PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 1 FY2009 Budget Roll-Out Steve Kahn PPA Director.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Children’s Service budget proposals 2013/14 Formal consultation.
Advertisements

Federal Budget Process Steve Kidd and Allison Boehm Budget and Program Analysis Staff April 2009.
0 FY14 State Budget Discussion EEC Board Meeting May 13, 2013.
Some thoughts on major challenges ahead for AGIS 27 June 2008 AGIS Collaboration Meeting Rene Ong.
Department of Energy Office of Science Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Dr. Robin Staffin Associate.
Department of Energy Office of Science Yet Another Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics Presented to SLUO September 10, 2006 Dr. Robin.
1 State Budget and its Impacts on Mines Faculty Conference August 23, 2010 Kirsten M. Volpi, CPA Senior Vice President for Finance and Administration.
February 19, 2008 FACET Review 1 Lab Overview and Future Onsite Facilities Persis S. Drell DirectorSLAC.
This is the last message in this gathering of North American PI’s with an interest in the INFN hosted SuperB project. I will try to deal with issues on.
No 1 REVIEW OF ACADEMIC STRUCTURE PROPOSED GENERAL STAFF STRUCTURE 3 June 2008.
Managing an established facility: Scenarios for group work Kimmo Koski 26 October 2011.
A Possible Strategy Towards a Future Lepton Collider Tor Raubenheimer SLUO Annual Meeting September 17, 2009.
Strategy for Moving Forward in PPA Page 1 Strategy for Moving Forward in Particle Physics and Astrophysics at SLAC Steven M. Kahn Associate Laboratory.
July 23, 2008PPA All-HandsPage 1 PPA All-Hands: Debrief from the SLAC Program Review Steven M. Kahn Associate Laboratory Director and Director of Particle.
Budget Briefing with OHEP Staff: March 3, 2009 Page 1 SLAC HEP Budget Meeting Summary Discussion Charts S. M. Kahn, D. B. MacFarlane, R. Alva SLAC Rev.
Performance Evaluations: PPA InterpretationsPage 1 Interpretations on Performance Evaluation Process D. MacFarlane June 4 th, 2009.
Australia’s Experience in Utilising Performance Information in Budget and Management Processes Mathew Fox Assistant Secretary, Budget Coordination Branch.
SEN and Disability Green Paper Pathfinders March 2012 Update.
October 24, 2000Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing Milestones and Funding Profiles Matthias Kasemann Fermilab.
HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.
3/6/2006FY07/08 DOE Budget Briefing1 FY07/08 Budget Briefing Jonathan Dorfan Director Persis Drell Deputy Director SLAC.
FY 2012 Budget Update Policy and Fiscal Committee July 25, 2011.
1 LSST dark energy science collaboration meeting Penn June 11-13, 2012 LSST dark energy science collaboration meeting Penn June 2012 Governance Document.
Developing a Library Marketing Plan, Part 2 Implementing the Plan Mark E. Ibach Marketing & PR Coordinator South Central Library System.
FORMAL CONSULTATION ON CHILDREN’S SERVICE BUDGET 2012/13.
Long Range Planning Pier Oddone September 24, 2007.
LSST CD-1 Review SLAC, Menlo Park, CA November 1 - 3, 2011 The Funding Agency Context for the LSST DESC Steve Kahn.
SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing RemarksPage 1 SLUO LHC Workshop: Closing Remarks David MacFarlane Associate Laboratory Directory for PPA.
DOE Annual Review of SLAC HEP Research Program June 14-16, 2005 SLAC Charge to Committee Issues Procedures.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
FY 2008 Proposed Budget ($2.776 Trillion OL) R&D = 13% of discretionary spending Non-Def. 16% Other Mandatory 11.5% Social Security 20.9% Net Interest.
P5 and the HEP Program A. Seiden Fermilab June 2, 2003.
International Linear Collider The ILC is the worldwide consensus for the next major new facility. One year ago, the choice was made between the two alternate.
Lab Coordination Meeting 9/25/13Introduction – G. Sabbi 1 Magnet Development Plan Update Overview GianLuca Sabbi LARP Lab Coordination Meeting September.
LIGO-G M Planning and Implementation Strategy for Advanced LIGO Gary Sanders LSC Meeting Hanford, August 14, 2001.
CLIC Implementation Studies Ph. Lebrun & J. Osborne CERN CLIC Collaboration Meeting addressing the Work Packages CERN, 3-4 November 2011.
All Hands Meeting FY 2008 Budget Pier Oddone Fermilab December 20, 2007.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
PS Days, January 2001 The “Plan” B.W.Allardyce The Medium Term Plan is presented at the June FC meeting by the Management and covers 4 years (I.e. in June.
PPAN Programmatic Review Presentation to PP town meeting Jordan Nash.
September Board Meeting FY08 and FY09 Spending Plan.
1 FY09 PPA Budget Kick Off Rafael Alva Charlotte Chang Oct 22, 2008.
Welcome and Presentation of Charge Steve Holmes Accelerator Advisory Committee ( May 10-12, 2005.
US LHC Accelerator Research Program (LARP) Background  Proposed in 2003 to coordinate efforts at US labs related to the LHC accelerator (as opposed to.
Proton Improvement Plan: View from the Directorate (and the DOE) Stuart Henderson PIP Meeting Jan 3, 2012.
SLAC Accelerator Development Program Tor Raubenheimer OHEP Accelerator Development Review January 24-26, 2011.
Future Direction of the U.S. Fusion Materials Program Dr. Pete Pappano US Department of Energy Fusion Energy Sciences Fusion Power Associates Annual Meeting.
Department of Energy Office of Science  FY 2007 Request for Office of Science is 14% above FY 2006 Appropriation  FY 2007 Request for HEP is 8% above.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
NOAA Fisheries Update MAFAC Meeting Paul Doremus DAA for Operations September 23, 2014.
Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation: The Prairie Adaptation Research Cooperative Mark Johnston Forest Ecosystems Branch, Environment and Resource Management.
Global Design Effort September 20-22, 2006 MAC Review R&D Programme (Tools) Eckhard Elsen GDE DESY.
Budget Outlook Glen Crawford P5 Meeting Sep
Americas comments on Linear Collider organization after 2012 P. Grannis, for LCSGA – Aug. 24, 2011 ILCSC GDE.
Office of Science January 28, 2008J.Blazey / SiD Workshop / SLAC1 The View from DOE Moving ForwardMoving Forward HEPAPHEPAP FY08 “in review”FY08 “in review”
LARP Review, June 12-14, 2006 Prebys, Todesco, Zisman 1 Accelerator Systems Eric Prebys Ezio Todesco Mike Zisman.
SLAC All Hands Briefing: FY2008 Budget Persis S. Drell SLAC Director 1/7/08.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
State of the States Brian Sigritz Director of State Fiscal Studies NASBO NASACT Middle Management April 12, 2016.
ILC MAC April 07 Global Design Effort 1 European Regional R&D plan Brian Foster (Oxford & GDE) MAC Meeting.
CU Development Grants 2016 Information Session 482 MacOdrum Library June 2 nd, 2016.
CPM 2012, Fermilab D. MacFarlane & N. Holtkamp The Snowmass process and SLAC plans for HEP.
The SiD LOI Proposed Milestones and Schedules SiD Collaboration Phone Meeting September 6, 2007 John Jaros.
FNAL SCRF Review R. Kephart. What is this Review? FNAL has argued that SCRF technology is an “enabling” accelerator technology (much like superconducting.
MICE Project in the US: Completion of Efforts
S4 will be a “big” Collaboration:
Yet Another Report from DOE Office of High Energy Physics
Introduction FY09 Linac Ops Review
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Presentation transcript:

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 1 FY2009 Budget Roll-Out Steve Kahn PPA Director

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 2 Purpose of Meeting *Persis established a tradition of holding “budget roll-out” meetings to mark the official start of the budget planning process for the coming fiscal year. *I have maintained that tradition, because it gives us a chance to have an open discussion of the opportunities and challenges we face as we try to tailor our programs to our funding constraints. *This particular meeting will give you a chance to meet and interact with the new head of our PPA budget planning office, Rafael Alva, who joined us earlier this month. *This meeting is occurring later in the year than it has in the past. This is partly due to the uncertainty at DOE in establishing our budget, and partly due to our desire to wait until Rafael arrived, so that he could get fully engaged in the process. *Charlotte and Rafael will show you the statistics slides. I will dispense with that and move directly to comments on the programs and the budget.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 3 Milestones for Major Programs *PEP-II/BaBar –As you know, we had to terminate the B-factory operations early in April of this year, due to the severe budget hit that came out of the omnibus bill. Nevertheless, the program ran flawlessly, with higher than expected luminosity for the 3+ months of running. –The physics analysis efforts have also been extremely impressive, leading to the very quick discovery of the  B, among other results. –FY09 and FY10 will be devoted to the “intense analysis phase”. We are fully committed to enabling this activity in support of the planned analyses. Beyond FY10, there has been discussion of an archival analysis phase, but the details still need to be worked out. –BaBar D&D has begun in earnest and will become a significant activity in FY09. *FGST –Launch finally occurred in June, leading to a very successful LEO phase of the program. –The LAT is performing flawlessly. –ISOC has also been extremely impressive, maintaining and exceeding its planned turn- around rates for turning telemetry bits into science. –Support of operations and science on FGST will remain the highest priority for the particle astrophysics program at SLAC.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 4 Milestones for Major Programs (Cont’d) *ILC –As you know, the ILC program was officially terminated in FY08, but has been reinstated in FY09 under the rubric of “accelerator r&d”. –SLAC remains committed to its participation in this program under the guidance of the GDE. –The future of the ILC, however, remains very uncertain, and I suspect there may be some redirection of accelerator r&d efforts generally, coming from OHEP. We will have to monitor this situation carefully. *ATLAS –We are trying to grow the ATLAS effort to become the major program in accelerator-based particle physics at SLAC. Significant growth is planned for Phase 1 commissioning and analysis, participation in the ATLAS upgrade efforts, and expansion of ATLAS computing at SLAC. –However, DOE OHEP has not given us blanket approval to redirect personnel onto this program. We need to justify our expansion in the context of overall planning for US ATLAS and the ATLAS consortium as a whole. –We submitted a “white paper” detailing our proposed future ATLAS efforts at the end of September. Discussions with DOE and US ATLAS have been ongoing. This situation is still in flux and it is unclear how it will play out.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 5 Milestones for Major Programs (Cont’d) *LSST –LSST is still in an R&D phase. It was strongly endorsed by P5, so our expectation is that DOE OHEP will support this program if and when NSF moves ahead as the lead agency. –However, the process has been stalled to some degree by the “decadal survey process” in astronomy and astrophysics, which has only just started. NSF has indicated that they cannot seek formal approval for LSST until and unless it is given high priority by the new decadal survey committee (chaired by RB). –Nevertheless, we are on track for Preliminary Design Review in mid to late Spring The Conceptual Design Review, held in Sept 2007, was very successful. *EXO –EXO-200 will be delivered to WIPP in January. –The experiment is transitioning into operations. –Planning is underway for expansion into “full EXO”, presumably in connection with DUSEL, but the timescale for this opportunity is still very uncertain. *High Gradient Program –The collaboration is still functioning well with strong ties to Europe and Japan. –We have been looking to expand this program significantly to include the development of new sources of high power X-band rf. –The goal is to develop a credible, potentially lower cost alternative to the ILC technology for a TeV-scale collider. P5 was supportive, and there is receptiveness at DOE, but the future of this program is still unclear.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 6 Milestones for Major Programs (Cont’d) *JDEM –The JDEM program was recently significantly revamped. There will no longer be a “competition” between competing concepts. A “science coordinating group” has been formed to flesh out the requirements for a single concept, and then NASA will develop that concept. –DOE will participate through a commitment to design, build, and deliver a specific component of that payload, scoped roughly at the level of $200M. DOE has established a project office at LBNL to oversee this activity. –It is still likely that SLAC will have a major role in electronics for the the DOE contributed subsystem. Other technical roles remain to be worked out. *FACET –A specific proposal for FACET has been developed over the past year, and has been reviewed by DOE in competition with the BELLA proposal from LBNL. –The emphasis has been steered to the development of the beam-driven plasma wakefield concept, leading to its applications toward a TeV-scale e+e- collider. –We are still awaiting the official outcome of that review. If positive, construction could start in FY09, although that will require additional funding.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 7 FY09 Budget Guidance *The news is actually not bad. Our budget guidance is at the level of $87.2M, which, given that we no longer need to cover linac operations, can support most of our planned ongoing programs. *We also have some significant carry over funding from FY08, much of it coming from the supplemental bill, which was passed later in the fiscal year. *On the other hand, the lab’s over head rate has increased from 42% to 45% –This will decrease the spendable/direct funding. *However, there are significant challenges: –The Lab is transitioning from a “stewardship model”, to one more closely approaching “full cost accounting”. This means that many centralized services will no longer be subsidized by the linac ops budget. The impact on PPA is still to be determined, but it is likely that our basic operating costs will increase. –We are still in CR through March. It is very unclear how that will play out (more on next slide). –DOE OHEP has changed its way of doing business, and has moved to a “program-based” funding approach, as opposed to an “institution-based” funding approach. This means we have less flexibility to move money between B&R codes. We still do not have agreement with OHEP in the allocation of our FY09 between these codes.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 8 CR Uncertainties *The official CR goes through March. –At this point, we have only received 5/12 of our funding in our contract. *However, given the change of administration, it is very likely that it will be extended, perhaps for the entire year. *On paper, an extended CR doesn’t really hurt us badly, because our budget was dropping from FY08 anyway. However, it could cause havoc for the rest of DOE-OS, and for OHEP, specifically. If that occurs, it is very likely we will see further readjustment, with a cut in our budget to help address shortfalls elsewhere. *We are especially vulnerable, because our program is not strongly “anchored” by running experiments. It is much easier to cut R&D programs than operating programs.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 9 Bottom Line *We need to be very cautious how we structure our expenses over the next few months, until we get a better idea of how the budget will evolve. *The explicit guidance is to spend at 5/12 of the allocated IFP. I want to throttle us down below that rate while we are in CR, to protect against possible disaster scenarios emerging later. *This means we will take a very conservative approach toward discretionary expenses: travel, M&S, new hires, visitors, etc. *We will look at all aspects of HEP-funded work at SLAC in making tough decisions. A reasonable fraction of our funding still goes outside the directorate. We will evaluate the effectiveness and priority of those efforts as well. *As much as possible, we will try to engage the department heads in helping us to optimize the program. In tough times, it is important that we all try to understand the programmatic needs of all of our programs. It is fine to submit “wish lists”, but you should recognize the funding constraints we are under in considering your real needs.

PPA Budget Roll-Out Meeting October 22, 2008 Page 10 Funding Priorities *Despite our desire to get some new programs going, our priorities will have to remain similar to what they were last year - operations, projects, R&D: –BaBar Intense Analysis and BaBar D&D. –FGST. Highest priority is for operations, but exploiting the science opportunity is clearly important. –ATLAS. We want and need to make ATLAS work, as a key element of our future program. –Accelerator R&D. This will become better defined in the coming year, but electron accelerator r&d is the key core competency at SLAC and must be maintained. –LSST, EXO, JDEM, FACET. These are the future initiatives in various stages of development. We have invested heavily in them already. –New(er) initatives. There are a lot of ideas out there (some good). We do not want to stifle creativity. We will do what we can within the confines of our budget constraints. The newly inaugurated LDRD program provides a vehicle for supporting fledgling efforts of this kind.