Summary conclusions

General policy matters

The Heads of Delegations, meeting in executive session prior to the opening of the plenary and discussing general policy matters, had decided, that at the time of entering its new Phase 3, the IACG concept and operative modes, should be reviewed and reformulated taking into account the experience of the past phases and the changed planning and financial framework confronting at present the agencies. This was not unlike the procedure adopted in 1986 at the inception of Phase 2.

A Preparatory Group composed of one representative of each Member Agency and coordinated by the Executive Secretary was set up to conduct a reflection on these issues and prepare a proposal for consideration by the Heads of Delegation by the end of April 2000.

During this period, and pending the recommendations of the Preparatory Group, only the bodies of the IACG that would suffer from delays or interruptions would be maintained. This applied particularly to Working Groups 1 and 4.

The existing Panels, having completed their initial tasks, would be dissolved at the end of the present session. Working Group 3 would also be dissolved. The suitability of the IACG framework for the current activities of Working Group 2 would be reviewed by the Preparatory Group within its mandate.

Working Groups and Panels

The IACG heard the reports of the Working Groups and Panels and reached the following conclusions:

Working Group 1.

The focus on Small Body Exploration was reconfirmed and the area of Exploration of Mercury included within its domain of activity.

The action plan for the next year was accepted.

Dr. Marcello Coradini of ESA was nominated Chairman in replacement of Dr. Carl Pilcher who had resigned after completing his two-years term.

Each delegation was requested to nominate two representatives to the Working Group with experience in its two main areas of activity.

Working Group 2

The past and proposed future scientific activity of the Group was highly praised. However the matter of principle arose whether COSPAR or other similar institutions would not provide a more appropriate framework than the IACG for the Working group scientific activities.

The Preparatory Group should evaluate this matter.

Working Group 4.

The activity of the Group was recognized as timely and of value in support of the IACG scientific missions

The Working Group plan of action and recommendations were approved with slight modifications.

Panel 1.

The request of the Panel to be included among the Working Groups was not addressed at the session pending the guidelines and reflections of the Preparatory Group.

The Panel as such was dissolved, as reported under the general policy paragraph above

Panel 2

There was neither report nor representation from Panel 2, that was also dissolved.

Panel 3

The panel’s recommendation was considered of importance and approved since the IACG support could be instrumental in its application.

The Panel as such was dissolved, as reported under the general policy paragraph above

The reports of the IMEWG and ILEWG were heard by the IACG. A general statement of support for their activities and plans was given by the IACG but no specific actions were requested of it.

Reports

The reports of the member Agencies and of ISSI were heard but did not generate any specific recommendation for actions.

Date and place of the next meeting

NASA will host the 20^th meeting at a place and date to be defined (probably early November 2000).

Other matters.

The chairman Dr. Nishida congratulated the Delegations on the thoroughness of their discussions .At this plenary, decisions with far reaching consequences had been taken with the intent to equip the IACG with the best tools to face the future challenges and continue serving the best interest of space science and scientists.

All Delegations expressed their admiration to Dr. Nishida who is about to retire from active duty at ISAS and expressed their best wishes for the future.