Berkeley HEP Program Future Plans and Wrapup

1
Berkeley HEP Program Future Plans and Wrap-up

• Jim Siegrist
• February 19, 2004

2
Summary of Progress

• Important technical progress on SNAP RD,
  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
3
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.

4
Proposal Progress

• SNAP has enjoyed extensive review
  prioritization by the community. Scope of
  necessary RD is clear we propose 3-year RD
  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.

5
Near Term Issues
6
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.
7
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 RD program stewardship

• Result Large budgetary pressures

8
Funding Changes since May 03 Review
9
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

10
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.
11
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, ?

12
Future Planning
Need to balance in the long run allocations among

• 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

13
Physics Division Funding (LHC excluded)
14
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 RD
  activities.
• November internal review highlighted
  complexity/cost of doing RD and proposal,
  cost/schedule.

We propose a 3-year plan to complete the sensor
RD program in time for project definition.
15
FY05 Base Program Impacts

• Maintain to extent possible, highest priority
  program elements SNAP RD, ATLAS, SNF
• Sharply curtail other ongoing physics efforts
  (CDF, BaBar)
• Delay future developments (Polarbear, ?13)
• Faculty particularly adversely impacted by these
  cuts

16
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 gt inflation in our
  efforts
• Need planning scenarios from DOE that allow for
  this growth
• Otherwise ATLAS physics manpower will begin to
  decrease in FY06

17
FY05/FY06 Base Program Budget Requests

• For FY05, the Presidents 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 Presidents 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

18
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 LBNLs
  excellence in these challenging times.
• From November 2001 Directors 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. OFallon from cover letter on SNAP review,
  July 2002
• In summary, the Committee recommended that The
  RD 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 Committees comments and
  recommendations useful in your continued pursuit
  of this important project.

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