J. Dunlop (Edinburgh)
S. Eales (Cardiff)
D. Hughes (INAOE)
M. Rowan-Robinson (IC)
I. Smail (Durham)
R. Ivison (ATC)
S. Serjeant (Kent)
S. Oliver (Sussex)
S. Rawlings (Oxford)
D. Scott (UBC)
A. Blain (Caltech)
M. Devlin (UPenn)

The duties of the members of this group are as follows i) To meet every 6 months (not necessarily physically) to agree the staffing rota for the coming semester on the telescope ii) Over the course of the survey, to ensure that the agreed proportion of observing effort is delivered by their group (see below) iii) To propose up to 4 main areas (from the list of headings given below in section 4) within which their group wishes to focus their main effort on the survey. To provide a brief project plan covering these areas (including any necessary telescope proposals) and to detail any proposed PhD theses related to this work. iv) To propose, if they so wish, further additional members of the consortium. A case must be made for any new additions, and if necessary the management group will vote on this. This includes new PhD students not already on the consortium email exploder, especially since this group must ensure lack of excessive overlap between the PhD thesis work of different postgrads. iv) To agree on 1st authors for papers, as candidates emerge v) Together with agreed 1st authors, to finalise authorship of papers vi) If ever things get so difficult that this group is split down the middle, I would have the casting vote

3. Consortium Rules i) The consortium comprises those individuals already on the email exploder ii) Additional members can only be added through the procedure detailed above iii) The consortium will exist (and hence these rules apply) until 1 year after the final 850 micron observations have been taken (ie when public data release takes place). iv) During this period, the work of the consortium is deemed to consist not only of construction of the 850 micron and BLAST maps, but also ALL related follow-up work at any observing frequency, and all directly related theoretical or interpretive efforts. v) This does NOT mean that every paper will have every current consortium member as a co-author, but does mean that any consortium member thinking of writing a proposal, a paper, or exploring any existing dataset for the purpose of source follow-up MUST inform the entire consortium in good time. Any consortium member is then free to ask to be involved. The lead author/initiator will then consult with the management team in finalising the actual author list of a given paper, in the light of contributions and effort actually made. vi) It is proposed that every current member of the consortium can expect to be on what we anticipate will be the first 4 major survey papers, namely the survey design paper, the first SCUBA source counts paper, and the first SCUBA/BLAST z estimation paper, and the first clustering paper. This is (at least in part) in recognition of the fact that every current member has already made a sacrifice in the sense that they have forfeited their right to apply for alternative blank-field survey projects with SCUBA. It is also in expectation that we should be able to ensure a fair spread of effort in basic survey observations, data reduction, simulation etc. Beyond these first four major papers it is anticipated that authorship will be determined on merit, as outlined in v) above. vii) A Survey Science Archive will be set up to house the raw and reduced SCUBA and BLAST data. This will be set up and maintained by Bob Mann whose involvement in AstroGrid will ensure that it benefits from developments in the 'virtual observatory' world". Consortium members will be able to access the SCUBA and BLAST data (both raw and current reductions) through this archive. The SCUBA data will be moved from Hawaii into this archive at the end of each run. The BLAST data (on the SCUBA survey fields only) will also be provided to the archive in raw and reduced form as soon as it is available. It is proposed that secure access to this archive will be by password protection initially, but it is intended that this will be replaced by a more sophisticated mechanism, currently under development in AstroGrid and outlined which prevents the (deliberate or accidental) passing on of access rights. This Science Archive will also house the web pages (both public and private) for the survey, and will be where observers can download up-to-date plots of current mapping coverage etc prior to each observing run. Bob has undertaken to ensure that a absic web page structure is in place by Nov 1st, when I require to write a first report on survey `progress' to the JCMT TAG (and also before the next observing run). By this point I would also expect that, for simplicity, Bob will take over operation of the email exploder, currently kindly and helpfully run by Mark Halpern. Perhaps most crucially, it was also agreed at last weeks meeting that all related follow-up multi-frequncy data obtained or analysed by consortium members MUST also be offered up for incorporation into the science archive. This must be in final reduced and useful form, because offering up messy raw data would in many cases be of little use. This also however means that the people who offer up these data must be sure that their interests are protected - authorship and scope of the papers reporting directly the results of this work will therefore be agreed with the management group at the same time as the data are incorporated into the archive. The aim here is to make reduced data available to all consortium members to explore in as timely a manner as possible, without those who have put in the lion's share of the work feeling vulnerable. Science Archive plans. Bob Mann writes: Firstly, my apologies that a prior commitment meant I could not present these ideas at the consortium meeting last week. The data volumes involved in this survey are not large, but the number and range of datasets, and the size of the consortium, mean that it makes sense to have a single science archive from which consortium members extract data and the presence in the consortium of people involved in "virtual observatory" (VO) projects, such as AstroGrid, should ensure that this can be implemented using current best practice. The exact shape of the science archive will evolve as we learn what is really required, but the initial idea is to have a public WWW site, with the usual promotional information (e.g. science case, updated progress report, etc) and links, and a password- protected private site, with consortium documents (e.g. crib sheet for observers), the mail exploder archive (TBC) and access to the data, both raw and science-ready products. In the next year or so, simple password-protected data access can be replaced by a more sophisticated digital-signature system, which ties access rights to authenticated identities. If the consortium is happy to be used as a guinea pig, to some extent, we can benefit from developments from the VO community to produce a comprehensive science archive system, aiding scientific exploitation of survey data. Whilst I take responsibility for this web site, I see myself more concerned with its back end - the database access, etc - than with its public face, so any offers from the artistically-inclined to help prettify the public web site would be very welcome. viii) Given the above, the sanction to be imposed for not adhering to these rules is obvious, namely removal of access rights to the science survey archive. This would remove access not only to the multi-frequency database, but also to further 850 micron and BLAST data.