United States Gemini Program

Quarterly Review of

 The Gemini Near Infrared Spectrograph (GNIRS)

 Held March 7, 2001 at Tucson, Arizona

 

1. Meeting Background

 A USGP Quarterly Review (QR) of GNIRS was held on March 7, 2001 in conjunction with the IGPO Mid-Fabrication Review of GNIRS. The meeting was attended by Taft Armandroff (US Project Manager) and Mark Trueblood (Work Package Manager) from the USGP, several members of the GNIRS team including Neil Gaughan (GNIRS Project Manager), Jay Elias (Instrument Scientist), Brooke Gregory (member of the systems engineering team), and Dan Eklund (GNIRS Project Assistant) from NOAO/GNIRS, and members of the Gemini Mid-Fabrication Review Committee including Doug Simons (by video), Jim Oschmann, Mark Hunten, Bret Goodrich, Tom Geballe, Manuel Lazo, and Kim Gillies (by video). Others attending included Dan Weedman (NSF), Jeremy Mould (NOAO), and Sidney Wolff (NOAO).

 The goal of the QR’s is to evaluate each instrument project's progress in a number of different areas, with emphasis on management and high-level concerns. Specifically, the USGP uses a formal mechanism to determine whether a project is on track with respect to budget and schedule, and to identify potential problems before they significantly impact progress.

 The previous QR was held in November 2000 and normally this QR would have been held in February 2001. However, this QR was delayed approximately three weeks to permit it to be co-scheduled with the Gemini Mid-Fabrication Review to minimize the impact on the team of preparing for reviews.

 2. Major Findings

 Overall, the project is approximately 1.5 months behind the current schedule, about the same as the previous two QR’s, except that the Pre-Ship Acceptance Test is now scheduled to be complete in September 2002 instead of August 2002. The main area behind schedule remains mechanical design, for the reasons noted in previous QR reports.

 The projected delivery date has not changed significantly (slipping about one month) in the last year, despite considerable refinement of the design, updates to the schedule based on the details of the current design, and the initiation of fabrication. At the last QR, the accuracy of cost and schedule estimates for fabrication was unknown. It now appears these estimates were not far off the mark.

 The estimated cost remains at about $3.9 million, where it has stood from January 1999. Although some estimated costs, such as capital, have risen, projected labor costs have fallen to compensate.

 Since the last QR, the team has completed all design of optical benches, electronics, and software, and made significant progress on bench, electronics, and software fabrication. They have completed most mechanism design and have begun most mechanism fabrication, and have begun fixed assembly design.

 The USGP estimates that the GNIRS team can meet their current schedule despite their being slightly behind schedule at this point in time, provided:

(a)    the GNIRS team is able to schedule around the inability of IGPO to deliver the OIWFS components by the end of CY2000

(b)   the team’s new source of BaF2 proves to be acceptable, and

(c)    they are able to find a supplier of acceptable MgF material and Wollaston prisms made from this material.

 These are very serious issues that will be reviewed at the next QR, which will be held in mid-June.

 3. Project Summary

 3.1 Project Overview and Key Accomplishments 

The key accomplishments since the last QR have been: 

·        Cold motor testing; identified an inventory of qualified motors for the instrument, including spares

·        Completed fabrication of some major components and began that of others; the OIWFS bench is complete, and the Post-slit bench was begun

·        Completed a significant amount of electronics fabrication

·        Completed a significant amount of software fabrication; can move motors; EPICS coding is ahead of schedule

·        Closed the optics contract with RMI and awarded a contract to Janos for the BaF2 camera lenses.

 3.2 Project Status and Plans 

The GNIRS project is about 1.5 months behind the current schedule. The following goals for the prior November, 2000 QR that were met for this QR are: 

·        Award contracts for fabrication of 3 of the remaining 6 mechanisms; fabrication of 7 mechanisms is now under way.

·        Complete 3-D designs of all remaining mechanisms; completed. 

The following goals for the prior November, 2000 QR that were not met for this QR are: 

·        Complete lens delivery and acceptance testing; the contract with RMI was closed, reducing the contract value by $60,000 while a new contract for $30,000 was awarded to Janos for the BaF2 camera lenses, saving the project $30,000. The lenses are expected in mid-April.

·        All optics on order or delivered; delayed by mechanism definition, all optics were promised to be on order by December 15 at the last QR. However, the Wollaston prism is still not on order, though a quote had been received by the March QR.

·        Begin OIWFS components integration; IGPO did not deliver the OIWFS components per Amendment 4 of the GNIRS Work Scope by September 5, 2000 and had not delivered the parts as of the March QR. The parts are now expected in early April.

·        Release rotary prototype report; writing the report was placed at a lower priority than other work, but the results were incorporated into the design

·        Release linear prototype report; writing the report was placed at a lower priority than other work, but the results were incorporated into the design 

The following goals for this March, 2001 QR that were met are: 

·        Complete 50% of the 3D design effort on the following fixed assemblies:

o       Bulkhead assemblies (forward and center)

o       Dewar components (light shields, shell)

o       Mounting trusses

o       Cryo head mounting hardware

·        Have software testing in process

·        Complete Phytron motor testing and have a plan for moving forward 

The following goals for this March, 2001 QR that were not met are: 

·        Fabricate all three benches; the OIWFS bench is done, the Post-Slit Bench is 56% complete overall (including design), and the Pre-Slit Bench fabrication is 75% complete.

·        Have all mechanisms in fabrication or fabricated, and the slit-decker, camera drive, and environmental cover will be done and the motor drive will be in testing. The focus mechanism is 3D designed and ready for 2D design, not yet in fabrication. The grating turret is about to be released for fabrication.

·        Have all optics on order (including flats, prisms, grating replicas); the BaF2 issue may not be resolved by February, but an action plan should be in place. The MgF Wollaston prisms are not yet on order, and neither are the flat mirrors. The main optics issue from the prior QR, the BaF2 for the camera, is being addressed in what appears to be an appropriate manner.

·        Complete electronics thermal enclosure fabrication; Component Control Thermal Enclosure fabrication stands at 51% complete and is making acceptable progress. This task is not on the Critical Path and is likely to be completed by the next QR.

·        Have OIWFS components integration/test under way; due to reasons outside the control of the project, OIWFS integration has slipped until the subsystem can be delivered by the supplier. 

By the next review, nominally scheduled for mid-June, the Project Manager plans to: 

·        Complete all open goals from prior QR’s

·        Complete fabrication of all mechanisms

·        Complete 3D design of all fixed assemblies

·        Complete 2D design of all fixed assemblies

·        Complete dewar cold station PCB fabrication

·        Complete dewar warm-up controller fabrication

·        Complete dewar to Thermal Enclosure cabling fabrication 

The project is 55% complete from the Restart Review to the delivery of the instrument, now scheduled for September 2002. 

3.3 Project Problems and Concerns 

The USGP could find no major problems that require the attention of management outside NOAO. The Project Manager noted the following items that he is watching closely: 

The USGP considers the Project Manager capable of dealing with these situations within NOAO. The status of these items will be reviewed at the next QR. 

Items noted last time that are no longer of concern are: 

3.4 Project Schedule 

The summary-level project schedule is available on the GNIRS Web site (a copy is attached to this report). An analysis of the schedule performance of each major engineering discipline appears below. The Critical Path was deliberately designed so that no single mechanism could delay the instrument. Instead, it includes various steps in most of the mechanisms.

 3.5 Project Milestones, Cost, and Manpower Charts 

A summary-level Microsoft Project schedule is attached as an appendix. This reporting category is not repeated for each work area below, since all work areas are represented in the project schedule and manpower charts. 

3.6 Project Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The cost of the project is estimated to be $6.4M, including the $2.4M spent between the project start in October, 1995 and December 31, 1998. As of the QR, the project had spent a total of $4,459,599 against a planned value of $4,839,546 yielding an underrun of $379,947. Most of the underrun is in labor, primarily in Mechanical in the area of fabrication. Increased capital costs for sending parts to outside machine shops did not completely offset the lack of instrument makers available to the project, in part because the project is slightly late with having drawings ready for fabrication. USGP expects this underrun to be spent in accordance with the Project Manager’s projections. The estimated cost of the project has remained constant since early 1999. 

3.7 Organization 

The project appears to be staffed with a sufficient number of competent staff, except in the areas of design drafting and instrument makers. The recent loss of a design draftsperson has placed drafting on the Critical Path, and sufficient time does not remain in the schedule to find a replacement. The project is struggling with half the instrument makers originally promised to it, and is sending much more work to outside shops, increasing the burden on procurement as well as the engineering staff for oversight. However, an additional instrument maker has been hired, and one more will be secured from SOLIS in May. 

Furthermore, each key engineering position is only one deep, so when a person leaves the project, no immediate replacement is usually available to fill the gap. At this late stage of the project, loss of an engineer would ensure a delay in the delivery date, perhaps of several months. 

4. Project Management 

4.1 Project Management Overview and Key Accomplishments 

The Project Manager continues to exert proper management control over the project. Since the last QR, the Project Manager took control of the BaF2 situation as recommended in the prior QR report. 

4.2 Project Management Status and Plans 

The project continues to be effectively managed. The projected schedule slip of about one month in almost one year since the Pre-fabrication Review reflects the pressure the Project Manager is keeping on the staff to maintain the schedule. This is paying off in maintenance of the budget as well. 

4.3 Project Management Problems and Concerns 

The BaF2 lens issue from the prior QR remains an issue until the lenses are in hand. However, the project has taken action that has a higher probability of success than the former path. Since the prior QR, the MgF Wollaston prisms have become a new issue that now poses an imminent hazard to the schedule. This could involve assuming a great deal of risk with unknown vendors outside the US. 

The labor wave issue mentioned previously is a concern that has been building in past QR’s, and is now an issue that the staffing profile shows must be addressed in the coming months. The replanning proposed by the Project Manager at the QR/PFR has a good chance of being able to deal effectively with this problem. 

An item mentioned at the previous QR that remains an issue is the delivery by the IGPO of the On-Instrument Wavefront Sensor (OIWFS). This was to have been delivered last September under Amendment 4 of the GNIRS Work Scope, and when it wasn’t, the USGP submitted a Change Order to IGPO under the terms of Amendment 4. There would have been little, or possibly no impact to the schedule if the OIWFS had been delivered by the end of calendar year 2000. However, as of this writing, the OIWFS has not been delivered, and the latest information is that it will be delivered around the end of April 2001. These issues will be reviewed at the next QR. 

4.4 Project Management Schedule 

The Project Manager usually delivers reports on schedule and meets his other schedule obligations. 

4.5 Project Management Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

4.6 Project Management Organization 

The GNIRS Project Management organization consists of Neil Gaughan (Project Manager), Dan Eklund (assigned half time as Project Assistant), and Melissa Bowersock (Administrative Assistant to the Project Manager). 

5. Systems Engineering 

5.1 Systems Engineering Overview and Key Accomplishments 

Key accomplishments since the prior QR included:

5.2 Systems Engineering Status and Plans 

Systems engineering was reported as being 100% complete, however, the final reports for the rotary and linear prototypes are still not written. From this point on, systems engineering activity will consist of sustaining engineering support to the other engineering staff. 

5.3 Systems Engineering Problems and Concerns 

Although the collimator mirror passive flexure compensator has the advantage of reduced complexity, it also does not permit adjustment while the instrument is cold, and will not compensate for inelastic or non-gravity induced shifts. This could increase the time to perform system integration when the schedule is tight and further slips cannot be tolerated. 

5.4 Systems Engineering Schedule 

No further systems engineering work is scheduled. However, USGP still expects the final prototype reports to be written, as a service to the Gemini instrument community. 

5.5 Systems Engineering Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

5.6 Systems Engineering Organization 

The GNIRS systems engineering group consists of Jay Elias (GNIRS Instrument Scientist and lead systems engineer), Dick Joyce (KPNO IR spectroscopist), and Brook Gregory (CTIO instrument scientist). 

6. Optics Design 

The optics design is complete. All further optical work is in the area of procurement, installation, alignment, and integration. 

7. Optics Fabrication 

All optics fabrication will be performed by outside contractors. Optical procurement is 71% complete.

As noted elsewhere, although the BaF2 issue has been addressed, it remains a major concern until lenses of acceptable quality are in hand. Furthermore, the limited number of bidders on the MgF Wollaston prisms raises a new concern in that area, as well. 

8. Mechanical Design 

8.1 Mechanical Design Overview and Key Accomplishments 

Progress is being made on mechanism design, with all 9 mechanisms having 3D design complete, and all but one having 2D design complete or nearly so. 

The OIWFS bench has been fabricated. The Post-Slit bench design is complete and is in fabrication. The Pre-Slit bench has some parts in fabrication, some in 2D design, and some in 3D design. 

All 12 fixed assemblies are in various stages of 3D design. 

8.2 Mechanical Design Status and Plans 

Mechanical design and fabrication (which are reported together) are 55% complete overall with benches 59% complete, mechanisms 67%, and fixed assemblies 17%. Mechanism design was not completed by the end of the calendar year as expected at the prior QR. However, design of the fixed assemblies was begun in January as anticipated. 

Plans for the next QR are to have all mechanism 3D and 2D designs complete and fabrication complete. 

8.3 Mechanical Design Problems and Concerns 

The project recently lost a designer, which places design drafting tasks onto the Critical Path. At this late stage of the project, it is impossible to find a qualified replacement, train that person in the particular drafting package used by the team (which is not widely used, and therefore there is not a large pool of skilled labor well versed in this package), and have that person be productive by the time the major drafting phase of the project ends. Looking back, if the project had had a larger budget, it would have been useful to have had a larger drafting staff and a larger instrument maker staff, but it is now too late to do anything about the former situation. 

8.4 Mechanical Design Schedule 

The mechanism design activities are about 6 weeks behind schedule, the bench design activities are about two months behind, and fixed assemblies are about 7 months behind. The schedule shows the benches to be about 4 months behind schedule, due to the slip in integrating the OIWFS bench because of the late delivery of the parts from the IfA. If the engineers work additional overtime, the first attempt at the post-slit bench fabrication is successful, NOAO is able to find some way to work around the late delivery of the OIWFS parts, and no serious problems are encountered in system integration, it is likely this will not significantly impact the final delivery date of the instrument. This is because the instrument will be integrated from the inside out, so that the mechanisms will be integrated to the benches while the fixed assemblies are being fabricated. 

8.5 Mechanical Design Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

8.6 Mechanical Design Organization 

The GNIRS mechanical engineering group consists of Ed Hileman (benches and fixed assemblies) and Gary Muller (mechanisms and engineering management systems). The mechanical design group consists of John Andrew (lead), Dave Rosin, Eric Downey, and Dale Circle. 

9. Mechanical Fabrication 

9.1 Mechanical Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments 

All but one of 9 mechanisms is in fabrication. The OIWFS bench is complete, the Post-Slit bench is 56% complete overall and is in fabrication, and the POM and Offner parts of the Pre-Slit bench are in fabrication. 

9.2 Mechanical Fabrication Status and Plans 

Fabrication status is not reported separately from design (see above). By the next QR, all mechanisms should be fabricated and assembled. 

9.3 Mechanical Fabrication Problems and Concerns 

The cost of sending parts to outside shops for fabrication is several times higher than using the NOAO shop. At the project restart, the Project Manager was promised four instrument makers but was given only two, forcing him to use outside shops that increased his costs over initial estimates by factors of three or more. Some cost growth over initial estimates would have been likely had the NOAO shop been used, but since NOAO rates are lower, factors of three or more were unlikely.  In the near future, the two NOAO instrument makers will need to be used full time for subsystem and system assembly. If the instrument maker staff assigned full time to GNIRS is not increased, it will force the project to use outside shops exclusively for parts fabrication. This could add another $200k or more to the eventual cost of the instrument. 

As discussed above, one new instrument maker was hired recently, and another is promised from SOLIS. It is important to train the newly hired instrument makers rapidly and to incorporate them into the GNIRS team full time so that they can contribute meaningfully to the large amount of fabrication work yet to be accomplished. 

The Project Manager successfully met the challenge of transitioning the project from what had been largely a design enterprise to a fabrication effort. This item, noted in the previous QR report, is no longer an issue. 

9.4 Mechanical Fabrication Schedule 

Overall, the Project Summary Schedule shows bench assemblies with mounted and aligned components to be 4 months behind schedule, mechanisms to be 6 weeks behind schedule, and fixed assemblies to be several months behind schedule. As noted above, the late delivery of the OIWFS components severely constrained NOAO’s ability to rework the schedule without delaying delivery, and could cause both an irrecoverable schedule slip and a further cost overrun. 

9.5 Mechanical Fabrication Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP.

9.6 Mechanical Fabrication Organization 

Mechanical parts fabrication will be performed by a combination of outside machine shops and the NOAO instrument shop. The latter will assemble and check out each subassembly. 

10. Electronics Design 

10.1 Electronics Design Overview and Key Accomplishments 

Since the previous QR, the team completed layout and design of the component controller thermal enclosure, and layout and design of the dewar wiring. 

10.2 Electronics Design Status and Plans 

Electronics design is on schedule and is essentially done. Electronics design and fabrication are reported together as 63% complete. 

10.3 Electronics Design Problems and Concerns 

None. 

10.4 Electronics Design Schedule 

Electronics design is on schedule. 

10.5 Electronics Design Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

10.6 Electronics Design Organization 

The GNIRS electrical engineer is Jerry Penegor. He is assisted by electronics technician Ron George. 

11. Electronics Fabrication 

11.1 Electronics Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments 

With the completion of electronics design, fabrication has begun. 

11.2 Electronics Fabrication Status and Plans 

All board schematics are drawn and released. All PCB’s are laid out and etched, including 7 coldstation cards, motherboard for Phytron driver cards, hard stop board, and the hermetic connector adaptor PCB’s. 

Connector panel for enclosure is machined, VME crate is built and is being used for S/W development, the Phytron crate is in fabrication, and the ancillary crate is ready for fabrication. All PCB’s are fabricated, most are loaded. 

By the next QR, the team will have the remaining electronics fabrication complete, except for internal dewar wiring. For example, by the next QR, the team will:

·        Complete dewar cold station PCB fabrication

·        Complete dewar warm-up controller fabrication

·        Complete dewar to TE cabling fabrication 

11.3 Electronics Fabrication Problems and Concerns 

None. 

11.4 Electronics Fabrication Schedule 

Electronics fabrication is on schedule. 

11.5 Electronics Fabrication Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

11.6 Electronics Fabrication Organization 

The GNIRS electrical engineer is Jerry Penegor, assisted by electronics technician Ron George. 

12. Software Design 

12.1 Software Design Overview and Key Accomplishments 

The software design is essentially complete. 

12.2 Software Design Status and Plans 

Overall the software design is quite similar to that used by NIRI, with the exception that actual component control is performed in ordinary C software instead of EPICS software written in C.

The design is mature and well-understood. 

12.3 Software Design Problems and Concerns 

None 

12.4 Software Design Schedule 

The software design is essentially complete. 

12.5 Software Design Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

12.6 Software Design Organization 

The GNIRS software engineer is Richard Wolff, with assistance from Peter Ruckle for the EPICS code. 

13. Software Fabrication 

13.1 Software Fabrication Overview and Key Accomplishments 

Since the previous QR, the hardware simulator was delivered. The Components Controller is able to move motors, and the EPICS software is ahead of schedule. 

13.2 Software Fabrication Status and Plans 

Overall, the software is 49% complete and is about 2 months behind schedule according to the GNIRS Project Summary Schedule. The Components Controller is 67% complete, but was scheduled to have been completed at the end of January. The Lab Support software is 6% complete. The EPICS code, which is missing from the Project Summary Schedule, is 60% complete. Although the software is behind schedule, it is not on the Critical Path, in the judgment of the Work Package Manager. The Project Manager reports software to be under control. 

Both the Components Control software and the EPICS software are due to be complete in July, after the next QR. There are no major milestones between now and the next QR by which to judge software progress at the next QR, other than early completion of the software by the next QR. 

13.3 Software Fabrication Problems and Concerns 

None 

13.4 Software Fabrication Schedule 

The software fabrication is about 2 month behind schedule, due to the software engineer’s being assigned to other Gemini work. That was recently completed, so now rapid progress is expected to be made. USGP expects the schedule to be recovered in full and will review this at the next QR. 

13.5 Software Fabrication Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

13.6 Software Fabrication Organization 

The GNIRS software engineer is Richard Wolff with EPICS software provided by Peter Ruckle. 

14. Subsystem Integration 

14.1 Subsystem Integration Overview and Key Accomplishments 

The major planned subsystem integration activity was the OIWFS optical bench. IGPO is late in delivering the OIWFS parts, which were due September 5, 2000. USGP delivered a Change Order to IGPO in accordance with Amendment 4 of the GNIRS Work Scope. OIWFS bench subsystem integration should have begun in September, according to the schedule. The bench itself was not ready until December 2000. However, the parts will not be delivered until well after the time scheduled for OIWFS bench integration, which will delay the project. This will most likely cause a cost and schedule impact to the project. 

14.2 Subsystem Integration Status and Plans 

The plan outlined at the Mid-Fabrication Review is to wait until about late May or early June, when the fabrication of most mechanisms and the benches will be complete, and the drafting and fabrication of the fixed assemblies will be quite far along. By that time, either the parts for the OIWFS will have been delivered, or a firm schedule for their delivery will have been established. A better idea of where things stand on the IFU should be available by that time, as well. Therefore, at that time the schedule for integration and testing will be reworked to determine how to minimize the impact of the late delivery of the OIWFS parts and how best to use the available parts on hand for GNIRS for system integration. 

14.3 Subsystem Integration Problems and Concerns 

See above. 

14.4 Subsystem Integration Schedule 

See above. Alignment and integration are due to begin April 1, but due to delays elsewhere in the schedule, this activity is unlikely to begin until at least June. 

14.5 Subsystem Integration Budget and Expenditures to Date 

The GNIRS Statement of Work does not require this WBS element to be reported separately to the USGP. 

14.6 Subsystem Integration Organization 

Various engineers and technicians perform subsystem integration, depending on which subsystem it is. 

15. System Integration 

No system integration was scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review.  

16. Test and Checkout 

No test and checkout tasks were scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review. The USGP urges the GNIRS team to heed the following advice of the Mid-Fabrication Review Committee and, given recent experience with NIRI, to act on it to prevent a re-occurrence of it: 

The planned flexure tests of the completed instrument are similar to what was used for NIRI and places the instrument at risk of not fully demonstrating its flexure performance prior to shipment to Chile. In NIRI’s case, single axis tests were completed in Honolulu and this was the extent of the testing completed due to lack of proper facilities at the IfA to complete multi-axis tests. Such tests were run when NIRI was placed on the telescope and, of course, the flexure along untested rotation axes was then demonstrated to be unacceptably large. Gemini and the IfA worked together to resolve the problem, but the solution required having the NIRI PI on-site, working in the Gemini lab, and shuttling to/from the IfA shop in Honolulu. It is important to note that NIRI was not formally accepted due to flexure problems, hence it was the clear responsibility of the IfA to lead the effort to fix the problem under these circumstances. If we have a similar problem with GNIRS due to lack of proper flexure testing, it will require NOAO personnel to be in Chile for extended periods of time, potentially with parts being sent to and from Tucson, i.e. the remedy stands to be much more complex, costly, and time consuming. GNIRS must therefore be properly flexure tested before it is sent to Chile as part of the on-site acceptance tests in order to demonstrate that it meets an acceptable level of flexure before it is shipped. Details of these tests will be defined through the GNIRS Acceptance Test Plan. 

17. Documentation and Training 

No documentation or training tasks were scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review. 

18. Other Activities 

No tasks for other activities were scheduled to begin before the Quarterly Review.

 

Home | Management | System Design Notes | Requirements | Configuration Images | Subsystems | Archives | Staff | FTP Site | Internal Information


If you have any questions or suggestions regarding this website, please contact Melissa Bowersock.
NOAO Intranet Services
NOAO Copyright
 Statement

National Optical Astronomy Observatories, 950 North Cherry Avenue, P.O. Box 26732, Tucson, Arizona 85726,
Phone: (520) 318-8000, Fax: (520) 318-8360