The following were nominated as officers of the executive of the ISSC

Jodrell Bank Observatory 6 August 2000 Revised: 8 October 2000 Present: Australia: Wim Brouw ATNF-CSIRO Ron Ekers ATNF-CSIRO Canada: Peter Dewdney Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics Russ Taylor University of Calgary China: Bo Peng Beijing Astronomical Observatory Europe: Harvey Butcher ASTRON Arnold van Ardenne ASTRON Franco Mantovani Insituto di Radioastronomia Anton Zensus MPIfR Peter Wilkinson Jodrell Bank Observatory Phil Diamond Jodrell Bank Observatory/MERLIN India: Govind Swarup NCRA-TIFR USA: Douglas Bock University of California, Berkeley Jill Tarter SETI Insititute Dayton Jones JPL Bernard Burke MIT Bob Preston JPL/Caltech Rick Fisher NRAO At-large: Richard Schilizzi JIVE Observers: Andrew Lyne Jodrell Bank Observatory S. Ananthakrishnan NCRA-TIFR Observers were invited to attend by Russ Taylor. 1. Approval of the Agenda The agenda was modified to include item 1.a to discuss a temporary change to the structure of the ISSC executive. 1.a In order to have representation from all major regions Ekers suggested that the executive be increased to four members. The proposal arising from discussion was for a temporary structure for the executive that would allow for a total executive of four, consisting of the chair, vice-chair, past-chair and executive secretary. During the first cycle (two years), we will elect two vice chairs. At the next election, when the current chair becomes the past-chair, we will revert to one vice-chair as laid out in the Memorandum of Understanding. 2. Nominations and Election of Officers The following were nominated as officers of the executive of the ISSC Chair: Ron Ekers, Vice-chairs: Harvey Butcher, Jill Tarter Executive Secretary: Russ Taylor There being only one nomination for each position, all the above were voted in by acclamation via a show Page 1 of 7

of hands. 3. The MOU Signing Ceremony (Wilkinson) The signing ceremony for the MOU establishing the ISSC will take place at 5:30 on August 10th at the end of the IAU session on Future Large Scale Facilities. Peter Wilkinson has prepared a story for IAU Newspaper, including a picture of the ISSC members taken at Jodrell Bank. There will also be a press release for the public. The press release and a copy of the new brochure are posted on the SKA web site in Calgary. Peter Wilkinson will liaise with the IAU press office and attempt to follow up on the results of the press release. A poster has been produced in Australia and has been carried to the IAU meeting by Anne Green. It will be posted during the signing ceremony. All signatories to the MOU have approved with the exception of India. India will sign in the near future pending approval by the Council of the TIFR. 4. Global Biodiversity Information Facility Ron Ekers reported on a proposal for a Global Biodiversity Information Facility that faces similar challenges to the SKA project in terms of international organisation. The proposal is for a large database facility with an operating budget of $50M. It was proposed by an OECD working group. The project has a registered a web site and a secretariat with funds for work programs. The legal framework of the organisation includes a non-legally binding MOU between the secretariat and governments. The MOU includes an intellectual property clause and uses GDP to assess contribution. The letters of invitation to governments came out of OECD. Burke notes that we need to identify intellectual property agreement. We agree to set up a small working group to discuss this. The committee consists of Richard Schilizzi (chair), Jill Tarter, Harvey Butcher, Peter Dewdney and Bruce Thomas. A position paper will be submitted for discussion at the next ISSC. 5.Outline of International Management Plan Short written summaries from each of the workshop working groups were submitted to the ISSC to inform the discussion of an international management plan. 5.1 Timeline A draft time-line document that arose from the two management working groups at the workshop was distributed and explained by Bob Preston (The two working groups were: a) design evaluation mechanism based on science requirements, and b) five-year management plan and technical oversight). The draft timeline includes two streams 1) Design choice and 2) Site choice. Major milestones for the design choice path are 1) January 2002: a) Carry out initial technology/cost assessments of various concepts b) Prioritize and categorize science goals 2) August 2002: a) Establish guidelines for straw man concept choices b) Articulate detailed design requirements from the science goals, including breakpoints. Page 2 of 7

3) August 2003: Reduce the number of SKA concepts to a small set of competing straw many designs. 4) August 2005: Agree on design choice for the SKA Major milestones for the site selection path are: 1) October 2001: Solicit and receive letters of interest from potential host countries/regions 2) January 2003: Establish detailed site requirements 3) August 2005: Select Site 5.2 Standing Working Groups and Committee 5.2.1 Engineering Management Team The Five-year Management Plan and Technical Oversight working group recommended an Engineering Management Team. The main functions of the EMG would be: a) conduct a technical audit of the existing SKA technical acitivities and present the summary to the ISSC; b) highlight synergies between efforts of various groups and recommend possible collaborations groups to the ISSC c) indentify important deficiencies and pressing technical or system engineering needs in the international SKA effort d) recommend to the ISSC the formation of specialist engineering, science and planning task forces and, when these bodies are operational, act in information gathering, distillation and reporting roles; e) create and maintain an evolving SKA system definition document, updated annually; f) foster the flow of information between international project groups and between the science and engineering communities, by means of a formal SKA technical memo series g) work with the Science Advisory Committee toward identifying and resolving issues in which critical science goals and engineering constraints interact. Jill Tarter noted that we should hire a full-time engineer to run this team. Bob Preston agrees that we need a full-time project manager, and possibly also a system engineer. The signatories to the MOU will investigate their ability to fund a project manager and a system engineer for a term until 2005. Return on this in two months (1 October). The project manager should not be chair of the EMT. How should the project manager fit into the organisation? In the meantime it was agreed that we should proceed with EMT and SAC and work on funding a project manager and project office on the time scale we can find resources. Bob Preston and Richard Schilizzi and Harvey Butcher to work on developing a project management office description and organization plan. Recommended changes to EMT proposal: change item a) to read "suitably scoped technical audit". The following individuals were recommended as members of the Engineering Management Team: Rick Fisher Arnold van Ardenne Peter Dewdney Page 3 of 7

Sandy Weinreb Peter Hall If we cannot identify a single individual who is able to devote a large fraction of time to chair the EMT, two co-chairs may be a good way to proceed. Bob Preston notes that impartially is an important criterion for the chair of the EMT (i.e. not associated with any particular concept. Additional members must be identified to include representation from all the technology concepts. Rick Fisher was elected chair of the EMT. The ISSC will communicate with NRAO requesting Rick to fill this position. Rick will submit a committee structure and membership recommendation to the ISSC. A membership of about 6 is suggested. ISSC will then write letters to institutions requesting proposed members to participate. Support of one full-time secretary for the EMT may be critical. 5.2.2 Design Evaluation based on Science Requirements This working group recommended we a) commission a Science Advisory Committee. b) Hold an NGST/ALMA/ELT/SKA joint international meeting in the fall of 2001 c) registered an SKA web site d) publish a concept paper The ISSC agrees to commission a Science Working Group. The SWG will be chaired by Russ Taylor. Other names suggested for membership are: Peter Wilkinson Don Backer Rob Braun Thijs van der Hulst The signatories to the MOU will send suggestions for names from their constituency to Russ Taylor. Russ Taylor will then send list of recommended names to ISSC for approval. One of the early goals of the SWG will be to advance the science case and establish primary science goals (unique to the SKA), shared science goals (complementary with other next generation instruments) and secondary science goals. Science outreach will be part of the mandate of the SWG. Russ Taylor and Ken Kellermann to organize an SKA concept paper. 5.2.3 Other technical working groups Other working groups recommended from the workshop include: a) A Digital Back End Processing Group that includes RFI mitigation, correlator issues and beam-forming, b) A joint working group on interfaces, c) Configuration and Simulations, d) Site Selection and Evaluation. Groups a), b) and c) will be constituted by the Engineering Management Team. The Site Selection and Evaluation Committee will be constituted directly by the ISSC. Bruce Thomas was recommended and approved as chair of the Site Selection and Evaluation Committee. Page 4 of 7

Other groups that will be needed are and Outreach Team and an Industrial Liaison Group. Peter Wilkinson will chair of Outreach Committee. Industrial Liaison will be discussed at a later, but the EMT should also discuss how they might proceed on this. 5.2.4 General Issues relating to project management. The need to bring in the next generation of scientists and engineers was noted. How to bring in the next generation? Rick Fisher and Doug Bock and Anton Zensus agreed to give some thought to this. Govind Swarup suggested that we produce a promotional video for students (science and engineering). Jill Tarter suggested Seth Shostak might be able to help produce a video. The institutes involved the SKA project should be mindful of opportunities to fund postdoctoral positions and thesis research The draft timeline for 2000-2005 implies an increment to resources around 2003 as the technology assessment between 2003 and 2005 becomes integrated into the international project, as opposed to individual national programs. We may need to send a heads-up about the need for resources around 2003 for participation in international activities as we move toward the final design assessment phase. 6. The International SKA Secretariat Russ Taylor will set up an International SKA Secretariat account at the controller's office at the University of Calgary. Invoices we be sent to the MOU signatories for annual fees. A motion was tabled to allocate $30 k CDN (about $20 k US) per year to pay for teaching relief for Russ Taylor as ISSC executive secretary and for a part time secretary within the department of Physics and Astronomy. The motion was passed unanimously. Other secretariat expenditures, above some amount to be determined by the ISSC executive, must be approved by any two members of the executive other than the executive secretary. The executive secretary will submit a financial report to each ISSC meeting. The secretariat will pay for the production of the SKA brochure. 7. Letters of Invitation for Siting We should start to get an idea of the level of interest of potential host countries for the SKA. Should the ISSC request each of the consortia for expressions of interest regarding siting. Perhaps the OECD could issue this letter under the auspices of the task force. Harvey Butcher will check into this. What about South America and Africa, where large RFI clean regions exist? In the meantime representatives to the ISSC will solicit expressions of interest for hosting the SKA within the countries represented on the ISSC. 8. External Relations Peter Wilkinson will chair this activity. Will be discussed further at next meeting. 9. OECD Task Force on Spectrum Management The OECD Task Force is moving slowly. Satellite industry associations will help US find US industry people. Bill Adler VP of Global Star has been identified. 10. Defining RQZ's This agenda item will be discussed at next meeting 11. International Space Law Meeting in Toulouse Page 5 of 7

Jill Tarter and Harvey Butcher will follow up this action item from the last meeting. 12. Berkeley 2001 meeting Dates are required for this meeting as soon as possible. Jack to communicate dates to Russ. The target is the week of 9 July. The science element of this meeting should be a preparatory meeting for a possible future NGST/ALMS/SKA/VLOT meeting. Harvey Butcher and Anton Zensus to report back on plans for organising this meeting as soon as possible. 13. Any Other Business At large memberships were briefly discussed. This will be revisit at next meeting. Russ Taylor noted that the proceedings of 1999 Amsterdam and Dwingeloo conferences would be useful to help promote awareness of the SKA science and technology. Extra copies should be distributed to key individuals. Harvey Butcher thinks there are several tens of extra copies. Harvey will determine the number of copies available and communicate with Russ Taylor. Russ Taylor will send out a notice to representatives who might want copies and send results to Michel. 14. Review of Action Items 1. India to sign the MOU. 2. Russ Taylor to distribute copies of the MOU to signatories. 3. Richard Schilizzi, Jill Tarter, Harvey Butcher, Peter Dewdney and Bruce Thomas to prepare a discussion document on an intellectual property agreement for the next ISSC meeting. 4. Signatories to the MOU to assess potential for funding a project manager and project engineer and report by October 2000. 5. Bob Preston, Richard Schilizzi and Harvey Butcher to draft a project management office description and organization plan. 6. Rick Fisher will submit to the ISSC an Engineering Management Team structure and membership proposal. 7. ISSC to issue letters of invitation to participate in the EMT. 8. Signatories to submit suggestions for Science Working Group members to Russ Taylor 9. Russ Taylor to submit SWG membership proposal to ISSC. 10. Russ Taylor and Ken Kellermann to organize an SKA concept paper. 11. Rick Fisher, Doug Bock and Anton Zensus to discuss ways and means for engaging young scientists and engineers. 12. Russ Taylor to sent up the International SKA secretariat account at the University of Calgary and invoice signatories for annual fee. 13. Russ Taylor to communicate details of brochure distribution to Ron Ekers. 14. Representatives to assess level of interest for siting the SKA in their home countries. 15. Jill Tarter and Harvey Butcher to follow-up on International Space Law meeting. 16. Jack Welch to communicate dates of the Berkeley meeting to Russ Taylor 17. Harvey Butcher and Anton Zensus to report on plans for organizing a joint NGST/ALMA/SKA/OWL meeting. 18. Harvey Butcher to communicate to Russ Taylor on availability of Amsterdam and Dwingeloo proceedings. 19. Russ Taylor to survey representatives for distribution of the Amsterdam and Dwingeloo proceedings. 20. Russ Taylor to distribute recommendations about memberships of committees. 15. Date and Place of Next Meeting The next ISSC meeting is scheduled for 5th January 2001 in Cambridge, hosted by MIT. Page 6 of 7

The 'annual' SKA working meeting in 2002 is invited to the Netherlands in association with the 19 August 2002 URSI General Assembly at Maastricht. It was noted that we should follow up on SPIE meetings to maintain an SKA presence (Harvey Butcher and Peter Dewdney will follow-up). It was also noted that these are very expensive meetings. Page 7 of 7