1. OPC matters Simon Morris

2. Topics for possible Discussion • Simon Morris is OPC Chair for period 80 and 81 • Rapid turnover planned for Panel membership • Large number of proposals, large number of panels • Document describing feedback requirements (see 8m users web site) • Following VG were written in Nov after last OPC describing OPC process for non experts (for information)

3. Normal Proposals • Proposal deadline end of Sept for following April-Sept (and end of March for Oct-Mar) • Sorted into 4 science categories • A Cosmology • B Galaxies • C Stars • D Planets and Solar System • Depending on demand are 2-3 sub-panels (of 6 people) per category. Proposals assigned to a panel trying to group science topics together and avoid conflicts of interest • Each proposal gets a primary and 2 secondary referees. They give in grades and comments in advance of the meeting. All members of the panel have to read all their proposals before the meeting. • During the meeting all proposals assigned to the sub-panel are discussed and regraded. Most panels use anonymous paper grades. The average and rms are recorded and used to generate a ranked list separated by telescope. • There is a complex and evolving process for combining all the panel grades for each telescope. New for this period, the sub-panel grades are being renormalized to have matched mean and rms before merging. • ESO then tries to schedule the proposals starting with the top ranked proposal in the merged list for each telescope and working down. However, will stop taking proposals from a given category regardless of rank when get to the fraction of time requested in that science category. • Panels write feedback to proposers. Are instructed to include a statement about Strengths, Weaknesses and Ways to Improve. This is merged with quartile and scheduling information by ESO and sent to all proposers.

4. Large Programs • Generally more than 100 hours of time, often spread over more than one telescope and more than one period. • Get more space for science case • Are assigned to a category as before, but are read by all sub-panels in that category, also are read by the OPC members of all categories (made up of Panel Chairs and a few others from the panels) • Proposers are asked if they are willing to have the proposal converted to ‘normal’ (i.e. cut down to only 1 period) • Are discussed in joint meeting of category sub-panels and graded. Joint group also recommends on whether should go as a Large Program, and whether it should be considered as a Normal Program. If the answer to the latter is yes, then the sub-panel grades the current period bit during their normal discussions. • After the sub-Panel meeting, the OPC meets and decides on all Large Programs. They never revive a programme recommended for death by a panel, nor do they change a recommendation for conversion to normal. They often do not recommend Large Program status even if a panel supported a proposal. Implementation as a Large Program requires more than a simple majority of the OPC to support, but not unanimity.

5. Targets of Opportunity • GRBs, SNs, CVs, … • Now 3 classes of trigger: • Rapid Response Mode – very fast response (minutes), mostly used for GRBs • ‘Hard Triggers’ between minutes and hours where ESO staff have to write the OBs • ‘Soft Triggers’ generally after several days, but at unpredictable time in period. Proposer can write OBs. ESO willing to support more of these. • ESO willing to support about 200 Hard Triggers, with assumption they will only implement 100 or less of them in a period. • Proposals graded as Normal, but then ToO sub-committee meets to prune down numbers of triggers awarded and sort out target conflicts. Generate ranked list of ToOs for ESO across all categories with recommended numbers of targets, RMM triggers and hard and soft triggers. OPC endorses this list.

6. VST and VISTA Surveys • Were two separate Survey Panels set up, chaired by Duccio Macchetto. They were asked to take all VST and VISTA survey proposals, prune the list and talk to the proposers about possible merging of overlapping surveys. • VST survey plan was endorsed by OPC 6 months ago • VISTA survey plan was endorsed by OPC at this meeting • VISTA will be almost exclusively used for surveys (probably 100% for 1st year, and 85% for following years) • UK astronomers are PIs for 5 of the 6 merged VISTA surveys, although teams are very international. • Is an expectation from ESO that PIs will find national (i.e. in our case PPARC) support to deliver the survey results.

7. Instrument News • VST Telescope is still in Naples, primary ready for acceptance in Moscow, OmegaCAM ready apart from filters • VISTA telescope and camera soon in Paranal, Primary on critical path and still in Moscow • CRIRES offered – high dispersion 0.95-5.3 micron spectrograph • Laboca on APEX not offered • DAZLE had first run of 10 nights. Claimed to have gone well. • 3.6m was off line with dome problem 6 Oct – 4 Nov

8. Proposal Statistics • 898 proposals (635 for Paranal) • 85% of proposals submitted in last 36 hours • A&B proposal count flat, C&D driving increase • Oversubscription factor on UTs ~ 4 • Lilly zCOSMOS running very slow – will take ~5 years to complete