{"items":[{"id":"B01","summary":"Nora has stated that strawberry bars must remain below 10°F until customer handoff, and this temperature requirement is not in dispute. The instruction is to record the rule in the operations sheet so operations staff follow it. No alternative cooling approach is mentioned in the note. The person responsible for updating the ops sheet is not named, and no deadline for the update is given.","decisions":["Strawberry bars must stay below 10°F until handoff."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Record the strawberry-bar temperature rule in the ops sheet","status":"open"}],"risks":["Strawberry bars could exceed 10°F if the ops sheet is not updated and followed."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who owns the ops-sheet update and by when?"},{"id":"B02","summary":"Permits for the beach delivery-drone service remain unresolved. A city liaison might be Anita, but that assignment is uncertain. Theo thinks a beach launch may also need parks approval, which is not confirmed. Nobody has contacted the relevant authorities. Ownership of permit outreach, the exact list of required approvals, and whether Anita is the city liaison are all still unclear.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Contact city and parks authorities to determine required beach-launch permits","status":"open"}],"risks":["Operating without required city or parks permits could halt the pilot."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Is Anita the city liaison, and does beach launch require parks approval?"},{"id":"B03","summary":"The pilot operating zone was agreed in a huddle as the stretch from Pier 3 to lifeguard tower 5 rather than the entire beach. That geographic limit is treated as a confirmed planning decision. The note does not name who must publish the zone, obtain map approval, or brief operators. Related corridor-map work appears elsewhere and is not claimed as complete here.","decisions":["Pilot zone is Pier 3 to lifeguard tower 5, not the whole beach."],"actions":[],"risks":["Operators may fly outside the agreed zone if it is not documented and briefed."],"needs_clarification":false,"clarification":null},{"id":"B04","summary":"Jules is assigned to price insulated cargo pods by Friday, unless a vendor quote arrives first, in which case that quote may supersede the internal pricing work. The note does not identify the vendor, the Friday date’s calendar week, or what happens if neither quote nor Jules’s price is ready. Payload and cooling constraints from other notes are not resolved here.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Jules","task":"Price insulated cargo pods by Friday unless a vendor quote arrives first","status":"open"}],"risks":["Pilot hardware cost and pod choice may slip if Friday pricing and vendor quotes both miss."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Which Friday is the pricing deadline, and which vendor quote would take precedence?"},{"id":"B05","summary":"Flights must not pass over sunbathers; the note calls this obvious but still requires it to be written down as a rule. An approved corridor map is still needed and is not described as existing. No owner is named for documenting the no-overflight rule or for producing and approving the corridor map. Approval authority for the map is unspecified.","decisions":["No flights over sunbathers."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Write down the no-overflight-of-sunbathers rule and obtain an approved corridor map","status":"open"}],"risks":["Flying without an approved corridor map could endanger beachgoers or violate the no-sunbather rule."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who will produce the corridor map and who approves it?"},{"id":"B06","summary":"Marketing wants to use the slogan ice cream from the sky, but legal has not approved that line. The phrase is therefore not an authorized customer-facing claim. No owner is named for submitting the line to legal or for a decision deadline. Using the unapproved slogan in public materials would conflict with the legal hold described in the note.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Obtain legal approval or rejection of the marketing line ice cream from the sky","status":"blocked"}],"risks":["Using an unapproved slogan could create legal or advertising-compliance exposure."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who will take the slogan to legal, and by when must legal decide?"},{"id":"B07","summary":"Sam owns the battery swap cart prototype and described it as done-ish, which the note treats as not done. A test date must be requested; none is recorded. Completeness of the prototype, pass criteria, and scheduling of tests remain unknown. Treating the cart as operational would convert uncertainty into a fact the note explicitly rejects.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Ask Sam for a battery-swap-cart prototype test date and remaining work","status":"open"}],"risks":["Pilot operations may lack a working battery swap cart if done-ish work is not finished and tested."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"What remains unfinished on the swap cart and what is the test date?"},{"id":"B08","summary":"It is uncertain whether riders need a landing marker. A QR placard is only a possible option, not a chosen design. Nina is assigned to test whether people can find the marker in wind. The requirement itself, the marker design, success criteria, and test timing are not confirmed. The note does not say the QR placard is approved.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Nina","task":"Test whether people can find a landing marker, possibly a QR placard, in wind","status":"open"}],"risks":["Customers may not locate landing points in wind if marker need and design stay unresolved."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Is a landing marker required, and is a QR placard the design to test?"},{"id":"B09","summary":"The team must not promise 10-minute delivery because no route timing exists yet. That prohibition is a confirmed messaging decision. Actual delivery duration, routing method, and when timing analysis will occur are unknown. Any public or sales claim of a 10-minute SLA would contradict the note. No owner is named for timing studies or for updating marketing copy.","decisions":["Do not promise 10-minute delivery."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Ensure no 10-minute delivery promise is used until route timing exists","status":"open"}],"risks":["Promising an unmeasured 10-minute delivery time would create unmet customer expectations."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who will produce route timing, and who will police delivery-time claims?"},{"id":"B10","summary":"The beach vendor association wants a meeting. Theo can take Tuesday morning, which indicates availability rather than a booked appointment. The note does not confirm that Tuesday is accepted by the association, which Tuesday is meant, the agenda, or that Theo is the named owner of the relationship going forward. Scheduling is therefore still incomplete.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Theo","task":"Meet the beach vendor association Tuesday morning if that slot is confirmed with them","status":"open"}],"risks":["Vendor-association concerns could block beach operations if the meeting is not actually scheduled."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Which Tuesday, and has the beach vendor association confirmed Theo’s morning slot?"},{"id":"B11","summary":"Vanilla cups are described as easy and are not flagged as a problem. Slushies spill in the current container, so the product team needs an alternate lid. That lid is not selected, tested, or approved in the note. No named individual on the product team, deadline, or spill-test standard is given. Vanilla-cup packaging is not treated as requiring action here.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"product team","task":"Provide an alternate lid so slushies do not spill in the current container","status":"open"}],"risks":["Slushie spills in flight or at handoff could damage cargo and customer experience."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who on the product team owns the alternate slushie lid, and by when is it needed?"},{"id":"B12","summary":"Jules is to make the drone payload limit visible in the ordering flow. The numeric limit is still to be determined, so the interface cannot yet show a confirmed maximum. Displaying a made-up limit would turn uncertainty into a fact. No deadline, design for the ordering flow, or source of the TBD limit is stated in the note.","decisions":["The drone payload limit must be visible in the ordering flow once the limit is known."],"actions":[{"owner":"Jules","task":"Make the drone payload limit visible in the ordering flow once the limit is defined","status":"blocked"}],"risks":["Customers may order overweight items if the payload limit is missing or invented."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"What is the drone payload limit, and who sets it?"},{"id":"B13","summary":"The emergency land rule is that the operator chooses a safe clear area, then calls dispatch. That sequence is stated as the rule. Training sign-off still needs an owner, which is not assigned. Without a named sign-off owner, training completion cannot be confirmed. The note does not record that training materials exist or that anyone has signed off.","decisions":["On emergency land, the operator chooses a safe clear area, then calls dispatch."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Assign an owner for emergency-land training sign-off and complete that sign-off","status":"open"}],"risks":["Operators may handle emergency landings inconsistently without signed-off training."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who owns emergency-land training sign-off?"},{"id":"B14","summary":"Nora confirms dry ice will not go in the pod and that powered cooling only will be used. That is a confirmed product and operations decision, not a proposal. Implications for power draw, strawberry-bar temperature, and pod design are not decided in this note. No further action owner is named beyond Nora’s confirmation. The prohibition on dry ice should be treated as firm.","decisions":["Do not put dry ice in the pod; use powered cooling only."],"actions":[],"risks":["Powered cooling must actually hold required temperatures or product quality will fail without dry ice as backup."],"needs_clarification":false,"clarification":null},{"id":"B15","summary":"The pilot will start with two drones, not six. Finance approved two drones for the pilot, so fleet size for the pilot is a confirmed decision. The note does not authorize six drones, a later scale-up date, or additional finance approval. Treating a six-drone launch as planned would contradict the note. No owner is named for procurement of the two aircraft.","decisions":["Start the pilot with 2 drones, not 6; finance approved two."],"actions":[],"risks":["Capacity will be limited to two aircraft; unofficial plans for six could overspend."],"needs_clarification":false,"clarification":null},{"id":"B16","summary":"Nina heard that lifeguards want radio contact rather than a phone-only number. That is secondhand and not confirmed with the chief. The note instructs confirmation with the chief and does not establish radio as a requirement. No chief’s name, radio protocol, or additional owner is given. Do not record lifeguard radio as an agreed operational fact.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Nina","task":"Confirm with the lifeguard chief whether radio contact is required instead of a phone-only number","status":"open"}],"risks":["Phone-only contact may be inadequate for beach emergencies if lifeguards actually require radio."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"What did the lifeguard chief require for contact, radio or phone?"},{"id":"B17","summary":"A numeric wind cutoff from engineering is required; light breeze is not an acceptable operational limit. No engineering value, measurement method, or owner inside engineering is recorded. Weather abort rules therefore remain undefined. Publishing a qualitative breeze limit would contradict the note. Until engineering provides a number, flight or no-flight wind policy cannot be treated as set.","decisions":["Do not use light breeze as the wind cutoff; an engineering number is required."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Obtain an engineering numeric wind cutoff for flight operations","status":"open"}],"risks":["Flying in undefined wind conditions could cause loss of control or unsafe beach operations."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who in engineering will set the wind cutoff number, and what units and measurement height apply?"},{"id":"B18","summary":"Sam says the geofence demo passed in the simulator. A field test is not scheduled. Simulator success is not the same as a field-validated geofence. No field-test date, location, success criteria, or owner for scheduling is given. Do not treat geofencing as field-ready. The simulator result can be recorded as claimed by Sam only.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Sam","task":"Schedule a geofence field test; simulator pass is not a field test","status":"open"}],"risks":["An untested-in-field geofence could allow drones outside the pilot zone or over people."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"When and where is the geofence field test, and who signs it off?"},{"id":"B19","summary":"No alcohol in phase one. That catalog restriction is a confirmed decision and should be put in catalog rules. The note does not name who updates the catalog, the phase-one end date, or enforcement in ordering. Alcohol remaining off the menu for the pilot should not be weakened without a new decision. The catalog-rules update is still an open task.","decisions":["No alcohol in phase one."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Put the no-alcohol-in-phase-one rule in catalog rules","status":"open"}],"risks":["Alcohol could be offered in the catalog if the rule is not entered and enforced."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who will update catalog rules, and when does phase one end?"},{"id":"B20","summary":"The beach cleanup crew needs to know landing times. The relationship is probably Theo’s, which is uncertain and must be verified. Do not assign Theo as confirmed owner without verification. Landing-time notification content, frequency, and a cleanup-crew contact are not specified. Treating Theo as the established liaison would convert probably into a fact.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Verify whether Theo owns the beach cleanup crew relationship and arrange landing-time notifications","status":"open"}],"risks":["Cleanup crew unaware of landing times could conflict with drone landings or leave sites unsafe."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Is Theo the cleanup-crew liaison, and what landing-time notice do they need?"},{"id":"B21","summary":"Whether customers receive refunds if an item arrives melted is undecided. The decision is deferred until an insurance review. No insurance-review owner, date, or refund policy is recorded. Do not state that melted-item refunds will or will not be offered. Customer-facing refund language should wait for that review. The review itself has not been scheduled in the note.","decisions":["Melted-item refund policy is deferred until insurance review."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Complete insurance review and then decide melted-item customer refunds","status":"blocked"}],"risks":["Unclear refunds for melted product could create customer disputes and uninsured cost."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who owns the insurance review and when will melted-item refunds be decided?"},{"id":"B22","summary":"Reusable pod liners may be used if sanitation says yes. Sanitation has not signed off. The liner approach is conditional, not approved. No sanitation contact, criteria, or deadline is given. Ordering reusable liners as the baseline would ignore the missing sign-off. Single-use versus reusable remains open pending sanitation.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Obtain sanitation sign-off on reusable pod liners before adopting them","status":"blocked"}],"risks":["Unapproved liners could fail sanitation rules; waiting too long could delay pods."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who in sanitation signs off on reusable pod liners, and by when?"},{"id":"B23","summary":"Jules asked for power draw on the cooling unit by Wednesday. Nora said she can measure it, which assigns the measurement to Nora rather than confirming it is already done. The Wednesday in question is not calendar-dated. Results are not recorded. Powered cooling and no dry ice make this measurement important, but the number itself is not yet a fact.","decisions":[],"actions":[{"owner":"Nora","task":"Measure cooling-unit power draw for Jules by Wednesday","status":"open"}],"risks":["Unknown cooling power draw could exceed drone payload or battery budget."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Which Wednesday is the power-draw deadline?"},{"id":"B24","summary":"Launch date is not Memorial Day. Sam’s Memorial Day remark was a joke. No launch date has been selected. Any plan that treats Memorial Day or another specific day as the launch is incorrect. Owner and process for choosing a launch date are not named. The absence of a date is explicit and must stay visible.","decisions":["Launch date is not Memorial Day; no date is selected."],"actions":[{"owner":"unassigned","task":"Select an actual launch date; do not use Memorial Day","status":"open"}],"risks":["With no launch date, permits, staffing, and vendor communications cannot be aligned."],"needs_clarification":true,"clarification":"Who will set the launch date, and what constraints apply?"}]}