# Presentation: 091384

## Berkeley HEP Program –Future Plans and Wrap-up

**Jim Siegrist**
**February 19, 2004**

## Summary of Progress

**Important technical progress on SNAP R&D, particularly in the sensor area**
**Improved understanding of DOE/NASA relationship & LNBL role**
**Supernova Factory coming together this year**
**ATLAS strips nearing completion**
**ATLAS pixels in production**
**ATLAS Data Challenge happening this year**
**Run II CDF physics beginning to happen**
**BaBar physics hitting full steam**
**CMB work breaking new ground in instrumentation**
******13 ****neutrino effort showing promise**
**Theory: EWSB, CKM, extra dimensions, particle astrophysics, strings...**
**PDG printing next book**

**Exciting activity at every turn**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Science Priorities

**After extensive discussion among the staff, our highest priorities in the longer term are:**
**Electroweak symmetry breaking (LHC, LC)**
**Cosmology and Astrophysics (SN/SNAP, CMB)**
**	****We hope to maintain the breadth of our program with a joint effort (NSD, AFRD) on neutrino physics.**
**	****We are adjusting our resources to match these priorities.**
**	**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Proposal Progress

**SNAP has enjoyed extensive review & prioritization by the community. Scope of necessary R&D is clear; we propose 3-year R&D profile.**
**Supernova Factory work given positive SAGENAP endorsement.**
**ATLAS has been under continual project review since inception.**
**CDF & BaBar at LBNL have finite remaining lifetimes with clear physics objectives.**
**CMB work currently lacks full community endorsement. We are preparing a SAGENAP proposal to vet this work with the DOE community.**
******13**** ****neutrino experiment just at the inception. Plan to assemble a letter of intent for SAGENAP.**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Near Term Issues

## Science Program

**Near term science for Berkeley:**
**	****Dark Energy studies – Supernova Factory**
**	****	****APEX/SZ**
**	****Flavor Physics – BaBar, CDF, KamLAND**
**	****Electroweak Parameters – CDF, D0**
**In Development:**
**	****ATLAS, SNAP, CMB Polarization (Polar Bear), ********13**** **
**Near term priorities: Keep developments on schedule, harvest physics from past investments.**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Budget Comments

**We appreciate the large budget increase 03-04**
**This increase is accompanied by an even faster increase in responsibilities:**
**ATLAS physics ramp up**
**SNAP R&D program stewardship**

- Result: Large budgetary pressures

- 2/18/04 Review

## Funding Changes since May 03 Review

| Time | Item | Budget Impact |
| --- | --- | --- |
| August 03 | Phase out of LDRD/Strategic funds | (500K) |
| September 03 | Lab burden & overhead increases | (700K) |
| October 03 | Budgets to groups based on PB |  |
| January 04 | DOE recission | (325K) |
| January 04 | Additional Lab payroll burden 2.7% increase | (380K) |
| January 04 | LDRD/Strategic funds rescission | (160K) |
| January 04 | Governor’s plan raises grad student  fees 40% | (90K) |
|  | Total | (2.1M) |

- 2/18/04 Review

## FY04 Actions

**Currently we have a detailed scheme to close FY04, but it requires sharp cuts in our program**
**Allocate resources to high priorities in accordance with strategic plan and review recommendations:**
**CDF, D0 into ATLAS; BaBar into Dark Energy**
**Accelerate reduction in postdocs for lower priority efforts**
**Reduce non-labor allocations for all programs, especially lower priorities**
**Protect SNAP funding to the extent possible**

- 2/18/04 Review

## FY04 Program Impacts

**Severe reductions of travel & purchases**
**Continue planned manpower reductions (CDF, BaBar)**
**Delay engineering work on CMB, neutrinos**
**Delay planned ATLAS manpower increases**
**Consolidate proton collider (ATLAS, CDF, D0) research under Gilchriese**

**A very tough year.**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Longer Term Plans

**Longer term science for Berkeley:**
**	****What is Dark Energy? - Hi Z surveys**
**	****What are the origins of mass? – ATLAS**
**	****What powers inflation? – PolarBear**
**	****Is CP violation observable in the neutrino sector? - ********13**
**In Development:**
**	****SNAP, LC, CMB pol satellite, ...?**
**	**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Future Planning

**Staff salaries and wages**
**Operations costs**
**Travel**
**Purchases**
**Recharges (space, phone, etc.)**
**Reinvestment in staff and infrastructure**
**We have detailed bottom up plans for this, but need to rework in light of the absence of ATLAS funding increases for the last few years and JDEM announcement**

*Need to balance in the long run allocations among:*

- 2/18/04 Review

## Physics Division Funding (LHC excluded)

|  | FY03Final Funding | FY04Current Fin Plan | FY05 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Protons | 6669 | 5550 | 5212 |
| Electrons | 2240 | 2514 | 3040 |
| Non-Accelerator | SNAP        3435
Research  2400 
Total          5835  | SNAP        2950
Research  3456
Total          6406 | SNAP        2950
Research  3095
Total          6045 |
| Theory/PDG | 2723 | 3335 | 3300 |
| Technology  | 2480 | 5274 | 5273 |
| Total | 19947 | 23079 | 22870 |

- 2/18/04 Review

## FY05/FY06 Budget Scenarios for SNAP

**NASA studies show need for up-front funding to avoid later project overruns.**
**National Academy studies of DOE project management said same thing.**
**FY02 Lehman review set scope of required R&D activities.**
**November internal review highlighted complexity/cost of doing R&D and proposal, cost/schedule.**

**We propose a 3-year plan to complete the sensor R&D program in time for project definition.**

- 2/18/04 Review

## FY05 Base Program Impacts

**Maintain to extent possible, highest priority program elements: SNAP R&D, ATLAS, SNF**
**Sharply curtail other ongoing physics efforts (CDF, BaBar)**
**Delay future developments (Polarbear, ********13****)**
**Faculty particularly adversely impacted by these cuts**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Requests - Assistance

**For SNAP:**
**Set date to begin JDEM Science Definition team**
**Big impact on our planning**
**Request NASA to choose lead flight center soon**
**A crucial step to bring NASA up to speed**
**For ATLAS:**
**Out years require growth > inflation in our efforts**
**Need planning scenarios from DOE that allow for this growth**
**Otherwise ATLAS physics manpower will begin to decrease in FY06**

- 2/18/04 Review

## FY05/FY06 Base Program Budget Requests

**For FY05, the President’s budget will require severe cuts across all our ongoing research programs (CDF, BaBar, Astrophysics...), our future programs (ATLAS...) and theory.**
**Request: +400K above the FY05 President’s budget to allow us to meet minimal responsibilities in the ongoing US-based collider programs and in astrophysics, and to prevent reductions in ATLAS.**
**For FY06, severe problems in ATLAS in a + 2% scenario**
**Request: +1.3M above FY04 P.B. for protons**

- 2/18/04 Review

## Quality of Our Program Remains Very High

- Statements of support –
*R. Staffin from May 2003 DOE Review*
- “The overall evaluation is that LBNL is performing outstanding work with a strong emphasis on many of the important areas of high energy physics. The DOE HEP budget continues to be quite tight, and we recognize that has a significant impact on LBNL program. I want to work with you to find ways of continuing LBNL’s excellence in these challenging times.”
*From November 2001 Director’s Review*
- “The Review Committee rates the LBNL Physics Division as outstanding. It is an active and important part of many current experiments in High Energy Physics and in Astrophysics/Cosmology, and, looking forward, has plans to be engaged in an equally broad range of activity for many years to come.”
*J. O’Fallon from cover letter on SNAP review, July 2002*
- “In summary, the Committee recommended that ‘The R&D effort necessary to move this project forward should be pursued with all possible speed’ and that ‘SNAP is ready to go to CD-0, when deemed appropriate by DOE.”
- “I would like to commend you and the project team on your achievements, and I believe that you will find the review Committee’s comments and recommendations useful in your continued pursuit of this important project.

***We hope this performance will be a positive influence on our funding.***

- 2/18/04 Review