Oil Spill Recovery Institute
Advisory Board Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, April 21, 1999
Held at the Alaska SeaLife Center in Seward
Board members present:
Gail Evanoff, Native representative
Glenn Ujioka, Native representative
R.J. Kopchak, Fishing industry representative
Marilyn Leland, At-large representative
John Goering non-voting representative, Institute of Marine Science, UAF
Mead Treadwell, non-voting representative, Prince William Sound Science Center
Grant Vidrine, Oil industry representative
Carol Fries, Alaska Dept. of Natural Resources
Ed Collazzi for Larry Dietrick, Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation
Cmdr. Ross Tuxhorn, Dept. of Transportation
Doug Mutter, Dept. of Interior
Claudia Slater (via teleconference), Alaska Dep't. of Fish and Game
Not present: Virginia Adams, Kevin Meyers, Barbara Moore
Staff and visitors: Gary Thomas, Nancy Bird, Penny Oswalt
Others attending: Branch Haymans, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Reynolds; Peter Armato,
National Park Service; Cheryl Brooking, Attorney with Wohlforth, Argetsinger, Johnson &
Brecht
Approval of agenda:
In addition to the discussion of the Geographic Response Plan, Mutter would like to add a discussion of the Environmental Index Sensitivity Mapping Project for Prince William Sound. Under the Chair's Report, Treadwell would like to add a discussion of nominees for replacement board members and a brief report on Arctic Council issues.
Motion by Leland, seconded by Evanoff to approve the agenda as amended. Without objection, agenda approved.
Approval of minutes:
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Leland, to approve minutes of Nov. 24, 1998. No objection. Motion passed
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Leland, to approve minutes of Aug. 12, 1998. No objection. Motion passed.
Chair's report:
By Vice-Chair Mead
Treadwell
Funding for Arctic research
Conferences, Collaborations
Treadwell reported on various legislative initiatives related to funding for Arctic research issues. He noted that the Arctic Research Council is chaired this year by the United States and that one of its committees is meeting in Anchorage the first week of May. In early December, the Pacific Rim Fisheries Program of Alaska Pacific University has scheduled a conference which will bring fisheries commissioners from all Pacific Rim nations to Alaska. Discussion ensued regarding collaboration/coordination among research groups in the state.
At-large representatives
Bird reported on the process for appointing at-large seats. Cowper has officially resigned and Leland's term expires in September, 1999. Terms are for two years. Bird also reported on the governor appointed terms.
Motion by Leland, seconded by Mutter, to advertise the availability of at-large positions, one vacant now and one in September, and to invite letters of interest. Motion passed. Tuxhorn announced that he will be leaving the Coast Guard this spring. Capt. Ed Page is likely to be his replacement. It was suggested that the Board should send letters of appreciation to past Board members.
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Ujioka, to do so. Motion passed.
Treasurer's Report
by R.J.Kopchak, Penny
Oswalt, and Branch
Haymans
2nd quarter FY99
Kopchak noted one correction to the 2nd quarter report: the Program Reserve is $589,000 instead of $541,000. He stated that following a meeting with the investment counselor, it has been decided to realign the investment report portfolio to match OSRI's fiscal year. An error in technology totals in the 2nd quarter report was pointed out. Oswalt will reconcile this. Vidrine asked if the Board wants to continue the 40-40-20 allocation between technology, ecology and education. Treadwell asked to defer discussion on this issue.
Investment portfolio
Haymans distributed the investment report and described the
portfolio of investments. He stated that the report will be
revised to match the federal fiscal year rather than the current
calendar year basis. He expects the next report, in six months,
will show a better picture. Treadwell pointed out that the
primary priority in the contract with Dean Witter is
preservation of principle. He questioned whether OSRI should
be going back to CD's to insure that. Haymans said no. There
was a discussion of possible changes to the investment policy to
open up more options for increasing the investment return.
Two of these would be to increase the allowed length of
corporate government bonds from 7 to 10 years, and to allow
triple B bond purchases in addition to double A bonds.
Haymans noted that Dean Witter is Y2K compliant, and asked
for questions. Treadwell stated the staff recommendation that
Dean Witter provide a good financial report prior to Y2K, and
also asked for a legal review to insure that OSRI has a method
to recover assets should there be any problem.
Kopchak summarized corrections to the Quarterly Report, and invited suggestions for any revisions to the report format.
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Leland, to approve the Treasurer's Report as amended. Motion passed.
Break
Coffee break from 10:15 a.m. until 10:40 a.m.
Note: Prior to 10:40 a.m. Claudia Slater was able to hear via teleconference, but not speak. Following this break she was able to fully participate.
Director's Report
by Gary Thomas
Thomas noted that the legislative report was covered by Treadwell in the Chair's Report. In the research area, he stated that the concept for a nowcast/forecast center is endorsed by the Office of Naval Research, and also is being endorsed more strongly by the National Science Foundation. In Alaska, however, other research entities are not yet focusing on nowcast/forecast and a unified research plan as Thomas would like to see, although progress is being made. This approach requires equipment, infrastructure, and a commitment to long-term monitoring.
Technology Projects
Update
The status of current projects is listed in tab 4 of the meeting
packet ("Program Status Report dated April 6, 1999"). After a
brief discussion, Leland and Thomas agreed to confer later on
the status of Tangborn's iceberg drift trajectory project.
The Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation must spend
its remaining R&D funds by June 30. At Treadwell's request,
Tuxhorn said he will investigate the formalization of a
cooperative relationship between the US Coast Guard and
OSRI. Thomas said he has received letters of interest from
individuals in USCG, ADEC, and RCAC, who would like to
work cooperatively on specific projects. Thomas stated that he
would like to see a method developed to cooperate more
regularly.
ACOPS proposal: Thomas said he has had no contact for a year. Treadwell said that the applicant is talking with the State Dept. and he recommends that they reapply when they are ready.
Small spill technology workshop: Thomas noted there was good attendance by harbormasters but a lack of attendance by fishermen. Kopchak said that the State Harbormasters' Association has contacted the organizers and wants to redo this conference at their conference.
Technology Coordinator
Technology coordinator: Thomas has had a hard time finding
someone with research experience: a professional search firm
has been hired. Thomas invited comments on several
candidates. There was a discussion regarding the expertise of
the individuals mentioned, and whether we need to reassess the
current job description. Perhaps we are looking for too much
in one individual. Treadwell expressed concern that OSRI is
not well known in the oil industry and the technology arena.
The consensus was that the OSRI Board will accept a temporary technology coordinator as long as we continue to move toward a long-term position. Kopchak stated he sees this position as being someone who actually does research. Treadwell said this person needs to be the spokesperson for the continuation of nowcast/forecast team science. Fries agreed that this person cannot be both an administrator and a Principal Investigator/publisher.
Ecology projects
update
Alaska Clean Seas has taken the lead in organizing the Oil and
broken ice workshop, and will be submitting a proposal
shortly. The Circumpolar workshop of resources at risk will
result in the publication of a field guide for oil spill response in
the Arctic. This is currently available in draft form, and the
final report will be published soon. Vidrine noted that industry
and government have worked together on the North Slope to
publish a field guide that sounds similar to this effort.
The Circumpolar mapping of resources at risk to oil pollution is an international effort, with Norway taking the lead. Each Arctic country will be contributing to this. OSRI has set aside $60,000 to support this effort, but has not identified a contractor yet. OSRI will be working with NOAA and EVOS for the seasonal map series of sensitive areas in PWS. NOAA will be in PWS in mid-May to begin work on this, including identifying coastlines and photography. The lack of worthwhile projects submitted in FY98 for oil impact prediction/monitoring resulted in substantial carryover monies to FY99, and the ability to fund four proposals this year. Johnson and Okkonen of the Institute of Marine Science have just received a grant to organize a Cook Inlet Workshop to determine what is presently known about circulation in Cook Inlet and to identify research priorities. It was suggested to them that they organize a workshop like this to identify research needs as a precursor to applying for research funds.
Education projects update
The OSRI website is currently receiving about 3,000 hits a month, and has recently received a face-lift. Bird noted that she is working on getting a simpler web site address, and expects it to be changed shortly. She will forward the new address to Board members. The small spill prevention and awareness money is set aside to be used for projects that may be recommended from the small spill workshop. Current education fellowships and interns were briefly noted.
MORICE proposal
Thomas reported that he met with the partners of MORICE
(Mechanical Oil Recovery in Ice Infested Waters) while at the
oil symposium in Seattle. They have requested $64,000 for
phase 4 of this project, to do testing at Prudhoe Bay this
summer. Thomas recommended OSRI go into partnership on
this and solicited comments from the Board.
Collazzi stated that ADEC is very interested in this program
but is unable to contribute as a partner due to the two year
proprietary clause for results. ADEC supports OSRI's
involvement. Treadwell asked a point of order regarding the
confidentiality of this program. Bird stated that the Grant
Policy Manual requires proposals to be kept confidential until
awarded and said only Board members' packets included the
full proposal (others received a brief summary description).
Questions and discussion ensued regarding OSRI participation
in proprietary research, payback process, and clarification of
whether the $64,000 budget request on page 6 of the proposal
is the total amount requested. In response to a question on oil
being spilled in the Bering Sea for this test, it was stated the
test will be done in a pit with sea ice.
Motion by Evanoff, seconded by Mutter, to proceed with
negotiations for a contract to support MORICE, for discussion
purposes. Mutter said he still has some unanswered questions
and wonders about the Board approving a contract of this size,
something the Board normally doesn't do. He feels that OSRI
also needs a report on the proprietary issues, including payback
and dissemination. Leland suggested that the contract be
approved subject to being able to negotiate a payback that, at a
minimum, would be the amount granted. Kopchak
recommended co-sponsorship with Alaska Clean Seas.
Treadwell said that the ASTF policy for State of Alaska grants
to profit-making entities is to require a payback of some
multiple of the grant amount based on 5% of the gross sales
from marketing the technology. Kopchak stated that he felt that
if OSRI is funding the development of new technology it
deserves a cut of the proceeds, but if OSRI is only
demonstrating a new technology that has already been
developed, it does not need a payback. Further discussion.
Bird restated the motion, with friendly amendments, as follows: Motion by Evanoff, seconded by Mutter, to proceed with contract negotiations to support the MORICE project, subject to being able to negotiate a payback if it is a commercial and not simply a demonstration project. At a minimum the payback will be the amount granted. Motion passed unanimously.
Weather stations
One pending project is to fill critical gaps in weather monitoring in the Prince William Sound and Copper River region. A weather information network was established through the Sound Ecosystem Assessment program but there are gaps, particularly in the Copper River Delta and the Culross Pass areas where there are no weather stations. Science Center staff have been working with Bruce Goldstein of the National Weather Service to secure funding for up to seven new weather stations at a cost of about $25,000 per station. The weather service may contribute to the costs to install stations but does not have the funds to maintain them. Treadwell suggested that the PWS stakeholders convene a meeting to determine the need for these stations and to get support. Information is needed by many groups but none of them are willing to do maintenance. Thomas suggests that OSRI match the funds from the Coast Guard and other agencies to install and develop these sites. Fries will see if there is any available funding in the Boater's Safety Program of the DNR, and if they have the latitude to help support this. Tuxhorn said that the Coast Guard is looking for ways to extend its communication within the Sound. It was questioned whether OSRI wants to commit to a multi-year support program.
Lunch break
Lunch break taken from Noon until 1:00 p.m.
Conflicts of Interest
Bird gave a short summary of the reason behind eliminating Appendix I of the Grant Policy Manual, and adding Section 4.5 regarding impartiality and appearance of fairness. This is an attempt to state the reasoning behind acceptance of proposals, and to describe the review procedures. It also shows the procedures by which OSRI insures that proposals received from the Science Center are treated no differently than proposals from other individuals/organizations.
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Leland to adopt Action #1 as described in the meeting packet, section 6, page 1.
Motion passed unanimously.
This action adopts the following as Section 9 of Article IV of the OSRI bylaws:
"Section 9, Article IV, OSRI Bylaws - A conflict of interest may arise
where there exists the opportunity for direct or indirect material
personal gain by a Board member. Any duality on the part of any Board
member or a member of the Board member's family shall be
immediately disclosed to the Advisory Board, and made a matter of
record in the minutes. Members of the Advisory Board shall complete a
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure form, in substantially the form as shown
in Appendix A, upon becoming a Board member and whenever a
potential conflict of interest arises. Any application for a contract, grant
or award shall include a Conflicts of Interest Disclosure form from each
of the Principal Investigator (PI) and Authorized Agent (AA) to assist the
OSRI Director in avoiding conflicts throughout the review process.
Any Board member having a duality of interest shall not vote or
participate in a peer review of the matter. Such Board member shall be
counted in determining the quorum for a meeting, however. The
minutes of the meeting shall reflect that a disclosure was made, and the
abstention from participating in voting. The Board member shall refrain
from any discussion unless questioned by the Board.
Any grant, contract or award in which a Board member or a member of
the Board member's family has an interest shall be valid
notwithstanding such interest, if the material facts of such interest are
disclosed or known to the Board in advance, and the Board shall
nevertheless, authorize and ratify the grant, contract or award,
PROVIDED THAT, no Board member shall supervise a family member
or administer a grant, contract or award to a family member(1).
In addition to the above, Board members are obliged to comply with any applicable federal, state, municipal or organization requirements regarding conflict of interest and disclosure, and political activities.
1This allows the Director to make small grants (<$100,000) without
involvement from the Board, even if there is a Board member conflict,
provided the Board does not supervise or administer the grant."
"Oil Spill Recovery Institute
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure Form
This form is being completed in accordance with Article IV, Section 9 of the OSRI Bylaws and
Section 8.2.2 of the OSRI Grant Policy Manual.
1. Please list all business and professional activities in which you or any immediate family hold an interest as owner (excluding stock ownership in a publicly traded corporation), officer, board member, partner, employee or other beneficiary position.
2. Please identify any family or business relationship with any current Board member or employees of OSRI and identify the names of the persons, the positions they hold, and the nature of the relationship.
3. Provide a brief description of all legal proceedings pending or threatened to which you or another person with whom you are affiliated or a family member are a party with interests adverse to OSRI.
4. Do you or any member of your family have an arrangement or understanding for employment by any recipient of a current grant or award by OSRI or are there any future financial transactions anticipated between OSRI and such persons or entities? If so, please describe the terms and parties to each such arrangement or understanding.
I certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, that I am not in a position of possible conflict of interest except as stated above or as follows:
and that I will promptly disclose any potential conflicts to the Advisory
Board as they arise.
DATE Signature Printed name
Motion by Kopchak, second by Evanoff to adopt Action #2 as described in the meeting packet, section 6, page 1. Motion passed unanimously.
This action adopts as Section 8.2.2 of the OSRI Grant Policy
Manual the identical language as stated above for OSRI
Bylaws, Section 9, Article IV.
Motion by Kopchak, seconded by Leland to adopt Action #3 as described in the meeting packet, section 6, page 1. Motion passed unanimously.
This action eliminates Appendix I of the OSRI Grant Policy
Manual, adds a new Section 4.5 "Impartiality" (stated below),
and revises Section 8.2.3 to include a reference to the new
section 4.5 (also stated below).
"Grant Policy Manual Section 4.5 Impartiality - The procedures for
evaluating proposals are designed to insure fairness between each
applicant for a grant, contract or award. There may be situations where
the Prince William Sound Science Center is an applicant, and because
of the relationship between the Center and the Oil Spill Recovery
Institute (where the Center is charged with administering the Institute),
the following procedures are adopted.
The OSRI Advisory Board impartially reviews and determines all large
grant awards ($100,000 and over). The Advisory Board delegates
decisions for small grant awards (under $100,000) to the OSRI
Executive Director. The procedure for determining small grant awards is
as follows:
1. All complete proposals received in response to the Broad Area Announcement (BAA) are independently reviewed as detailed in Section 4.3.1 of the Grant Policy Manual and in the specific BAA.
2. Proposal rankings are based upon the independent reviews.
3. The OSRI Executive Director determines award amounts based on both the proposal rankings and the program budget. There may be zero to several projects awarded in full or in part within each program announced through a BAA.
4. All proposals ranked higher than a proposal submitted by the Prince William Sound Science Center shall be offered an award prior to the Center's proposal(s) being approved for funding support.
5. Material information made available to the Prince William Sound
Science Center shall be made available to all other known potential
proposers.
Further, when small grant award decisions include the Prince William
Sound Science Center, the following procedures will be followed:
(1) An "intent to award" notification will be sent to the OSRI Executive Committee within 5 calendar days of the decision by the Executive Director.
(2) If an Executive Committee member wishes, he or she may review the award decision (the proposals, independent reviews and any other pertinent information). If desired, a committee member may request a special meeting to challenge the decision, but this request shall be made within 15 calendar days of the "intent to award" notification.
(3) If requested, a special meeting will be scheduled within 5 working days of the request and the Executive Committee will issue a written decision within 5 working days following the special meeting determining whether to fund the award in question.
(4) All grants challenged in this manner will remain pending until
the Executive Committee makes a decision.
The approval or disapproval of awards by the Executive Committee can
be appealed by any interested person to the Advisory Board within 30
days of the committee's decision. The Advisory Board's decision is
final."
"Grant Policy Manual Section 8.2.3 - Appearance of Fairness: When parent research organizations, such as the Prince William Sound Science Center administer funding institutions, such as OSRI there can be an "appearance of fairness" issue whenever the parent organization receives an award, regardless of the procedures followed to insure fairness. The intent of this section is to double check on the procedures to insure fairness and provide the Board the confidence to dismiss any unjust allegations that may occur. Therefore, it is important that procedures be established for the Board and staff to follow. This is made easier by OSRI clearly identifying long-term goals for its R&D, a framework to provide clear decision-making relative to reviewing proposals and specifying these criteria in the award procedures, policy and advertisements. Procedures to be followed are given in Section 4.5, Impartiality."
Business Plan
Treadwell summarized the history of development of this plan. He noted that it is a living document. There was a discussion of Vidrine's earlier question of whether a 40-40-20 formula is still appropriate for budgeting of funds among the technology, ecology and education programs. The general consensus was to continue allocation of total funds on the basis of this formula. Thomas was questioned on how he thought things were going. He stated that he thought things were going well, though he was a little frustrated in his efforts to convince other agencies to adopt the approach OSRI has endorsed.
Motion by ??? , seconded by Mutter, to adopt the Business Plan. Motion approved.
Public Comments
In response to a question on OSRI's tax status, it was stated that the PWS Science Center, which administers the OSRI funds and programs, is a 501(c)(3) organization. However, OSRI is not a 501(c)(3) organization.
Board Comments
Vidrine expressed pleasure at working with the Board. He said this will be his last meeting. He commented that it was interesting to watch the Institute get going and personally it was exciting to have met all the Board members and to have learned about the areas they represent.
Adjournment
Motion by Leland, seconded by Fries to adjourn. No objection. Meeting adjourned about 2:30 p.m.
Informal Workshop
Presentations
The meeting adjourned to an informal workshop. Three short presentations were made.
(1) Science reporting in Alaska - Steve Heimrich, Alaska Public Radio Network, spoke briefly on a project he and Jody Seitz, producer of Alaska Coastal Currents, are building to more broadly disseminate science information.
(2) Cook Inlet Geographic Information Systems project - Carol Fries, Alaska Department of Natural Resources, described a workshop on this topic held in Anchorage in January 1999. She distributed a document to those interested.
(3) Geographic Response Plans for Alaska - Doug Mutter, Department of the Interior, reported on a workshop held in Anchorage in November 1998. OSRI supported this workshop and a report is available both in hard copy and through the OSRI web site.
These minutes were reviewed and approved by the Advisory Board on
Doug Mutter, Secretary