As part of our effort to develop an integrated process for getting telescope time to undertake complete scientific programs, the way in which proposals are evaluated is changing. Starting with the upcoming deadline for the 1999B semester, proposals for all NOAO telescopes will be reviewed in a single set of meetings. Dave De Young, who has chaired the KPNO TAC for many years, will oversee the new process. For the current cycle, the facilities include KPNO and CTIO, but the national access time on the MMT and the HET will be added in over the next year and the US time on Gemini shortly after that. The concept, which has been endorsed by the NOAO Users' Committee, the AURA Observatories Council, and the AURA Observatories Visiting Committee, is to divide proposals among discipline-based panels rather than site-specific TACs. Merged ranked lists are generated for each telescope using a simple numerical algorithm and these lists are reviewed by a "merging TAC" with representation from all the panels. The final, TAC-approved, ranked lists are then submitted to the site directors and telescope schedulers.
Initially, there will be four different disciplines: galactic, extragalactic, solar system, and surveys. There will be two separate panels of each of the galactic and extragalactic types, making a total of six panels. The split between the two galactic panels or the two extragalactic panels will be based on a combination of subject matter and telescope. The goal, however, is not to narrow the range of subject reviewed by any single galactic or extragalactic panel, but to ensure that all proposals to do the same or similar science are reviewed by the same panel.
In order for the sequence of panel and merging TAC meetings to be practical, we will schedule them to occur within a single week, roughly four weeks after the proposal deadline. We hope that this will allow us to streamline the process and minimize duplicate effort. As additional telescopes are added, we will add more panels, with the intent of limiting the number of proposals that each panel reads to about 100.
The goal of these changes is to encourage proposers to think about and present their work in a more complete scientific context. Proposals that require facilities in both northern and southern hemispheres will be allowed, and we will try to understand the relationships between smaller and larger telescopes. Of course, we will continue to assess the success of this method of reviewing observing proposals and further modify it if necessary.
Todd Boroson