Report From NSAC 2012 Committee

Report From NSAC2012 Committee

Robert Atcher Peter Jacobs Jamie NagleLANL LBNL Colorado

Jeffrey Binder David Kaplan Kenneth Nash (ACS)ORNL Washington Washington State

Jeffery Blackmon Joshua Klein Allena OpperLouisiana State Pennsylvania George Washington

Gail Dodge Karlheinz Langanke Jorge PiekarewiczOld Dominion GSI Florida State

Alexandra Gade Zheng-tian Lu Julia VelkovskaMichigan State ANL Vanderbilt

Susan Gardner Robert McKeown Rajugopal VenugopalinKentucky Jefferson Lab BNL

Donald Geesaman (Chair) Curtis MeyerANL Carnegie Mellon

1NSAC Report March 15, 2-13

The 2013 President’s Budget Request brings challenges


FY12 NP down 3.5% from FY11 and NSCL held flatFY13 expect about flat


FY12 President’s Request

FY11 President’s Request

In as spent dollars assuming 4% inflation. Actual inflation ~2-3%. In fact through 2012 the summed ONP budget in constant effort dollars from 2007-2012 is very close to ONP budget.


Budget History• President’s request matches Long Range Plan scenario• Congress appropriates less money in FY11 and FY12• FY13 budget request $20.5M less than FY12

appropriation• Current FY13 budget is temporary continuing resolution

which runs out in end of March• Sequestration, designed as a poison pill to resolve a

budget impasse, leads to new reduction - nominally in the press ~5% across the board.


Office of Science FY 2013 Budget in the House Bill

6

Offi ce of ScienceFY 2012 Enacted

FY 2013 Pre-Sequester

Annualized CRFY 2013

SequesterFY 2013 CR w/

Sequester

Advanced scientific computing research 440,868 443,566 -22,178 421,388 Basic energy sciences 1,688,093 1,698,424 -84,921 1,613,503 Biological and environmental research 609,557 613,287 -30,664 582,623 Fusion energy sciences program 400,996 403,450 -20,173 383,278 High energy physics 790,860 795,700 -39,785 755,915 Nuclear physics 547,387 550,737 -27,537 523,200 Workforce development for teachers and scientists 18,500 18,613 -931 17,683 Science laboratories infrastructure 111,800 112,484 -5,624 106,860 Safeguards and security 80,573 81,066 -4,053 77,013 Science program direction 185,000 186,132 -9,307 176,826

Total 4,873,634 4,903,459 -245,173 4,658,289

$523.2M compared to $526.9M

NSAC Report March 15, 2-13

NSAC Report March 15, 2-13 19

Budget Options II

Modest Growth Budget• Can run CEBAF and RHIC at reduced levels and

continue to build FRIB• Research budgets remain tight• Rather small amount of funding for new initiatives to

FY17

The subcommittee was unanimous in endorsing the modest growth budget scenario as the minimum level of support that is needed to maintain a viable long-term U.S. nuclear science program that encompasses the vision of the Long Range Plan.

NSAC Report March 15, 2-13 21

No Growth Budgets

If a decision were made to force the U.S. nuclear science community to downsize through budgets that provide no growth over the next four years, a choice would have to be made that would fundamentally change the direction of what remained of the field.Because of the superb science lost in either shutting down RHIC or terminating construction on FRIB, the committee was not able to make a choice based on scientific merit alone. Based on additional considerations of timing of the budget crisis relative to the status of the ongoing construction initiative, the subcommittee vote, while closely split, resulted in a slight preference for the choice that proceeds with FRIB. This choice secures the significant non-ONP contributions that are critical to the cost-effective construction of FRIB, ensures a leading position for the U.S. in the central area of nuclear structure and nuclear astrophysics based on FRIB's unprecedented science capabilities. This slight preference arises in the context of facility timelines and the approximate profile for FRIB construction, presented to the subcommittee as a snapshot of the field. If this budget exercise had occurred in a near future year, this snapshot would have changed, and the choice might well have been different.

Feedback from the Report has been positive

• Clearly laid out the impacts of cuts• Provided an answer if tough budgets do come

to pass

• At March 8, 2013 NSAC meeting, Director of the Office of Science stated, “We are trying to keep all 3 things [CEBAF-12 GeV, FRIB, RHIC]”

“I share the view that I don’t think shutting down the RHIC facility at this time is the right thing to do. “


Office of Science Facilities Plan

• OMB and Congress have requested that DOE Office of Science lay out a plan for new construction over the next ten years.

• Each of the Office of Science Advisory Committees was asked to grade existing user facilities and new initiatives with cost >$100M

• Initial list of facilities prepared by the Office of Nuclear Physics

• NSAC could add or subtract facilities from the list.

• Facilities were not to be ranked


The Facilities PlanFacility Science ReadinessExisting User Facilities ATLAS absolutely centralCEBAF absolutely centralRHIC absolutely centralNew Facilities EIC absolutely scientific/technical central challengesFRIB absolutely ready for construction centralTon scale Neutrino-less absolutely scientific/technicalDouble Beta Decay central challenges


Note each has upgrades underway

Conclusion (from Tim Hallman’s 8 March Presentation)

• Leadership in discovery science illuminating the properties of nuclear matter in all of its manifestations.

• Tools necessary for scientific and technical advances which will lead to new knowledge, new competencies, and groundbreaking innovation and applications.

• Strategic investments in tools and research to provide the U.S. with premier research capabilities in the world.

The United States continues to provide resources for and to expect:

The future of nuclear science in the United States may not be exactly as envisioned in the 2007 Long Range Plan, but it remains rich with science opportunities.

Nuclear Science will continue to be an important part of the U.S. science investment strategy to create new knowledge and technology innovation supporting U.S. security and competitiveness

26

Report From NSAC 2012 Committee

Documents

Transcript of Report From NSAC 2012 Committee