Research Coordinating Council

                                               Memorandum 157

                                              September 16, 2004                     

 

Members Present:

Brian Attebery                                John Bennion                                  James Bigelow 

Phil Blick                                        Steve Byers                                    Linda Deck                  

Deb Easterly                                   Karen Kearns (for Kay Flowers)     Larry Ford                   

Dianne Horrocks                             Richard Inouye                                Lori Johnson    

Skip Lohse                                      Mike McCurry                                Subbaram Naidu

Malcolm Shields                              Beth Hudnall Stamm                        Al Strickland

Rob Van Kirk                                 Robert Wharton                              Thomas Windholz

Paul Zelus                                       Connie Tillotson, Committee Secretary

 

Members Absent:          Carol Ashton (Health Professions), GSRSC Representative (open), Gregory Green (for FRC), Frank Harmon (IAC), Graduate Council Representative

 

Guests:                         David Buck, Director, Purchasing (Financial Services)

                                    Cyndy Kelchner, Research Administrator, Institute of Rural Health

 

Dr. Wharton called the meeting to order.  Dr. Wharton suggested taking a few minutes for introductions since we have many new members to the committee. 

 

Dr. Wharton declared a quorum was present.

 

I.          Dr. Wharton requested a motion to approve the minutes.  Dr. Ford requested correction to Item II (E) to modify/add “Day” after Memorial.  Dr. Strickland moved to accept the minutes with the correction, Dr. Lohse seconded the motion.  Memorandum #156 was approved with corrections.

 

II.         REPORTS

 

            A.        Faculty Research Committee - No representation for the committee.  Dr. Wharton mentioned the FRC did meet.  Dianne Horrocks reported the committee made a change to the proposal form.  The committee decided to combine the cover page and the identification page for more clarity.  This change does not require RCC approval since it is a change to the form and does not affect the guidelines.

                       

            B.         Graduate Student Research and Scholarship Committee - No representation for the committee.  Dr. Ford advised the committee will meet next week.

 

            C.         Undergraduate Research Committee - Dr. Van Kirk reported the committee has yet to meet.  The committee will about the first week in October followed by the call for applications for the fall semester with a due date being a month later.  Dr. Van Kirk is new to this position and is still in the process of determining membership.

 

            D.        University Research Committee - Dianne Horrocks volunteered to provide the report since Dr. Wharton was not with ISU at the time of the last meeting and Dr. House was still chairing the committee.  She reported the committee met this past Spring and made seven awards.  The committee awarded $57,279 to seven different projects.  Majority of the faculty to receive the awards were in the natural and physical sciences.  They had some funding available after the awards were made and the committee decided to allocate the remaining funds to the Faculty Research Committee.  A total of $79,000 has been spent with $57,279 towards URC and $21,721 to FRC.  Dianne reminded the committee the URC only has one call for proposals which went out earlier this Spring.  The committee does not anticipate any further business until Spring 2005.  If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Wharton, the presiding chair.

 

            E.         Federal Initiative Update - Dr. Ford reported the only bill that has passed so far concerning us is the Defense Appropriation bill providing two million dollars for the Idaho Accelerator Center’s project on Chem Bioagents and a initiative for one million dollars to Fisk University in Tennessee which shares those funds 50/50 with Idaho State University - means ˝ million dollars to the COLD Project with Dr. Westphal.  The Energy and Water bill which is another big one for us is facing much controversy mainly related to Yucca Mountain.  The Commerce/State/Justice Bill has been marked up by the Senate and they are just short of ˝ million dollars for the Boise Center Aeronautical  Lab which is Dr. Glenn’s project.  Currently these are the only issues affecting us.  The remaining bill will be revisited in continuing resolutions when Congress is back in session either before new elections or after. 

 

Dr. Ford also reported that the FY06 call for proposals was sent out earlier this week to all Deans, Department Chairs, and Center Directors.  He advised if the committee knows of any individual(s) who might be interested in submitting a proposal and has not heard/received the memo to please contact him.           

                       

            F.         INEEL Bids - Dr. Ford reported the proposals for the new contract on the new Idaho National Lab were due in June.  Four contracts were submitted - teams from Bechtel (the current contractor), Battelle, University of Chicago, and the Shaw Group.  All have made their oral presentations and their bids are being evaluated.  The Department of Energy (DOE) has advised the bids will be evaluated and awarded by November 15 and the new contractor will be on board by February 1st.   He feels ISU will be in good shape no matter who is awarded the bid.  His major concern is the Energy Authorization bill and the controversy over Yucca Mountain.  Dr. Ford feels if this project is not funded and is closed down, it would deliver a serious blow to nuclear energy for a long time and consequently for the Lab for a long time.

 

            G.         Other Business - Deb Easterly mentioned normally on the first RCC meeting of the Fall session the committee reviews the annual report which she had produced over the summer.  Connie Tillotson confirmed the report had been provided and Dr. Wharton requested the committee be provided with a copy of the final report.

 

III.       Council Business

 

            A.        Disposition of Equipment Policy - Dianne Horrocks reported that the subcommittee of the RCC (herself, Dr. Shields, Dr. Bhushan) met with representatives from the Financial Services.  They decided last Spring the flowchart required some refinement and clarification.  They received assistance from David Buck from Purchasing, Financial Services Office.  She presented the flowchart to the committee for approval.  David Buck was invited to the meeting to answer any questions. There was discussion on various situations some have experienced with equipment.  Normal procedure is to contact Paul Chatfield in Inventory Control to surplus equipment.  All computers which are surplus need to have the hard drive wipe of all programs and information.  Inventory Control may arrange for each department or the department may delete the hard drive themselves.  Dr. Wharton was curious about property owned by another agency but located on ISU property.  David Buck advised the property is still tagged but identified as owned by another agency - but records are kept on such property for insurance purposes.)  Dianne extended her thanks to David Buck for all his assistance. Dr. Wharton requested a motion to accept the recommendation of the subcommittee as policy.  Dr. Attebury motioned to accept the document as policy for the disposition of equipment, Dianne Horrocks seconded the motion.  It was unanimously approved accept this document as policy. 

 

            B.         Center for Biological Imaging - Level I status has been requested. Dr. Inouye reported this center has been on campus for some time now.  At this time they are not requesting funds but are just looking to obtain the Level I status for a research center.  Dr. McCurry requested clarification on the difference between Level I status and Level II status.  Dr. Ford advised Level I status is recognition as a research center but no guarantee of funding and Level II status is similar to the Idaho Accelerator where University funds are committed to it.  Some discussion on whether additional authority was required prior to recognition as a Center.  Dr. Ford reported for a Level I status the only requirement was the approval of the Committee as long as the request is with the blessing of the department and college.  Dr. Wharton requested a motion from the committee.  Dr. Stickland moved to accept the request for Level I status for the Center for Biological Imaging.  Dr. Shields seconded the motion.  The motion passed to accept the Center for Biological Imaging as a Level I Center. 

 

            C.         Dr. Wharton had a few questions in relation to the Bylaws.  He requested clarification when the input from the Human Subjects Committee, Animal Welfare Committee, Radiation Committee, and Biosafety Committee is requested.  There was some discussion on when their input is needed and what type of circumstance requires their participation with the committee meetings. 

 

            Dr. Wharton mentioned he had an opportunity to read the Bylaws which outlines the duties of the members.  He read the duties outlined in the Bylaws and encouraged all members to continue as in the past and to feel free to discuss topics as needed.  He has an open door policy and would like to know how he may assist you with your research.

 

            Dr. Wharton discussed when he was at the National Science Foundation (NSF) most of the Program Managers are on IPA’s (Interagency Personnel Agreement).  They arrive from universities and are professors and they serve for several years.  After a few years they return to their universities.  He does not know whether ISU is taking advantage of this opportunity.  He advised the committee to take this into consideration cautioning that some individuals would want to be at a certain stage in their careers to avail themselves of this opportunity.  He mentioned it is a wonderful opportunity for someone to learn first hand how an agency works.  He encouraged them to discuss it with their colleagues. 

 

The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.