\section{Very Long Baseline Array}

The VLBA continues to produce science that has a broad impact.  The VLBA 
remains the pre-eminent high resolution radio inteferometer in the world.  This
progress and scientific stature exists in spite of a negative funding
climate and limited resources for the VLBA.  We encourage NRAO 
to continue a search for innovative funding paradigms and
external partners who can invest in the future of the VLBA.

Astrometric science, in particular, represents a unique vein of research 
that touches broadly on many aspects of astronomy.  Routine sub-milliarcsecond
astrometry is unique in astrophysics.  We expect that new astrometric
results will continue to raise the profile of the VLBA in the US and 
international scientific communities.

In general, the VLBA appears to be particularly ripe for large scientific
campaigns.  The recently approved large programs for the measurement of the 
Hubble constant, the search for extrasolar planets, and the characterization
of potential GLAST sources are excellent examples.  We support the assistant 
director's interest in conducting a more extensive calibrator survey that
will create a denser grid of high quality astrometric calibrators. 

We commend NRAO for fully implementing the MK5 disk-based recording system.
This new system, installed out of operations funding, enables NRAO to maintain
its leadership in high resolution science.  {\em Increasing the recording rate 
of the VLBA to multi-gigabit per second rates is critical for the long-term
health and scientific productivity of the instrument.}

The VLBA is understaffed.  We encourage NRAO to find ways to meet the challenge
of allocating more staff to operations, testing, and development of the array,
in spite of its constrained resources.  A
VLBA chief scientist and a dedicated VLBA software engineer are two 
important positions to fill.

NRAO has taken a proactive position regarding the comments of the 
Senior Review of NSF astronomical facilities and programs.  In spite of its
unique characteristics, the VLBA was identified as vulnerable to closure
because of its relatively low level of US users.  {\em The UC strongly recommend
that NRAO take dramatic and inventive steps to keep the VLBA open 
and available to all users.}  We recognize that this may lead to new 
arrangements of time allocation for the telescope, i.e., observing time in 
exchange for financial support.  We endorse the exploration of these 
arrangements; without them, the future of the VLBA appears to be
clearly imperiled.  

The distinction between major and minor partners
is important.  Major partner agreements have models from the past (such
as the NASA-NRAO agreement providing X band receivers for the VLA during
the Voyager flyby of Neptune) and
are less likely to be controversial.  Minor partner agreements raise
more complex issues.  Maintaining peer-reviewed access to observing
time is an important goal; a significant fraction of observing time 
and observatory support must
remain open to all users regardless of whether they can make a financial
contribution.  This will maintain the high caliber of science produced
by the VLBA and the reputation of NRAO for scientific excellence.  
A model for minor partner contributions might include support --- in
cash or in kind --- that support more than just the experiment that 
the minor partner is pursuing.  Contribution of disks for the recording 
system that are reused for other experiments is an example.

The arrangements reached will
likely dramatically affect the user experience of the VLBA and perhaps
all NRAO instruments.  Agreements for VLBA support may ultimately form a 
model for support for some or all of NRAO instruments.  Therefore,
we encourage NRAO to remain engaged with the 
user community and the UC as new arrangements are developed.  This could
manifest as distribution of documents prior to agreement with a significant 
opportunity for community response, or inclusion of UC or community members 
on committees to evaluate agreements.  The opportunity for UC members 
to comment on and substantively influence the GLAST agreement was limited.
We also encourage NRAO to explore the time-sharing agreements other 
institutions such as NOAO have made in recent years.
Policy should evolve over the coming years on the basis of available
partners and their needs, NRAO goals and needs, and community response.