1. RRB Scrutiny Group Meeting A. Charkiewicz, 16 July 2013 M&O Budget Issues

2. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Main Issues 1.Outstanding M&O-B Issues 2.Modifications to the Draft Budget request for 2014  Communications/ website maintenance  DAQ Manpower/ Using the HLT Farm for Offline computing (Cloud Techniques)  Power consumption cost 3.Other budgetary issues 4.Next steps 2

3. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Outstanding M&O-B Issues 1.Trigger discrepancy in wording between presentation and RRB document Trigger (S. Dasu) The budget request for 2012 changed from 500 kCHF (see RRB-2011-079) to 419 kCHF. During the meeting it didn ʻ t become clear when exactly this change was made and how it was communicated to the SG. The SG noted the relatively high cash balance of 160 kCHF accumulated by the end of 2012 which almost corresponds to the total yearly cash budget for the entire trigger system. As a consequence the trigger group has downscaled its budget request in 2012. A further reduction is however considered too risky by the trigger group given the anticipated major changes in running conditions when LHC will resume operation in 2015. Note that the ISG report reports 2012 expenditures for personnel (two software developers) at 155 kCHF, while the budget request remains at 170 kCHF per year, and that report includes the statement “Therefore, we seek funding for them at kCHF170, which will allow us to provide them a small cost of living adjustment.” It was reported that 21 kCHF was not paid in 2012 due to a clerical error, and that 3.4 kCHF was not billed in 2013. Spending for communications in 2011 was reported as 6 kCHF. Spending for communications in 2012 was reported as 2 kCHF, while the budget was 15 kCHF. The budget request in this category remains at 15 kCHF. 2. Discrepancy between some statements made in the RRB Expenditure report concerning Trigger expenditures and the presentation to the SG and the ISG Report ACTION: Sridhara The dispute is about the statement in the RRB report: 163 kCHF were spent, which is about 25.5 kCHF above our request for 2012. The deficit was covered by the prior year balance. I finally found the email from which the expenditure report was derived (attached below), versus presentation last week. In any case the problem was due to my poor wording. What I had called "request for 2012" should have been "receipts for 2012" as I indicated in the meeting. 3

4. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Outstanding M&O-B Issues 1.HCAL ISG Report HCAL (J. Whitmore) For 2014 a significant budget increase of about 30% is foreseen leading to a total request of 1333 kCHF. This is due to increased manpower needed for LS1 activities and for unforeseen expenditures for projects in 2013 like the repair of Clock Control Monitors. For the years 2015-17 expenses are expected to return to pre-LS1 levels of 1046 kCHF which however represents a slight increase compared to 1018kCHF as projected in 2012. The report was submitted and transmitted to the SG on 1 July 2013 It also addresses the outstanding issue of what are the specific areas responsible for the 30% increase in the HCAL budget 4

5. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Outstanding M&O-B Issues 1.Muon Alignment – missing information The M&O-B budget for alignment of the Muon detectors is divided into the following two categories: Barrel Alignment Link Alignment The budget for the coming years is flat, and based on the existent experience, it is estimated to amount to 53 kCHF for the Barrel Alignment part and 16 kCHF for Link Alignment. The Alignment expenses of are mainly concentrated in Standard Electronics (purchase of spares of LV modules and replacement of custom electronic cards), as well as to contribute to the subsistence of Manpower at CERN for the operation and maintenance of the system. The manpower is just a fractional payment for people already working in other areas of CMS. The payments are handled directly by the institutes involved in Alignment with only some 30% of the total amount in cash. There is no cash reserve carried forward from one year to another. 5

6. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Outstanding M&O-B Issues 1.Travel Costs in M&O-B budget Following the presentation from the Tracker the issue was raised by the SG of whether travel costs are included in the M&O-B of any other Subsystem Following inquiries by the RM with all other Subsystems it was confirmed that no travel costs were paid from any other Subsystem Budget 6

7. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Outstanding M&O-B Issues Beam Radiation Instrumentation and Luminosity (BRIL) Project - potential new M&O-B item A new CMS project has been formed recently and is called Beam Radiation Instrumentation and Luminosity (BRIL) The objective is to coordinate all related activities in a more effective way and to ensure necessary funding Discussions are underway as to how the funds currently partly under M&O-A and partly covered by institutes should be managed in a coordinated and effective way This also applies to the Upgrades currently covered under the umbrella of Upgrade Common Items managed by Technical Coordination 7

8. SG Meeting16 July 2013 VERA Table (1) 8

9. SG Meeting16 July 2013 VERA Table (2) 9

10. SG Meeting16 July 2013 2014 M&O-A Budget Request including change for Online Computing 10

11. SG Meeting16 July 2013 CMS Communications A.3 Communications o Part of the savings resulting from discontinuation of EVO are proposed to be used to rework the CMS website as central element of CMS communications and to ensure its maintenance. o The initial cost is estimated at 20 kCHF which is requested to be added to the budget allocation yielding a total of 140 kCHF for this cost item  The SG expressed some concern that, once introduced, this costitem will stay in the budget also for the following years.  A request was put forward last year to the RRB SG to use the savings from discontinuation of EVO support for implementing the CMS Communications Strategy  Following internal CMS discussions this was dropped in favor of pursuing direct support from CMS institutes in developing this strategy  Efforts are underway to pursue this. However, one most important area still remains uncovered as concerns necessary resources  This is the need for revamp the CMS website, a central element of CMS Communications, and ensure its appropriate maintenance  The initial cost is estimated at 20 kCHF which is requested to add onto the 2015 budget allocation for A.3.02 Communications  The cost of maintenance after 2015 will need to be re-evaluated at a later stage  The CMS proposal is to maintain the initial allocation of 20 kCHF for 2014 and reduce it by 50% in following years and re-discuss with the SG based on actual cost experience 11

12. SG Meeting16 July 2013 DAQ System Management Manpower A.4 On-line computing o The cost of the Oracle Database support provided to CMS has been reduced from 150 to 40 kCHF. o On the other hand CMS initiated a project to use the HLT farm as opportunistic resource for off-line computing when there is no data taking. To operate this on-line cloud facility additional resources and specialist expertise are required. o The estimated cost of providing such support is 80 kCHF. o This leads to a proposed net decrease of 30 kCHF for cost item A.4 on the M&O-A budget compared to the numbers presented at the April RRB.  The CERN IT Department has revised the cost of the Oracle Database support provided to CMS  The previous cost of 150 kCHF has been reduced to 40 kCHF resulting in a saving of 110 kCHF  CMS initiated a project to use the HLT farm as an opportunistic resource for Offline Computing when the HLT farm is not needed for taking data  An overall architecture based on Cloud Resource Provisioning Techniques was chosen  In addition to technical merits, this has other advantages:  well defined responsibilities cloud infrastructure providing virtual machines (VMs) by the online group, and provision of virtual image including offline applications and actual operation by the Computing group  However, to operate the online Cloud facility requires additional resources and and specialist expertise from the System Administration team to manage the OpenStack and specialized network configurations 12

13. SG Meeting16 July 2013 DAQ System Management Manpower (2)  The estimated cost of providing such support is 80 kCHF (1 FTE)  The CMS proposal is to remove the saving resulting from the reduced IT Support cost (110 kCHF) from the Budget line A.4.1 System Management and adding the above allocation of 80 kCHF  This would still result in a net decrease of 30 kCHF on the M&O-A budget  It should be noted that, if proven feasible, the online Cloud facility will represent a large increase in the production capacity available to CMS with only small additional material resources. The Higher Level Trigger (HLT) farm in CMS is a more than ten thousand core processor farm that is heavily used during data acquisition and largely unused outside data taking periods. Overlaying a cloud infrastructure on top of the DAQ installation will make this resource similar to large scale commercial clouds. The HLT farm, if fully available the whole year, would correspond to roughly a 2 MCHF yearly resource, when estimated from the costs of the non-dedicated service on a commercial Amazon cloud. 13

14. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Electrical Power Budget Cost for power consumption o In the past years the actual costs for electricity were always significantly lower than foreseen in the budget. o CMS is working on a revised scheme to estimate the actual power consumption more precisely for the future. However, given the substantial modifications that will be implemented during LS1 (e.g. new dry gas plant) and that inevitably will increase the overall power consumption a careful analysis is required before a new scheme will be proposed.  An analysis has been carried out by CMS Technical Coordination of the estimated power consumption od the CMS detector at Point 5  The details of this analysis are specified in the document transmitted to the SG (dated 12 July 2012)  The estimated annual consumption of 33 MWh (including some margin for improvements in stable beam efficiency, additional radiation damage load, Phase I Upgrades) shows that the current estimate of 1.8 MCHF for electrical power cost seems to be correct 14

15. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Electrical Power Budget (2)  The discrepancy between the projected instantaneous consumption figures and those recorded has not yet been resolved Additionally, it appears that cooling costs may not be being charged at all to CMS, leading to a chargeable consumption (according to EN department) close to 20000 MWh, resulting in an annual charge of about 1.1 M CHF Before committing to a reduced M&O A allocation for electrical power costs, CMS Technical Coordination recommends verifying that the quoted consumption includes all that for which CMS is liable. A small nominal contingency should be retained to cover cost evolution Agreement should be reached as to an appropriate budget allocation for CMS power consumption in vie of the above circumstances 15

16. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Other Budgetary Issues  The status of M&O-A expenditures as at 16 July 2013 is in line with the current year’s budget with some 50% spent (64% taking into account commitments)  The Long Shutdown 1 (LS1) is proceeding in accordance with schedule (with some modifications) and CMS needs to ensure that all planned activities are carried out in in accordance with constraints imposed by the LHC Machine and support teams from other CERN Departments.  As already mentioned, an overspending is foreseen due to most of the LS1 costs concentrated in the initial period of the shutdown i.e. in 2013  The initial estimate that 4/7 of the total LS1 costs would be incurred in 2013 and 3/7 in 2014 still seems valid  Any overspending in 2013 is foreseen to be compensated by a corresponding underspend in 2014 with credit arrangements through CERN enabling this spending profile to be maintained 16

17. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Other Budgetary Issues  Following a recent visit of a CMS Delegation to Kuala Lumpur and a presentation made at the CB meeting on 12 July it is likely that Malaysia will joint CMS (with an appropriate financial participation among others in the M&O budget)  Some flexibility is requested to be agreed by the RRB SG in terms of usage of M&O funds vs. Upgrade Common Item funds in the interest of overall flexibility and management of available resourced  This is partly dictated by the difficulties faced by CMS in obtaining contributions to the Upgrade Common Items 17

18. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Summary  The total M&O-A Preliminary Draft Budget 2014 amounts to 15.4 MCHF  The issue of Power costs – this has been analyzed by CMS and agreement is required with the RRB SG concerning an appropriate allocation for the 2014 budget (and the following years) 18

19. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Schedule of CMS meetings with the RRB 19

20. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Spare slides 20

21. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Special On-line Account The amount of 3’625 kCHF has been accumulated with unspent DAQ allocations from 2011 and 2012 Together with the 2013 allocation of 1’900 kCHF (a total of 5’525 kCHF) some major DAQ replacement procurement is expected towards the end of this year 21

22. SG Meeting16 July 2013 2014 M&O-A PDB Comments The M&O-A cost estimates have changed only slightly with respect to the October 2012 RRB meeting. The only change is a request of 20 kCHF for website maintenance (A.3 Communications).  The total estimated budget for M&O-A excluding power is 13’676 kCHF  The total estimated budget for M&O-A with power is 15’426 kCHF This budget request will be revised further before being presented to the October 2013 RRB taking into account discussions at the CMS Finance Board and input from the RRB Scrutiny Group 22  The budget projection up to the year 2017 shows that, as agreed with the RRB, the total M&O-A allocation decreases after LS1 remains at a flat level in following years

23. SG Meeting16 July 2013 M&O-A 2012 Expenditures Overview  Overall M&O-A expenditures in 2012 were in line with the allocated budget  There is an overspending in some areas and under-spending in others. A detailed explanation of each budget item where there is significant divergence between the allocation and expenditure is provided in the document ‘Summary of Expenditure for CMS M&O for the year 2012’  The main areas where some overspending occurred were:  Gas consumption, which was higher due to the fact that CF4 recuperation has not yet been optimized to the anticipated level  Expenditures related to ensuring readiness for Long Shutdown 1 (LS1), mainly the completion of the Operations Support Centre (OSC), cabling activities and engineering design work  Secretarial assistance cost increased mainly due to the need for maternity leave replacement 23

24. SG Meeting16 July 2013 M&O-A 2012 Expenditures Overview (2)  The actual amount of expenditures for Online hardware was 490 kCHF*. However the total allocation of 2.8 MCHF is considered as spent as the balance has been transferred to the special DAQ Account approved by the RRB in October 2011. This will be used at the most appropriate time for DAQ hardware purchase, most likely at the end of 2013  Expenditures on electrical power reported in Annex 1 are significantly lower than the allocated budget. This is due to the fact that power costs are not invoiced to FAs which belong to CERN Member States and hence not reported as expenditures. Discussions have already taken place last year with the with the SG concerning the allocation for Power with the objective of proposing a reduction for the 2014 budget. This will be discussed in the course of the scrutiny process  Due to the fact that overspending has been compensated by under-spending in other areas ( e.g. cooling fluids, external cryogenics ) the overall balance of the M&OA (without power) is only slightly negative. This global over-spending represents only 85 kCHF which represents only 0.6% of the budget * 1.8 MCHF taking into account transfer to special DAQ account the 2011 savings on hardware 24

25. SG Meeting16 July 2013 M&O-A 2012 Expenditures Overview 25 978 kCHF of outstanding commitments to be paid in 2013

26. SG Meeting16 July 2013 CMS Upgrade Phase I  A scrutiny of the CMS Upgrades budget is being put in place by the RRB and LHCC in the course of 2013  The procedure for this will be agreed between the RRB SG, LHCC and the LHC Experiments 26

27. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Upgrade Phase I Budget (April 2013 RRB) 27

28. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Three main categories of CMS Upgrade Phase I 28

29. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Upgrade Phase I Funding  The general conditions defining the CMS approach to funding: 1.Each FA should assume a fair share of the total cost of the Upgrade 2.Obligations of FAs can be fulfilled by a commitment to an Upgrade Project/s or to one or more Common Projects 3.A fraction of the total Upgrade costs (6.5 MCHF) would be required as payment in cash to cover the cost of common items (Common Fund). This would be shared among FAs according to the PhD count  Some parts of the Upgrade (HF Phototubes and Muons) are ongoing and have progressed significantly with contributions from participating FAs/Institutes  Others (Tracker, HCAL) have finalized their TDRs and are proceeding with engineering reviews prior to procurements and initial fabrication  The Trigger is in the process of finalizing its TDR  The most urgent need is the Upgrade Common Items which need to be in place during LS1 29

30. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Upgrade Cost-sharing  A Cost-sharing matrix indicating areas of interest of Funding Agencies and their participation in the Common Fund has been already presented to the April 2011 RRB and its updated versions to subsequent RRB meetings  It is based on agreements between Funding Agencies and respective Projects (with some still representing FA assumptions/estimates prior to final TDRs)  For Projects where TDRs are ready the sharing between FAs is formalized via dedicated Subsystem Addenda to the Construction MoU  These Addenda are now being finalized and will be distributed to FA 30

31. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Upgrade Cost-sharing Matrix 31

32. SG Meeting16 July 2013 Upgrade Common Items  Funding for Subsystem Upgrades can be considered as relatively secure  The Upgrade Common Items for LS1, under the responsibility of Technical Coordination are not fully funded - there is less potential interest in participation from FAs and consequently less available or committed funds  The most immediate needs in this area were foreseen to be financed from the Upgrades Common Fund (6.5 MCHF)  The first priority is to collect resources into the CF. About 70% of the FAs have already either paid their due amounts or committed to do so in the coming months. However, this represents only about 2MCHF of actual cash payments  A loan from CERN will be requested to cover the missing amounts once the FAs which have not made payments commit to do so by signing the Common Items Addenda 32