NSF Program Update

1
NSF Program Update

• Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee
• May 16, 2005

2
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations

• Small Initiatives
• National Virtual Observatory (NVO) - Framework
  development funded discussion with NASA planning
  long-term support through joint solicitation
  Cyber funds in 06 and beyond?
• Laboratory Astrophysics program - funded in
  grants program, strongly represented in FY2004
  proposals and awards substantial co-funding with
  chemistry and physics divisions
• Theory support MPS Theory Workshop science
  opportunities, modes of support, education and
  training issues - 30 of grants are for theory,
  no need for separate theory program in AST

3
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations

• Small Initiatives
• National Virtual Observatory (NVO) - Framework
  development funded
• Laboratory Astrophysics program - funded in
  grants program, examined by AAAC
• Low Frequency Array (LOFAR) - DD funded
• Theory postdoc program - funded through AAPF
  program
• SOLIS expansion

4
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations

• Moderate Initiatives
• Telescope System Instrument Program (TSIP) -
  funded
• Advanced Technology Solar Telescope (ATST)
• Square Kilometer Array technology development
  (SKA)
• Combined Array for Research in Mm-wave Astronomy
  (CARMA) - funded
• VERITAS - funded
• Frequency Agile Solar Radio Telescope (FASR)
• South Pole Sub-millimeter Telescope - funded in
  NSF/OPP
• ( Design/Development)

5
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations

• Major Initiatives
• Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA) - funded
• Giant Segmented Mirror Telescope (GSMT) -
  technology development funded under Adaptive
  Optics Roadmap
• Expanded Very Large Array (EVLA) - Phase I -
  funded
• Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST) -
  development on detector arrays funded
• ( Design/Development)

6
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations

• In the Planning stages
• Giant Segmented Mirror Telescope (GSMT)
• Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST)
• EVLA Phase II
• Frequency Agile Solar Radio Telescope (FASR)
• Square Kilometer Array technology development

7
Status of Decadal Survey Recommendations
US Ground-based O/IR facilities should be
viewed as a single integrated system drawing on
both federal and non-federal funding sources -
TSIP and Systems Workshops - AURA/CELT
partnership for GSMT - LSST Corporation
8
Status of Quarks to Cosmos recommendations

• CMB Polarization measurement - CMB Research Task
  Force
• LSST - detector development funded
• Underground laboratory - NSF Physics phased
  approach
• Southern Auger array - funded
• Interagency initiative on Physics of the
  Universe

9
Physics of the Universe Interagency Plan

• Highest priority, ready
• LSST
• S-Z effect - coordinated NSF/NASA effort - CMB
  Research Task Force
• Dark Energy Task Force being formed under AAAC
  and HEPAP
• Underground facility
• Strengthen numerical relativity research -
  planned in Physics
• Upgrade of LIGO - approved by NSB for new start

10
GSMT Planning

• National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO)
  Science Working Group has formulated a detailed
  science case.
• Consortium formed to undertake an extensive
  technology development and site characterization
  effort.
• Would result in a public-private partnership with
  private funds supporting approximately 50 of the
  70M estimated cost proposal to NSF for the
  remaining 50. Public funds would support
  community effort in several major groups.
• Current estimate is that this effort would take
  five to seven years. Proposal under review.
• NSF and consortium have met as a group and
  individually to discuss timing and continue a
  constructive dialogue
• Funds in FY2005 appropriation limited similar
  for FY2006 Planned growth awaits outcome of
  Senior Review

11
LSST Planning

• National Optical Astronomy Observatory (NOAO)
  Science Working Group formulated detailed science
  case.
• LSST Corporation established.
• Pan-STARRS underway in Hawaii with DoD funding.
  No operations money at all and insufficient
  resources for software
• NSF provided 1.3M in FY03 for detector
  development for LSST Camera NOAO is funding
  telescope design at roughly 1.7M/year.
• DOE labs have expressed strong interest in
  participating in the project through provision of
  the camera. DOE science budget a problem?
• Technology development program and possible
  architecture studies planned in FY2005, FY2006
  (Physics of the Universe)

12
The Advanced Technology Solar Telescope
The ATST Project
13
The Telescope

• Improvements over current state of the art
• Resolution 7X improvement
• Light grasp 10X improvement (solar physics is
  actually photon starved in some
  experiments)
• Technical Specifications
• 4-m, off-axis Gregorian (all reflective), alt-az
  mount.
• Integrated adaptive optics.
• Hybrid enclosure with thermal control and dust
• mitigation.
• Wavelength sensitivity from 0.3-28 microns
  (near-UV
• through thermal infrared).
• Field of view 3 arcminutes (5 arcminute goal).
• Angular resolution lt 0.03 arcsecond.
• Polarization accuracy lt 0.01.
• ATST will be the worlds flagship facility for
  ground-based solar physics observation and the
  first large US solar telescope constructed in the
  past 30 years.

14
Marching toward MREFC

• ATST team had planned aggressively for an FY06
  start of construction. This will not happen.
• Additional funding will be required to pay
  marching army and produce final design (note that
  current MREFC rules preclude funding design from
  MREFC). AST will fund through FY06 (FY07).
• The next steps
• ATST and AST craft development plan for FY05-6.
• Site selection complete contract for
  environmental impact study
• Preliminary design reviews.
• Brought to MREFC panel in March 2005 awaiting
  action
• In-depth cost review endorsed costing models
• Attempt to address critical path items early
  procurement of primary mirror.
• Let contracts for final design to design and
  engineering firms.
• Complete Project Execution Plan.
• Final design review in early 2006.
• Construction begins in fall of 2006/2007.

15
Planning(Activity Accelerating)

• O/IR roadmap team convened by NOAO well underway
• Radio/mm/sub-mm convened by AUI underway
• CMB Roadmap
• Dark Energy Task Force

16
CARMA
ALMA
SKA
GBT
LOFAR
GBT
LOFAR
EVLA Phase II
EVLA I
NAIC
OWL?
VLA
GSMT
VLA
CHARA
LOI?
Gemini
Horizon Facilities
GSMT
LSST
ATST
Intermediate Term
LSST
Near Term
17
Astronomy Division Budget - FY2004
ALMA 50.7 M
18
Astronomy Division Budget - FY2004
Facilities - 124.75 M National Optical
Astronomy Observatory (NOAO) National Solar
Observatory (NSO) Gemini Observatory
National Radio Astronomy Observatory (NRAO)
National Astronomy Ionosphere Center (NAIC)
University Radio Observatories

Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA)
34.4 M (excludes 4M for TSIP 3M for
AODP) 14.27 M 54.98 M (directed) 10.54 M
10.56 M _______________
50.7 M
19
Astronomy Division Budget - FY2004

• Astronomy Research Instrumentation - 71.8 M
• Astronomy Astrophysics Research Grants (AAG)
• Particle Astrophysics
• Education Special Programs (ESP)
• CAREER, REU, Postdoctoral fellowships
• Advanced Technologies Instrumentation (ATI)
• Electromagnetic Spectrum Management (ESM)
• Science Technology Centers (STC)
• Center for Adaptive Optics (CfAO)
• NSF/MPS Priorities and programs
• e.g. ITR, Math Sciences, Biocomplexity in the
  Environment

20
FY2005 Budget and Outlook

• FY2005 AST request level - 204.35M (increase
  of 4 over FY2004)
• Final AST number 195.1M (lt FY2004 - 196.6M)
• FY2006 Request 198.64M (FY2005 1.81)
• Planning level budgets for next ? years
• Closer coupling between NSF and NASA budgets in
  difficult years?
• Changes in appropriations committee structure

21
AST Budget FY1992-2004
22
How can we afford it?

• Proposals and studies will sharpen cost
• Planning will provide phasing, decision points,
  down-selects
• Overall plan must meet fiscal reality
• How?

23
Senior Review

• Responds to
• Decade Survey recommendation re facilities
• Calls for examination of balance in AST portfolio
  (Committee of Visitors, Feb)
• Made imperative by
• Budget outlook
• Ambitions of the community
• AST budget growth

24
Senior Review

• AST retreat
• Established understanding of need and goals
• Self-examination of balance
• Identified issues that NSF and community must
  address
• First time this has been undertaken by AST
• AST retreat conclusions
• IF significant progress is to be made on
  development of major recommendations, 30M of
  free energy in AST budget must be identified.
• Implications for program may be profound
• Balance grants program (AAG) must be held
  sacrosanct
• Free energy will come from non-AAG portion of AST
  portfolio
• Next Steps
• Letter sent to facilities component costs and
  metrics due 7/31
• AST exploring implications of all issues
  identified
• Will frame options along with best understanding
  of consequences, positive and negative
• Will convene community representatives
  (Sept/October) to advise on best option(s) (or
  identify others).

25
Senior Review Parameters

• The primary goal of the review and the resultant
  adjustment of balance that will result is to
  enable progress on the recommendations of the
  Decade Survey, including such things as
  operations funds for ALMA, and other priorities.
  At the same time we must preserve, indeed grow, a
  healthy core program of astronomical research

26
Boundary Conditions

• The assumption is that the AST budget will grow
  no faster than inflationary increases for the
  remainder of the decade
•   In concert with the advice of every community
  advisory body that we have asked (and in keeping
  with our own evaluation of balance and need), we
  will not use resources from the unrestricted
  grants programs (AAG) to address the challenges
  of facility operations or the design and
  development costs for new facilities of the scale
  of LSST, GSMT, SKA, etc.
•  
• The process and the adjustments in balance that
  may result must be realistic and realizable
•  
• Recommendations should be based on
  well-understood criteria
• There should be ample opportunity for community
  input at all stages.

27
Goal

• The specific goal of the review is to examine the
  impact and the gains we might experience by
  redistributing 30M of annual spending from
  Division funds. These funds would be obtained by
  selective reductions in the operations of
  existing facilities. The near-term needs for new
  investment have lead us to conclude that we must
  try to generate the 30M in annual redistributed
  funding by the end of FY2011. Even with this,
  there will be challenges to be met to satisfy
  projected need in FY2007-2008.

28
Zero-based Approach

• In order to treat each of NRAO, NOAO, NSO, and
  Gemini on an equal footing and to obtain an
  in-depth understanding of the contributions that
  each of our facilities makes, component by
  component, we are adopting a zero-base
  approach. Under this approach, we ask that AUI
  consider and document
•  
•        The case for, and priority of, each
  component of NRAO (VLA, VLBA, GBT, ALMA
  operations, etc.), along with a defensible cost
  for each.
•        In doing so, build the case for a
  forward-looking observatory operation, the
  highest priority components of which would exist
  in 2011
•        Provide as realistic an estimate as
  possible of the cost and timescale that would be
  associated with divestiture of each component

29
Expectations

• We expect that your deliberations will
•  
•        Be based on extensive consultation with
  your user community
•  
•        Involve evaluation of component
  facilities and capabilities using well-defined
  and carefully documented metrics to define
  productivity, cost effectiveness, and future
  utility. We will work with all facilities
  managers to arrive at a common set of metrics so
  various components can be compared.
•  
•        Take into consideration systemic issues
  such as complementing observations at other
  wavelengths, filling critical niches in the
  overall U.S. system, role in training and
  technical innovation.
•  
•        Explore opportunities to deliver
  scientific knowledge at reduced cost or increased
  efficiency through new operating modes
•  

30
AST Action

•  
• With this information in hand from all of the
  facilities that we support, and with our best
  understanding of the needs for development and
  future programs, we will then present a number of
  scenarios to the senior review committee for
  their comment and advice. These scenarios will
  necessarily trade progress on the various
  recommendations before us against preservation of
  existing capability. The challenge will be to
  strike an acceptable balance.
•  

31
The Question

• We recognize that this will be a difficult task
  and that the end result may well be that some
  facilities are judged to be no longer viable
  under the circumstances. We also recognize that
  the landscape of U.S. astronomy could almost
  certainly change dramatically as a result of some
  these actions. The question for all of us is to
  judge whether these changes are viable and lead
  to a vital and sustainable future, or whether the
  pace and scope of change necessary to realize the
  cumulative aspirations of the community under
  severely constrained budgets are too drastic