December 10, 1989

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

1. Convene – Roll Call
The meeting was convened at 5:00 pm by Frauenfelder, Chair of the Governing Board.

Members Present:
Hans Frauenfelder, Chair
Peter B. Boyce (from 7 pm Sunday)
Kenneth W. Ford, Executive Director
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
Shirley A. Jackson
F. Dow Smith
Martin Walt
Jack M. Wilson
Jerry M. Woodall

Members Absent:
None

Non-voting Participants:
Robert T. Beyer (ASA)
Jean St. Germain (AAPM) (from 6 pm Sunday; from 10 am Monday)
William A. Duax (ACA)
Kurt F. Wissbrun (SOR)

Staff:
Robert E. Baensch, Director of Publishing
Arthur T. Bent, Treasurer and CFO
Theresa C. Braun, Director of Human Resources (Monday only)
Timothy Ingoldsby, Director of Information Technology (Monday only)
John S. Rigden, Director of Physics Programs
Nathalie D. Wagner, Assistant to the Secretary

2. Report of the Secretary

1. Minutes of the 7-9 September 1989 Meeting
   Grant presented the draft minute of the 7-9 September 1989 meeting for approval. He noted that Agenda Item 16.A. (p.17) should be relabeled to read “Gordon & Breach Complaint.”

   Havens said he disagreed with statements which had been made during the September meeting. As examples he cited that he feels that (1) the statement on p.8 under Agenda Item 8: FAMIS Status Report that electronic transfer of APS data had been satisfactory was not true, and (2) the statement that labels were being done in adequate time also was not true. In addition, he asked that it be included in the minutes that, though the ORACLE claim was that it would operate at 10 users per MIP, it is in fact operating at only 5 users per MIP.

   In response to further question about Ingoldsby's report, Grant said that he would modify Agenda Item 8. FAMIS Status Report in the September minutes so as to make it clear that the entire report contained therein is attributed to Ingoldsby.

   Woodall referred to the last paragraph of the section, regarding problems with the generic Oracle version on any platform. What is the supporting evidence for this assertion? He has talked with IBM personnel who say this is not true. Grant replied that his question should be addressed to Ingoldsby (who was not present). The minutes reflect what was said at the meeting, and no questions were asked on this point at that time.

2. Request from International Centre for Diffraction Data for Affiliated Society Status
   Grant referred to the 5 October 1989 letter from Dume to Messick and the 17 October 1989 reply from Messick to Duax. Grant reminded the Executive Committee that additional information concerning the ICDD had been requested at the 1 October Executive Committee meeting. This included: What is the support for their activities? How does one become a member of the organization? Why do they want membership in AIP? The letter received from Messick gives information on their membership. Their support comes mainly from sales of publications and data they collect. They are a 501(c)(3) organization, have publishing interests, and feel that an alliance with AIP would be helpful and appropriate.

   The following motion was made by Grant, was seconded by Wilson and, unanimously CARRJED.

   MOVED that the request of the International Centre for Diffraction Data for Affiliated Society Status be recommended to the Governing Board for approval.

3. Remarks by the Chair
Frauenfelder said he had no remarks at this time.

4. Report of the Executive Director
Ford said that, in addition to the budget, there are a number of things of importance to be discussed at this meeting. He then commented on three items:

1. Development Officer
   Ford reported the appointment of Joseph J. Iannoli, Jr. to the position of development officer as announced in a 29 November 1989 letter from Ford to the Governing Board. Iannoli will assume office about 1 February 1990.

2. Long Range Planning - Customer Services Task Force
   Ford reported that, on recommendation from Porter, chair of the AIP Long Range Planning Committee, he has established a Customer Services Task Force comprised of Weart (chair), Braun, Cunningham, Grant, Lloyd, and Sester [Fleming added subsequent to meeting]. The charge to the Task Force is:

   • To identify the main problems in relations between AIP and its customers, and to recommend steps to correct the problems;
   • To examine the responsiveness, at all levels in AIP--clerks, receptionists, middle managers, branch heads, and officers- to requests, queries, and complaints;
   • Among customers, to focus primarily on Member Society staff and individual scientists, but to include also internal customers-individuals and departments within AIP that use services of other AIP departments; and
   • In dealing with these problems, to keep in mind AIP's need for a service-oriented mentality as emphasized in the Institute's Long Range Plan.

   A final report is requested by 27 August 1990.

   He said that letters of complaint regarding AIP services have been received recently from AAS, ASA, and AVS. The complaints focus especially on problems in the area of subscription fulfillment. He hopes that the task force can put in sufficient time and effort so as to identify problems and to recommend ways to correct them.
   In response to a question from Havens, Ford said that the Committee on Society Services, which by charter deals with similar issues, will be consulted and kept informed. He said that the Task Force is not meant to replace that committee, but rather to serve as an internal group which can carry out the necessary studies to work toward solutions.

3. Status of Gordon & Breach Lawsuits
   Ford reported that Gordon & Breach has filed lawsuits against AIP, APS and Barschall in Switzerland, West Germany, and France. The Swiss suit is moving fastest. Meserve (the AIP attorney for this case) has completed a litigation document on behalf of the three parties. Meserve continues to feel we have a very strong case. Havens added that Meserve’s 70 page brief makes very interesting reading; it is available on request.

   Baensch said he had received a call from the American Mathematical Society, which has just been notified of the filing of a suit against them by Gordon & Breach. They requested the name of our attorney, and want to be sure the two organization keep each other informed.

5. AIP Mission, Objectives, Roles - Relations with Societies
Background material for this discussion included a 29 November 1989 memo from Ford to Executive Committee on Mission, Objectives, Roles of Societies and AIP, with the following attached: AIP mission statement, objectives, guidelines for public policy activities, submission of grant proposals, and development activities.

1. APS Council Resolution
   Frauenfelder directed attention to the 16 November 1989 memo from Krumhansl to Frauenfelder and Ford containing an APS Council statement, adopted on 12 November 1989: Location and Space, with a Statement on APS/AIP Relationships [attached as Appendix A.1]. Smith distributed a letter dated 4 December 1989 that he had written to the Governing Board in response to Krumhansl's memo [attached as Appendix A.2]; Frauenfelder asked that those present take time to read it.

   Frauenfelder said that the problem of the AIP/APS relation hips, the role of AIP, is a dynamic one; we won't solve it tonight; permanent guidelines which will meet every situation cannot be established.

   Smith said his main points are in the last paragraph of his letter. What is meant by the physics community? There are different ways of defining it and different points of view. The community represented by the Member Societies and by AIP has a broad base, and is not served by only one voice.

   Havens said he believes that the crux of the problem is that AIP has added things to its mission and objectives so that these have become almost the same as those of APS. Nobody, even some on the APS Council, differentiates between APS and AIP, but they are entirely different organizations. APS is a membership organization, and AIP is a staff-run organization. He noted Krumhansl’s suggestion that AIP have a change of name. He doesn't like the proposed name (American Association of Physics Societies), but a change could be helpful in this regard. He noted that the Constitution was written by Pegram, who was then Treasurer of both APS and AIP. The organizations have grown, with the introduction of conflict because of the lack of definition of AIP, except for tradition. At one time, AIP would not take on any new project without approval of the Member Societies. APS until the 1970’s was entirely volunteer, and AIP had permanent staff, so many things started by APS were taken over by AIP, e.g., Public Information, Placement, Physics of Fluids, Journal of Mathematical Physics. If AIP was considered, and acted, solely as a service organization, then some of these conflicts would not exist.

   Frauenfelder said that the underlying concern seems to be the question of who speaks for physics; there is not just one voice. If there is a conflict over this question here, there is one within APS also. Woodall said the Member Societies should first speak for physics, not AIP. Frauenfelder replied that we have agreed consistently that AIP should not speak for physics on its own, since AIP has no individual members.

   Beyer said he is concerned over implications that AIP is the mother organization in physics. This is not what it started out to be; it was intended to do work for the Member Societies. Through Governing Board action, AIP has been allowed to develop a character of its own. It is now more than a service organization.

   Wissbrun, reflecting on the Krumhansl statement, said that APS is a natural and a preeminent body in physics, but he cannot accept that APS is the only organization to speak for physics. It is a question of what services AIP can provide and whether it should be relegated to housekeeping duties or also should support some public policy and educational activities. The Board has adopted long range statements and policies; if there are now sources of conflict, these statements and policies should be reconsidered.

   Jackson raised three points for discussion (which she said cannot be resolved tonight):
   1) Ford's memo of 29 November notes many ways where potential conflict can come, but largely in the areas of public policy and education. The issue here is whether or not AIP initiates an activity that a Society feels is rightfully under its purview.
   2) A related issue is whether AIP would, or should, establish public positions that are inconsistent with a Member Society position.
   3) Given policies adopted by the Governing Board, what is the role of the Governing Board and the Executive Committee in monitoring or resolving conflicts?

   Frauenfelder stated that the APS Council statement is addressed to AIP. It showed a point of view to which other Member Societies can object. Havens said that APS, in issuing this statement, did not feel it could speak for other areas of physics; the statement is directed only toward AIP.

   Ford said that AIP management and staff ought to be doing what the Governing Board authorizes. It won't always happen that this will be done with unanimous consent of the Societies. For example, the majority view was in favor of the establishment of the Public Information branch in Washington, although APS doesn't agree. APS should be addressing this concern to the Governing Board.

   Havens commented that, because APS representation on the Governing Board is so small compared to the sum of the other Member Societies, decisions by the Governing Board do not reflect a true democratic procedure for resolving problems. Frauenfelder commented that APS is the largest organization, and thinks it is not listened to, whereas other Societies think APS is the largest, and so is the only one listened to. Once this conflict becomes serious it will hurt a Society or AIP. Where there is a clear conflict we must look at what can be done to resolve the problem.

2. AAPT Discussions Regarding Educational Projects
   Ford reported that discussions have been initiated with AAPT toward establishing guidelines for the initiation of AIP educational projects.

   He said that he has tried in the last two years to develop guidelines for AIP activities in various areas as he has felt the need for more clarity. Guidelines have been developed for fund raising, public policy activities, and grant proposals. It may be good to have guidelines stating under what conditions consultation with Member Societies is required on educational projects.

   Frauenfelder stated his opinion that it is better to solve these things at the lowest possible or working level. General guidelines that attempt to encompass everything on a high level can be counterproductive; it is not good to build up a powerful framework which may hinder progress.

6. Space and Location Issues
Frauenfelder said he has appointed an ad hoc Committee on Space - Cost Comparison [Krumhansl (Chair), Chris Marshall (AAPM), John R. Noonan (AVS), and Kurt F. Wissbrun (SOR)] to address the financial aspects of the space problem.

1. Brian Schwartz Critique of Moran, Stahl & Boyer Report
   Frauenfelder asked that the Schwartz critique and Ford's replies not be discussed now, as the ad hoc Committee will review them and report in February.

2. Other Society Responses
   1) SOR - letter from Mendelson to Frauenfelder and Ford
   2) AAPT - 18 October 1989 telemail from Wheeler to Ford
   3) AVS - 2 November 1989 letter from Greene to Ford
   4) AAS - 1 December 1989 letter from Osterbrock to Ford
   5) ACA - 5 December 1989 memo from Duruc to Ford

   Beyer said that a letter from ASA would be forthcoming shortly.

   Frauenfelder commented that in many ways, the main impact of the Schwartz critique was to make it clear that if we keep our publishing center on Long Island, we have more freedom to make decisions about other locations. His discussion with Krumhansl has made it clear that we should seek enough space in any location so as not to prejudice a later move of publishing. The worst situation would be not to provide for possible later expansion at a new site. We must now look at the best solution, considering: 1) New York; 2) Baltimore or 3) Philadelphia. The ad hoc Committee will look at the financial scenarios. Their job is to look at the numbers, not to devise a solution.

   Wodall said it was Kogelnik [at the Chicago meeting] who noted the basic two clusters of Societies: New York and Washington. We could have three center (plus publishing on Long Island): NY, Baltimore or Philadelphia, and Washington DC. The onus is on management to structure AIP to operate in such an environment. This way there are no losers; everybody wins.

3. Report on 28 November Meeting in Chicago
   An informal meeting, consisting of 16 Society officers, Frauenfelder, Ford, Baensch, and Bent, was held in Chicago on the afternoon of 28 November 1989. The meeting was called by Frauenfelder and Ford to discuss space matters, and was reported on by Frauenfelder in a 30 November 1989 memo to the Governing Board and Society Officers.

4. Proposal to Resident Societies for Moran. Stahl & Boyer Consulting Service
   Ford noted his 26 October 1989 memo to Officers of resident Member Societies offering MS&B service, at AIP expense, to ascertain human-resource costs of relocation.

5. General Discussion and

6. Location of Publishing Center in Long Island
   Frauenfelder called for general discussion, noting that there is no need for votes or a decision at this meeting.

   St. Germain said that one of her concerns with the MS&B report and with the discussion two years ago of a move to Washington was the impact on the current staff of AIP. A memo went out at that time [14 September 1987 memo from Ford to AIP and resident Member Society staff] stating that a move to Washington DC had been recommended by the Executive Committee at its September meeting. The MS&B report says that attrition of 65-95% is manageable. She is concerned that the staff has to address these personally in terms of their future. Limiting the discussions to finances and to location ignore these important personal concerns.

   Frauenfelder acknowledged these are important concerns which exist, but said that there is no obvious way to solve our space needs problem without creating such concerns among those affected.

   Ford said that he will announce the decision to keep publishing on Long Island in the senior staff meeting next week, and they can inform their staffs.

   Havens suggested that it would be appropriate for the Executive Committee to reiterate its previous statement that the publishing operation would not move. Discussion ensued concerning the nature of the statement. When it was suggested that the statement adopted at the informal meeting of society representatives in Chicago be adopted or recommended to the Governing Board, objections were raised concerning the precedent of giving legitimacy to such rump meetings.

   Baensch noted that he has to face the reality of over 300 staff required to produce 170,000 pages per year. When he returned from Chicago, he faced concerns from his supervisory staff that he is not relating to and communicating with them effectively; some had already heard the results of the discussions. He feels it important to have a clear statement on this issue so that he will be able to communicate an official message.

   Following several attempts to draft the statement during the Sunday evening meeting, Grant was asked to present a draft statement for discussion and action as the first item of business on Monday morning.

   On Monday morning the following motion was made by Woodall, seconded by Havens, and CARRIED; four YES, one NO, and two ABSTAIN.

   MOVED that the AIP Executive Committee state that in its discussion concerning options for resolving AIP's long range space needs, no move of the publishing center from Long Island is being contemplated.

7. Executive Session
The Executive Committee and non-voting participants, without AIP officers and staff, met in executive session from 8: 10 pm - 9:45 pm. This is reported in the official minutes only.

Monday, 11 December 1989 - Compton Board Room, AIP
The meeting reconvened al 8:30 am. The motion concluding Agenda Item 6. F. was presented and adopted as the first order of business.

8. 1990 Operating Budget
The draft 1990 operating and capital expenditure budgets were mailed to members of the Executive Committee and to non-voting participants in a single binder prior to the meeting. Revised pages were distributed at the start of the meeting.

1. Introduction
   Bent compared the 1990 draft operating budget to 1989 budget and projections: revenue for 1990 is up by $3.1 million over 1989 projection; expenses for 1990 are up by $3.9 million; and net (including all investment income) for 1990 is down by $800,000 to $1,670,000.

   Page 1 of the draft budget is the Summary Statement of Operations and includes Activities for Member Organizations. Total Publishing Operations amount to $51.5 million, General Operations amounts to $2.5 million, and Other Operations total $7.7 million.

   	SUMMARY (millions, rounded)
   AIP	$35.647
   Societies	$22.531
   IOP	$3.500
   Total	$61.678

   Page 3 is the combined statement of physics programs supported by AIP and outside sources. The AIP support is $3.768 million and outside support $1.086 million, for a total of $4.855 million.

   Page 4 is the Statement of Net Revenue and Expense. All figures on this page are NET and include only AIP activities.

   In response to a question from Smith, Bent said that the low point in our operating cash level occurs in October, when there is less than 3 million available. It is now up to $9 million, and will start to drop in April. Smith said that this seems OK; there has been concern that the low point has been at too high a level.

   Jackson asked about current budgeting guidelines for using investment income to meet expenses. Bent replied that we have talked about a break-even budget, including short term investment income, over the span of a few years.

   Havens again recommended that AIP look at the APS policy on use of investment income as revenue. He said it is risky to attempt to predict investment income. The formula used by APS involves applying as income a fixed percent of the total funds invested as of a certain date. This has eliminated some of the discussion about short term/long term investment income. It gives a budgeting figure that is fairly solid, making it substantive rather than speculative.

   Bent next commented briefly on several items not addressed in Publishing or Physics Programs:

   Development Office (page 56). Although budgeted for 1989, this activity will not begin until February 1990. The expenses listed cover a Director, Associate, and Secretary and their direct expenses, plus prorated costs.

   Grant, Exhibits and Other Income (page 57): The part of the summary which reflects grants lists only those received to date. Also listed here is income of $120,000 received in October as a recovery for insurance on the mortgage of the Woodbury property. Some of this latter revenue will go back to the Societies resident in the Woodbury facility.

   Ford commented that to date we have been budgeting in Grants and Contract Income only what we know is in hand. Next year he wants to include projected grants in order to do reasonable budgeting.

2. Publishing (See also Agenda Item 11.)
   Page 5 gives a summary of archival journal income. There is a 7.2% increase in publishing operating expenses, mostly the result of increases in page counts. The journal publishing management was reorganized during 1989, which has resulted in savings; the journal production staff was cut by 24 individuals (by attrition) and these people were replaced by 14 off-premise keyboarders. Savings have also been affected in the Books Program, in the Computers in Physics budget, through the discontinuance of Chinese Physics - Lasers and in the PINET budget. Finally, a plan for managing Soviet journals is being developed.

   Wilson asked why the Books Program showed a change from a budgeted loss of $182,000 to a projected loss of $580,000. Baensch noted that these losses are offset, in part, by a Conference Proceedings program that was budgeted to produce a net of $121,000, but is resulting in a net of $189,000 in fiscal 1989. The past practice of large initial print runs is being discontinued; rather, a quantity based on sales projections will be printed.

3. Physics Programs (See also Agenda Item 13.)
   Rigden referred to the Physics Today budget (page 35). He said he has been concerned over the fact that there has been a budgeted deficit for PT. In 1989, projected deficit has been reduced to $135,000 largely through increased advertising income ($200,000) and savings in expenses ($100,000).

   No new staff have been budgeted in any of the six Physics Programs Divisions. The Public Information budget increase of $100,000 (pages 64 and 65) will make it possible to re-activate the TV program activity in 1990 at a production level of one tape every other month.

   Bent next reviewed the General and Administrative Expense budget category (page 72). The draft budget reflects a decline of about $297,000 from the 1989 budget. The major change results from the completion of FAMIS development which will result in no further development costs from this project being charged to G&A in 1990. This reduction is partially offset by development costs for a portion of the Production Systems Division ($327,000), which will be charged to G&A in 1990. Allocation of Administrative Offices costs to G&A increases by about $100,000 in 1990. This represents the time devoted to the general management of the Institute.

   Net Operating Expense (page 4) (before short-term investment income) for 1990 is budgeted at $705,000; Short Term Investment Income is budgeted at $725,000; these combine for a budgeted Net Operating Revenue of $20,000. A Net Revenue of $1,669,000 is budgeted for 1990.

   The Personnel Budget shows the total payroll of $15,883,500. This total includes 610 employees, including 28 new positions of which half are part-time, cottage-industry keyboarders. There is a net increase of 28 positions.

4. Postponement of Recovery of FAMIS Development Costs
   Bent recalled that the Executive Committee had approved the following motion at its 1-2 December 1988 meeting: MOVED that it be accepted as AIP policy that the recovery cost of the FAMIS development be applied as a 20% charge to operating expenses for each of the five succeeding years and spread uniformly across all users of the system.... He said that management proposes that the 1990 portion of $150,000 be absorbed entirely by AIP with no portion passed through to the societies.

   Grant made the following motion, which was seconded by Boyce, and was CARRIED, with one abstention.

   MOVED that AIP management be authorized to waive the first-year portion of the recovery of the development costs for the FAMIS system which otherwise would have been billed to Societies in proportion to their use of AIP services provided by FAMIS.

   In the discussion of this motion it was clarified that for AIP to "waive…costs" should be interpreted to mean that AIP will "absorb…costs".

5. PINET Budgeting
   Havens said that he continues to be concerned about the magnitude of the budget for PINET, and asked about the business plan, marketing report, and projections which had been promised at previous meetings.

   Baensch reported on the Advisory Committee meeting of 8 November. The newly designed system went live on 1 September. There were four enhancements, including implementation of the BITNET node, online meeting registration, and ordering of books. The major uses to date have been for mail (152 hours); SPIN (24 hours); jobs (17 hours); and calendar (14 hours). A marketing survey was sent to 2,000 CIP subscribers; 560+ responses were received, with much interest expressed in PINET. A draft business plan was prepared for the Advisory Committee. The Committee asked management to come back in the spring after making system "fixes" on identified problems, and with a response to suggestions for major new services and enhancements. The committee also asked for review of the pricing structure. Baensch has asked Merrill to carry out a study of competitive pricing. The target date for completion of these studies is mid-March.

   Grant, a member of the Committee, said that he shared Havens' concern over the expense of this system. He said that Borchers (chair of the committee) proposed adoption of a more proactive, rather than reactive, service orientation. Information would be provided on a subscription basis, targeted for users when it becomes available based on their user profile. The committee understands that part of its charge is to be sensitive to the costs of operating the system, and of advising management and the Executive Committee as to its future.

   Baensch said that the Committee will receive a business plan for this activity at its May committee meeting; the plan will go to the Executive Committee at its June meeting.

6. Approval of 1990 Draft Operating Budget
   Grant made the following motion, which was seconded by Boyce, amended as shown immediately below, and CARRIED.

   MOVED that the 1990 Operating Budget of the American Institute of Physics, as depicted in the "Summary Statement of Operations" be approved.

   [Draft Budget 1990, page 1; copy attached as Appendix B to these minutes]

   Boyce asked for an explanation of the increase in charges itemized for Member & Subscriber Services Division Expense Distribution (page 81). The discussion is reported below under Item 8.G. The following motion to AMEND was made by Wilson, was seconded by Boyce, and CARRIED.

   MOVED to amend the motion to approve the 1990 Operating Budget to add the proviso that management is requested to present to the Executive Committee, at its 22-23 February 1990 meeting, a proposal to alleviate the burden placed on Member Societies (at this late date in their budget cycle) by the budgeted increases in charges for services provided by the Membership and Subscriber Services Division.

7. Member and Subscription Services Charges
   Boyce noted that the charges to AAS for dues billing and collection for 1990 will be double those of 1989. His recollection is that estimated prices and previous discussions both suggest a reduction of costs would result from the completion of FAMIS.

   Bent said that there were two factors involved: (1) the APS workload decrease will fully impact the 1990 budget (with a smaller base, the charges to AIP and societies increase) and (2) the total MASS costs have increased by about 18% from the 1988 to the 1990 budget years; 6% ($280,000) is the increase for 1990 over 1989, of which $56,000 is chargeable to societies, and $214,000 to AIP.

   Ingoldsby said that 5 people, back in the 1990 MASS division budget, previously were charged to the FAMIS development project. In 1990, in addition to these 5 people, there is depreciation for the Wang system and a maintenance programming level of two people.

   Grant commented that we should also look forward one year to see the effect the OSA withdrawal will have on these charges.

   Boyce reiterated that the impact on estimated prices is $12 per AAS member for Society records for 1990; this wasn't in earlier estimated prices on which he and other Member Societies have made their plans and set their prices.

   At this point the amendment to the motion to approve the 1990 Operating Budget was made and adopted, as reported above in Agenda Item 8. F.

9. 1990 Capital Expenditures Budget

1. Action on Contingency Figure
   Bent said that the proposed 1990 capital expenditures budget totals $931,000 including a contingency of $50,000 for management approved expenditures for individual items up to $10,000. In 1989 the management committee expended a total of $96,000 for such contingencies. Finally, there is an unexpended balance of $106,000 from the 1987 through 1989 budgets which we expect to spend in 1990.

   Grant said that budgeting for capital expenditure contingencies was a new feature within the last two years. In the last year expenditures exceeded the contingency budget. He proposed that we revise the proposed budget to reflect our experience, and that management be held to contingency authorizations within the budgeted figure.

   Bent and Ford said they thought this was a good idea.

   The following motion was made by Grant, was seconded by Boyce, and following discussion summarized below, was CARRIED with one abstention.

   MOVED that the draft 1990 Capital Expenditures Budget be amended so as to increase the amount budgeted for contingencies from $50,000 to $100,000 (for capital expenditures approved by the management committee within the current authorization limit of $10,000 per item).

   Walt commented that he found this budget to be enormously detailed. Most companies put items under $10,000 in a lump sum. Wilson agreed: he, too, thinks the budget is excessively detailed. He proposes that management restructure this part of the budget so as to remove this detail.

   Bent suggested that a contingency figure of $100,000 is realistic for this budget. In the future, they
   will make the budget less detailed, only enumerating items over $10,000.

   Grant read and made a motion, which Walt seconded. The motion was unanimously CARRIED.

   MOVED that the 1990 Capital Expenditures Budget of the American Institute of Physics be approved as amended (reflecting the change in the contingency figure from $50,000 to $100,000), totaling $980,740.

10. Other Finance and Administration Matters

1. Report of 31 October Meeting of Committee of Society Treasurers
   Bent said this was a productive meeting, and called attention to the draft minutes of the meeting included with the agenda.

   Grant asked whether a handbook on prorations, which has been referred to frequently, will be ready for the next meeting of this Committee? Bent replied that he cannot give a specific date for its completion at this time. The new controller (William Attick) will have to shepherd this project.

   Smith (Chair of Committee) noted that this committee meeting serves as an information exchange. At the most recent meeting, upon prior request, they devoted most of their time to discussion of the publishing programs within each Society.

2. Review of Investments
   As background, Bent noted the summary of the AIP long-term investment portfolios and of AIP long-term investments as of 31 October 1989; AIP investment portfolio income January-October 1989; and the 20 October 1989 letter from Laub Martin. He said he is attempting to develop a new format for presenting investment statistics in time for the next meeting. Performance of seven of the portfolios over the (Sept.1988-Oct.1989) reporting period has been quite good. The other two have been poor performers. There have been more losses in the arbitrage fund since this report. We will have to look at this in the February meeting of the Investment Advisory Committee.

   Wilson stated his continuing concern over AIP’s investment in arbitrage. Boyce agreed.

   Bent replied that the total investment in arbitrage is $1.4 million. In four years the total increase over the investment has been $140,000, a modest gain at best. This is not the time to be in this type of investment and it will be reviewed.

3. Resolution for Bank Account in Chicago (for JCP)
   Bent referred to his 1 December memo to Executive Committee explaining the need to establish a bank account for petty cash for JCP.

   The following motion was made by Havens, seconded by Wilson, and unanimously CARRIED.

   MOVED that the Executive Committee approve establishing a bank account for petty cash purposes for The Journal of Chemical Physics Editorial Office with the Continental Bank of Chicago, Illinois.

4. Exempt Employee Equity Adjustments and

5. 1990 Salary Matrix
   Braun presented and reviewed the 1990 Salary Matrix which will be effective 1/1/90. It calls for salary increases amounting to an average of 6.1%. She reminded the committee that salary budget figures are prorated over the year, as increases take effect on anniversary dates of employment. This and the fact that there will always be some positions vacant account together for the difference between the 6.1 % matrix and the budgeted salary increase overall of 4%.

   Ford noted two features of the new matrix: 1) It calls for a lower average raise to employees for 1990 as compared to 1989. Equity adjustments made in 1989 have put us in a competitive position, thus management thinks they don't have to be as aggressive in increases this year. 2) The range between low and high performers has been stretched relative to that provided in last year's matrix. The employee advisory committee emphasized the importance of providing premium raises to super performers.

   Braun said that there is some evidence that equity adjustments made in 1989 have cut employee losses; turnover in 1988 at this point of the year was 24.5% and for a comparable period in 1989 it was 21.7%. In the first six months of 1988 there was a 9.7% turnover, which picked up to 14.2% for the second half. In the first six months of 1989 the figure was 14.8%, but there has been a dramatic decrease in the last part of 1989 to 7.5%. This is the time when equity adjustments were implemented. Positions are filled much faster, and she sees an improvement in morale.

11. Report of the Director of Publishing

1. Report of Meetings of Publishing-Related Committees and Subcommittees

   Baensch called attention to features contained in the committee reports that were included as agenda attachments and made additional remarks as appropriate.

   1. Intellectual Property Rights - 27 October
      The Copyright Clearance Center, of which the AIP is a key supporter, has computed royalty payments to AIP as follows: mid 1983 through 1986: $61,886 (received in 1989); mid 1986 through 1987: $22,000; mid 1987 through 1988: $15,000. The latter two are not yet paid. Agreement has been reached with major corporations to develop a fee structure. The CCC is also trying to reach an agreement on a Library Copying Experiment in a University Library pilot program.

      The Association of American Publishers has established a task force to determine methods of tracking for 18 major universities and libraries which are making archival material available on CD-ROM. These machines are being installed to record usage for University Microfilms.

      Baensch reported that he is interviewing candidates for the position of Information Services Manager. This person will coordinate this kind of activity for AIP.

   2. Books - 31 October
      A marketing and distribution agreement with the IOP was implemented in July, and the distribution and billing systems are working. The move of AIP and IOP materials from Lancaster Press to a facility in Vermont has been completed. Society materials will be moved by January.

      Baensch reviewed the role of The Subcommittee on Books. Book Publishing Operational Plans were distributed to the Executive Committee in late September. Comment has been minimal. Management has authority to proceed with eight major book programs. Holton (Chair of the subcommittee) proposed adding two members to the subcommittee. They want to expand production of monographs, reference books, and textbooks. There is a need to expand and relate to international audiences. Their next meeting is scheduled for April.

   3. PINET - 8 November
      Baensch reported on PINET matters and this meeting of the committee in conjunction with budget discussions; see Agenda Item 8.E.

   4. Numeric Data Bases - 10 November
      The subcommittee will have to consider where AIP stands regarding implementing standardization and parameters as there exist a large the number of databases and numeric database formats with which we deal. Next meeting is planned for Spring 1990.

   5. Information Technology - 15 November
      Baensch noted that AIP is investigating a new laser proofing technology for the PT ATEX system that may also have application to the Woodbury ATEX and Xyvision operations.

      Baensch reported that they have proceeded with acceptance testing of the Xyvision system. A production rate of 25,000 pages per year is scheduled to begin in February 1990. (See a so report under Journals Subcommittee.)

      APS reports that TeX author submissions are in production and 108 articles have been accepted in the first three months of operation. AIP will join APS in accepting TeX, following the implementation of the Xyvision system.

      The APS archival data base has been transferred from reel-to-reel magnetic tape to high density tape cartridges. Database retrieval is becoming continually more important.

      The next meeting of this subcommittee is planned in the spring for Columbus, Ohio in order to tour CAS and OCLC.

   6. Journals - 16 November

      1. Proposed New Journal: The Physicist in Industry
         Baensch reported that a task force, with Robert Ubell of Ubell Associates as head, was established to review the proposal initiated by Ubell to establish this journal. They need to ascertain what the segments of industry are where physicists play a role, how plans for this journal intercept society and AIP Corporate Associates needs, and the potential for an audience.

      2. Proposed Chaos Journal
         Baensch reported that the Committee on Publishing Policy recommended that detailed analyses of various factors be prepared and that a final proposal be presented at the May meeting. Ford reported that he is in the process of compiling names of people to serve on the task force. Boyce suggested that an astronomer be included.

      3. Appointment of Editors of JAP and APL
         Baensch called attention to the 12 October 1989 letters of appointment from Ford to Steven J. Rothman, new editor of JAP, and Hartmut Wiedersich, new editor of APL; their appointments will be effective 1 January 1990.

         Scott has met with the new editors. They have been given a budget to upgrade computerization of their operations. Woodall, a member of the search committee, said they had found significant deficiencies in the operation of the office. The committee felt it had no choice but to leave the journals at Argonne, because of the knowledge base there, until this could be rectified.

      4. Review of Journal of Chemical Physics
         Baensch reported that Terry Miller chaired the ad hoc committee to review this journal. Their recommendations were reviewed for action by the journal editors. It was an excellent and very constructive review.

      5. Xyvision
         The first three journals to utilize the system will be JCP, JAP, and Journal of Rheology.

      6. General Physics Advance Abstracts
         Baensch reported that after a charge was instituted for a subscription to this publication, circulation dropped to about 3,000. As the result of projected losses of $88,000 for GPAA in 1990, it was recommended that publication cease after the 1990 volume and that availability of the information on-line, via PINET, be emphasized.

      7. Russian Translation Program
         Baensch reported on the two new journals started in 1989; Atmospheric Optics and Superconductivity. The 1988 volume of Atmospheric Optics will not be published; the third issue has only now been received. They have not yet seen the first two issues of Superconductivity; they are said to be en route. AIP bid on these in the fall of 1988, and did final negotiations on them in the summer of 1989.

         We have 18 journals on one agreement up for renewal in 1993; we need to broaden our base. The Soviets are intent on maximizing earnings in hard currency, so they want to do the translation and production. They have a problem with obtaining paper, but they insist on doing the printing. AIP is trying to control expenses on the translation and help them with desktop publishing.

         Terry Scott visited the Soviet Union recently to discuss editorial content for the five journals that are experiencing economic difficulty. We are considering going to bimonthly or quarterly publication because the page count has shrunk. Last year we were having delays in the translation process; this year we saved on production time and got them to the printer sooner. This is a selling point with librarians.

      8. Kinokuniya
         Our Japanese marketing agent had no circulation growth in the past. We asked them to develop a market research program for 11 AIP and Society journals. The result of this cooperative campaign was a 7.2% growth in circulation.

         The Journals Subcommittee wants to invite a librarian (possibly a representative from the Special Libraries Association) to attend as a guest at their next meeting. They also want to circulate the Tuttle newsletter (Newsletter on Serial Pricing, an online publication edited by Marcia Tuttle designed for librarians).

   7. Publishing Policy - 17 November
      Baensch reported that Abrahams (Chair) had named a "Liaison Committee" consisting of Abrahams, Barschall (Chair), Borchers, Holton, and Trippe to coordinate the activities of the four subcommittees which they chair.

      Lazarus has requested a special report on member subscription abuse at the next meeting, which is scheduled for May 1990. AIP was asked to look into the possibility of publishing JCP in topical versions, and permitting members to subscribe to single parts at reduced cost. The Committee asked for operational and financial plans on CIP to be presented at the next meeting to determine break even and income levels. The committee requested that a task force be set up to consider the proposal to start a new journal on Chaos. A search committee for a new editor of PoF-B will be named, as the present editor (Fred L. Ribe) will retire next year. It was suggested that a report on PT at the next meeting to consider how it fits into the responsibilities of this Committee. An update on Book Publishing Operational Plans and projections is also to be presented. They are looking for less of an intense capital investment in inventory and better return on investment.

      Baensch said he appreciates the work of these committees. There are many economic competitive pressures, making it necessary to revise procedures. A major goal for 1990 is that changes have to be implemented. The committee suggests more frequent meetings.

      Grant commented that having the summaries available for review by the Executive Committee in a timely fashion is very helpful. He noted that Ford has sent a memo to staff liaisons requesting summaries of committee meetings soon after a meeting has taken place. Management and the Executive Committee and Governing Board must have these reports available for recommendations by the committees to be considered and implemented effectively.

2. Request from Hewlett Packard for Replacement Journals (Earthquake Relief)
   Ford referred to the 3 November 1989 letter from Brian H. Koiner (Hewlett-Packard) which describes damage caused to journals as a result of the October earthquake and asking for consideration toward supplying replacement journals at little or no cost, and to his 14 November 1989 reply asking for a more detailed request. He said he has not received a response to his request for more information as yet.

12. Information Technology Matters

1. Status of FAMIS
   Frauenfelder stated that there is great concern among members of the Executive Committee about FAMIS. Most feel that previous assessments of the situation have been overly optimistic. It is important to tell the problem, not the promise.

   Ingoldsby referred to his 30 November 1989 memo to Ford, “FAMIS Status Report” which was included as an agenda attachment. What follows is a summary of his comments at the meeting, and of his responses to numerous questions from members of the committee.

   Processing of orders through FAMIS began on 20 November. Since that time all renewals, adds, changes, deletes are being done on FAMIS. Cash allocations to Accounting and Society disbursement also are being done through FAMIS.

   The system performance currently is acceptable for our applications. The Wang CPU upgrade improved the batch processing throughput, but the improvement in interactive processing was Jess than anticipated. Both WANG and ORACLE are investigating why the expected improvement did not occur. We have not paid WANG for the CPU upgrade, and they have not asked for payment as yet. ORACLE is reviewing our request for compensation for non-performance of their product - AIP lawyers are involved in the process. Ingoldsby stated that he understands that ORACLE is preparing a proposal to compensate us through such means as no charge for upgrades, waiver of license fees, additional products, and/or an extension of warranty.

   80% of daytime users are doing account inquiry utilizing indexed files, which are copies of the ORACLE database tables that are updated every weekend. By strictly controlling the number of simultaneous ORACLE users the response time has been acceptable. If everything had worked as planned, the account inquiry application using indexed files would not have been required. ORACLE pr9jects performance improvements with the next release of its product, expected by late 1990.

   Full production will be realized once final parallel testing is completed in January, which means the UNIVAC will be turned off at that time. There was a slippage in the projected date for completion of parallel testing as the result of a review by accounting leading to a request from them and from Bent for additional tests of several variations of order and cash processing. The cash allocations module has been completed and is in the test stage, as are the general ledger interface, back issues analysis, and aging invoicing.

   Payments will be made to societies this week, which will bring us current on invoices paid as billed from an AIP-generated invoice. Everything paid on other than an AIP invoice (i.e. over $3 million in agency orders) should be processed by the end of the current week.

   Ingoldsby said he thinks that the system as it is currently implemented could support an increase in use of approximately 50%, which is still less than Wang had promised. He said that this system provides a number of advantages over the UNIVAC system. He has found that it gives a 400-500% saving in processing time in the peak season. It previously took 2-6 weeks to process new members; we now will be able to do this in a few days. It will do what we want done; it cost more and took longer than he had anticipated and promised, but it does the things we defined as objectives.

   Havens asked about the promise of FAMIS terminals in the Member Society offices. Will this still be done? Ingoldsby said that terminals for AAPM and AVS, who had requested same, will be installed by the end of December.

   Ingoldsby said his goals for 1990 are to complete the peak season renewal processing by 15 March 1990 and to complete the FY91 renewal billing by 10 November 1990. The addition of new members to the database will be done within two days of receipt, and a change of address will be processed within five working days.

   Boyce asked when this rate of processing would begin. Ingoldsby replied that it should be happening by the following week.

   Grant asked about the expected delay time for new members to begin receiving their journals. Ingoldsby said that this is a timing condition: when a member is added to the database, the startup of their journals depends on the entry date's relation to the cutoff period for running labels. He added that 5 days is the expected turnaround time for label requests; they are now doing them in as few as 3 days.

   Ingoldsby said there was a disaster in early August which affected an AVS chapter which had requested labels to promote a symposium. This occurred as a result of poor supervisory practices; an employee had left AIP suddenly and there was no backup. He said that this occurred at a time when they were trying to get performance problems identified and resolved; for about four weeks label requests were filled at a slower pace than promised or planned. This problem was resolved in early September.

   Grant asked about problems which appeared to involve poor transfer of information between staff and customers; poor customer relations. How is this problem being addressed?

   Ingoldsby said that the task of dealing with customer requests is being reassigned to a person with a good customer manner. They have new forms customized for each society on which they can specify their requests; these provide a menu selection process. These revised forms have reached Society offices in the last 2-3 weeks.

   Boyce commented that an order processing backlog results in a second billing going out, often to a member who has already paid. During the peak season, how long does a member payment sit before it is entered in the system?

   Ingoldsby said there is no delay. The check is deposited at once. The delay occurs in shifting the funds on non-AIP-generated (agency) invoices. They work on these big orders in parallel with other work. Society work takes precedence.

   Boyce said that if it is recorded within a day of receipt, this will be a tremendous improvement in service and a great success.

   Ingoldsby was asked about the delay in mailing dues bills that had occurred this fall. He replied that this was the result of a bad decision on his part. He waited so that all the invoices could be printed at the same time, and to process and mail all dues bills on the FAMIS system only after the last response was received from the Societies. He has established a schedule for handling the FY91 renewal billing so that all bills will be out by 10 November, prior to AIP bills.

   Finally, Ingoldsby said he is concerned with the budgeted increases for Member and Subscription Services charges; cost containment will be a great concern for 1991. By the next meeting he will have an analysis of these increases, which he hopes can be cut by achieving further staff reductions in Member and Subscription Services. (See also related discussion and action regarding charges to Member Societies for dues billing and collection under Agenda Item 8.G.)

2. OSA Withdrawal from Fulfilment Services
   Ford noted the 24 October E989 letter from Quinn informing AIP that OSA will withdraw from the Institute's fulfillment processing services in 1991. They expect to handle their own nonmember renewal bills and member renewal bills in 1990, and to process payments for 1990 renewals. There was no discussion.

   (The meeting recessed at 12:10 for lunch and reconvened at 1:10 pm.)

13. Report of the Director of Physics Programs
Rigden referred to his report of activities m this Branch which was included as an attachment to the agenda.

1. 22 September Meeting of the Committee on Physics Today
   Rigden said the Committee finds PT a magazine they enjoy. There are varying degrees of concern about the level of the magazine; a reader survey is being prepared for distribution. Although the magazine is now out on a more timely basis, there have been delay with distribution, especially to the West Coast. This is being investigated.

2. 12 October Meeting: of the Committee on Public Information
   Suggestions were made toward enhancing the array of activities in this division. It was suggested to put Science Report, which is highly regarded by the committee, in a format for airline listening. They endorsed a television activity provided a minimal threshold is exceeded; there is a concern that in producing TV shorts it is important to have control over accuracy of content. A suggestion was made for an electronic media science award. An electronic science media bulletin board was suggested. The number of science writing awards given to astronomy-related subjects was questioned. The FYI's produced by the Washington office that the committee had seen were commended.

3. 20 November Meeting of the Committee on Physics Education
   Rigden noted that each Society is represented on this committee. They reviewed the educational activities of their Societies. There was a discussion of the proper roles of AIP and the Member Societies regarding educational activities. The Committee felt that for programs directed toward Grade 8 and below AIP should have the green light. Projects for Grade 9 and above should have the consensus of Member Societies. Their rationale is that many Member Societies have programs directed at the high school level, so it is felt that AIP should cooperate and not compete with these.

4. Grant Proposal: Introductory University Physics Project, Phase III
   A copy of the complete proposal, with accompanying documentation, was distributed in a separate binder. Total proposed budget for Phase III: $1,116,524; direct costs: $1,098,011; indirect costs: $18,513.

   Rigden reported that the Denver Conference in November was very successful. 10 models for introductory courses, in various stages of development, were presented. To date, more than 20 institutions have asked to be test centers during Phase III. The proposal for Phase III has been discussed and endorsed by the Steering Committee. Phases I and II had the sponsorship of APS and AAPT. He has not received formal confirmation that this sponsorship will continue, although he assumes it will. He has talked with Merzbacher, who said if AAPT does not approve it he questions whether APS should; he also said that if the AIP Executive Committee approves it, then he hopes APS will continue its sponsorship. The proposal was sent to both APS and AAPT about 10 days ago.

   Wilson said that it was not received in time for the most recent AAPT Board Meeting, although they had a preliminary version to review. The AAPT Board authorized a mail ballot; he senses it will be approved. IUPP started as a joint project with APS and AAPT, and the AAPT Board has stated that it is important that the sponsoring organizations be clearly identified for jointly sponsored projects. He suggested that the use of a separate letterhead would help in this regard.

   Havens said that APS has not received a formal request to approve sponsorship of this proposal from AIP. As it hasn't been discussed, he cannot speak for APS. He personally has reservation, and asked for clarification about (a) the overhead factor used in the budget, and (b) the management responsibilities during Phase III.

   Rigden said that Holcomb (co-project director) arrived at the factor of 28% for computing the overhead based on consultation with various schools that had indicated interest in participating as test institutions. Four will be chosen for the first year (beginning fall 1990).

   Rigden then described the management of the project. The steering committee will participate in the selection of the models to be tested, and of the institutions where they will be tested. They will oversee the development of models and related activities, such as evaluation. There will be different levels of commitment required of different members of the steering committee; in some cases a person on the steering committee also will be a member of a development team. Those who have proposed and developed models will be asked what work is needed to refine and implement them, and which individuals would be useful on a development team. At the Denver Conference people were asked to express their desire to be part of the development team for specific models. The steering committee next meets on 29 January to review responses. The decision as to which models to test, and on where to assign the models will be determined by the steering committee based on university interests and responses.

   Wilson made the following motion, which was seconded by Walt, and was CARRIED: four YES, zero NO, and three ABSTAIN.

   MOVED that submission to the National Science Foundation of the proposal for Introductory University Physics Project (IUPP) - Phase III be approved. (Co-Principal Investigators/Project Directors: John S. Rigden, AIP Director of Physics Programs, and Donald F. Holcomb, Cornell University.)

5. Grant Proposal: Operation Physics, Phase Three
   Rigden referred to the narrative and budget pages from the proposal for Operation Physics, Phase Three, to be submitted to NSF on February 15, 1990. The total budget amounts to $897,024: direct costs: $753,068; indirect costs: $143,956. The proposal is for the final phase of the project, whose goal is to shift responsibility from federal support to local (state) support in order to ensure the ongoing dissemination of materials and ideas which have been developed in Phases One and Two.
   Walt asked why AIP must contribute $35,000 to the project; why not add $35,000 to the cost of the proposal and have it included in the grant?

   Rigden said that funding organizations, such as NSF, like to see a sponsoring organization make a contribution. Kirwan would spend one-quarter of his time on this in the next two years, and the $35,000 represents this portion of his salary (budget, p.1) and a clerk (budget, p.3).

   Rigden said that he understands that there is interest among the states in this project. Nine states have not yet adopted it; neighboring states have agreed to put up their own money to send teams in order to proselytize the states not in the program. He said that NSF is enthusiastic about this project; there is now an Operation Chemistry which is modeled after Operation Physics. Wilson concurred that this project has a good reputation at the NSF.

   Grant made the following motion, which was seconded by Walt, and CARRIED, with two abstentions.

   MOVED that the Executive Committee approve the submission to the National Science Foundation of the proposal for Operation Physics: Phase Three. [Principal Investigator/Project Director: Donald F. Kirwan; Project Co-Directors: Gayle Ater and Fred Goldberg.]

6. Supplemental Grant for "Superbomb" Documentary
   Rigden the noted the 26 October 1989 letter from James M. Furman of MacArthur Foundation to Weart, stating that they had approved a supplemental grant of 75,000 to be expended over one year to AIP for this project. AIP serves only as a fiscal agent for this project.

7. High School Physics Curriculum Proposal
   Rigden reported that this AAPT / APS/ AIP proposal has been put on hold for resubmission in the spring after participating editorial staff have been identified.

14. Report of the 19 September Meeting of the Committee on Public Policy
Rigden said the Washington Public Information office has a staff of two people. This office is to serve as a conduit of information between the physics community and agencies of the Federal Government. The goals for this office were developed by Dick Jones, Senior Liaison-Government and Institutional Relations, and were patterned after the Committee on Public Policy Guidelines adopted by the Governing Board. Rigden read the goals:

1. Develop linkages with appropriate government agencies that collect statistics related to physics research and education.
2. Gather information of importance to physics and physicists and disseminate it, in a timely fashion, to AIP Member and Affiliated Society officers, and when appropriate, to the public at large.
3. Establish a methodology to conduct analysis of the budget and spending of the Federal government for physics research, and carry out the analysis annually.
4. Establish similar methodologies for analysis of the support of physics education and of industrial research in physics, and carry out such analyses.
5. Provide a library of reference materials for visitors to Washington, such as directories of Congressional staff members, background information on Members of Congress, etc.
6. Provide facilities such as offices, terminals, and phones for visitors who are conducting business with the government and other organizations.
7. Provide spaces for lunches, receptions, and meetings.
8. In collaboration with Member Societies, arrange meetings between members of the physics community and Members of Congress and their staffs, and with people in other parts of government and in Washington based institutions studying government operations in science, technology, and physics education.
9. Collaborate with societies that hold meetings in Washington to arrange opportunities for Washington dignitaries to meet with society leaders.

15. Report of the November 1989 Meeting of the Committee on International Affairs
Rigden reported two recommendations made by the Committee. (1) It reaffirmed its support for the creation of an International Journal of Physics Education and recommended that AIP provide fiscal support for the project in an amount of up to $5000/year for two years. (2) They also recommended that the AIP support efforts to ask the US to rejoin UNESCO.

Grant commented that the lack of minutes and substantive background information make it difficult for the Executive committee to review these recommendations. Rigden replied that these will be put into a later report.

Wissbrun suggested that a recommendation like the one re: UNESCO be referred to the Committee for Public Policy. Frauenfelder agreed such a recommendation should be referred, and commented that some of the things suggested in the report bear strongly on the question of when AIP should and should not speak for the physics community.

Rigden said the committee also passed a resolution recommending that the next High School Survey be extended to include a selected group of nations other than the U.S. This is in response to an invitation by the IUPP for preparing introductory course projects.

(See also Agenda Item 8.F. for additional discussion.)

16. General Discussion - Leftover Items
Reported under appropriate topic heading.

17. Other Business

1. Suggestion for Name Change
   Grant noted the 29 November 1989 from K.rumhansl regarding a proposal to change the corporate name of AIP. He distributed his 7 December response to Krumhansl, and stated that he would place this item on the agenda for the spring Governing Board meeting. In the interim, he will forward it to the Committee on Constitution and Bylaws. He briefly reviewed the procedure for a name change: it would require an amendment to the Constitution and a change in the Articles of Incorporation, and therefore could not happen in less than one year from action by the Governing Board.

2. SPIE Interest in Change of Status
   Ford said SPIE, now an Affiliated Society, is interested in moving to an Associate Member Society or full Member Society. He was approached by them, and met with their president and president-elect. Subsequently he went to their headquarters (in Bellingham, WA) to meet with their Executive Director, Joseph Yaver. They would not be interested if there are indications that they would be turned down. They are willing to proceed with the Associate Member Society route.

   They have indicated an interest in using AIP services. As a first example, we publish the Physical Optics Handbook, and are interested in other publishing services, such as joint book projects. He told them that the likelihood of their being accepted would be enhanced if they use more services. There is probably a good reason why the Associate category is empty; it requires payment of $2.00/member dues, a 7.5% overhead charge for services, yet they don't get PT and have no representation on the Governing Board.

   Frauenfelder suggested that we discuss this at the next meeting. There is potential conflict with the OSA. Woodall and Havens both stated that there were concerns about conflicts with SPIE within their societies as well.

18. Future Meetings

1. Location of 1990 Corporate Associates Meeting
   Ford announced that the location of this meeting will be shifted from Grumman, which is having business problems at present, to Sandia Labs in Albuquerque, NM. The dates for the meeting are the same as those previously announced.

2. Reconfirmation of September 1990 Executive Committee Meeting
   Grant noted that the dates scheduled for this meeting conflict with Rosh Hashana (Thursday, Sept 20). He suggested the possibility of holding the meeting all day Friday and Saturday instead of our past pattern of Thurs-Sat Noon. Frauenfelder thought this could be a workable idea. No decision was made at this meeting.

3. Venue of February 1990 Meeting
   Grant aid he had been asked to decide where to have this meeting and he thought Irvine would be a desirable location. The February meeting has in the last two years been held in Washington. Havens has noted that it is quite expensive for the Executive Committee to meet on the West Coast, as only one member is from that part of the country, and there are AIP staff costs as well. Havens said he favored holding the meeting somewhere in the Northeast (definition: between Washington and New York).

   Havens made the following motion, which was seconded by Wilson, and CARRIED, with one NO vote and one (formal) abstention (five people did not vote). Several people reported that they had made plans to be on the west coast at this time. Wilson offered to withdraw his second but this is not allowed. Wilson then made a motion to reconsider the vote. Walt seconded the motion to reconsider, which was CARRIED. The motion was then DEFEATED, with one YES, and six NO.

   MOVED that the February 1990 meeting be moved to the East Coast, either NY or DC. DEFEATED.

19. Executive Session
The staff were excused at 2:45 pm, and the Executive Committee and non-voting participants met in executive session. This is reported in the official minutes only.

20. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 3:20 pm.