Action items listed here were captured during the CoDR meeting sessions held April 15-16, 2020
OVERVIEW
- SRDP-522 Add to risk register the insufficient details of the review variants at this stage, potential for cross talk and confusion in process details that may be outside of current architecture
- SRDP-496 & 495 clarify diagrams taking the technical nature of notation, generalize the diagram, and add a legend where needed
- SRDP-493 clarify need for filtering and flexible project creation in System Description document, perhaps capture nature of observations at submission (DDT, RSRO, etc.)
- Add risk that we have not missed any other parts of the process
- SRDP-532 Done
- SRDP-461&531 Clarify requirement Compile a quantified list of things people like about the ALMA OT and what they don't like about the PST. Mine Science Helpdesk tickets to identify what is tripping people up about the PST.
- SRDP-515 Add discussion of what needs to be captured to allocate subarrays to System Description under capabilities, perhaps also in Sec 2
- Also add discussion on the ability tfor observers to request commensal systems to be on/off, does PI get to request data from commensal system
REVIEWS
- SRDP-522 Also discussed under OVERVIEW, no additional action from this discussion
- SRDP-507 Clarify the wording that the tool does not automatically assign reviewers, Dane to update ticket, Alan to review and close
- SRDP-537 & 541 Point to current guidelines as the policy for defining conflicts
- SRDP-505 Although automated seems simple on the surface, too many edge cases drive this to a manual review for conflict - Close
- SRDP-487 Committee recommends that the project should consider changing the Technical Justification from being tied to an Allocation Request to instead be tied to a Facility. The project should perform an evaluation including stakeholders to evaluate the impact and necessity of this change.
- SRDP-477 Change the wording to clarify that DDT proposals are not necessarily executed in the current semester