SET I

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

Relating to the

FEBRUARY 10, 1986, MEETING
REGARDING FY 1987 BUDGET REQUEST

for

HIGH ENERGY AND NUCLEAR PHYSICS

before the

STAFF OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
AND APPLICATIONS

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DR. ALVIN W. TRIVELPIECE
AND DEPARTMENTAL PERSONNEL

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

Question 1: For FY 1984 FY 1987, please indicate the percentages of actual and estimated High Energy Physics funding going to (a) DOE laboratories, (b) universities, and (c) non-DOE laboratory, non-university entities, including industrial firms.

Answer: The information is provided in the following table:

*Includes non-university entities, including industrial firms.

**Includes $4.6 million for SBIR assessment in FY 1986 and $5.3 million for SBIR assessment in FY 1987.

Note: The table above indicates the amount of funding provided directly to laboratories and universities respectively. However, laboratory funding is largely used to operate the accelerators and detectors which are used primarily by university based research groups. About 80 percent of the research is conducted by university groups. Thus a major fraction of the funding provided to the accelerator laboratories can be considered indirect support of the university program.

Question 2: For FY 1984

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

FY 1987, please provide the information requested

in items a-c below for each of the accelerator facilities supported by the Department of Energy at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.

a.

Actual and estimated budget profiles for operations, in-house research, out-of-house research, other operating expenses, Capital Equipment, General Plant Projects, In-House Energy Management, and any other specific construction projects attributable to the facility. Please indicate the sources of these funds (i.e., High Energy Physics, BES, Nuclear Physics).

b. Actual and estimated staffing levels.

C. Actual and estimated utilization of the facility. What would be
defined as the optimal level of utilization of the facility? If the
facility will not be operated at its optimal level of utilization in
FY 1987, what level of funding would be required to achieve this optimal
level of utilization?

Answer: In response to your question, I would like to provide an insert for the record.

* All funding except for In-House Energy Management Projects is from High Energy Physics budget.

Item (b): Manpower

2

Item (c): Utilization for High Energy Physics Research (as percentage of practical maximum)

In responding to the request for utilization levels for all high energy physics facilities, the data is presented in terms of the practical maximum level which is the basis on which the budget is discussed. We consider the practical maximum utilization of an accelerator facility to be the maximum number of weeks per year that the facility could be operated taking into consideration necessary downtime for maintenance, holiday periods, need to rearrange experimental configurations, the need to commission new beam lines, and special electric power situations such as the summer power limitation at SLAC. Optimal utilization, on the other hand, would be the maximum cost-effective utilization of a facility, taking into account the overall cost-effectiveness, balance, and productivity of the total program at the laboratory. Optimal utilization is estimated to be 70-80 percent of the practical maximum depending upon the particular circumstances with the accelerator and experimental facilities in a given year.

The practical maximum level of utilization for the Fermilab Tevatron would typically be about 20 weeks of operations for colliding beam physics and about 28 weeks for fixed target physics, with the remaining 4 weeks needed to make the transition between modes of operation and for routine maintenance procedures. The currently planned FY 1987 utilization of the facility is 26 weeks of operation of physics research, and about 4 weeks for startup and commissioning activities. In order to achieve the best operation for physics possible in FY 1987, an additional $5 million in FY 1987 facility operations funds would be required.

3

* FY 1986 was a special year at Fermilab because of the combined effect of a 9 month construction shutdown and the GRH reductions made. The Tevatron operated only during the first two weeks of the fiscal year for colliding beam tests.

* All funding except for In House Energy Management Projects is from High Energy Physics Budget. Funding of AGS operation for Heavy Ion Physics which is from the Nuclear Physics Budget is included in response to the similar question for Nuclear Physics.