ANASAC meeting  10 September 2004
Yun, Hibbard, Najita, Crutcher, Gurwell, vdB, Wootten, Fan, Turner, Mundy, Marvel
Carilli

Project news:  Status of antenna procurement
               ASAC Charges
               Beasley on board
               
ACTION for Al:  Should ASAC Charges be distributed to ANASAC?
             Al emailed Ewine to ask if this had happened with the ESAC.
             
Funding:  van den Bout discussed when the proper time for canvassing the community
regarding funding with ALMA observing time was.  With an NSF review coming up, the
time is probably now.  Who should do this?  The ANASAC is probably the smallest
community unit we could canvass, so a working group which Min put together has drafted 
a questionnaire which the ANASAC had before it today to discuss.

Who is the target of the questionnaire?
The whole AAS?  They could send it to their membership or to a subset of their members.
The biggest subset might be all US members.  The questionnaire would be on a website
and the answers tallied automatically with no chads left hanging.  We would need a go-ahead
from AUI and NRAO.  We'd want to tell cousins like AURA and NSF that this was happening.
The process would not take long.  Marvel has called into the meeting; John Hibbard has
also joined us as the other NAASC member.  John notes that there is an NAASC website; please
let him know what you'd like to see there.

Fan suggests identifying the wavelength band of the respondent's primary interests.
RC: Should say how much annual grant support do you have?
Should amount of support be less open-ended?  What is the goal?  With the GBT the guideline was 
publishing or supporting a student.  Mundy suggests getting more information.
Najita--possibly supply more information
JN: 
Give some guidelines in the example projects--clarify how many images, how many bytes in the
dataset?  
So suggest for you to choose one of the projects--of different scale (make them small, medium
and large) and ask what would you need to bring to publication.  
What about the minimum level of funding question?  Is that sensible?  Depends on whether you
apply for funds or just get money?  Could get time with no money, and money not strictly tied
to time allocated.  
Then how to get the money?
vdB  NSF probably won't do it.
If another party, it could be NRAO or some other subcontractor.  Third party sequesters this from
the NRAO budget, which might be useful.
LGM: Most would check directly from NSF, as they would think that looks better.
CC: It is NSF money, and has that color if it comes from them.
vdB: Probably goes in the intro rather than as a question.  Done.
LGM:  needs to be more explicit--list grants, university observatories and national observatories.
JT: Is this just NSF shifting resources around.
KM: I would be very careful with this question.  It may be overstepping the bounds--may sound
like you are speaking for NSF.
RC: You can't suggest things in a vacuum; I think we'd need to state what may be obvious to us.
LGM: Make it more conditional--could affect availability of funds.  

Examples:  Get these from the DRSP.
4, 10, 50 hour examples.  A deep mosaic, a multiobject survey, a single object item.
NAASC.  Dick, Al and Jean.  An item for the wiki page.
ACTIONS:  Talk to various people is in Paul's baliwick.  Should make good progress by the
end of the month.  
Making the form--Megan could do this.  Should we worry about getting only one response per
person.  Can we ask for email address.  This would be anonymous--put in intro.