small change to the ToO section

answers.tex

@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ \subsection{Rolling}\label{sec:rolling}
 We note that these time scales had been identified as sensitive and requiring additional improvements in \citetalias{PSTN-055} within the recommendation on rolling (\citetalias{PSTN-055} \S2.4.1): 
 
 \begin{quote}
-    {[\citetalias{PSTN-055} \S2.4.1] ``[...] the SCOC recommends the LSST cadence be designed to ensure coverage of time scales in the hours-to-one-day range by carefully tuning survey parameters in combination. Performing three visits per night by default is not recommended, but a combination of preferentially pushing a third visit to the following night [...] and requesting a third visit within a night once every several nights ($\sim 1$ week) would achieve this goal.'' }
+    {[\citetalias{PSTN-055} \S2.4.1] ``[...] the SCOC recommends the LSST cadence be designed to ensure coverage of time scales in the hours-to-one-day range by carefully tuning survey parameters in combination. Performing three visits per night by default is not recommended, but a combination of preferentially pushing a third visit to the following night [...] and requesting a third visit within a night once every several nights ($\sim$1 week) would achieve this goal.'' }
 \end{quote}
 
 %While not designed for this purpose, t
@@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ \subsection{Targets of Opportunity (ToO)}\label{sec:ToO}
 
 Human input may still be required to evaluate in real time the value of a ToO trigger and the specific response.  One (or more) Rubin members %(assigned on any given night from a group of Rubin Scientists) 
 should review triggers and be allowed to, if desired, overwrite the algorithmic decision to pursue/not pursue a ToO or interrupt the ToO observing sequence. Further, to ensure that appropriate expertise is available, an Advisory Committee of community members can interact and advise the observer in real-time, with communication initiated either by the committee or by the observer. 
-This Advisory Committee should be composed of community members and have a nomination-selection process (including self-nomination) to be outlined in detail before the start of survey operations, ensuring broad coverage of scientific competence and diversity along all relevant axes.
+This Advisory Committee should be composed of community members and have a nomination-selection process (including self-nomination) to be outlined in detail before the start of survey operations, ensuring broad coverage of scientific competence in all areas relevant to the ToO program and diversity along all relevant axes.
 The committee, observers, and Rubin leadership will review the ToO outcomes post factum to advise on program changes. 
 {\bf The SCOC recommends real-time human review of potential ToO triggers and the establishment of a Rubin ToO Advisory Committee as described above.} The Advisory Committee should be composed of community members and, collectively, have relevant expertise on all ToO science cases (Solar System, Neutrino, Gravitational Waves, and any science case that may be added to the program in the future). The Advisory Committee should be empowered to propose changes to the observing strategy based on the outcomes of the program and scientific developments. The SCOC will also solicit and consider feedback on the implementation of these ToO programs as necessary to ensure they meet the science goals outlined in the community ToO report.