Department of Energy Office of Science 1 DOE Office of High Energy Physics Fermilab User’s Meeting Dennis Kovar Acting Associate Director of the Office of Science for High Energy Physics June 4, 2008

Department of Energy Office of Science 2 Outline Context DOE HEP Program Budgets Status of U.S. HEP Program HEPAP P5 Report HEP Office Activities

Department of Energy Office of Science 3 Context

Department of Energy Office of Science 4 DOE Office of High Energy Physics (OHEP) High Energy Physics  is the study of the fundamental nature of matter and energy by discovering the most elementary constituents of matter and energy probing the interactions between them exploring the basic nature of space and time itself Federal Steward of HEP research  provides over 90 % of federal support (remainder primarily NSF) designs, constructs and operates forefront research facilities supports researchers at universities and laboratories to carry out the research develops advanced technologies and next generation scientific/technical workforce OHEP Mission:  is to maintain the Nation’s competency/leadership in this scientific field by effective strategic planning management of available resources articulation of the program

Department of Energy Office of Science 5 HEP is supported by Federal Government To deliver:  new scientific knowledge  advanced technologies  next generation scientific/technical trained workforce that will have significant impact and benefit the nation

Department of Energy Office of Science 6 Budgets

Department of Energy Office of Science 7 Some Budget Realities Funding Trend Over last decade: HEP funding has been eroded by inflation : FY 2007/FY 1996 ~ - 16% HEP has closed Facilities: BNL/AGS (FY 1999): SLAC/B-Factory (FY 2008) HEP FY 2008 funding was a -8.5% reduction from FY 2007: FY 2008/FY1996 ~ -23%

Department of Energy Office of Science 8 FY 2008 Budget/Program FY 2008 Appropriations ($689M  8.4% reduction compared to FY 2007) A Productive Program Tevatron is running well – CDF/D0, MINOS, MiniBooNE B-Factory completed successful 4 month run LHC and ATLAS/CMS proceeding on schedule GLAST to launch in June Projects underway: Minerva, T2K, Daya Bay, EXO, DES, CDMS DOE/NASA planning to proceed on JDEM DOE/NSF discussing participation in LHC Phase I upgrade DOE review for Advanced Plasma Acceleration Facility (APAF) 10 OJI awards in FY 2008 (increased $500k  $750K) ~22 awards (out of 69) Dark Energy R&D (~$3.8M) There have been significant impacts Staff reductions at SLAC and Fermilab Work on NOvA stopped ILC & SRF R&D supported at a minimal level FY 2008 Supplemental ? Senate Passed Supplemental Bill (includes $45M for HEP) House version had no funding for HEP

Department of Energy Office of Science 9 FY 2009 / FY 2010 FY 2009 Budget Request ($805M  +$115M over FY 2008 ($689M)) However, expectation of 6 month Continuing Resolution (CR) Tevatron plans to run 6 months into FY 2009 LHC program will be supported (but no growth) Some projects will be delayed Still plan to proceed with JDEM selection Continue discussions on participation in LHC Phase I upgrade APAF project will be delayed Across program – higher priority programs supported Significant impacts of a CR Staff reductions at National Laboratories Unable to proceed with NOvA ILC & SRF R&D supported at a minimal level FY 2009 Appropriation is pivotal Future of HEP Program will depend upon level of FY 2009 Appropriation HEPAP (P5) Report is viewed as important for determining funding level FY 2010 Budget Request to be submitted by New Administration DOE is developing plans for programs at different funding levels HEP will utilize HEPAP (P5) findings/recommendations in it plans

Department of Energy Office of Science 10 Status

Department of Energy Office of Science 11 Status of U.S. HEP in mid-FY 2008  HEP is at a productive and exciting period today  Significant discoveries anticipated over the next decade at the energy frontier at the intensity frontier at the particle astrophysics frontier  Current circumstances for the U.S. program are challenging  Reductions in FY 2008 funding resulted in loss of HEP’s scientific productivity and workforce Momentum on planned activities (NOvA, SRF infrastructure, ILC R&D) U.S. credibility as an interagency/international collaborator (BaBar, ILC)  No realistic strategic plan that has dealt with the increase in cost and the delay in possible start of an ILC energy frontier moving to Europe in FY 2009 closure of B-Factory and imminent closure of Tevatron Fermilab’s role in the future (US accelerator facility/research center?)  Competition for federal funding is fierce HEP is not a priority of the Administration or Congress HEP funding has eroded over the last decade “Why does the U.S. have to be a leader in HEP (particle physics)?” “What is particle physics”?

Department of Energy Office of Science 12 U.S. Particle Physics Program A Leader Today – Opportunities for Future Outstanding Physics/Opportunities Three of top ten FY 2007 Science Stories  Energy Frontier  Now the Tevatron Tevatron  Soon the LHC “Tevatron's Higgs Quest Quickens”  Future Terascale Lepton Collider April 23, 2007  Neutrinos  Intensity Frontier  MINOS, MiniBooNE, MinervaMiniBooNE  Daya Bay, NOvA “One Neutrino Anomaly Has Been Resolved”  Scientific opportunities April 18, 2007 (EPP 2010, HEPAP (NuSAG, P5, etc))  Cosmic Frontier  Pierre Auger, SDSS, VERITAS, etc.Pierre Auger  GLAST, AMS(?)“The Highest- Energy Cosmic Rays”  CDMS, ADMX, COUPP,.. November 12, 2007  Scientific opportunities (AAAC, NRC, etc)

Department of Energy Office of Science 13 HEPAP/P5

Department of Energy Office of Science 14 Need for a Realistic Strategic Plan Guidance Sought from the Community DOE/NSF Charge to HEPAP (P5) (November 2007/revised January 2008) Identify and evaluate the scientific opportunities and options that can be pursued at different funding levels for mounting a world-class, vigorous and productive national particle physics science program. Understand and evaluate the role Fermilab will play in the national and worldwide context of particle physics over the next two decades. Recommendations on the priorities for an optimized high energy physics program over the next ten years (FY ), under the following four funding profile scenarios: Constant effort at the FY 2008 (Omnibus) funding level Constant effort at the FY 2007 funding level Doubling of funding starting in FY 2007 Additional funding above the previous level, in priority order, associated with specific activities needed to mount a leadership program that addresses the scientific opportunities identified in the National Academy (“EPP2010”) report. Report was submitted in June 2008

Department of Energy Office of Science 15 HEPAP (P5) Report Major Findings Progress in achieving the goals of particle physics requires advancements at the: Energy Frontier Intensity (or precision) Frontier Cosmic (or particle astrophysics) Frontier (each provides a unique window for insight about the fundamental forces/particles of nature) LHC offers an outstanding opportunity for discoveries at the Energy Frontier Resources will be needed to support the extraction of the science by U.S. scientists Resources will be needed for planned accelerator and detector upgrades An opportunity exists for the U.S. to become a world leader at the Intensity Frontier Central is an intense neutrino beam and large underground long-based line detector Building on infrastructure at Fermilab and partnering with NSF Develops infrastructure that positions the U.S. to regain Energy Frontier (Muon Collider) Promising opportunities for advancing particle physics identified at Cosmic Frontier Requires partnering with NASA, NSF, etc. HEP at its core is an accelerator based experimental science Accelerator R&D develops technologies needed by the field and that benefit the nation

Department of Energy Office of Science 16 HEPAP (P5) Report Comments P5 seriously addressed the charge given by DOE/NSF: to examine the scientific opportunities and options for mounting a world class particle physics program at different funding levels Exercise utilized work of previous studies of HEPAP, National Academy, and other bodies Found, as other studies had, that “the field of elementary particle physics is entering an era of unprecedented potential” Grappled with the issue of to how to mount a world- class program addressing the highest priority scientific opportunities identified with funding available Outcomes of their efforts are consistent with the definition of leadership given in the EPP 2010 Report

Department of Energy Office of Science 17 Office of High Energy Physics

Department of Energy Office of Science 18 DOE Office of High Energy Physics (OHEP) DOE OHEP’s Mission is to maintain the Nation’s competency and leadership in HEP  Strategic planning to maintain a sustainable, world-leading program Obtaining guidance from the scientific community Will utilize input to develop a strategic plan  Management of available resources for a productive, cost-effective program that delivers world-class science Attempted in FY 2008 Appropriations and FY 2009 Request to do this Reorganized the Office structure to be more effective  Articulation of deliverables, benefits and needs of the program Obtaining input from the scientific community Need to effectively communicate the importance of program to the nation

Department of Energy Office of Science 19 February 2008 Division Director Research & Technology Division Facilities Division Facilities Development Accelerator Science Detector R&D Computational HEP Theoretical Physics Proton Accelerator Physics Electron Accelerator Physics Non-Accelerator Physics Fermilab Complex LHC Operations Other Operations (SLAC/ Other Labs) Office Director Office of High Energy Physics HEP Budget and Planning HEP Operations General Accelerator R&D LARP SRF R&D SBIR/STTR ILC R&D Instrumentation & Major Systems Facility Operations Research Technology Physics Research NOvA Minerva T2K Daya Bay DES CDMS JDEM Division Director New HEP Organization Chart

Department of Energy Office of Science 20 New Review Process for National Laboratories  Annual User Facility Reviews (Fermilab)  Institutional Reviews (on a rotating basis for multipurpose laboratories): 1)FY 2008 SLAC 2)FY 2009 LBNL 3)FY 2010 BNL 4)FY 2011 ANL  Research Program Reviews (on a rotating basis): 1)FY 2008: theory and accelerator science subprograms 2)FY 2009 for the non-accelerator and detector R&D subprograms 3)FY 2010 for the proton-based and electron-based subprograms  Reviews of specific activities/initiatives annually (similar to before but expanded)

Department of Energy Office of Science 21 Changes in DOE HEP Office New Positions Facility Management Division Director Deadline: June 4 Science /Technical/Planning Advisor Deadline July 23 Program Manager Proton (fixed target) ResearchDeadline August 4 Program Manager Non-Accelerator ResearchDeadline August 4 Program Manager InstrumentationTo be advertised (other positions now on hold) IPA/Detailees Arriving Amber Boehnlein (FNAL)April Don Petravik (FNAL)April Ted Levine (SLAC)July David Muller (SLAC)July Eli Rosenberg (Iowa State)August-September IPA/Detailees Departing Craig Tull (LBNL)March Randy Johnson (Cincinnati)August Tom Ferbel (Rochester)August

Department of Energy Office of Science 22 By all accounts an exciting period Outstanding scientific productivity Near term future has incredible potential A dedicated and hardworking community A pivot point in the U.S. for the HEP program (and physical sciences basic research) There is support for research and development – but there is a debate about how much should go for short-term, mid-term and long-term (basic) research The Administration has strongly supported long-term basic research FY 2009 Budget Request provides funding for doubling funding for SC However, expect a Continuing Resolution (funding at previous level) for 6 months President will not submit a FY 2010 Budget Request HEPAP (P5) has presented a vision for the a U.S. program This vision (plan) appears to be realistic and robust with flexibility to adapt to new information and circumstances This plan will be used to try to change the direction of the U.S. HEP program that was implied in the FY 2008 Omnibus Bill (and has been the trend over the last decade). Support of the US HEP community will be essential for this to happen OHEP will use this vision as basis for requesting funding do its best to ensure a strong, productive world-class program with resources available Conclusions