP,
PETRA and LEP. At present, the two asymmetric e^+^e^-^ collider
facilities, PEP II/BaBar and KEK/BELLE, have established CP violation in
B→J\\ψ K~S~ decays and have shown that, viewed within the context of the
Standard Model, it is consistent with other measurements in B and K
decays**,** providing there are no surprises due to discreet
ambiguities. These two storage rings will gradually improve their
luminosities, perhaps reaching 10^34^ /cm^2^-s over the next few years
and their experiments will continue to produce new results. These
experiments can observe B~d~ and B~u~ decays but will not be able to
contribute meaningfully to the knowledge of B~s~ decays. The two high
P~t~ Tevatron experiments, CDF and D0, are now running and over the next
few years should contribute to the study of CP violation in B~d~ and
B~u~ decays, and observe B~s~ mixing. However, the experiments at the
asymmetric colliders and the Tevatron will not address many critical
issues that remain in the study of B decays: whether all CP violation is
a result of the CKM mechanism or whether there are other contributions
that appear as departures from the very specific predictions of the
Standard Model. In the answer to question 1, we have explained how BTeV
continues the B physics program and extends it to unprecedented
sensitivity for New Physics beyond the Standard Model**, and how BTeV is
crucial to interpret any New Physics found at the LHC.**

On the relevant timescale, the only competing experiment is LHCb, a B
physics experiment at the LHC. The schedule for both LHCb and BTeV have
uncertainties. LHCb depends on the completion date of the LHC, the
length of the commissioning period, the initial luminosity, and the
funding profile and priority of the experiment. The current schedule
calls for a machine commissioning run in 2007 followed by a 4 month
physics run starting in the late summer of '07. This is based on
schedules that certainly have to be viewed as extrapolations at this
point in time since only a tiny fraction of the crucial components have
been fabricated and funding remains a concern. Moreover, the schedule as
published has no contingency. The lab plan notes that if this project
were managed by DOE, there would be a schedule contingency estimated at
around 18 months. Some expectation of schedule slippage is therefore
built into the Fermilab plan. On the other hand, it would be unwise to
formulate a plan that depends on excessively long delays in the current
LHC schedule.

For BTeV, the main issues are 1) when the detector can be ready, which
depends both on funding issues and overcoming technical challenges; and
2) when the appropriate transition to BTeV operation from CDF/D0
operation can be accomplished, which is a programmatic issue for
Fermilab management.

The current detector funding profile for BTeV calls for completion of
R&D in FY04, ramp up of funding for construction in FY05, peak funding
in FY06, 07, and FY08 and completion of the detector in FY09. The
spending profile permits the installation of all infrastructure
components -- the analysis dipole, the RICH vessel, the muon toroids,
the EMCAL support structure, and the superstructure for all other
tracking chambers -- in the shutdown scheduled for 2006 to replace the
Run 2 silicon detectors. Most of the design work to accomplish this is
complete. After that, because of the open geometry of the detector,
installation of most components can occur a little at a time on down
days and the occasional longer shutdowns that occur. Commissioning can
proceed immediately as each piece is installed, using interactions of
the beam halo on a wire target and occasional periods of collisions
obtained by turning the separators off at the very end of collider
stores. This will provide an important head start to BTeV for
commissioning its detector relative to LHCb, while permitting both RUN 2
experiments to continue for as long as possible. The Fermilab schedule
shows this commissioning activity as an official activity of the program
beginning in 2008, although some limited work could start as early as
2007. Fermilab management supports this model.

The original BTeV proposal in May of 2000 included the construction of a
new set of IR magnets specifically for producing collisions at C0. This
plan would have provided the ability to run any two of the three
experiments, BTEV, CDF, and D0, simultaneously, although CDF/BTeV or
D0/BTeV both could not both run at the highest luminosity. As part of
the descoping of the detector in 2002, Fermilab management decided that
the IR quadrupoles from one of the existing experiments will be moved to
C0 to form the low β\* collision region. Under this plan, one of the two
high P~t~ experiments would have to stop running forever at when this
occurs.

It is estimated that the installation of the IR components will require
3 months. The Fermilab schedule, presented in its documentation to P5,
shows the installation occurring in the middle of 2009. As explained
above, Fermilab management believes that, even though this would
nominally place BTeV two years behind LHCb, a more realistic assessment
of the situation is that BTeV would start no more than 6 months to a
year behind. Moreover, BTeV will, when it starts to run, be nearly fully
commissioned under the current plan. Because of the character of the
BTeV detector, and given the current spending profile, a significant
portion of BTeV can be installed parasitically before this shutdown. The
current funding profile is consistent with this schedule. The last
portion of the spending, the part that occurs in 2009, is for mainly for
trigger and electronics components that are in the counting room and do
not require access to the experimental hall to install.

A protracted delay, relative to the startup of LHCb, puts BTeV at a
disadvantage. However, there are a few factors that make it possible for
BTeV to start a bit behind LHCb and then overtake it. First, these types
of experiments are trying to achieve statistical precision and it will
take quite a bit of time to accumulate enough data to have a useful
result. Since BTeV has significant advantages over LHCb, even in this
circumstance it remains competitive. Secondly, these experiments are
fairly complicated and require significant commissioning periods. BTeV's
ability to run with a partial detector in parasitic mode can give it a
head start even before its IR is installed. However, it is important
that a realistic plan be developed and followed, that allows BTeV to
come into operation in a timely and competitive manner.

Fermilab also retains the option of building a separate set of IR
quadrupoles if it were to turn out that it made physics sense to prolong
the running for CDF and D0 or to keep both B0 and D0 viable as
interaction regions. It should be noted that because there is
significant lead time required to build new IR components, certain
procurements, such as superconducting wire, must be started, and
supported by adequate funding, relatively soon.

Finally, one might ask what would happen if the LHC were significantly
delayed. From the standpoint of competition with LHCb, one could simply
delay BTeV startup. This strategy might not, however, produce the best
physics. We are assured by Fermilab management that decisions about
running will be based on considerations such as doubling times for the
running experiments, physics opportunities, and performance of the
detectors. There is a commitment to get BTeV significant running in
2009, even if the LHC were to slip significantly. Again, the option
exists to build a third set of IR quadrupoles and to attempt to run two
out of three interaction regions together, if there is a long delay in
the LHC schedule or if a period of overlap of (One) Run 2 detector and
LHC operation is desirable.

**What is the minimum number of years of running that the proponents
would consider adequate?**

We envision the experiment lasting on the order of 3 years in its
current form. We expect to bring the detector on quickly due to partial
commissioning activities discussed above. During the three year
data-taking period, we hope for some improvements in efficiency and
perhaps incremental improvements in luminosity throughout this period.
We use the measurement of the angle χ to set the statistical goal for
BTeV. The error on χ over this period, neglecting any possible
efficiency or luminosity improvements, will be about 0.4^o^, compared to
the value expected in the Standard Model of about 2^o^. This permits a
reasonable test of the consistency of the Standard Model.

The doubling time beyond this period is prohibitively long. If, however,
it turned out to be desirable to proceed to push the sensitivity of
these measurements, presumably based on their connection with New
Physics observed either in BTeV or at the LHC, it is possible to reduce
the doubling time to two years by adding a second arm to BTeV. This
second arm would double the number of tagged B events per year without
requiring any increase in machine luminosity. It is also possible that
there could be increases in machine luminosity that we could efficiently
utilize. Reducing the time between crossings would also allow more
luminosity to be accumulated quickly.

**What is the projection for available manpower for construction and
then detector operation and physics exploitation?**

The current size of the BTeV collaboration is 160 Physicists. Several of
the groups are "below strength," mainly because they cannot build up
until BTeV is approved for construction. Moreover, in this stage of the
experiment, it is not appropriate to recruit large number of physicists
who do not have permanent positions. When these considerations are taken
into account, the projected size of BTeV, based only on the existing
groups, is about 275. However, we expect that additional collaborators
will join if BTeV is approved for construction soon. We project a
collaboration size of 250-350.

The needs for various human resources for the construction project are
given in Table 1 below. Approximately 350 FTE-years of physicist effort
is required over the 5-6 years of the construction projects. This
includes commissioning. We estimate another 200 fte-years of effort to
complete the offline analysis from where we are today. The total of 550
fte-years should be well within the capabilities of the collaboration
since about 2000 people-years of effort will be available (or perhaps
more realistically, 1500 people-years given a ramp-up). This gives a
required duty factor of 25% to 33%. Members of this experiment have
worked together on large projects before and an average duty factor of
50% has been typical.

Our model of operations assumes that experimenters on shift will carry
out many routine maintenance functions, as we have done in our many
experiments at Fermilab and elsewhere. We see this as a crucial
component of successful experiment operation and student training. Given
the technical complexity of the experiment and the difficulties of
working in the limited space at C0, we have included a modest technical
staff to provide expertise and assistance in operation. The staff is
available only during regular hours on weekdays, but is, of course, also
available for emergency call-in. We see no problem maintaining
operations with an experiment of this size. We estimate that 30-50
physicist FTE-year/year will be required for operations and maintenance.
Similarly, we believe that we will have plenty of people to analyze the
data based on our previous experiences. There will certainly be more
than 100 FTE-year/year of effort available for the analysis.

Table 1: A breakdown of the labor required for BTeV construction, based
on information from the Temple Review of October 2002.