Individual Review. DanaBalser reported that the reviews were released later than planed (Monday instead of Friday). The tighter schedule this semester plus travel delayed the technical review assignments. We also had technical problems due to the hack used for X-proposals last semester. The science review panels are moving forward, however, at a good pace. A feature was revealed regarding changing the conflict assignment before reviews are assigned. We also had problems with reviewers using the Safari browser.
Source Conflicts. BarryClark will generate these but maybe not until next week.
PHT Items. RickLively reported that all items are on webtest. AmyMioduszewski noted that there is only one item that still needs to be tested related to copying Sessions.
X-proposals. DaleFrail summarized the status of X-proposal review. The XSAC has met and produced a report. Steps to follow include:
Communicate results to PIs.
Selected TTA staff to check comments and provide any feedback.
TTA, data management, and operations should digest proposals moving forward and provide questions for the face-to-face feasibility meeting.
Plan the face-to-face feasibility meeeting. It seems unlikey that this will occur before we realease info to the 20B TAC (6 April 2020). We could move the staring time for X-proposals to 21A.
GBT Large Proposal Ticket. After some discussion we agreed that we should create a new ticket and ToneyMinter should provide detailed requirements. RickLively will then assess the feasibility and the resources required.
Active Large Proposal Report. Background. The GBO has agreed to use the same report form for active Large proposals. NRAO has been producing reports for the TAC once per year for the October TAC meeting (A semester). Since the GBT will only be accepting Large proposals for the B semester it would be better to have these reports ready for the April TAC meeting (B semester). ToneyMinter proposed we do the GBO and NRAO reports in different semesters. Nobody had any issues with this proposal. We then had a tangential discussion about Large proposals: how are these reports used and do we still consider a proposal Large if the TAC reduces the time below 200 hours? We agreed that at a miniumum we should better define our procedures for the new TTA tools.
PST Source Lists. Background. The authors of a 20B proposal asked about having to list source coordinates that are proprietary. Our current policy is that source coordinates must be included unless the proposal is Triggered. A wrinkle to this issue is that telescope positions are included as meta-data which is availble in the archive once the data are taken (before the proprietary time). Though the user has control over the source names. The consensus was that we should not change our policy which was supported by the interim SSR AD.
PST Discussion. This was defered to the next meeting.
JIRA:RickLively noted that the JIRA nomenclature for the ticket status is not senesible at the moment as they are redefining these terms.
X-Proposals:DaleFrail noted that we should think about how X-proposals will be documented within the TTA process.