IRAM Program Committee Recommendations

The IRAM program committee convened in Grenoble on March 25 and 26 to discuss the proposals submitted for the summer 2002 scheduling period. The committee was chaired by Linda Tacconi (MPE, Munich).

Plateau de Bure Interferometer Proposals

In total 33 proposals were received for the interferometer and evaluated by the Program Committee. The principal investigators of each proposal are informed by letter about the outcome, which will include comments issued by the committee if there were any.

For the interferometer, the programs were classified A (accepted), B (backup) and C (rejected). Programs rated A will be scheduled in priority. Further time, if it becomes available, will go to the B programs, taking into account scientific merit, crowding in certain right ascension ranges and general aspects of balance. For projects rated A and B, check the list of the local contacts.

Project	Rate	Project	Rate	Project	Rate
M001	C	M002	B	M003	A
M004	B[ $^{\dagger}$]	M005	B	M006	B
M007	A	M008	B	M009	B
M00A	B	M00B	A	M00C	A
M00D	B	M00E	B[ $^{\dagger}$]	M00F	A
M010	B	M011	B	M012	C
M013	B	M014	C	M015	B
M016	C	M017	B	M018	A
M019	A	M01A	C	M01B	A
M01C	C	M01D	B	M01E	A
M01F	A	M020	C	M021	A

[ $^{\dagger}$] some parts of the program - others rated C

30m Proposals

In total 85 proposals were received for the 30m telescope, requesting 4152 hours of telescope time. The highest rating ``A'' was given to 27 proposals; 31 proposals were rated ``B'', i.e. were given backup status. The remaining proposals, although scientifically valuable in most cases, were rated ``C''. The individual ratings are listed in the attached table. All A-rated proposals will be scheduled on the telescope, although some with less time than requested. We expect that about half of the B-rated programs will actually be scheduled. The selection will take into account scientific merit, crowding in certain right ascension ranges, and general aspects of balance. Proposals rated ``C'' will not get telescope time.

The principal investigators of each proposal are also informed by letter about the outcome of the evaluation process. Comments issues by the committee - if there were any - will be included.

A		B		C
010-02	050-02	001-02	041-02	002-02	060-02
014-02	051-02	004-02	042-02	003-02	065-02
015-02	055-02	007-02	048-02	005-02	067-02
018-02	057-02	011-02	049-02	006-02	070-02
019-02	061-02	013-02	054-02	008-02	076-02
020-02	062-02	016-02	056-02	009-02	078-02
022-02	064-02	023-02	063-02	012-02	079-02
027-02	069-02	024-02	066-02	017-02	080-02
028-02	071-02	025-02	068-02	032-02	081-02
029-02	074-02	026-02	072-02	033-02	084-02
037-02	077-02	030-02	073-02	034-02
040-02		031-02	075-02	047-02
043-02		035-02	082-02	052-02
044-02		036-02	083-02	053-02
045-02		038-02	085-02	058-02
046-02		039-02		059-02

Roberto NERI and Clemens THUM