June 9, 1988

Executive Committee of the American Institute of Physics

Minutes of Meeting

1. Convene – Roll Call
The meeting convened in the Embassy Room of the Dupont Plaza Hotel at 5:00 p.m., 9 June 1988.

Members Present:
Hans Frauenfelder, Chair
Peter B. Boyce
Kenneth W. Ford, Executive Director
Roderick M. Grant, Secretary
William W. Havens, Jr.
F. Dow Smith
Martin Walt
Jack M. Wilson

Members Absent:
David Lazarus
James A. Purdy

Non-voting Participant:
Joseph M. Reynolds

Gerald F. Gilbert, Treasurer
John S. Rigden, Director of Physics Programs
Timothy C. Ingoldsby, Director of Information Technology
Paul A. Parisi, Manager, Special Projects
Nathalie D. Wagner, Aaaistant to the Secretary
Spencer Weart, Manager, History Division and
Chair, Long Range Planning Committee (10 June session)

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

2. Report of the Secretary

  1. Minutes of 11-12 February, 18 March, and 25 April Meetings
    These minutes were approved as distributed.

  2. Report of Telephone Ballot re FIZ Contract
    Grant reported that the draft FIZ contract had been approved unanimously by telephone ballot. He further stated that he had not polled the Executive Committee by telephone concerning the Gemant Award as information had been received only recently, and could be acted on at this meeting.

3. Report of the Chair of the Governing Board
Frauenfelder said he had no remarks at this time.

4. Report of the Executive Director

  1. Meeting with FIZ
    Ford reported that he spent two days in France with a representative of FIZ negotiating details of the proposed new contract with FIZ. He anticipates that the remaining details can be resolved so that the contract can be signed in early July. Havens asked if there had been any comments from IEE in England regarding the possibility of violation of anti-trust laws. Ford said he had a brief discussion with the representative of IEE, who was disappointed over the planned arrangement, but cordial; no legal action was mentioned. Attorneys for both AIP and FIZ think this is a non-issue.

  2. Appointment of Congressional Fellow
    Ford announced that Arthur A. Charo, now at the Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard, was the first choice of the selection committee, and that Charo had accepted the appointment.

    1. Continuation of Congressional Fellow Program
      (The following was discussed under Agenda Item 19. C. (Other Business) on the next afternoon, but is brought here for continuity of subject.)

      Ford distributed a memo dated 1 June 1988 to Executive Committee concerning the continuation of the Congressional Fellowship Program. He said the number of applicants this year was not large (20), but was large enough to assure well-qualified candidates. The program was originally approved for one year, as recommended by the Committee on Public Policy (CPP) and approved by the Governing Board. He was not sure if continuation of the program would be the best use of AIP funds but the CPP at its recent meeting recommended continuation of the program. Action is needed now if it is to be promoted for another year.

      The following motion, suggested in Ford's memo, was made by Boyce and seconded by Wilson. Following further discussion the motion was CARRIED, with one abstention.

      MOVED that the AIP Congressional Fellowship program be continued for two additional years under terms similar to those applied in its first year, and that the program be reviewed at the end of that two year period.

  3. Officer Titles
    Ford noted his 31 May 1988 memo to the Executive Committee: "Titles of Officers" distributed at the meeting. The title "Managing Director" which had been put into use in September 1987 without formal Executive Committee or Governing Board action, has not won adherents, so he proposes to return to the title "Director" for the heads of the Finance and Administration, Physics Programs, and Publishing Branches. The Executive Committee concurred with this change.

  4. Annual Report
    Ford noted the annual report, contained in the June issue of Physics Today, just published, and its structure. He encouraged the Executive Committee to review the report and to comment on the twelve issues identified therein which face the Institute in the coming years.

    He called at tent ion to the fact that the financial statements were inadvertently omitted from the report through a production oversight. They will be published in the September issue and added to the reprint version which is sent to the entire AIP mailing list.

5. AIP Woodbury Facility: Expansion Feasibility and Schematic Study
Gilbert referred to the 20 May 1988 from Mojo-Stummer Architects, and to his 23 May response. He said the Executive Committee had asked management to investigate the possibility of changing the zoning for the AIP Woodbury property to commercial and to have plans drawn up. He signed an agreement with Mojo-Stummer for $10,000 to draw up a schematic. William Weinbaum (AIP's real estate consultant) was asked to find an appropriate person in the area to look into zoning. Owen Smith was selected; he has good credentials and is knowledgeable about environmental issues.

Owen Smith noted some salient facts:
1) Zoning. In considering a request for a zoning change, the town wants to be sure the site would not be sold to a promoter. They would want a signed agreement indicating long term use.
2) Tax-exempt status. Gilbert files an application for tax exemption every May; there are no complications on this. Since we do not pay taxes, O. Smith suggested that in the spirit of reciprocity we might consider making a contribution towards services.

Gilbert and Ford will now meet with O. Smith, and the architect will now formalize the plan (included in draft form with the agenda).

D. Smith asked how this fits with AIP's long range space needs. Ford said it fits quite closely. It would double the space currently available.

Frauenfelder said this seems sufficient for at least 10 years, and it is impossible to project beyond that time. There would be no disruption of the work force.

Gilbert said he told Weinbaum the town should realize that AIP cannot put more money into the site unless the zoning is revised. He has no indication of timing for construction of a building. We have better rapport with the neighbors now then earlier. Weinbaum advises having an open house as soon as it can be arranged.

Ford said that Owen Smith has agreed to a contingency fee basis: if no success, no fee. [Note: This was subsequently changed. Smith will work on an hourly basis.] We are in the hands of Weinbaum, as he has the experience in this area. The architectural plan was designed (1) to get the maximum building space on that property and (2) to have no impact on property which borders the residential area. It has four levels, and multi-level parking.

6. Financial Matters

  1. Status of Capital Expenditures
    Gilbert reviewed the status of capital expenditures. He said the relationship of expense to budget has been good. He also included in this summary the unbudgeted capital expenditures authorized by management.

  2. Status of 1987 AIP Audit
    Gilbert referred to the 25 May 1988 memo from Dolowich reviewing the status of the 1987 audit. The audit went well and the auditors have now signed off.

  3. Status of IRS Tax Case
    Gilbert's 31 May 1988 memo to the Executive Committee reports that the IRS Appeals Officer has called him several times requesting additional information and that William Lehrfeld had written to the Officer asking where we stand. Lehrfeld has not yet received an answer to his letter.

    Frauenfelder asked what it would mean if we lose the case. Gilbert said this case was for the year 1984; we would probably have a liability of $150,000 for that year. Lehrfeld is confident that we will win, but he thinks they will drag their feet. The facts are complicated and every case is different. We could go to court if we lose this round.

  4. IOP Contract
    Gilbert's 31 May 1988 memo to the Executive Committee explains the details of our contract with IOP. This plan works out well for both IOP and AIP. We are now preparing material for the non-member billing. We need to renew our agreement with IOP annually, and the personal contacts that Marks and Gilbert have made with their officials are helpful; they are concerned about any ramifications due to Marks' departure. Gilbert will meet personally with IOP officials Tony Pearce and Louis Cohen in mid-June.

  5. Policy on Grants and Contracts
    Ford referred to his 27 May 1988 memo to Executive Committee on "Current Procedures for Handling Contracts, Agreements, and Grants" and to Havens' 5/6/88 memo to the Executive Committee, "The Need for an Advisory Group on Sponsored Research and Suggested Guidelines for Sponsored Research" which was mailed to the Executive Committee on 3 June.

    Ford reminded the committee that Havens, at a previous meeting, had requested information on current procedures, and had raised the question of whether it would be timely to have a more formal set of procedures. He stated that grant or contract proposals would be brought to the Executive Committee if they are out of the ordinary or take a new direction. He thinks there should be exceptions to this, i.e. in cases where time is of the essence, when AIP would be able to proceed after consul ting the Chair of the Governing Board and the Secretary.

    Smith asked if there is any dollar cutoff. There must be many contracts and agreements in the nature of business. Havens said these are not what is being discussed here. His memo is intended for non-commercial, foundation, and government agreements.

    Gilbert said Weart is aggressive and successful in fund raising. AIP has a policy that if we act as a conduit for money being received by AIP which then is passed on to another per on, AIP gets 1% for handling this outside contract. An example is the newly formed Superbomb Project, a documentary film in the planning stage. The money has to go through a 501(c)(3) organization, and there is necessarily some overhead. The agreement was signed by the MacArthur Foundation for $90,000; this is disbursed periodically upon submission of expenses. A number of organizations will contribute to this project. Bills are approved by officers of the film contractor and Weart will also check on them. Weart is on the advisory committee of this project, and Ford told him AIP would have to be involved in the decisions, although the expenditures are by another organization.

    Havens said this is a good example of these concerns. What was the approval procedure? Gilbert said it went through the sequential routing, per the blue routing sheet (included in the Attachment).

    Walt said he is more concerned about the procedures. In his experience, it is useful to have everyone who is involved in decisions concerning approval of applications get together for a discussion. Issues and possible pitfalls can occur to people and be raised within a group.

    Frauenfelder said two things are involved: 1) policies, and 2) mechanisms for approval.

    Havens said the policies should be approved by the Governing Board. There is also the magnitude involved. He noted the Information Project, a grant to AIP from NSF in the late 1970s which was over $1 million. This was withdrawn on short notice, causing severe problems for AIP.

    Frauenfelder thought the blue approval sheet circulated internally was sufficient for routine proposals. Should some of Havens' ideas be incorporated for other types of proposals? He thought they would not be needed for routine proposals. To set a dollar amount can be dangerous. He hoped this could be done without a new committee, rather have the Executive Committee and in extraordinary cases the Governing Board serve as a review committee.

    Ford said he will be willing to undertake as an assignment to draw up a proposed method.

    Smith said we should make sure things are scrutinized. He thinks it is a good idea to have a meeting of all offices or parties involved.

    Frauenfelder said he will expect Ford to draw up a proposed method with a clear procedure and rules to catch unusual things that could cause problems.

    (The following two financial topics were discussed under Agenda Item 19 (Other Business), but are brought here for continuity.)

  6. Oil Tank Replacement
    Gilbert distributed a 7 June 1988 memo from Kranz on this subject. The underground storage tank for #2 fuel oil failed the county mandated pressure test. The memo summarized the required and alternative expenses: for removal of the tank, backfill and asphalt repair, and replacement with a new tank. Conversion of the existing oil furnaces to dual gas-oil burners is an alternative to be considered. Kranz is getting proposals and will have a consulting mechanical engineer help choose the best solution. Approval is needed to authorize the expenditure, as action must be taken quickly once the decision is made. Gilbert said most of this would be capitalized expense.

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

    MOVED that the expenditure of up to $50,000 for the replacement of a leaking underground oil storage tank, per the 7 June 1988 memo from Kranz to Gilbert, be approved.

  7. Allocation of 1987 Net Revenue
    Gilbert distributed his 9 June 1988 memo to Executive committee "Allocation of 1987 Net Revenue". Each year the annual net revenue is allocated to Designated Funds. For the past several years we have allocated 25% to each of the four funds. The biggest discrepancy between reserves and expense is in the Publication Fund. He recommends allocating 100% of the 1987 Net Revenue to the Publication Fund.

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

    MOVED that 100% of the AIP 1987 Net Revenue in the amount of $1,700,000 be allocated to the Publication Fund.

7. 1989 Budget Guidelines
Ford said this item set the stage for pricing discussions. We asked what the principal changes are in 1989 that will require publishing income. In gains, we look for increased revenue from the books program, FIZ, increased resident Member Society rentals, less deficit in CIP. In debits, there are significant increases in educational programs, maybe additional staff in the educational area, increases in rentals and office services, inflation, salary increases, and increased bottom line. The revised budget for 1988 shows a projected net of $400, 000. He wants to bring this up to at least $1 million for 1989, which means publishing has to generate $400,000 more next year. On the basis of these figures, Parisi did his pricing studies. Fortunately it is possible to meet this objective with more modest price increases than in the last several years.

Walt said he is worried whether in this approach AIP is motivated to keep costs down in order to keep journal prices from rising too much. Ford replied that we do this in part, but maybe not thoroughly enough. AIP is studying costs to some extent, and he hopes the new Director of Publishing will look at this in more detail; we need careful analysis for all aspects of publishing.

Frauenfelder asked about the APS study of the cost-effectiveness of AIP services. Havens said this study is in progress.

Havens said APS has been studying the page charge question, and will recommend to its Executive Committee an increase in page charges in 1989. Their motivation is the belief that library subscription rates cannot continue to escalate.

(The meeting recessed at 6:30 p.m. for dinner.)

8. Executive Session
The staff was excused at 8: 00 p m. following dinner, for the executive session, which is reported in the official minutes only.

(The meeting resumed on Friday, 10 June, at 9:00 a.m. in the AIP Washington Office.)

9. Publishing Matters

  1. Reports of Meetings of Subcommittee

    1. Journals - 11 May
      J. T. Scott's 24 May 1988 memo to Ford reviews discussions at this meeting. Parisi reported that the subcommittee recommended that Physics of Fluids be split into a fluid-dynamics section and a plasma section. Scott and Ford are forming a committee to do a five-year review of the Journal of Chemical Physics. The committee noted that two journals (JAP and JCP) will have special covers indicating that they are for Member subscriber use only.

    2. Information Technology - 12 May
      Parisi referred to his 18 May 1988 memo to Ford which reviewed discussions at this meeting. He said it is probably now technically feasible to do automatic page makeup. This has been considered for some time and staff is examining the economic possibilities of this to see if the bottom line has improved and if it is practical. Three vendors have been considered, and staff will make visits to see the systems in operation.

      Grant said that a representative from the American Mathematical Society was invited to the meeting to describe their experiences in processing disks prepared by authors in versions of TeX, and spoke positively about the system. However, very few manuscripts are received this way. The AIP staff prefers to scan manuscripts by Kurzweil as there are no computer compatibility problems with this system.

      Havens said APS plans to have TeX ready by September, and Boyce reported that AAS is working towards this as well. Ford commented that when APS is ready to accept TeX manuscripts, AIP wants to be ready also.

      Parisi reported that though authorization has been given to purchase a laser proofer, one has not been obtained as staff has not found one which can emulate the Videocomp output satisfactorily.

  2. Report of 13 May Meeting of Committee on Publishing Policy
    Parisi's 18 May memo to Ford reviews actions at the meeting. Ford introduced the topic by distributing his 4 May 1988 memo which went to the Committee on Publishing Policy. He summarized four topics of discussion at that meeting:
    1) Page charges. There was a 50-50 split on what should be done. The Committee will return to the issue in November.
    2) Page budgets. They thought it would be a mistake to impose a maximum number of pages, rather than using quality as a criterion.
    3) Quality of the journals. a) Physical; b) Editorial. Are we at the right point between these two factors? We may be leaning too high on the physical quality.
    4) Member prices. Are member/non-member ratios appropriate? (See discussion under 9.B.2.)

    Frauenfelder raised a question about (3) - what is the cost of higher quality pages? Havens commented that when the physical quality decreases, the complaints increase. The cost per page for quality appearance is small. Ford said that it has to be realized there have to be compromises between quality and price; AIP needs to understand better the cost of quality in deciding on the best balance.

    1. Recommendation to Publish Physics of Fluids as Parts A and B
      The Committee on Publishing Policy approved the recommendation of the Subcommittee on Journals that this journal be split. The fluid dynamics component is increasing. The Editorial Board was mainly in favor of this; they think it will help get more of the better papers. Parisi noted that the table of contents for both will appear in both publications and perhaps the abstracts. Nonmembers will have to take both parts A and B.

      The following motion was unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the recommendation from the Committee on Publishing Policy that the Physics of Fluids be divided into Part A (Fluid Dynamics) And Part B (Plasma Physics), each to be published monthly, be approved.

    2. Recommendations on 1989 Subscription Prices for Archival Journals, Translation Journals, and Package Prices
      Parisi referred to his 16 May 1988 memo to Ford, with attached summary budget sheet showing actual 1986, projected 1987, budgeted 1988, and preliminary 1989 based on itemized assumptions. He reviewed the rationale for the proposed pricing of archival journals as contained in the memo. The proposed 1989 increases range from 9% to 30% for members and from 11% to 15% for nonmembers. No changes are recommended in the page charges for these journals.

      Several members commented that AIP should study the page charge issue again, as library subscription rates have been growing rapidly. AIP has allowed the nonmember/member price differential to grow, in some cases 14 to 1. The Committee on Publishing Policy passed a resolution that member prices should be adjusted over time to bear the incremental cost of the journal.

      The following recommendation was unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the schedules for 1989 subscription prices and page charges for AIP archival journals be approved, as depicted in the 16 May memo and accompanying tables from Parisi to Ford. (All approved prices are given in Appendix A.)

      Parisi's 16 May 1988 memo to Ford gives the background and budget sheet information on translation journals. Proposed 1989 increases range from zero to 14% and average 9.44%. The new royalty rate will go from 8.5% to 10% starting in 1989 as a result of the recently signed agreement with the Soviets.

      The following recommendation was unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the schedules for 1989 subcription prices for AIP translation journals be approved, as depicted in the 16 May memo and accompanying tables from Parisi to Ford.
      Parisi then reviewed the recommended 1989 package prices for archival and translation journals.

      The following recommendation was unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the schedules for 1989 package pricing of archival and translation journals be approved, as depicted in the 16 May memo and accompanying tables from Parisi to Ford.

    3. Recommendations on 1989 Subscription Prices for Physics Today, Computers in Physics, and Secondary Products and Services
      Parisi referred to his 16 May 1988 memo to Ford. Parisi said no increases in price for PT, CIP, SPIN, Advance SPIN, and GPAA are recommended. Continuance of the GPAA is dependent on the APS action with respect to continuing to offer GPAA to its members. For CPI, increases of 15% for nonmembers and 11% for members are recommended.

      Grant said that information on ad rates was not included for the Executive Committee. These previously had been approved by the Executive Committee. If ad rates are set without such action, it constitutes a change of practice, not policy.

      Ford said he would like the judgment of the Executive Committee on whether they need to approve ad rates. He would assume it would not be necessary.

      Smith thought management should have flexibility to determine these and pursue them. Gilbert said Greeley felt this way, too.

      Frauenfelder suggested taking up this point at the next meeting.

      The following recommendation was unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the schedules of subscription prices for Physics Today, Computers in Physics, and for Secondary Products and Services, as depicted in the 16 May memo from Parisi to Ford, be approved.

    4. Recommendation to Ship Journals Via Air Freight
      Parisi said management recommends that, beginning in 1989, Airfreight Service be provided (included in the subscription prices) to all paid member and nonmember subscriptions from the Eastern Hemisphere (16 May 1988 memo from Parisi to Ford and 1 April 1988 memo from John Dicaro to Parisi). Delivery to Japan by airfreight is already mandatory. Many claims for missing issues are received for journals going to these countries as surface mail is slow and quite haphazard.

      Havens said it is highly desirable for the Institute and all the Societies to have the same policy. However, the number of subscriptions in some countries is very small and the extra expense could be a problem. For example, all member subscriptions to PR-B from India are surface.

      Frauenfelder said we can either approve it or have the Member Societies allow a choice.

      There was unanimous agreement to drop the word "Member" from the recommendation. The following was then unanimously CARRIED.

      MOVED that the recommendation from the Committee on Publishing Policy that, beginning in 1989, Air Freight Service be provided to all paid nonmember subscriptions from the Eastern Hemisphere (Europe, Asia, Africa, and Australia).

      Wilson said the AAPT Board had asked him to bring the following to the Executive Committee. In the recent billing cycle, AAPT journal information was not entered in the AIP journal billings. Since taking over its subscription fulfillment, AAPT has provided information regarding AIP journals in their billings. Does AIP want AAPT to continue providing information on AIP journals to AAPT members?

      Ingoldsby and Gilbert were surprised that AAPT was not entered on this billing cycle, and said the omission would be corrected as soon as possible.

(The meeting recessed for lunch at 12:15 p.m. and resumed at 1:00 p.m.)

10. Physics Programs Matters

  1. Senior Education Fellow
    Rigden reported that Jorge Barojas has accepted the position of Senior Education Fellow for the coming year (1 July 1988 - 30 June 1989). Barojas' curriculum vitae was contained in the 27 May 1988 memo from Rigden to Ford.

    In response to Havens' concern that the education fellow of the AIP should be directed toward U. S. educational programs and that Barojas had very little experience with educational systems in the U. S. A., Rigden said Barojas is Secretary of the IUPAP Commission on Physics Education, and thus has considerable international experience and active involvement with the U. S. through work done with AAPT. He is experienced in building of networks for dissemination of physics teaching information and will work on projects trying to build a consensus on restructuring the basic physics course.

    Gilbert said the Institute is aware of the fact that Barojas is not a U. S. citizen. T. Braun is working with an immigration lawyer who will assist him in obtaining an H-4 visa which will make him eligible for employment.

  2. Manager of Education Division - Status of Search
    Ford said an offer has been made but it has not been finalized, so there is no announcement as yet.

  3. Gemant Award
    Rigden referred to the 13 May 1988 letter from Burke, chair of Gemant Award
    Committee, to Ford. He reported that the committee unanimously decided on Professor
    Freeman Dyson of the Institute for Advanced Study as the second recipient of the Andrew
    Gem ant Award.

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

    MOVED that Professor Freeman Dyson be designated as the second recipient on the Andrew Gemant Award.

    A replacement for Burke on the Gemant Award Committee is needed. It is a three-person committee; the senior person serves as chair. Rigden will follow up ·on suggestions made by Member Societies and the Executive Committee, and make a recommendation to Frauenfelder for this appointment.

  4. Report of 3 June 1988 Meeting of Committee on History of Physics
    Rigden commented that this committee is a sophisticated and responsive group. Stuewer asked him to tell the Executive Committee two things:
    1) He thinks the History Division is a world-class operation, and the committee is very pleased with the Center.
    2) The committee is concerned over continuity if Weart should ever leave the Institute. They want to propose the appointment of an Associate Director to assure continuity of the work. This historian should have an interest in education, to implement some of the kinds of thing discussed at the meeting.

    Smith asked if Weart, who was present in this part of the meeting, had any comments on the hi tory of science relating to education.

    Weart said the Division has run a number of educational programs in the past, but this would require another hand on board as these projects require a lot of staff time. He think we have a mandate to look into this area.

  5. Status of Other Advisory Committees

    1. Committee on Physics Programs Policy

    2. Proposed Committee on Physics Education
      Rigden said the Committee on Physics Programs Policy (CPPP) will meet in mid-June. Ford had distributed a 1 June 1988 memo to the Executive Committee dealing with the proposed Committee on Physics Education. Rigden said education enjoys the greatest areas of overlap in terms of Member Society interest, and he views this proposed committee as one of the most important.

      Grant made the following motion, which was seconded by Boyce. After extensive discussion the motion was WITHDRAWN.

      MOVED that a Committee on Physics Education be established to provide review, advice, and recommendations concerning projects and programs within the Education Division of the Institute.

      Smith thought it an important committee to establish; he hoped it also would serve as a vehicle for communication among the Societies. Rigden thought this should be implicit in its charge.

      In response to a question from Havens, Ford said this proposed committee would report through the Executive Director, not through the CPPP, and only indirectly to the Board. It is to be an advisory committee, parallel to the History Advisory Committee.

      Wilson said he thinks this proposed committee is what the CPPP, the existing committee, should be doing and that the current membership of the proposed new committee should be the membership of the present CPPP.

      Grant said he agrees somewhat with this, but we do not now have a committee advisory to the Education Division. The composition of the committee is a subject for discussion at CPPP next week. He then suggested amending the motion to state that the initial members of the new committee would be the current membership of the CPPP, with changes to follow later after further discussions.

      Rigden agreed that all those on the current CPPP would be appropriate members for the proposed committee.

      Frauenfelder said the best way to do it would be to change the name of the CPPP to the name of the proposed new committee and make a new overview committee.

      At this point Grant withdrew his motion and Boyce his second.

      The following motion was made by Wilson and seconded by Havens. Following the discussion, the motion was WITHDRAWN.

      MOVED that the current Committee on Physic Programs Policy be renamed the Committee on Physics Education.

      After discussion concerning the best way to reconstitute the CPPP and to structure the proposed new Committee on Physics Education, Smith suggested that the Secretary be instructed to come back with a specific proposal along the lines of the discussion and in the meantime to ask the CPPP to move ahead as if they were overseeing the education activity.

      Smith made the following motion, which was discussed in depth. The motion died for lack of a second.

      MOVED that a Committee on Physics Education be established, parallel with the existing advisory committee.

      Smith said there is a need for this committee, populated by people with a strong interest in education. The policy committee could be constituted of chairs of five committees, with the possibility of additional members. Such a proposal should be brought to the Governing Board.

      Ford, Grant, and Rigden were asked to collaborate in drafting a proposal that would resolve the issue of the CPPP and the proposal for a Committee on Physics Education.

11. Fulfillment and Member Information System (FAMIS) - Status Report
lngoldsby referred to his 27 May 1988 memo to Ford, a status report of the project. Using a portable work station port connected to the Wang in Woodbury and linked to an overhead projector, he outlined progress to date and demonstrated some features of the system design.

Staff is on schedule with the conversion. The planned operational date is mid-September. This would allow us to be online prior to the processing of returns from end of year billing. Conversion from Univac is in process; it is going slower than anticipated. There are many problems with the Univac which are causing delays. We are continuing with the old processing style for now but will do the work on the new reliable hardware as the conversion blocks are done and tested.

Ingoldsby distributed a memo "FAMIS Design Considerations", which contained a list of topics he would like discussed. After they were presented, the consensus was that they should be discussed thoroughly by the Committee on Society Services.

1. Membership Multi-Year Terms, i.e., span of membership.
A. What quantization of term is desired? What would be the smallest term to bill for? The system can support whatever minimum length is desired.
B. What pricing options(s) are desired?
C. What rounding factor should be applied to calculated prices?
D. What about life membership and pricing of same?

2. Journal Multi-year Subscription Term.
A. What granularity of term is desired?
B. What pricing options are desired?
C. What about increases in freight charges?
D. What about lifetime subscriptions to journals?

3. Random Expiry. Over time, this feature would be desirable to reduce fulfillment costs, but for journals it is preferable to have entire volumes. Should AIP code this if it will not be used?

4. Accounting Considerations
A. How are multi-year fund allocated?
B. How are life memberships allocated? He is not sure of the implications of offering a multi-year term, for auditing purposes. Gilbert said this would be done by year.

Summing up, Ingoldsby said we are on schedule and under budget in development of the system. He anticipates full operation in time to process renewal of calendar Subscriptions and memberships.

12. PI-NET - Status Report
Ingoldsby reported that much progress has been made in the last month with Peter Sutherland, AIP's new UNIX/C programmer. The existing features are almost completely converted. PI-NET and PI-MAIL are being brought together. The goal is to have it online by 15 September.

Ingoldsby then reviewed the proposed services, and the possibilities for revenue. He does not think that PI-NET will be a revenue generator in the near future. Fees will probably pay phone charges and administrative costs, but we will not recoup research and development costs.

Ford noted the 27 May 1988 memo from Merrill and Ingoldsby regarding a proposed pricing structure for PI-NET. He would like Executive Committee approval to proceed with a pricing structure. The recommendation here came from the PI-NET Advisory Committee. It is simple and has no surcharges. It would at least generate income to cover the telephone and connect charges.

Ingoldsby pointed out that the intent is to make PI-NET mail a service to people who have no other service. We will never satisfy everyone. We are providing an end point for any of the networks, but we are not providing a gateway between networks. A not-for-profit company cannot do this.

Wilson made the following motion, which was seconded by Boyce. Following discussion, the motion was DEFEATED (two in favor, three opposed).

MOVED that the Executive Committee delegate to AIP management the authority to set prices and alter rates for PI-NET.

Smith thought we are looking at something still amorphous. It needs a reasonable amount of monitoring, overall. He thinks it is not inappropriate to have the Executive Committee oversee it at this stage. Havens said he agreed with Smith that it is still an amorphous issue. Pricing is small but it is necessary for the future. It should not be delegated to management at this time. This is what the Executive Committee has to be concerned with at this stage.

Frauenfelder said we could come back to this discussion at any time. The vote was then taken, and the motion was defeated, as reported above.

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

MOVED that the proposed pricing structure for PI-NET, as depicted in the 27 May 1988 memo from Merrill and Ingoldsby to Ford, be approved.

13. Development Committee - Status Report
Ford noted the recommendation from the Member Societies for membership on the new AIP Development Committee that were contained in the 26 May 1988 memo from Wagner and said he hope to convene the committee in July. All Societies except the SOR have given recommendations. The SOR President said his society has chosen not to make a recommendation.

14. Committee on International Affairs - Status Report
Ford referred to his 26 May 1988 letter to Jossem and noted the charge to the committee from the ad hoc Committee on International Relations. Rigden has been designated as the staff liaison. Plans are to convene the first meeting in September.

15. Report on Plans for October Corporate Associates Meeting
Ford reviewed the format and speakers for the October Corporate Associates meeting.

(The meeting recessed at 12:15 p.m. for lunch and resumed at 1:00 p.m.)

16. Long-Range Planning
Frauenfelder, referring to the 31 May 1988 memo from Weart to the Executive Committee: "Progress Report of the Long-Range Planning Committee", said he liked what he had seen so far; with so many important issues it is difficult to decide what is the most important.

Weart said that one of the purposes of this long-range planning exercise is to force people to decide priorities. After reviewing the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT), he said the objectives require initiatives, then targets must be set to reach the objectives. The hardest part is monitoring to see if targets are being reached. The committee is now converging on objectives. The next step is to tackle the initiatives.

After leading the committee through an extensive discussion of the draft objectives, Weart asked that additional ideas and thoughts be sent to him.

Frauenfelder said he hopes the interaction will be a continuing one. He said it is clear to him that long-range planning should be something continuous and should be a part of Executive Committee meetings.

Weart said it would be a cycle: at one time a discussion of objectives; at another time, policies and initiatives.

17. Discussion of Agenda Items for September Executive Committee Meeting and October Governing Board Meeting
Ford said he would appreciate suggestions regarding forthcoming meetings in several areas: 1) overall journal pricing philosophy; 2) PI-NET philosophy and budgetary concerns 3) public and international affairs.

Frauenfelder said it is better to have fewer topics presented for discussion, and to do them well.

18. Future Meeting Dates
(* indicates new dates set)
8-10 Sep (9 a.m. Thurs - 12 noon Sat) Executive Committee, Woods Hole, MA
23 Oct (12 noon - 5 p.m. Sun) Executive Committee, Westchester Marriott,
Tarrytown, NY
23-24 Oct (6 p.m. Sun - 4 p.m. Mon) Governing Board, Westchester Marriott,
Tarrytown, NY
25-26 Oct Corporate Associates, IBM Watson Labs, Yorktown Heights, NY
1-2 Dec (5 p.m. Thurs - 4 p.m. Fri) Executive Committee, New York, NY
* 2-3 Mar (5 P.M. Thurs - 4 P.M. Fri) Executive Committee
30-31 Mar (1 p.m. Thurs -) Assembly of Society Officers
31 Mar (a.m.) Executive Committee (if necessary)
31 Mar (12:45 - 1:15 p.m.) Annual Corporation Meeting
31 Mar - 1 Apr (1:30 p.m. Fri - 1 p.m. Sat) Governing Board
* 5-6 Jun (5 p.m. Mon - 4 p.m. Tues) Executive Committee

19. Other Business

  1. Oil Tank Replacement and

  2. Allocation of 1987 Net Revenue to Designated Funds
    These are reported under Agenda Item 6: Financial Matters, for continuity of subject.

  3. Congressional Fellow
    This is reported under Agenda Item 4.B., for continuity of subject.

20. Executive Session
The staff were excused at 3: 50 p .m. for the executive session, which is reported in the official minutes only.

21. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.