September 11, 1986

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

1. Convene – Roll Call

Members Present
Fans Frauenfelder, Chairman of AIP
Robert T. Beyer
Peter B. Boyce
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
H. William Koch, Executive Director
David Lazarus
Edward N. Sickafus
F. Dow Smith
Jack M. Wilson

Non-Voting Participant
A. F. Spilhaus, Jr.

Guest
Kenneth W. Ford (12-13 September sessions)

AIP Staff
Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer
Robert H. Marks, Director of Publishing
Lewis Slack, Director of Educational Programs
Bernard Dolowich, Controller (11-12 September sessions)
Lawrence T. Merrill, Assistant to the Director
Paul A. Parisi, Manager, Special Projects
Nathalie A. Davis, Assistant to the Secretary

For clarity in presentation with reference to the printed agenda, events recorded here are not necessarily in the same chronological order in which they occurred.

2. Convene in Executive Session

1. Policy on Relationship Between AIP Management and Executive Committee

2. and

3. Policy on Relationship between AIP Staff and Resident Society Staffs
   The Executive Committee convened in executive session at 9:00 am on 11 September. Executive sessions are reported in the official minutes only.

3. Convene in Open Session - Introduction of Non-voting Participants
The meeting convened in open session at 11:40 a.m. Spilhaus was the only non-voting participant. Frauenfelder noted that, as this is not a meeting where the schedule is critical, time can be devoted to discussion as necessary.

4. Report of the Secretary

1. Minutes of 12-13 June 1986 Executive Committee Meeting
   Grant offered the minutes of the 12-13 June 1986 meeting for approval. The minutes were approved after correction to reflect that Beyer had been absent from that meeting.

5. Report of the Chairman

1. Society Responses to Letter re: AIP Locations
   Frauenfelder said the range of responses to his letter is wide enough to cover any decision we might want to make. He noted that ASA prefers to be at Woodbury. Sentiments also were expressed in favor of having an increased presence in Washington, DC. Further discussion on this issue was postponed until later in the meeting.

6. Meeting Plans
Koch said that the extended meeting outline, sent prior to the formal agenda, should be considered as a wish list of topics that it would be desirable to cover. The intent is to stimulate discussion about, and refinement of, AIP's long range planning documents.

7. Introduction to 1986 AIP Long Range Plans - Planning Structure and General Assumptions

Koch said that the material in the Long Range Plans is in draft form and changes will be made after discussion and before sending it to the Governing Board. The existent Function Planning lacks critical elements necessary for good long range planning. The Function Planning volumes describe eight functions of the Institute in terms of products and services, but do not provide an opportunity for including the policies and activities which lead to the products and services. The new format delineates three basic businesses: I. Finance and Administration, II. Publishing, and III. Educational.

8. Proposed Mission II - Publishing Services

1. Operations Action Items Related to Mission II

   1. New Computers in Physics Magazine

      1. Review of Estimated Investment

      2. Status of Editor Appointment

         Marks said there were no action items to present. There is enthusiasm regarding the new computer journal/magazine. The search committee for the editor is in place but has not yet met. He encouraged the Executive Committee to contact him or Voss regarding an editor and the concept.

         Marks said the budget has not yet been further refined. Present projections are for net expenditures of around $400,000 per year initially. This will be built into the 1987 budget, although the first issue will not come out until 1988.

         Grant suggested that the Governing Board should be asked to approve an expenditure of this magnitude.

      3. Eventual Assignment to Educational Services Mission
         Koch said that it will be appropriate to assign this journal to the AIP Educational Programs mission for general oversight once it is established.

   2. Pi-MAIL

      1. Pricing
         Merrill reported that promotion of Pi-MAIL is scheduled to begin in the September issue of Physics Today. 70 people are now registered; he hopes to gain a large number of new registrants in the coming months.

         Boyce thought it was unfortunate that Pi-MAIL and AMERPHYS are distinct; many networks do not talk to each other very easily, meaning that people have to sign on to several systems. Fe would like to see the situation simplified in a way which would better serve the total community.

         Grant said these matters need to be addressed by AIP. Frauenfelder agreed that AIP should explore the possibilities.

         Koch said these comments would be passed on to the Electronic Publishing Subcommittee and the Taskforce.

         Merrill said that Pi-NET usage is greater than had been anticipated and it held up in the summer. The average connect time is 16 minutes, and maximum interest in the job area. They are evaluating responses from a questionnaire sent to Pi-NET users.

      2. Planning for New Software and Hardware
         Merrill said he will present the future needs for Pi-NET to the Subcommittee on Electronic Publishing. It was originally put on Datapoint, as that system was in place. The demand for more sophisticated use is growing. It is necessary to examine whether to stay with Datapoint or to look at other hardware and software systems.

   3. Translation Journals
      

      1. Proposal to NBS on Japanese Translations
         Koch said that the NBS was directed to initiate a program to make available scientific literature from Japan. AIP staff visited the NBS to discuss possibilities. AIP plans to develop a proposal, which will include NBS support. A number of Japanese physics journals are already in English, so a mechanism to include the marketing of certain English language journals in the U.S., as well as translation of others, is in order. Other possibilities are to issue translations of selected articles, books and reports, and complete journals.

   4. 1985 International Conference on Magnetism

      1. Approval for Funding Conference Deficit
         Koch distributed copies of the original letters detailing fiscal plans for this conference. AIP publishes the proceedings of an annual conference which is held in the U.S. Every fifth year it is an international conference. It was held in San Francisco in 1985, with Elsevier publishing the proceedings. In 1984 AIP agreed to assume the deficit from the conference, which amounted to $14,000.

         After discussion, the following motion was made by Lazarus, seconded by Sickafus, and unanimously CARRIED.

         MOVED payment of $14,000 to ICM-85, as AIP's contribution toward covering the deficit incurred by that conference, as previously agreed to by the AIP Executive Committee at its 6/84 and 9/84 meetings.

         The meeting recessed for lunch at 12 noon and reconvened at 1:00 p.m.

   5. Policy Action Items Related to Mission II
      

      1. Replacement of Fully-depreciated Production Equipment
         Marks said that depreciation has to be funded. The Videocomp, ATEX system, camera, and subscription fulfillment equipment are depreciated over a five-year period. We are funded for these items, so we will have money to invest in new equipment when needed. At present, AIP staff is looking at an automatic page makeup system.

   6. Response to Increasing Work-load at Woodbury

      Marks said AIP has run out of space at Woodbury. The ASA Standards office may relocate at Woodbury. Publication Sales needs more space. He estimates that 5-10,000 square feet are needed. Nearby space may be available for rental. [See also 8. A. 2.]

   7. Leadership Role for AIP in Mechanics of Publishing
      (Copyright, PACS, Indexing, Secondary Services)

      Koch said that ATP staff should feel encouraged to take a leading role through committees and boards of organizations dealing with copyright of secondary services.

      Lazarus said that the copyright transfer form is different from the one approved by the Executive Committee in February 1986. He said that this contained substantive changes from the previous one. It takes rights away from authors. He does not agree to the modifications which had been made.

      Marks said he took the approved statement and simply put it in the same form as the previous one. The wording and arrangement are different but there are no substantive changes. The member Societies have been notified and sent this revised statement and asked to comment.

      Marks said that, as this is not in force yet, he will take it back to the Committee on Copyright. Re has proposed starting to use the new one next year; there is still time to receive comments and to make changes.

   8. Elimination of Page Charges for Computer-Readable Input
      Koch said that the question of the future of page charges is an important one. We want to be able to have no page charges if a computer-readable input is implemented. Havens said the APS now charges one-half the page charge to people who supply Compuscript. However, the usage of this option is not as large as had been anticipated.

      Lazarus said it probably costs more to receive a Compuscript manuscript; it definitely takes longer to handle a Compuscript manuscript. The rules require that it must look just like the publisher-produced pages. How much exception to quality can be tolerated?

2. Proposal on Preprint Literature
   Koch referred to a letter to him from Signell (Michigan State Univ.) regarding the possibility of AIP's taking over Nuclear Physics Preprints, and asked for comments.

   The general reaction from the Executive Committee was very negative.

3. Need for New Publishing Development Plan
   Marks noted the statement of goals contained in the 1982 Publishing Development Plan. Many goals have been accomplished. He suggested that next year would be the time for a new development plan.

4. Evaluate Policies for Mission II in Part A, pp.8-9 for Adequacy in Dealing with Above Action Items

   Koch led a review/discussion of current and proposed AIP policies dealing with Mission II. The discussion led to a number of modifications in the number and in the wording of these policies. These changes will be reflected in future drafts of this long-range planning document.

5. AIP Editors: Terms and Qualifications
   After discussion of issues having to do with AIP Editors, Lazarus thought it would be useful to indicate specific lengths of terms. Wilson said the AAPT automatically appoints a search committee in the last year of an editor's term.

   Following discussion, Lazarus made the following motion, which was seconded by Havens, and unanimously CARRIED.

   MOVED that it be recommended to the Governing Foard that the term of office of AIP Editors be fixed at five (5) years, and that a search committee automatically be formed in the last year of such a term.

9. Proposed Mission I - Administrative and Financial Services

1. Operations Action Items Related to Mission I

   1. Confirmation of Telephone Ballot for Letter of Credit Covering 140 E. 45th St. Lease
      Gilbert asked for confirmation of the affirmative telephone ballot of the Executive Committee in July.

      The following motion was made by Lazarus, seconded by Boyce, and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the telephone ballot of 18 July 1986 empowering the Treasurer to sign an Application and Agreement for Irrevocable Letter of Credit (Standby) with Bankers Trust Co. in the amount of $260,730.15 designating Knapp Communications Corporation as beneficiary, as a security deposit under the terms of our sublease between Knapp Communications Corporation and the Institute, covering the premises of the 37th floor, 2 Grand Central Tower, New York, NY 10017, be confirmed.

   2. Plans to Sublease 216 E. 45th St.
      Marks said that the response to our inquiry of legal counsel concerning our
      options at 216 E. 45th Street was that there are no grounds for constructive eviction.
      Prospective clients are seeing the property but there are no firm offers as yet.

2. Study by Landauer-Production of Building Development Plan
   Gilbert reviewed the discussions on this issue at the June Executive Committee meeting. He informed Landauer Associates that we would get back to them. Havens said no action has been taken by the ad hoc Space Needs Committee as they have been awaiting Member Society responses. Fe has asked Marks to find out about the availability of additional property in Woodbury. A letter has recently been received from Weinbamn giving current real estate prices on Long Island. There is a property available for rent and possible purchase within walking distance of the AIP Woodbury property. This could take care of any necessary expansion at Woodbury.

   Koch said that he feels that with the recent move in New York City, AIP can feel comfortable for the next five years.

   Gilbert suggested waiting to act on the Landauer proposal until October. The Institute is not under pressure now. The members of the Executive Committee concurred.

   1. Emergency Power at Woodbury
      Marks reviewed the discussions on this matter at the June meeting. He reviewed the 12 August 1986 memo from Kranz to him; for $100,000 we could obtain a first-class uninterrupted power supply (UPS) similar to the arrangement in Ridge. This could be incorporated into the Capital Expenditure Budget for 1987 if approved.

      It was agreed that funds for an UPS be included in the 1987 Capital Expenditure Budget for review in the December meeting.

   2. Reappearance of IRS Auditors
      Gilbert reviewed the IRS requests to date. A complete review of our 1983 tax return was requested. The auditor who came to AIP recently knew nothing of the previous review; Gilbert gave him all the pertinent documents. He will probably finish the 990 form by the end of this week, and will then go to the 990T form (unrelated business income). Tile only problem that could arise would be a request to have everything reported differently, i.e., in terms of Society income and AIP income.

      The other recent IRS request was for the 1984 forms 940 and 941; this related to FICA. The auditor brought payroll statements and wished to match the with ours; Gilbert gave him the packet of payroll exemptions; he has not been back after the first day. Gilbert also had another IRS call which said they would probably do a review of the 1984 990. He told them he would call our attorney, as we already had a ruling from the National Office. He subsequently received a call saying that no one would come to our offices.

   3. Confirmation of Telephone Ballot on Investments
      Gilbert noted the 28 July 1986 telephone ballot which approved the recommendations of the Investment Advisory Committee and requested confirmation of same.

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

      a. That the authorization of 13 June 1986 empowering the Treasurer to purchase a 5-year certificate of deposit be rescinded.
      b. That the Treasurer be authorized to invest $1,000,000 in the Benham GNMA Income Fund.
      c. That the Treasurer be authorized to invest $1,000,000 in the Fidelity Government Securities Fund.
      d. That the Treasurer be authorized to liquidate our portfolio with Avatar Associates and put the proceeds in our Cash Management Account pending future long-term investment.

   4. Report of Investment advisory Committee Meetings: Investment Recommendations
      Gilbert said the Committee has been very active. He reviewed the report of the 28 August meeting and read their recommendations. He then read the report of their conference call meeting of 9 September.

      Following an amplification of these reports and recommendations, and some discussion, the following motion was made by Lazarus, seconded by Sickafus, and unanimously CARFIED.

      MOVED that the treasurer be authorized to liquidate current holdings in the Fidelity Magellan Fund.

      The following motion then was made by Sickafus, seconded by Boyce, and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the Executive Committee approve the following recommendations of the Investment Advisory Committee:

      a. That the Treasurer be authorized to liquidate the small balances in the Stein Roe Capital Opportunities Fund and the T. Rowe Price New Era Fund.
      b. That the Treasurer be authorized to invest $1,300,000 in the Minis & Company tax exempt balanced accounts.
      c. That the Treasurer be authorized to invest $1,300,000 with the investment counsel of Resource Capital Advisors, Inc.
      d. That the Treasurer be authorized to invest an additional $400,000 in our arbitrage account with Drexel Burnham Lambert.

   5. Establishment of Goals for Designated Funds
      Gilbert said it is appropriate for the Executive Committee to recommend policies for establishing these goals. He has had discussions on this matter with Touche Ross; we need the policy as back-up for our financial decisions.

      Lazarus asked if a one-year budget really is needed in every area. Gilbert responded that a year's operating expense is considered prudent.

      Wilson made the following motion, which was seconded by Boyce and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the Executive Committee recommend to the Governing Board the adoption of the following policies for setting goals for AIP Designated Funds, with adoption of the recommended 8% for inflation:

      a. Building Fund. 1bis fund should cover the accumulated depreciation of the cost of the building(s} and improvements plus 8% to provide for inflationary costs.
      b. Equipment Fund. This fund should cover the accumulated depreciation of the cost of equipment plus 8% to provide for inflationary costs.
      c. Educational Programs Fund. This fund should cover the current budgetary expense for educational programs.
      d. Publication Fund. This fund should cover the current budgetary expense of publishing operations.

   6. Depreciation of Fixed Assets
      Gilbert reported that Touche Ross requests that AIP have a written policy for depreciating fixed assets, as the accounting profession is tightening up on this.

      The following motion was made by Sickafus, seconded by Lazarus, and unanimously CARRIED. [ed. note: It is here stated as subsequently amended slightly on recommendation of the Audit Committee.]

      MOVED that the following AIP Depreciation Policy Covering Fixed Assets be adopted:

      LAND is to be carried at cost and is not subject to depreciation. BUILDING AND IMPROVEMENTS thereto are to be carried at cost. The cost of maintenance and repairs is to be charged to expense as incurred. Building and major improvements thereto are to be depreciated on a straight line basis over the remaining life of the building. Leasehold improvements are to be amortized on a straight line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset or the life of the applicable lease, whichever is shorter. FURNITURE AND EOUIPMENT are to be carried at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight line method.

   7. Bank Resolutions
      Gilbert reviewed the need for these new bank resolutions; both actions are retroactive, as the accounts had to be opened.

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

      MOVED that the Executive Committee approve the following: Chemical Bank PCC Merchant Application, signed by the Treasurer on 28 July 1986, opening a new bank account for AIP Pi-MAIL.

      The following motion was made by Smith, seconded by Boyce, and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the Executive Committee approve the following: Corporate Certification of the Benham Capital management Group covering an investment of $1,000,000 in the Penham GNMA Income Fund, said certificate to be signed by the Secretary.

   8. Cancellation of Professional Liability Insurance
      The letter to Gilbert from Wohlers, our carrier for liability insurance, gives their reasons for refusal of renewal. Gilbert said many such policies have been cancelled. Our policy lapses on 1 October 1986. AIP has disability insurance with another firm, which is considering carrying AIP for professional liability insurance.

      Lazarus thought AIP should go on record as assuming responsibility for its officers, Governing Board and Committee members, editors and referees, i. e. be a self-insurer.

      Spilhaus said the AGU is currently taking the approach of self-insuring its editors. They have not had case in 50 years. The last company they used took away the coverage for peer review, which was the principal reason for this insurance.

      Gilbert said the societies most concerned about this are people involved in standards activity. 11ie question of whether a firm is covered under the terms of a policy if it is a publisher or owner or both is under scrutiny by CESSE. They are also looking into carriers.

      In response to Sickafus' question of the types of coverage, Gilbert said there are several: 1) liability by a publisher; 2) wrongful act in review: 3) any wrongful act. The most important factor is legal costs incurred in procedures.

      Frauenfelder commented that this has been a status report; we will wait for more information.

   9. Status of Subscription Fulfillment System
      Dolowich said that in October we will attempt limited processing using the two systems in parallel. A subscription fulfillment group has been set up in Woodbury. Member and non-member categories will disappear as the distinctions are not relevant to the new system. There are four functional units:

      1) Cashiering. The backbone of this unit is the NCR equipment. The NCP salesman informed us that the model we have will be discontinued by NCR, and he asked us to order another one now if we want it. AIP's response was that before agreeing to buy one, we would need assurance in writing that it will handle the software which already has been developed.
      2) File maintenance. The major on-line system interaction.
      3) Selection. This includes labels for journals as well as special requests.
      4) Clerical-non-computer services.

      A work plan is now being established. He distributed a chart showing AZTFCP involvement in the subscription fulfillment project and reviewed the payment schedule.

      We have been concerned about the processing time. Gudes, our consultant, has identified potential problems in the journal selection module. He says the indexes AZTECH has used have slowed down the response time. AZTECH is responding by modifying this module accordingly.

      Dolowich distributed an Analysis of Special Rate Publications. Some rates requested by the Member Societies will not be possible with the new system; they will have to adjust to what is possible.

      AZ TECH has begun to address the issue of software maintenance; they have stated that after the 90-day warranty period, they would charge time and materials, but cannot guarantee delivery time or staff availability. Wilson said he could not imagine a maintenance agreement with AZTECH after this experience. We need to have a plan for maintenance and expertise within our staff. After discussion, it was agreed that this issue would have to be addressed in more detail soon.

      The meeting recessed for a buffet supper at the Study Center at 5:30 p.m. and reconvened at 7:00 p.m.

3. Policy Action Items Related to Mission I

   1. Advisory Committee Structure re Administrative Services
      Koch commented that the Committee on Society Service has specialized concerns. He thought it may be desirable to have a committee or subcommittee on subscription fulfillment, one on meeting services, and one on accounting.

      Boyce said the members of the Committee on Society Services were disturbed that their advice and concerns were not considered by the right people. He felt that the Committee’s charge covers a wide range of activities. Concerns about subscription fulfillment and meeting services are quite different, and, in fact, may involve a different set of people in the discussions.

   2. Society Shares in Building Equities
      Koch asked if there is any substance to the concept of selling building shares to societies; could a society ever recover its investment? If AIP buys or builds a building, this is a clean situation.

      Spilhaus said he knows of a parallel case, in which societies have wanted to build up an equity position. One purpose of this plan is to raise funding. There is a problem in getting money out of such an investment. The concept is a sticky, complex one and should be avoided if possible.

      Frauenfelder said if one or two big societies made a proposal to build a property together that would be different than trying to get a small society to put in money. Asmall share is difficult for both.

      The consensus seemed to be that if a building is to be built or purchased, the ownership should rest with AIP.

   3. Sale of Mailing Lists
      Slack referred to a proposed price schedule for the sale of mailing labels by AIP. He explained that AIP has done this for some time, on behalf of the Societies. He compared our practices with those of other societies.

      Slack next explained the procedures for approving sale of the lists. Every request is given to the Society whose list is requested, for approval or rejection. Only after the Society grants the request is the order filled.

      No action was taken on the proposed price schedule.

   4. Library Affiliates
      Koch was invited to speak to the Physics and astronomy Staff Librarians. He feels it would be useful to develop a small group of librarians that could advise the Institute on various issues of mutual concern.

      Koch noted that the librarians represent the big market for our journals. They have strong opinions about many aspects of journals. There are a variety of things we could get information on from them. He first propose getting a group together for an informal discussion.

      Grant thought this would be a good idea to pursue.

   5. Service Surcharges for Different Classes of Societies
      Koch said the MRS proposes becoming an Associate Member Society. Pike, their current president, wants to speak to the Governing Board on the issue of having no surcharge for the MRS should it gain Associate Member Society status.

      Havens felt that if they would become an Associate Member Society, they should pay this surcharge. What is their rationale? What would be in it for AIP? Lazarus noted that they would get privileges without responsibilities. He has no sympathy for the MRS position.

      Grant read the March 1986 Governing Board action, which was a motion to invite a MRS Officer to attend the next meeting of the Governing Board as an observer.

      Tile consensus was that Pike should be invited to attend and to speak to the Governing Board, but that there was no sympathy for the requests being made by MRS.

      AIP staff were excused at 8:30 p.m. The Executive Committee met in Executive Session to discuss the Report of the CEO Search Committee Chairman.

      The meeting reconvened at 8:30 a.m. on 12 September in Executive Session for a discussion with the CEO Candidate.

      The meeting reconvened in open session at 9:30 a.m.

   6. Evaluate Policies for Mission I in Part A, pp.6-7 for Adequacy in Dealing with Above Action Items

      Koch led a review/discussion of current and proposed AIP policies dealing with Mission I. Tile discussion led to a number of modifications in the number and in the wording of these policies. These changes will be reflected in future drafts of this long-range planning document.

10. Review of Secretary's Arrangements and Secretary
Koch reviewed the current arrangements for the Secretary of the Institute. The procedure is to review the performance and salary for the Chairman and Secretary at the June meeting. They are elected annually at the March meeting of the Governing Board.

Historically, there have been two kinds of arrangements with Secretaries of the Institute. Waterfall was Secretary from 1949-74; he was full time at AIP and held the position of ASA Secretary as well. Millman was secretary from 1974-80, and was in the office part time. Johnson was Secretary from 1980-82 but was based at Penn State. Grant has been Secretary from 1982 to present. Two questions to be addressed: (1) Should a Secretary be appointed for a five-year period rather than a one-year period? (2) Should the Secretary be resident or non-resident?

Grant said when he became Secretary, his discussion with Ramsey was that he should be ready to commit himself to five one-year terms. He thinks it is a good idea to have a more substantive review after a five-year interval. If a change is desirable, his institution and department need to know it this fall. There is always a question as to whether this commitment is good for his department; the administration of his university has changed since he has assumed this office. The Executive Committee need to consider the position, and whether it should be a rotating one on a relatively frequent basis.

(Grant was excused for the subsequent discussion.) Points of discussion: (1) Should the Secretary be resident, or can that person adequately serve from a nonresident base? It was felt that Grant had demonstrated that the remote location worked well. (2) It was deemed highly desirable that the person occupying the position of Secretary should be a physicist in order to bring to the position the perspectives that such a person might have. (3) Some discussion of the term of office was held, including the possibility of changing the Constitution to allow for election to a five-year term rather than to a one-year term as required at present. Grant has stated that he feels that the one-year term is desirable and appropriate, but that there be a mutual understanding that a substantive review of the position and the arrangements would take place every five years. There was general agreement to this approach. (4) A review of the individual holding the position will continue to take place annually at the June
Executive Committee meeting, with the recommendation for renewal or replacement being communicated at that time to the individual and to the next year's Nominating Committee.

11. Proposed Mission III - Educational Services

1. Operations Action Items related to Mission III
   Slack noted the value of this mission to the physics community; at a recent archivists' meeting, AIP was frequently mentioned; our manpower statistics are highly sought and regarded; the advisory committee for the Public Information Division is pleased with the current programs, and have suggested new ones.

   1. Fund Raising for Joint IUPAP 1987 Meeting
      Koch noted the memo from Merrill to Foch detailing the status of income and expenses for the IUPAP 1987 meeting. He reviewed the funds raised to date. NSF and DOE grants are expected, and he hopes that a total sum of $150,000 will be raised.

      Havens said he expects that meeting details will go out by the end of September. It was originally expected that both the APS Council meeting and the AIP Governing Board would be held at the same time, but there is not enough time for both. The NAS has agreed to pay for staff as needed for this meeting. AIP and APS will handle the registration desk.

   2. Annual Budget for Washington Office
      Slack presented the estimated annual budget for the Washington office. Condell has several major efforts underway, including organizational work for the VSPP.

   3. Report on Physics Olympiad
      Wilson described the stages and procedures involved in this year's Physics Olympiad. The University of Maryland covered room and board for the participants who had the intensive training there. The selection process worked well. It was found that there were many students who could compete; the competition has generated a lot of interest and publicity. Kalson and his assistant were invaluable with the publicity.

      He hopes for preliminary approval to begin activities toward next year's Olympiad. He thought an advisory committee would be useful; this committee would review the material and plan for the coming year. Information should be sent in October to high schools. He seeks approval from AIP, APS, and AAPT to continue. It must be decided who will be responsible for what. A realistic budget would be $30,000. There are some funds left over from this year, which would be a nucleus for next year.

      Koch said that in the past year AAPT handled the accounting. Wilson said he would be willing either to continue or to give it over to AIP.

      Koch said if AAPT is willing, he can see the merit in that. AAPT has a central position in education.

      Ford said that, as the APS representative, he made the suggestion that AAPT continue for the next year, but then consider the future direction. It is the kind of thing AIP could do well. The high point of his year was the chance to work with the kids. Wilson's personal role was critics, and the AAPT initiative enabled this to begin in 1986.

      Wilson said the project was a big load on his staff, but was very rewarding.

      Grant said this program will continue to rely on a few dedicated individuals who will work with and interact with the students.

      Frauenfelder thought this was a remarkable achievement and expressed appreciation to Wilson for his initiative.

      Wilson outlined the competition this year. There were 22 teams, with five students two instructors per team. Four gold medals, four silver, a number of more bronze medals, and many honorable mentions were awarded. Our team won three bronze medals, and the other two were very close to the honorable mention level.

      Lazarus made the following motion, which was seconded by Havens and Boyce and CARRIED unanimously.

      MOVED that the Executive Committee extend its thanks to Wilson for his efforts with the Physics Olympiad in 1986 and that the Executive Committee recommend that ATP serve as a sponsor in 1987.

2. Policy Action Items Related to Mission III

   1. Relationships among ATP and Society Programs - Ford Report
      Slack said the question arises of how AIP’s educational efforts can best be meshed with those of the Societies. He noted Ford's White Paper for APS and invited him to share his thoughts.

      Ford said we are seeing a renewed resurgence of interest and concern in science education which is broader than the surge of interest in the 1950 ' s; the range of concerns includes teacher training and equipment. AAPT has expanded its efforts. AIP has authorized the appointment of a senior education fellow. APS has authorized a staff position for an education officer. Other Societies are actively concerned. His paper also deals with the relation of APS efforts with those of other Societies. He summarized the things APS is doing, which include the following: symposia at national meetings conducted by an education committee; new career booklets; inviting teachers and subsidizing their attendance at APS meetings; supporting role in Physics Olympiad and Inter-American Conference; joint sponsorship with AAPT of the Conference of Chairs in 1983, 1985, and 1988. The most significant initiative is in CPIC (College/High School Interaction Committee), a joint AAPT/APS effort. A proposal to NSF is in preparation; the goal is to stimulate increased linkage between the colleges and high schools and industrial labs. The overlap and possibilities for cooperation among AIP and the societies are obvious. AIP can offer the following: public information, data gathering and analysis, and management of sizable programs such as the Physics Olympiad and the Visiting Scientist program.

      Grant commented that the Committee on Educational Policy, because of its makeup as a committee of society representatives, can play a role in the exchange of information about education programs.

      Smith noted the OS sessions last year for high school teachers; OSA paid for the expenses and substitute teachers to enable the high school teachers to attend.

      Ford said AIP should consider whether it should have an education officer or even a real education group.

      Frauenfelder said he was impressed by the White Paper and commented that we need to watch new developments and to keep an open mind about whether and how to support new initiatives.

   2. Purpose and Scope of Committee on Educational Policy
      Slack noted that this statement was distributed at the June Executive Committee meeting, but it was decided to defer discussion and to consider the wording. He revised the text slightly and sent the revised version to Holcomb who had drafted the original version; the revised wording was acceptable to Holcomb.

      Lazarus made the following motion, which was seconded by Wilson, and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the Statement of Purpose and Scope of the Committee on Educational Policy be recommended to the Governing Board for adoption.

   3. Gemant Award Policy Statement
      This had been approved previously, and will be before the Governing Board for their approval.

   4. Use of AIP Funds for Society Programs
      Koch raised the question of the use of ~IP funds for Society programs. With all of the things being done in the educational area by the individual Societies, is it useful for AIP to fund these? He thinks it is not appropriate, unless it is a joint effort.

      Havens said APS has considered this; it cannot be a funding agency for external programs. He thinks a comparable policy is appropriate for AIP. If it supports a program, it must be actively involved.

   5. Science Writing Awards
      Slack reviewed the history and funding of these awards. The Governing Board approved funding by AIP for last year's awards. They are well established and carry prestige. He thinks it is appropriate at this juncture for AIP to be the sole sponsor of the awards. This view was endorsed strongly by the Subcommittee on Public Information. They also urged the establishment of an award for science writing for the young.

      Boyce moved adoption of the three components as itemized in Kalson’s proposal, as follows: Proposal for Three American Institute of Physics Awards Honoring Science Writing. Award A: For a Professional Science Writer, honoring writing aimed at the general public. Award B: For a scientist/writer, honoring writing aimed at the general public. Award C: For science writing aimed at children.

      The motion was seconded by Lazarus, but withdrawn in its original form after discussion. A revised motion was passed, as reported following the discussion.

      After some discussion, Koch clarified the distinction between A and B by stating that the writers themselves decide if they want to be considered as science writers or as scientists. We want to include recognition of non-scientists who write about science.

      Havens said he has a problem with the children's award. There is no criterion or judgment for this; it is represents a different community with which we have no experience.

      Ford asked if the production end writing of more good science books for children is something AIP wants to encourage. The answer ought to be yes. A suitable judging committee could be found.

      Frauenfelder said he was in favor of the children's award because he thinks his career was totally influenced by books he read as a youth.

      Boyce then made the following motion, which was seconded by Lazarus and unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED it be recommended to the Governing Board that AIP support, with its own funds, science writing awards.

      It was agreed that the definition and number of the awards is in the province of the CEP, and that the Executive Committee should not appropriate the activities of the CEP.

      Frauenfelder said the sentiment of the Executive Committee was in favor of the proposal, and that the judgment as to which award category was appropriate was up to the author who submitted the work for judging.

   6. Evaluate Policies for Mission III in Part A, pp. 8-9 for Adequacy in Dealing with Above Action Items
      Koch led a review/discussion of current and proposed AIP policies dealing with Mission III. He noted that 55% of the AIP staff are involved in AIP-owned activities, and 45% are involved in activities on behalf of member Societies. This percentage is vital for our tax exemption. We generate monies and utilize them for the public good. The discussion ensuing led to a number of modifications in the number and in the wording of these policies. These changes will be reflected in future drafts of this long-range planning document.

      Koch called attention to the statement that Advisory Committees are advisory to the Board or management and not to organizational units. It is important to have this policy statement as a referent in discussions with committees.

      Frauenfelder agreed that it is important for Koch to have sue a statement to which he can point if needed.

   7. Fees for Placement Service
      Koch referred to the policy statement regarding fees for placement services. Educational services are charged at actual cost, not incremental. Fees are charged to employers and registrants. Should these fees go to Member Societies or to AIP? Management feels that it should go to the Placement Service, which would make it possible to keep fees as low as possible. The Societies are charged for incremental costs.

      Slack added that the fee does not always pay the cost.

      Havens said APS uses this service the most. It is useful and he thinks AIP should get the money.

      The meeting recessed for lunch, followed by a free afternoon, at 12 noon, and reconvened at 6:00 p.m. for a reception, followed by a clambake. The meeting reconvened on 13 September at 8:30 a.m.

12. Final Overview of Three Missions and AIP
Koch asked meeting participants to give their views on the draft long-range policy and operating plans.

Spilhaus said they were helpful in sorting out operations from policy. Stating the policies in one place may help the Governing Board to focus on policy and leave operations (the carrying out of policy) to staff.

Grant said he thinks that Koch's draft of the operating and policy plans made these more accessible and recognizable than with the function plans. He thinks the staff did a good job in a relatively short time; revisions are still needed, but we have a useful draft.

Lazarus said he was pleased with this method of organization; it serves to pull the functions of the Institute into coherent policies.

Koch suggested reflecting on the three missions and doing some brainstorming.

Publishing. The production of material is almost completely computerized. Book publishing is entering the publishing picture. This complements the journal picture nicely and provides the means for publishing portions of the literature outside the journals. For the future, journals not in the AIP line of operations are excluded from the advance abstracts that we publish. For instance, he noted that the AGU literature is large; how can these be included?

Lazarus disagreed with Marks' earlier statement that we should replace equipment on a routine basis. The fact that it is amortized does not mean it should be replaced. There is no point in doing anything that adds to the cost; we have to keep our prices down for the sake of our consumers, largely the libraries.

Havens had a counter argument to this. One reason AIP is at the forefront is because we are at the forefront of technology. If you always try to save money you will lose money. AIP itself is not the pioneer in technology; our job is to know what is happening in the field and get savings when the technology is mature enough to use. Cost-consciousness is naturally a prime factor. There are important reason for changing equipment; often equipment is no longer serviced.

Marks commented that they have four bids on possible systems to do automatic page makeup, but we are not under the gun to do anything. A system like this could ultimately save time and personnel. There are now no plans to include this in the 1987 Capital Expenditures Budget.

Frauenfelder said he sees the problem from a different perspective. Libraries need more shelf space, thus there is a need to consider other means of production. We cannot go 100 years with the present rate of publication.

Spilhaus said the discussion has raised a number of issues. What should be published in a book and what in a journal? Books have a small subject and higher cost. People often prefer to publish in a book even though it is better for the community to publish in journals.

Marks said AIP is proceeding conservatively. Conference Proceedings are not risky. The books program makes heavy use of journal articles. Translation books are not a big risk either.

Lazarus said the basis of publishing is the value of the material, not its marketability.
Educational Programs. Koch said that AIP has had umbrella programs but no truly physics education program. It is a question of how to define educational programs for AIP. One of the big new things is the Washington office. Condell has interviewed the Societies to see what they would like. Most of the Society activity has been with Congress, not with the agencies. The possibility of an administrative newsletter which would highlight Washington activities has been suggested.

Wilson asked what AIP can do better than the Societies individually. For instance: (1) data collection and (2) management of the Physics Olympiad. Another way of deciding: what kind of expertise must be drawn upon? Teacher training is clearly the province of AAPT. AIP should try to keep as much contact as possible with the Societies, since it is in a position to facilitate interactions between the Societies.

Wilson said one role of AIP that he sees as very important is to educate the physics community and to educate the public.

1. Procedure for Comparing with Comparable Services
   Marks reviewed the background on the rejection of our proposal to ACA. The International Union of Crystallography is based in the U.K. They publish two main journals; one-half of their circulation is in the U.S. It is now done mostly in England and partly in Denmark by a series of contracts. A commercial outfit generally quotes very low and does not estimate authors' alterations and overtime, which AIP includes in its costs. He feels the principal reason is that the Union did not want their journals published by a U.S. organization.

   He reviewed the way editorial mechanics benefits from being done in-house. The main justification for in-house composition is that we have faster schedules and our costs are 5-10% lower than those of outside compositors.

   Smith said the reason OSA took their publishing away from AIP was due to scheduling, not cost. (Lazarus said the schedules for the last two to three years have been on target within two to three days.) Smith and Spilhaus expressed interest in comparative costs, and would share their current costs with AIP for comparison purposes.

2. Fiduciary Responsibilities of Society Representatives to AIP
   Koch noted that at the March 1985 briefing for Member Society Officers they discussed fiduciary responsibilities of officers to their own Societies. He noted that when a representative is on a Society council they have a responsibility to ensure the health of a Society. When on the Governing Board of AIP, they have a responsibility to AIP. When a Society has no work done by AIP, they may wonder what their function is. Answer: they are actually responsible to the physics community at large.

   Smith said that Koch's remarks reflect the problem. The way to get people involved in AIP is to have programs in development. The stronger the commitment, the more active the programs’ the more participation.

3. International Involvements of AIP and

4. Gaps in AIP Coverage on Behalf of Physics Community
   Wilson asked Koch what AIP's role is internationally. APT has a number of foreign members and subscribers.

   Koch said we have increasing involvement. We have broad-gauge coverage of Japanese and Soviet literature. Perhaps we should think in terms of a page in PT dealing with developments in Europe and a page on the Far East.

   Spilhaus said more than half of the AGU subscriptions are foreign. They see their future expansion from overseas. We need to protect and expand these interests. He feels that AIP should give serious thought to international competition in journals.

   Koch noted that Howitt (head of AIP's marketing Division) recently visited the IOP offices in Bristol and worked with their journals and books marketing managers. He feels we could have marketing exhibits abroad.

   Frauenfelder said this opens a broad problem. It would be good to have a subcommittee look at this and see how we can respond to international interests. They should be asked to contact all the Societies regarding their interest.

   After discussion. Wilson made the following motion, which was seconded by Beyer and unanimously CARRIED.

   MOVED that the Committee on Public Policy be asked to consider ways in which AIP should be involved in matters of concern to the international physics community.

   Frauenfelder said that of the gaps he has identified, the international area may be the most important one.

   Grant said that he thinks CPP is the wrong group to consider this problem. We should identify and convene relevant people to discuss the issue, or suggest that the CPP can appoint a subcommittee.

   The sense of the group was that CPP input would be invited but not in regards the committee and its membership.

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

   MOVED that the Chairman of the Governing Board be authorized to appoint an ad hoc Committee on International Affairs to report to the Executive Committee on appropriate AIP involvement.

   It was suggested that they report at the February meeting of the Executive Committee. The CPP should be asked about issues appropriate to consider.

   Frauenfelder asked for suggestions for names from the Executive Committee.

5. Comments of Legal Counsel
   Koch said the primary comments on the draft long range plans from our legal counsel were editorial. The Attorney suggested that it be indicated what fraction is AIP-owned and what is for the Societies. This is critically important regarding IRS audits. He would also like to have us review the documents and de-emphasize words like competition and profit motive. He asked if "services" could be changed to "programs." Koch will check on these references.

13. Other, Old, and New Business

1. Flow of Information to and from AIP
   Frauenfelder said complaints had been heard about lack of information from AIP. This is not a one-way street. AIP also needs information; the flow should be to and from-societies.

2. Letter from Mexican Physical Society President re Industrial Contacts
   Frauenfelder recently received a letter from the president of the Mexican Physical Society, who asked for help in contacting American companies with subsidiaries in Mexico for support. He asked if it was acceptable for Koch to assist with such contacts.

   Koch said it is not clear to him how to go about this. He will pose the question at the forthcoming meeting of the Advisory Committee on Corporate Associates.

3. ACS Letter to Government Officials re NSF 1987 Budget
   Frauenfelder said that AIP was recently asked, on short notice, to sign a resolution from the ACS to Congress. He read the relevant rules and thought it was clear that he cannot sign such a statement for AIP. It would have to go the Governing Board. The Executive Committee concurred with this interpretation of our rules.

4. Letter from Perlow re Editorship of APL
   Frauenfelder noted the letter recently received from Perlow, the current editor of APL, and asked Koch for the background. Koch said two years ago Perlow gave advance notice of his retirement. A search committee for a new editor was established. Holonyak, chairman of the Review Committee, recently wrote to Frauenfelder and suggested not to search for a new editor; Perlow wishes to continue.

   Frauenfelder suggested giving Perlow's name to the search committee as a potential candidate, but that it would not be appropriate to dissolve the search committee.

5. Terms of AIP Editors
   See Item 8. B.

14. Future Meetings
Koch reviewed the proposed dates for upcoming meetings of the Executive Committee. After discussion, they were agreed to as follows:

Dates are scheduled as follows:
19 October 1986: Executive Committee, Somerset, NJ.
19-20 October 1986: Governing Board, Somerset, NJ.
21-22 October 1986: Corporate Associates, Exxon Research Labs, Annandale, NJ.
11-12 December 1986: Executive Committee, New York.
19-20 February 1987: Executive Committee, New York.
26-27 March 1987: Assembly of Society Officers, Woodbury.
27 March 1987: Executive Committee, Woodbury (tentative).
27-28 March 1987: Governing Board, Woodbury.
8-9 June 1987: Executive Committee, New York.
10-12 September 1987: Executive Committee, Woods Hole, MA.

AIP Staff were excused at 12 noon and the Executive Committee met in executive session.

15. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m., followed by lunch.