March 31 – April 2, 2003 Meeting Minutes

SAAESD Spring Meeting
March 30 – April 2, 2003
Hawks Cay Resort
Duck Key, FL


General Schedule | Action Items | Participants | Agenda | Agenda Briefs


General Schedule

Sunday, March 30:
6:00 – 7:00pm – Informal Reception – Dolphin DeckMonday, March 31:
7:00 – 8:00 – Breakfast Buffet – Palm Terrace
8:00 – 10:00 – Joint ASRED/SAAESD meeting – Flagler Center & West
10:00 – 5:00 – SAAESD meeting – Flagler Center
8:30 – 5:00 – Guest activity to Key West
6:00 – Informal reception and dinner – Atlantic Pool Deck
Tuesday, April 1:
7:00 – 8:00 – Breakfast Buffet – Palm Terrace
8:00 – 10:00 – Joint ASRED/SAAESD meeting – Flagler Center & West
1:30 or 4:30 – Guest activity to Key West
10:30 – 5:30 – Tour
6:00 – Tour and dinner at Mel Fischer Maritime Museum – Key WestWednesday, April 2:
7:00 – 8:00 – Breakfast Buffet – Palm Terrace
7:00 – 8:00 – Chief Operating Officers’ Meeting/Breakfast – (tba)
8:00 – noon – SAAESD meeting – Flagler Center

Action Items

  • Agenda Item 11 – Intellectual Property: Chair will appoint a steering committee to explore the feasibility of a regional conference.
  • Agenda Item 12 – Social Science Research Center Expertise Mapping Project: Chief Operating Officers are to send an electronic directory of SAES researchers by location to correct the SSRC database.
  • Agenda Item 13 – Multistate Research Committee: The following recommendations were approved:
    • The ED will review each DC for its potential duplication.
    • The AA will coordinate with the appropriate AC group to ensure that the AC is reviewing annual reports, minutes, and other pertinent information.
    • Each Experiment Station Director will monitor their faculty members’ participation in multistate projects. It will be the responsibility of the AA to incorporate any new faculty members into a project.
  • Agenda Item 14 – S-009: Level funding of $395,643, with the usual caveat regarding change in Hatch, was approved.
  • Agenda Item 15.1 – NRSP-1: Approved FY04 budget at $218,915 with caveat.
  • Agenda Item 15.2 – NRSP-3: Approved FY04 budget at $116,145 with caveat.
  • Agenda Item 15.3 – NRSP-4: Approved FY04 budget at $481,182 with caveat.
  • Agenda Item 15.4 – NRSP-5: Approved FY04 budget at $247,786 with caveat, contingent of approval of new project.
  • Agenda Item 15.5 – NRSP-6: Disapproved funding.
  • Agenda Item 15.6 – NRSP-8: Approved FY04 budget at $400,000 with caveat, contingent of approval of new project.
  • Agenda Item 17 – SAAESD Leadership Award: Jim Fischer was presented the first SAAESD Leadership Award.
  • Agenda Item 21 – Cotton Winter Nursery Support: The Executive Director (ED) was asked to look at the possibility of 1) formation of mechanism to use Multistate Research Funds; 2) asking faculty who use the program to absorb costs with increased fees; and/or 3) raise University contribution in SY costs. ED is to present options at the fall meeting.
  • Agenda Item 22 – Stakeholder Advisory Group: Chair appointed a committee of Jim Fischer, Richard Jones, Vance Watson, and Eric Young to recommend a strategy for involving stakeholders.
  • Agenda Item 23 – Future Meeting Costs: Future registration fees should be increased in order to cover all meeting expenses.

Participants

Jerry Arkin, GA
Bill Brown, FL
Bill Brown, LA
Kitty Cardwell, NPDN
Jerry Cherry, GA
Mary Duryea, FL
Jim Fischer, SC
Marty Fuller, MS
Bob Holm, IR-4
John Jensen, AL
Richard Jones, FL
Skip Jubb, VA
Tom Klindt, TN
Fred Knapp, KY
Steve Leath, NC
David Morrison, LA
Roland Mote, TN
Chuck Onstad, ARS
Alberto Pantoja, PR
Jim Rakocy, VI
Anna Marie Rasberry, SAAESD
Rick Roeder, AR
Charley Scifres, TX
Bob Shulstad, GA
Neal Thompson, FL
Clarence Watson, MS
Vance Watson, MS
Greg Weidemann, AR
Bob Westerman, OK
Johnny Wynne, NC
Eric Young, SAAESD

Agenda

Monday, March 31
Time Agenda # Agenda Item – Presenter
10:30 Call to Order – Charles Scifres
10:35 1. Approval of Agenda, Minutes, and Interim Actions – Charles Scifres
10:40 ESCOP Core Committee Reports:
2. · Advocacy and Marketing – Jim Fischer
3. · Budget and Legislative – Richard Jones
4. · Science and Technology – Nancy Cox
5. · Partnerships – D.C. Coston (written report only)
6. · Planning – Skip Jubb
7. · Executive Committee – Eric Young
11:00 8. Update on National Institute for Agricultural Security – Eric Young for D. C. Coston
11:15 9. Roundtable Discussions on Bioterrorism Efforts by Member States – Charles Scifres
11:40 10. Liaison Reports:
ARS – Chuck Onstad
12:00 Lunch
1:30 11. Intellectual Property Issues – Richard Jones
2:20 12. Social Science Research Center Capability and Expertise Mapping Project – Eric Young and Jay Ritchie
2:40 13. MRC Report – Bill Brown (FL)
3:00 Break
3:30 14. S-009: Report and Budget Request – Jerry Arkin
3:45 15. NRSP Budget Requests:
15.1 – NRSP-1 – Bill Brown (FL)
15.2 – NRSP-3 – Jerry Arkin
15.3 – NRSP-4 – Neal Thompson
15.4 – NRSP-5 – D. C. Coston
15.5 – NRSP-6 – Bob Westerman
15.6 – NRSP-8 – Jerry Cherry
4:15 16. New NRSP Guidelines and ED Report – Eric Young
4:30 17. SAAESD Leadership Award – Charles Scifres
Tuesday, April 1
Joint Meeting with ASRED, Tours
Wednesday, April 2
7:00 Chief Operating Officers’ Meeting
8:00 18. Report from Chief Operating Officers Meeting – Charles Scifres
8:15 19. IPM Grants Program Report – Fred Knapp
8:30 20. Special Research Presentation: “Protecting U.S. Agriculture From Bioterrorism Attack” – Marjorie A. Hoy
9:15 21. Cotton Winter Nursery Support – Eric Young and Johnny Wynne
9:30 22. Stakeholder Advisory Group – Charles Scifres
10:00 Break
10:30 23. Future Funding of SAAESD Spring Meetings – Charles Scifres
10:45 24. Resolutions Committee Report – Roland Mote and Clarence Watson
11:00 25. Announcements, Future Meeting Plans, etc. – Charles Scifres
11:15 Adjourn

Agenda Item 1
Approval of Agenda, Minutes, and Interim Actions

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: The following items will be presented:

  • Agenda
  • Minutes: September 23, 2002 – Baltimore, MD
  • Interim Actions:
    • Appointed Ron Lacewell as southern representative to the ESCOP Advocacy and Marketing Committee.
    • Appointed Tom Klindt as member of the southern region Multistate Research Committee.
    • Appointed William F. Brown as southern region Administrative Advisor to NRSP-1, “CRIS,” replacing Eric Young.
    • Appointed Greg Weidemann, Chair, with William H. Brown and Jim Fischer as members of the SAAESD Leadership Award Selection Committee.
    • Appointed Bob Westerman as Administrative Advisor to NRSP-6, “Introduction, Preservation, Classification, Distribution and Evaluation of Solanum Species,” replacing Eric Young.
    • Appointed David Morrison as member of the southern region Multistate Research Committee.
    • Appointed William F. Brown as chair of the southern region Multistate Research Committee.
    • Appointed Marty Fuller as southern region representative to the ESCOP Partnership Committee.
    • Appointed Clarence Watson as Administrative Advisor to IEG-33, “Review of Cooperative Variety Testing Programs in the Southern Region,” replacing Vance Watson.
    • Appointed Clarence Watson as Administrative Advisor to SERA-IEG-26: “Fire Ants,” replacing Ray Frisbie.
    • Appointed Fred Knapp to continue as member of the Regional IPM Policy Committee.
    • Appointed Frank Gilstrap as Administrative Advisor to IEG-C-1: “Pine Bark Beetle Conference.”
    • Approved DC-204 “Plant Genetic Resources Conservation and Utilization” to write replacement project for S-009; Jerry Arkin, Administrative Advisor.
    • Approved Southern Cooperative Series Bulletin #402, “The Economics of Producing Nursery Crops Using the Pot-in-Pot Production System: Two Case Studies.”
    • Appointed Mary Duryea as Administrative Advisor to NRSP-4, “A National Agricultural Program to Clear Pest Control Agents for Minor Uses,” replacing Neal Thompson, effective July 1, 2003.
    • Appointed Gail Cramer as Administrative Advisor to SERA-IEG-19, “The Changing Rural Health System…,” replacing Jim Moran.
    • Appointed Susan Barefoot as Administrative Advisor to AC-14, “Advisory Committee on Human Nutrition,” replacing Jim Moran.

Action Requested: Approval.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Cherry and Brown the agenda, minutes, and interim actions were approved.


Agenda Item 2
ESCOP Advocacy and Marketing Committee
(Communications and Marketing Committee)

Presenter: James R. Fischer

Background: This committee’s name was changed last year to more acurately reflect its mission. (The official name change will become effective with approval of updated ESCOP Rules of Operation.) The committee will meet later this spring to determine how it can most effectively assist the Experiment Station Section in communicating and marketing its impacts and needs. One mechanism that may be considered is to prepare two or three ways in which the Science Roadmap could be exhibited, i.e. poster display, powerpoint show, web presentation, etc. Even though it didn’t get accepted for this year’s Exhibit on the Hill, there are other venues where it might be displayed in some form if an exhibit were readily available.

The committee would greatly appreciate any ideas, suggestions or guidance that ESCOP members and liaisons might offer on communication and/or marketing activities that would enhance the experiment station system’s support from decision makers and clientele.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 3
ESCOP Budget and Legislative Committee

Presenter: Richard Jones

Background:

FY 03 Budget: The President has signed the Omnibus FY 03 budget bill passed by Congress. Analyses of the impact of the budget on CSREES has been distributed to the System. There has been a further 0.67% across-the-board cut in the federal budget including CSREES appropriations following passage of the budget. It is doubtful that there will be further modifications to the CSREES budget in the FY 03 Supplemental budget bill.

FY 04 Budget: The BAC requested that each section submit up to two items to be considered for the one pager that will be developed by the Blue Ribbon Team (BRT, the advocacy organization) for use by CARET (during their Hill visits). Following the guidelines suggested by the BAC, the Budget and Legislative Committee submitted the following statement:

  • Food Safety and Security:
    1. Develop rapid/real time methods to detect known and emerging pathogens, naturally occurring and introduced toxic substances, and other biological and chemical agents-of-concern throughout the food and water chain.
    2. Enhance our understanding of the microbial biology and ecology of known and emerging human pathogens and our understanding of the stability of their toxic products and other hazardous substances in food ingredients and products to enable food processors to design and apply product formulations and processing treatments to inactivate or eliminate pathogens and toxins.
  • Nutrition and Health:
    1. Determine the biological effects of the various active components of food on the human body, including the effects on regulation of genes and gene products.
    2. Create healthier food using conventional and molecular methods to modify food components, develop biomarkers for nutrients and phytochemicals, and enhance knowledge of nutriceuticals and probiotics.
  • Environment:
    1. Enhance our understanding of earth’s hydrologic cycle including the effect of decreased water availability on future land-use patterns, distribution of crop and livestock production systems, impact on wildlife and fishery systems, conflicts among competing water users, and continued development of communities.
    2. Assess the impact of climate change by developing accurate mathematical models for assessing the short and long term effects of both man-made and naturally occurring climate changes on crop and livestock systems and develop strategies to prevent losses in biodiversity and genetic resources and cope with changes that may result from altered climatic conditions.

The National Institute for Agricultural Security (NIAS) will develop a description of FY 04 budget requests so that it complements the statement developed and endorsed by the BAC. The ESCOP B/L Committee will review the request.

FY 05: The Committee will carefully monitor the response of Congress and the Executive Branch to the FY 04 recommendations and the recommendations from CSREES for FY 05 to determine if the priorities for FY 05 should be modified.

Legislative Action: The Farm Bill Committee (FBC) of the BAA has been appointed. ESCOP recommended that an ESCOP representative be appointed along with the Executive vice chair of the ESCOP B/L Committee (since the EDs for Extension and Academic Program are listed on the Committee). Chair Angle has written to Bobby Moser requesting those appointments. In addition, ESCOP has recommended an Experiment Station Director for each of the five subcommittees of the FBC: Conservation – Henry Vaux (CA, henry.vaux@ucop.edu); Rural Development – Alfred Parks (Prairie View A&M, alfred_parks@pvamu.edu); Energy – Kevin Kephart (SD, kkephart@abs.sdstate.edu); Research and Education – Bill Brown (LA, bbrown@agctr.lsu.edu); Forestry – Bruce Wiersma (ME, wiersma@apollo.umenfa.maine.edu).

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 4
ESCOP Science and Technology Committee

Presenter: Nancy Cox

Background:

  1. Status Review of Committees
    • Social Sciences Subcommittee
      • Incoming Chair nominee is Stephan Goetz of Penn State
      • Active in reviewing Social Science opportunities with NSF
      • Review of Science Road Map
      • Inquiry about administrative support from ESCOP for the subcommittee
    • Agricultural Biotechnology Implementation Task Force (joint ESCOP-ECOP)
      • Chair Tom Hoban
      • Web report currently being implemented
    • Rural Communities and Farm Crisis Task Force (joint ESCOP-ECOP)
      • Chair Lou Swanson
      • Folded into the Social Science Subcommittee
    • Food Safety Subcommittee (joint ESCOP-ECOP)
      • No chair currently appointed
    • Genetic Resources Subcommittee
      • No activity
    • Genomics Subcommittee
      • Currently not active
      • Randy Woodson would be willing to lead the group with suggestions for surveying current level of activity (FTE), organisms studies, appropriate role of AES’s
    • Pest Management Strategies
      • Co-chairs Eldon Ortman and Frank Zalom
      • Coordinating meetings with regional pest management centers and 4th National IPM Workshop
  2. Other issues: The S&T committee has formed subcommittees to evaluate, on behalf of ESCOP, the following: 1) Public Sector IP Initiative, 2) NAS report on REE, and 3) Science Road map follow-up.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 5
ESCOP Partnerships Committee

Presenter: D. C. Coston (written report only)

Background:

The Partnerships Committee is collaborating with the new partnerships initiative that emerged from recommendations of the Baltimore Conference. Components of the Land Grant community including 1890 Universities, Academic Programs, International Programs, Experiment Stations, and Extension are actively engaged along with CSREES. Several meetings have been held with expectations that there will be sharing of partnering activities with particular attention to the core values and attributes that assure success.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 6
ESCOP Planning Committee

Presenter: Skip Jubb, Southern Region Representative

Background:

The minutes of all past committee meetings and various working documents are available under the Planning Committee section of the ESCOP website.

A committee meeting is scheduled for May 6th, 2003. Based on feedback from committee members, the meeting will be held via conference call.

ECOP will be providing suggestions for coordinating planning efforts through their new structure. Potential interactions include a Futuring Workshop, to be held in the Fall of 2003, and the participation of an ESCOP representative on the new ECOP Advisory Council.

Continuing the ESCOP-PC’s charge of linking planning with budget development, as a part of the 2003 Fall meeting a session will be organized to review the current 4-5 year ESCOP priority list and to identify ESCOP priorities for the future. Information gathered at the session will be compiled by the Planning Committee.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 7
ESCOP Executive Committee

Presenter: Eric Young

Background:

A brief update will be given on the following items from ESCOP.

  1. New Board on Agriculture Assembly (BAA) advocacy firm, Fleischman Hilliard Government Partners Group
  2. NASULGC assessments
  3. BAA’s Policy Board of Directors items
  4. National Institute for Agricultural Security (NIAS)
  5. NRSP, new guidelines and Advisory Committee
  6. NE region Executive Director
  7. National Information Management Support System (NIMSS) status
  8. Joint COPS Meeting, Jersey City, NJ, July 20-23
  9. Fall SAES/ARD Workshop and ESS meeting, Dearborn, MI, Sep 21-24

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 8
National Institute for Agricultural Security (NIAS)

Presenter: Eric Young for D. C. Coston

Background:

Establishment of the NIAS

  • The NIAS Board of Directors formerly convened February 2-4, 2003.
  • Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation have been filed by a lawyer with the State of Maryland. The Bylaws and the Articles will be presented to the Agricultural Experiment Station (AES) Directors at the Experiment Station Section (ESS) meeting in September. The paperwork for filing with the IRS for nonprofit status is being completed.
  • The membership of the Board were appointed by the ESCOP Chair and include D.C. Coston, Neville Clarke, Darrell Nelson, Daryl Lund, David Thawley, Ed Mather, Eric Young, Joe Joyce, Mike Harrington, Ralph Cavalieri, Sam Donald, Scott Angle, Stan Johnson and Terry Nipp (non-voting).
  • Officers were elected: D.C Coston, President; Dave Thawley, Vice President; Mike Harrington, Secretary; and Scott Angle, Treasurer. Terry Nipp was appointed Executive Director.
  • ESCOP residual funds have been transferred from NASULGC to the University of Maryland, which will provide fiscal and accounting management services to the NIAS.

Management of the NIAS

  • An initial Plan of Activities (POA) for the NIAS has been reviewed and approved by the Board. The Executive Director (ED) is charged to develop the POA and to proactively seek opportunities to ensure that the NIAS is self sustaining in the near future.
  • The Executive Director is charged to arrange for office staff support services, which will be expand as new funding sources are established.

Activities of the NIAS

  • It was agreed that the NIAS would seek to avoid competing with specific projects being developed by individual universities and consortium, serving instead to facilitate communication among these institutions and the larger university community.
  • A series of specific projects were developed, which were further refined at a meeting of the BOD on March 3, 2002.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 9
Roundtable Discussions on Bioterrorism Efforts by Member States

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: A representative from each state will be asked to report on bioterrorism efforts in his/her state.

Action Requested: For information.

In-Meeting discussions: Verbal reports from each state were presented with highlights contained in the following file: Southern Region Agrosecurity Efforts, April 2003.


Agenda Item 10
Liaison Reports

Presenter: (as available)

Background: SAAESD liaisons are invited to report to Directors at the spring meeting. Any available reports will be heard at this time:

  • ARD – Sam Donald (not able to attend)
  • ARS – Chuck Onstad
    • FY03 budget: 4.5% increase
    • Transferred Plum Island to new Homeland Security Department
    • Renovated National Animal Disease facility in Ames, IA
    • ARS is going toward outsourcing – as much as 35%
    • Exotic New Castle Disease – major outbreak in 3 western states
    • Screw Worm – eradicated in US, Mexico, and Panama Canal; an accident resulted in release of non-sterile flys but has now been contained
    • Drs. Knipling and Rexroad are still “acting” administrators.
  • ASRED – Christine Waddill (not available)
  • EPA – Lisa McKinley (not available)
  • Forest Service – Peter Roussopoulos (not able to attend)

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 11
Intellectual Property Issues

Presenter: Richard Jones

Background:

Several Land-Grant universities are partnering with private- and public-sector research entities in discussions about intellectual property issues. An initiative sponsored by the Rockefeller and McKnight Foundations is providing means to delve into the problem of IP barriers to freedom to operate (FTO). These barriers are limiting the ability of public-sector research institutions in the U.S. to carry out their missions of 1) improving food security for poor people in developing countries, and 2) contributing to development of the agricultural sector in their states.

The development of new IP licensing practices will include participating institutions making a collective commitment to do all possible to retain certain specific rights for use of public-sector IP relevant to advanced agricultural technology, collaborating in the development of licensing language and learning from each others’ experiences in order to improve and promote these new licensing practices, and working on a strategy to engage the private sector in developing approaches that help the public sector achieve its mission, and meet the interests of companies in obtaining enforceable rights to public sector technologies.

Intellectual Property Issues is the first in a series of topics to be developed by SAAESD into published white papers. Dr. Jones will present information on what we’ve learned thus far and where we go from here.

With input of a few other Directors, Dr. Jones prepared the following thoughts. The unique position of SAES’s within the Land-Grant University (LGU) system creates a number of problems concerning intellectual property (IP) ownership and royalties. These issues apply with respect to all of our research programs, but they manifest themselves most obtrusively with respect to our plant improvement programs. Consequently, the discussion is focused in that area.


SAES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ISSUES

Background Information:

  1. The SAES system, since its inception in 1887, has supported strong programs in crop plant improvement through development of new improved cultivars. Nearly all commercial agricultural crops in the U.S. today contain germplasm developed in the public sector by SAES.
  2. Many of today’s crop varieties are released by the private sector, especially the major commodity crops. (Appendix A)
  3. SAES has moved to protect the IP contained in its released cultivars. Still, in 1996, 92% of the corn varieties, and 69% of the vegetable varieties released by SAES were public releases. (Appendix A)
  4. However, in the crop areas of fruits/nuts, ornamentals, and forages/grasses, 75%, 90%, and 63% respectively were released by SAES with some type of IP protection. (Appendix A)
  5. The movement by SAES to protect germplasm IP has led to licensing of such IP, and to generation of royalties to the SAES system.
  6. In a 1996 survey, 33 SAES’s reported an income of ca. $9 million in cultivar royalties. The distribution of this income is highly skewed amongst SAES’s. Ten percent of the SAES’s received one half of this income; 15% received two thirds, and 20% received three fourths of the income. Two institutions received over $1 million/year and several received nothing. (Appendix B)
  7. Royalty distribution varies greatly amongst SAES institutions. In a survey of the Southern region, all responding SAES’s receive PVP royalties, 11 receive PP royalties, and 10 receive royalties from utility patents. The amount received varies from 0 – 100% of the royalties generated. (Appendix B)

Goals:

It is helpful to first identify what the SAES wants to accomplish based on the environment in which we now operate.

  1. SAES should have the ability to use current technologies in cultivar development programs. Toward this end, within a LGU, SAES should have access to IP developed by SAES scientists without costs.
  2. SAES should receive royalty income from all IP developed by SAES scientists
  3. SAES should receive higher royalties from cultivar licenses (PVP’s and PP’s) commensurate with recognition that a finished product has been developed and SAES has made a large financial investment.

Problems:

  1. Hindrances to use of gene technology (or other protected IP) in cultivar development programs.
    • FAES does not own the IP, but rather the LGU – OTL (Office of Technology Licensing)
    • OTL sees potential reduction in royalty (the importance of this varies with OTL philosophy – maximize royalty or full employment of IP).
    • Inventing faculty see potential reduction in personal royalty.
    • Potential licensee sees loss of value of IP license.
  2. With the advent of gene transformation, multiple patents on enabling technologies held by multiple entities severely restrict SAES freedom to operate in the use of transformation in cultivar development.

Confounding Issues:

  1. Joint interstate programs.
    • How do we decide on IP split among cooperating scientists? What is importance of agreements among breeders vis-a-vis OTL vis-a-vis SAES opinions and policies?
  2. Relationship of SAES and OTL within a LGU.
    • SAES has knowledge of product and business, but OTL may be negotiator.
    • SAES and OTL may have different royalty policies.
  3. SAES interaction with funders, particularly commodity groups or some industries.
    • SAES’s are played against each other. Some funders attempt to claim IP ownership or a share of royalties. SAES’s need common agreement on IP and royalties. (FAES and UF policy is held strictly that no 3rd party owns the IP, neither do they share royalties. These topics are off the table.)
  4. Various states and SAES’s have varying levels of ag business expertise within a foundation seed entity, an OTL or the SAES (FAES has hired a person with plant IP experience to work jointly with UF OTL and FFSP).

Action Requested: For information.

Action Taken: The chair will appoint a steering committee to explore the feasibility of a workshop involving Directors, industry personnel, and representatives from Universities’ Offices of Technology Licensing (OTL). It was suggested that AOSCA’s president is located at North Carolina State University and would be a good contact. The steering committee will also look at what other regions are doing relative to Intellectual Property.


Agenda Item 12
Social Science Research Center Capability and Expertise Mapping Project

Presenters: Eric Young and Jay Ritchie

Background:

The presentation will begin with a short review of the past year’s activities. Next, there will be a presentation of the Expertise Mapping Project, a developmental project exploring the possibility of mapping the location of expertise in the Southern Region states and the surrounding states and using that ability to build collaboration and expertise sharing opportunities. This prototype was developed using the Subjects of Investigation (SOI) of Cotton, Poultry, and Peanuts. The mapping project involves the location and inventory of Branch Station activities for the region and an inventory of CRIS activities by scientist for the SOI’s in the study. These data will be presented through a variety of visualization techniques to explore possible management uses of such information.

Action Requested: For information.

Action Taken: Chief Operating Officers are to send an electronic directory of SAES researchers by location to correct the SSRC database. SSRC database was pulled from CRIS and some states list the scientists’ location as being at the main station, regardless of true physical location. This creates inconsistencies in the mapping project.


Agenda Item 13
Multistate Research Committee Report

Presenter: William F. Brown

Background:

Members of the MultiState Research Committee (MRC) include Bill Brown (FL), Chair; Skip Jubb (VA), Tom Klindt (TN), David Morrison (LA), and Chuck Onstad (ARS). Eric Young and Anna Marie Rasberry provide staff support . The MRC met by way of conference call on March 11, 2003. Following are the highlights of that meeting and points for discussion at the SAES Directors meeting at Duck Key, FL.

Review Approval Process for DCs and MRPs
Questions for discussion included whether there is sufficient involvement by the MRC in the development and approval of a DC, and whether the MRC should be involved in the initial request for establishment of a DC. An additional question was whether criteria (for example an evaluation of the existence of overlapping activities, whether there are adequate output/outcome indicators to justify the project) should be established for use in considering a DC request. Discussion centered on the following points:

  • Currently DC requests go to the AC group and then to the Executive Committee for approval
  • Currently there are no criteria standards for DC development
  • There was concern that there was no evaluation of the DC request relative to other multistate projects that exist in the various regions.

Recommendation 1: The MRC recommends that the Executive Director review each DC for its potential duplication with existing multistate projects at the time the DC goes to the AC group for evaluation. This review by the Executive Director will take place before the DC goes to the Executive Committee for final approval.

Consider Mid-Term Review of MRPs and Possible Role of Advisory Committees
Some regions such as the North Central conduct a mid-term review of their multistate projects and their equivalents of the southern region’s IEGs. Discussion focused on whether the Southern Region should conduct mid-term reviews of multistate projects, IEGs and SERA/IEG’s.

Recommendation 2: The MRC recommends that the Administrative Advisor of each multistate project, IEG and SERA/IEG coordinate with the appropriate AC group to ensure that the AC group is reviewing and discussing the annual 422 report from multistate projects and meeting minutes from IEGs and SERA/IEGs.

Should MRPs Have Open or Selective Participation
Concern has been raised by some Directors that currently through the NIMSS system, members of multistate projects have no control over individuals that join at the start of a new project, and the AA can add members throughout the project without consultation of the current membership. Some Directors feel that since members can be added in the middle of the review process, the committee has no control over the plans of these added individuals to address the objectives or whether their interaction will be duplicative or counter-productive.

The point has been raised that the Multistate Guidelines state that: “The request to add a participant is forwarded to the AA who will consult with the technical committee to arrange for implementation.” Some models for this consultation could be: consultation by informing, limited consultation, or extensive consultation:

Recommendation 3: The MRC recommends that each Experiment Station Director monitor the faculty members participation in multistate projects. After the Experiment Station Director approves a faculty member to join a project, it will be the responsibility of the AA to ensure that the faculty member is incorporated into the project.

Consider What Kinds of Participant Information Should be Collected for Activities Other Than for MRPs (ie. IEGs, SERAs, etc.)
Currently within the Southern Region, no participant information is collected for members of IEGs, SERA/IEGs, ACs, or DCs. Other regions collect much more participant information; although, there is inconsistency among the regions in the type of participant information collected.

Recommendation 4: The MRC recommends that following information be collected for all IEGs and SERAs: name, e-mail, RPA/SOI/FOS.

MRC Activity for 2002

  • S_temp061 – Water Quality Methodology for Crop Protection Chemicals
    Replacement for S271
    Administrative Advisor: Neal Thompson
    Status: Reviewed by MRC, returned for final revision. Will become S-1011.

Action Requested: For decision on recommendations.

Action Taken: Recommendations 1, 2, and 3 were accepted for immediate implementation. Recommendation 4 was tabled until a newly appointed joint Extension/Research Committee has reported on the SERAs.


Agenda Item 14
S-009 Update and Budget Request

Presenter: Jerry Arkin

Background:

SUMMARY OF ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR YEAR 2002
Genetic resources representing 206 new accessions were received, increasing the total collection maintained at the Plant Genetic Resources Conservation Unit (PGRCU) to 82,566 accessions. The new introductions represented a broad range of 8 families, 18 genera, and 37 species from 23 countries. A total of 125 ornamental crop accessions were sent to the new ornamental crop repository in Ohio. A total of 4,312 accessions were requested for regeneration from S-9. These included field seed increases of over 2,100 sorghum accessions to be regenerated in Puerto Rico and St. Croix.

In 2002, there were 699 orders processed containing 29,405 accessions (in-vitro, plants, rhizomes, seeds, canes) with 9.4% (2,777 accessions) of the accessions being supplied to foreign requesters. A total of 20,643 U.S. distributions were sent to users in the S-9 region. More than 1,940 items were shipped to the National Center for Genetic Resources Preservation (NCGRP, formerly NSSL) in Ft. Collins for long-term storage or backup. Overall, 87.2% of the collection has been backed up at NCGRP (up from 72.7% in FY00, 81.3% in FY01, and 86.9% in FY02). This year, for the first time, the invitro sweetpotato collection is being backed up in Ft. Collins. Currently over 200 accessions (plantlets in tissue culture) have been sent to Ft. Collins with an additional 500 backups to be made during 2003.

Demand for genetic resources maintained at Griffin has greatly increased in the last few years (Fig. 1). In 1992-1999, an average of 13,500 accessions of all crops maintained at Griffin were sent each year to customers worldwide upon request. In the last three years, demand has increased to an average of 31,800 accessions requested each year. Demand for sorghum, the largest of the national seed collections maintained at Griffin, has increased from 3,400 seed samples each year in 1992-1999 to 17,300 seed samples each year in 2000-2002. Already in 2003, over 16,683 accessions have been distributed to customers and an additional 18,822 accessions have been requested.

More than 142,000 records were created and 87,000 records were modified by site personnel to enhance the Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) database. These figures include morphological, disease, insect, and seed weight data not previously in GRIN for a number of accessions. Relinkage of duplicates, addition and correction of passport data was continued on the Meridian, MS, sweet sorghum collection which had not previously been entered into GRIN.

Accessions distributed by PGRCU were utilized in a vast array of research studies throughout the the S-9 region and the world. Each year it is noted that more and more accessions are used by people in research outside of traditional plant breeding. Requests come from scientists in agronomy, genetics, molecular biology, plant pathology, entomology, botany, anthropology, archeology, medical fields, pharmaceutical, nutritional, ecology, homeland security, energy, animal science, artistic, and aquatic areas. For example, germplasm requests include new uses such as public demonstrations at Epcot Center, Department of Defense uses, classroom plant and seed identification, church demo project (Heifer Project Int.), switchgrass biofuel use, archaeobotany and anthropology use (India, Africa, and Asia agricultural origins), sorghum use for paper pulp, peanut protein profile to identify allergy reaction differences, velvetbean for wildlife management, gourmet chile for Pacific Rim cuisine, botanical artist painting Solanaceae, develop plant cell cultures for drug discovery, identification of archaeological specimens, bermudagrass adaptability on fields fertilized with animal waste, vegetable juice to help nutrients get into blood stream of cancer patients, kenaf for biofiltration research, sorghum syrup making, seed for baking and candy industry, exhibit of plants used for paper making, green manure crop in California deserts, fish control research, fiber and dye plants used by fiber artist, and phytopharmaceutical and energetic uses.

Regeneration and characterization was conducted during the past year for a number of crops. Watermelon regeneration was conducted on 150 accessions in pollination cages with bees. A total of 800 accessions of cultivated peanuts were grown for increase at Byron, GA, though tomato spotted wilt and consistent rains during harvest greatly reduced the seed quality and quantity. The majority of the accessions will have to be redone. Over 200 quarantine peanut lines were increased in the greenhouse including 65 accessions of peanut germplasm collected during a collection trip in Paraguay. Seed was produced for 47 cowpea accessions in the greenhouse and 121 cowpea accessions in the field. An additional 49 accessions were increased by cooperators at Isabela, Puerto Rico. Fifty chile pepper accessions were increased in the field at Griffin and 30 chile pepper accessions were increased in cooperation with New Mexico State University. A total of 700 accessions comprising the in vitro sweetpotato collection were regenerated in tissue culture in growth chambers with backups sent to Ft. Collins during normal regeneration. There were 66 annual clovers and 173 misc. legumes, grasses, and new crops that were regenerated in the field and greenhouse.

The chile pepper core collection (400 accessions) was grown in Griffin and characterized for 40 morphological descriptors. In response to a request by the Pepper CGC, digital photographs were made of all 400 accessions and uploaded into GRIN.

Further information on accomplishments of the S-9 Multistate Research Project for this year and previous years can be found in annual reports and minutes at the web site (http://www.ars-grin.gov/ars/SoAtlantic/Griffin/pgrcu/s9.html).

SUMMARY OF CURRENT PROGRESS AND PROJECTED PLANS FOR 2004
The USDA-ARS base funding for the PGRCU was increased $349,370 in FY01 and $225,000 in FY02. There was no increase in permanent funding by USDA-ARS in FY03. USDA-ARS also provided $100,000 in temporary funds for FY02 to purchase two DNA sequencers for the molecular laboratory. The increase in funds in FY02 enabled the PGRCU to hire a research geneticist, Dr. Ming Li Wang, to conduct molecular characterization and evaluation of germplasm in the collection.

The addition of new funds in FY01 and FY02 has revitalized the PGRCU mission at Griffin. The reason this Unit exists is to conserve plant genetic resources for future generations. The PGRCU has the responsibility to acquire, characterize, maintain, evaluate, document, and distribute genetic resources of agricultural and horticultural crops; most of which are grown in the southern U.S. The long-term goal of the PGRCU plant germplasm collection is to conserve the complete range of genetic variability in crops of interest and their wild relatives, rather than just trying to obtain the maximum number of accessions. Germplasm collections can no longer afford to maintain duplicate or redundant accessions because of the risk of losing more valuable, unique accessions.

The additional funds are being used to support this core mission and long-term goal in a number of ways. Numerous equipment, supply, and personnel (see personnel section) additions have improved the effeciency and productivity of the Unit. The last two year’s reports highlighted the increase in operating budgets for each curator, additional summer temporary labor, additional technicians, and initiation of a germination laboratory to conduct germination tests on all accessions in the collection. This year we have completely upgraded the seed processing facility with six new workstations, a new air compressor and drop lines to clean seed threshing equipment, and a new dust collection system with flexible tubes above each workstation to rapidly remove dust to an outside collection site. We have purchased a third seed germinator, a large growth chamber, custom-made seed storage trays to enable us to store more material in the -18 C freezer, a fertilizer spreader, a backup generator for the sweetpotato collection, an autoclave for media preparation, a new LAN computer server, and a number of items for the molecular laboratory including a centrifuge, water purification system, photo imaging system, and a mixer mill. We’ve upgraded facilities with new shingles on the headhouse, replaced gravel and reset benches in the greenhouse, and replaced worn vent arms in the greenhouse ventilation system.

Additional funds in the last two years have also enabled the PGRCU to interact at meetings with users and customers. During the past two years, the Research Leader has attended all Crop Germplasm Committee (CGC) meetings of crops maintained at Griffin including meetings on sorghum, peanut, clover, forage and turf grass, new crops, pepper, cowpea, sweetpotato, cucurbits, and watermelon. Specific crop curators have also attended their CGC and national commodity meetings. It continues to be a priority for the PGRCU to be represented at each CGC and national commodity meeting for crops maintained at Griffin to facilitate open communication and exchange of scientific information on plant genetic resources with our users.

PGRCU has continued to work on improving the maintenance of the collection by splitting samples. The bulk of each accession will be maintained in freezer storage at -18 C and a distribution sample to handle expected requests for the next 5 years will be maintained at 4 C. Currently, over 12,000 sorghum samples have been split between -18 C and 4 C. An additional technician was hired to continue splitting samples of all accessions to retain better seed quality by maintaining the bulk of the accessions in -18 C.

Regeneration of accessions to produce fresh, high-quality seed continues each year. Presently over 2,100 sorghum accessions are growing in Puerto Rico and St. Croix for regeneration of sorghum accessions known to be of poor quality or have low seed quantities. Accessions of other species will be regenerated during the next year at Griffin and Byron, GA, (or at cooperators’ locations) including cowpeas (200 accessions), cultivated peanuts (800), watermelon (150), peppers (50), squash (20), cucurbits (10), grasses (30), kenaf (3), morning glory (30), velvetbean (10), misc. legumes (320), and annual clovers (75). All 700 sweetpotato accessions maintained in tissue culture will be regenerated next year.

SUMMARY OF PERSONNEL ACTIONS
During 2002, six federal positions and no S-009 positions were filled due to replacing retired employees or new hires. Five federal technicians and a federal molecular biologist were hired. Already in 2003, two S-009 and four federal positions have been filled including two state technicians, two federal technicians, a federal research geneticist (Dr. Ming Li Wang), and a federal agronomist/warm-season grass curator (Dr. Melanie Newman). Presently, there are 26 federal employees and 8 state employees in the program with a number of additional positions to fill including a federal technician, a federal molecular geneticist, and a federal administrative officer. The addition of Dr. Wang as the lead scientist in the molecular laboratory is a key addition to the Unit’s research on genetic analysis of plant germplasm through the use of molecular markers. Dr. Newman will specialize on the warm-season grass germplasm collection to improve the content and quality of this collection.

USDA-ARS PGRCU BUDGET SITUATION AND OUTLOOK
The large increase in number of germplasm distributions is a welcome problem. Genetic resources are maintained in storage to be used and the genetic resources at Griffin are being used in greater numbers than ever before (Fig. 1). This large number of requests delays progress in some areas of seed maintenance, such as splitting seed samples, since the same people conduct seed distribution and seed storage functions. Our priority is prompt seed distribution in order to prevent delays in research progress by our users. We continue to make every attempt to respond to the needs of our customers as we are financially able. Obviously, federal and state budgets are tight and little change is expected in the immediate future. With the mission critical status of our Unit to American agriculture, improvements in physical security will be completed to preserve our genetic resources for use by scientists of today and of future generations.

REQUESTS

FUNDING REQUEST FOR FY2004
A. S-9: Authorized
FY2002
Authorized
FY2003
Requested
FY2004
Personnel $332,646 $343,457 $318,917a
Travel 1,000 1,000 1,000
Operations 48,186 48,186 72,726a
Equipment 3,000 3,000 3,000
TOTAL $384,832 $395,643 $395,643
a Salary from one vacant position (ARA III) moved to operations.
B. USDA/ARS: Authorized
FY2002
Authorized
FY2003
Requested
FY2004
Personnel $1,428,960 $1,527,297b $1,557,843c
Travel 32,000 20,000 20,000
Indirect Research Cost/
Other Services
265,956 236,945 239,000
RSA support 10,476 5,000 0
Operation 253,960 218,622 204,133
Equipment 153,000a 34,500 20,000
Construction 0 0 0
Building and Field
Maintenance/Support
56,624 58,612 60,000
TOTAL $2,200,976a $2,100,976 $2,100,976
a Includes $100,000 in temporary funding for DNA sequencer.
b Includes new molecular geneticist position, three federal technicians, and ten federal temporary student positions (previously in RSA).
c Includes an average 2% projected increase in salaries.

Figure 1. Distribution of Genetic Resources from Griffin

* Distributions listed for 2003 include 16,683 accessions already shipped and additional orders for 18,822 other accessions.

Action Requested: Maintain the S-009 FY04 budget at the same level as FY03 ($395,643) reflecting no increase in salaries based on The University of Georgia salary projections.

Action Taken: On motion/second of Drs. Fischer/Weidemann, level funding of $395,643 (with the usual caveat regarding change in Hatch) was approved.


Agenda Item 15.1
NRSP-1: Current Research Information System
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: W. F. Brown

Status: NRSP-1 terminates 9/03. A one-year extension to 2004 has been requested and is pending approval by regions.

NRSP-1: Current Research Information System
Description MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING
Authorized FY02 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04
Salaries $129,852
(2.2 FTE)
$135,255
(2.1 FTE)
$118,682
(1.9 FTE)
$501,142
(7.9 FTE)
$439,738
(7.0 FTE)
Fringe Benefits
(salary only)
32,270 38,550 32,818 142,832 121,594
Wages
(+ wage fringe)
0 0 0 0 0
Travel 600 1,063 1,063 3,937 3,937
Supplies 1,200 2,125 2,550 7,875 9,450
Maintenance 900 1,063 3,188 3,937 11,812
Equipment/Capital
Improvement
4,400 4,251 0 15,749 0
Other 50,176 36,608 60,614 135,642 224,583
TOTAL $219,398
(2.2 FTE)
$218,915
(2.1 FTE)
$218,915
(1.9 FTE)
$811,114
(7.9 FTE)
$811,114
(7.0 FTE)

Program Accomplishments and Project Plans for FY04
System Enhancements: CRIS staff continued, and will continue, to design and implement enhancements to the UNIX/STAR system by pursuing multiple goals. The office maintained the CRIS technical data in an on-line environment, accessible in a user friendly mode via the World Wide Web. The office expanded the capability to maintain CRIS financial data stored in a STR data system. Many additional STAR based report formats were designed and developed allowing the CRIS staff to generate reports with technical information, financial information, or both, in a variety of techniques to satisfy various requirements.

Statistical Analysis System (SAS) software tools are being utilized to develop and implement a pilot project for building fiscal year files for report generation activities. This facility is being developed to examine the potential for CRIS to offer controlled access to financial information with more flexibility in report generation. This will allow quicker response to a wider variety of requests.

CRIS staff will participate in efforts to make CRIS data available through the Research, Education and Extension Information System (REEIS) that is still in development. This activity has the potential to increase the accessibility of CRIS data to a wider audience and to increase the utility of CRIS information by allowing it to be integrated with data from other sources from within CSREES and REE.

Initiated activity on a pilot project to be developed in a new document management software system (FileNet) procured by CSREES. The project will provide facilities for on-line project review and approval of formula funded projects. The goal for the effort is to achieve an electronic file folder that will replace the paper copies currently utilized in the CSREES approval process. The integration of resources from CRIS and the document management system will allow the CSREES NPL (National Program Leader) to review and approve new and revised formula projects electronically. This system will also greatly facilitate the tracking and management of proposals while in the approval process.

Data Collection: During 2002, 98% of all input was received electronically, and this allowed CRIS to terminate activities with data entry contractors. The CRISFRMS programs were supported through a cooperative effort between the CRIS staff and University of Vermont staff, providing hardware and software facilities, and continued development of data collection via the World Wide Web. Notable activities or improvements included the implementation of a process to enter the ‘ Admin’ password only once for access to all functions, a status screen which highlights unsubmitted items and shows all pending and deferred projects, capability to resubmit deferred projects using the web forms, ability for sites to include a message to site users at the time they select their site, new user types ‘Financial Manager’ and ‘Data Manager’, and provided continuing user support and documentation.

Retrievals: The activity on CRISTEL continues to increase as more individual users perform searches andretrieve information from CRIS utilizing either the assisted search or professional search toolsprovided on the website. The number of retrievals for technical information conducted in-house isdeclining, however, the nature of the retrievals performed in-house are more complex and require a higher level of search expertise to accomplish then previously was needed.

Fiscal year data are maintained in a separate data file that is not accessible from the CRIS website. Any request for retrieval of information or report generation is performed by a member of the CRIS staff to insure the appropriate information is retrieved, and that the report generated provides information that is consistent with agency requirements and guidelines for fiscal reporting.

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Brown/Jones, the budget request of $218,915 was approved subject to the caveat specifying that the budget will change as Hatch funds change.


Agenda Item 15.2
NRSP-3: The National Atmospheric Deposition Program
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: Jerry Arkin

Status: NRSP-3 terminates 9/03.  FY 04 funding request is tied to request for new project (see NRSP_temp001 in NIMSS). Southern Region approved the new project proposal at the spring meeting, 2002.

NRSP-3: The National Atmospheric Deposition Program
MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING*
Authorized FY02 Authorized FY03 1Proposed FY04 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04
Salaries $104,382
(1.61 FTE)
$106,817
(1.57 FTE)
$110,021
(1.57 FTE)
$305,457
(6.54 FTE)
$303,537
(6.1 FTE)
Fringe Benefits 5,682 5,945 6,124 83,044 82,515
Wages 0 0 0 0 0
Travel 0 0 0 30,978 30,978
Supplies 0 0 0 32,888 32,888
Maintenance 0 0 0 6,500 6,500
Equipment/Capital
Improvement
0 0 0 0 0
Other Direct Costs 2,698 0 0 13,900 13,900
TOTAL $112,762
(1.61 FTE)
$112,762
(1.57 FTE)
$116,145
(1.57 FTE)
$472,767
(6.54 FTE)
$470,318
(6.1 FTE)
1 FY 2004 requested % salary increase: 3%
* Funding from a cooperative agreement between the USDA/CSREES and the University of Illinois.

BRIEF PROJECT SUMMARY

The National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) provides quality assured data and information on the exposure of managed and natural ecosystems and cultural resources to acidic compounds, nutrients, base cations, and mercury in precipitation. These data support informed decisions on air quality issues related to precipitation chemistry and are used by scientists, policy-makers, educators, and the public. Data are freely available via the Internet, which enables on-line retrieval of individual data points, seasonal and annual averages, trend plots, concentration and deposition maps, reports, manuals, and other data and information (http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu)

2002 HIGHLIGHTS

  • Technical Committee. Eighty-two registrants attended the three-day “NADP 2002, NADP Scientific Symposium and Technical Committee Meeting” in Seattle, Washington in September. Five symposium sessions covered diverse topics (stable isotopic measurements, new clean air legislation, temporal trends, and Western regional atmospheric deposition issues). In total, 50 papers were presented. (See http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/meetings/fall02/TCmin2002Fall.pdf ).
  • Extension Activities. The NADP Program Office contributed to the University of Illinois Extension Service program, “Environmental Stewardship Week,” which targets elementary students and engages them in hands-on learning activities in the environmental sciences. The activity center run by NADP staff members compared the pH of household chemicals with the pH of water from a nearby lake and that of an acid rain sample from the NTN network. Approximately 1,200 children participated.
  • Internet usage. Users of the NADP Internet site, data files accessed, and maps viewed continued to increase. The site had 52,843 unique visitors, an increase of 23.3 percent over 2001, and user sessions rose by nearly 43 percent to 156,182. This site now regularly receives more than a million hits per year or more than 4.5 times as many as in 1998, when site usage was first tracked. The number of data files downloaded from the NADP site now exceeds 18,000 files per year, 1.6 times higher than in 1998. Color-contour annual average pH maps from the NTN also appear in chapters on air pollution in newly published McGraw-Hill textbooks, Meteorology and Environmental Geology.
  • Informing Policy. In July 2002, President George Bush sent the U.S. Congress legislation that would set new limits on electric power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and mercury. These limits would require emissions reductions in a cap-and-trade program modeled after the acid rain portion of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA). Documentation supporting this legislation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) used NTN sulfate and nitrate deposition maps to describe current conditions and to demonstrate the efficacy of previous emissions reductions under the 1990 CAAA.
  • Homeland Security. The NADP has experience in efforts to monitor disasters. For example, after the explosive release and spread of radionuclides during the Chernobyl nuclear accident in April 1986, the NADP sent precipitation samples to the Environmental Measurements Laboratory in New York City, where government scientists used radionuclide measurements to map the distribution and estimate the amounts of radioactive fallout across the United States. With more than 20 years of experience, existing monitoring stations, a communications network, and a management infrastructure, the NADP stands ready to help if called on to assist in national homeland security efforts.
  • Publications. There were more than 180 publications (68 journal articles, a new high) using NADP data or published by NRSP-3 scientists in 2002. In April, the journalAtmospheric Environment featured a special section “NADP 2000 – Ten Years After the Clean Air Act Amendments” that contained nine articles presented at the 2000 NADP Technical Committee meeting. (Selected pubs list at http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu/lib/program/SAES422-2002.pdf ).

PLANS FOR 2003/04

  • Serving science and education. The NRSP-3 seeks to continue to support the needs of researchers and educators by providing up-to-date quality-assured data and information on nutrients, acidic compounds, base cations, and mercury in precipitation. Experience has demonstrated the value of the Internet in making NADP data available to users. Several new Internet products are under development, including time-series and site classification maps and related geographic coverages, such as orography and land coverage. A new informational brochure on mercury in rain, similar to the popular nitrogen brochure, will be developed.
  • Supporting informed decisions on air quality issues. Scientists and policy-makers have a keen interest in the atmospheric deposition of ammonia and other nitrogen compounds, especially in East and Gulf coast estuaries experiencing eutrophication, hypoxia, or anoxia. A recent National Academy of Sciences report calls for improved measurements of atmospheric ammonia. In recognition of this interest in ammonia, a one-and-a-half-day workshop on ammonia measurements is being planned in conjunction with the 2003 NADP Technical Committee meeting.
  • Responding to emerging issues. Researchers now receive archival NADP precipitation samples for measuring stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen. In the coming year, archival samples will be delivered to two researchers who plan to measure N-15 and O-18 in nitrate, as a potential means of tracing sources of nitrate in precipitation.Environmental monitoring networks, such as the NADP, could assist in a national surveillance system. The NADP is cooperating with the University of Illinois Veterinary Diagnostic Clinic to look for Bacillus anthracis spores in selected precipitation samples. These spores occur naturally in some soils. If found in rain, the effort will turn to identifying their genetic signature, which will make it possible to map the distribution and genetic fingerprint of naturally occurring anthrax, providing a reference against which to detect unnatural releases.

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Jones/Brown, the budget request of $116,145 was approved subject to the caveat specifying that the budget will change as Hatch funds change.


Agenda Item 15.3.
NRSP-4: A National Agricultural Program to Clear Pest Control Agents for Minor Uses (IR-4)
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: Neal Thompson

Status: NRSP-4 terminates 9/04.

NRSP-4: A National Agricultural Program to Clear Pest Control Agents for Minor Uses (IR-4)
MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING
Authorized FY02 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04
Salaries $481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$1,299,584
(20.0 FTE)
Budget information
not available
at this time.
Fringe Benefits 311,900 @24%
Wages 1,611,484
Travel 190,000
Supplies 120,000
Maintenance 0
Equipment/Capital
Improvement
0
Consultants, off-campus facilities rental, postage, phone, copier maint., publications, subcontracts (biopesticide & research) 1,143,516
TOTAL $481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$481,182
(5.0 FTE)
$3,065,000
(20.0 FTE)
 

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Thompson/Arkin, the budget request of $481,182 was approved subject to the caveat specifying that the budget will change as Hatch funds change.


Agenda Item 15.4
NRSP-5: Develop and Distribute Deciduous Fruit Tree Clones That Are Free of Known Graft-Transmissible Pathogen (IR-2)
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: D. C. Coston

Status: NRSP-5 terminates 9/03. (See request for new project, NRSP_temp101 in NIMSS.)

NRSP-5: Develop and Distribute Deciduous Fruit Tree Clones That Are Free of Known Graft-Transmissible Pathogen (IR-2)
MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING  
Actual FY02 Estimated FY03 Proposed FY04 Estimated FY03 Anticipated FY04
Salaries $128,920
(3.20 FTE)
$130,000
(3.20 FTE)
$161,906*
(4.20 FTE)
$143,784
(4.25 FTE)
$149,535
(4.25 FTE)
Fringe Benefits 38,817 41, 154 51,880* 40,891 42,527
Wages 31,692 31,692 32,960 4,210 4,378
Travel 5,533 5,000 5,200 5,035 5,236
Supplies 42,824 39,940 39,940 44,055 45,817
Maintenance 0 0 0 41,712 43,380
All Other Direct Costs 0 0 0 4,930 5,127**
TOTAL $247,786
(3.20 FTE)
$247,786
(3.20 FTE)
$293,484
(4.20 FTE)
$284,617
(4.25 FTE)
$296,000
(4.25 FTE)
 * The proposed increase in salaries and benefits are based on the recommendations of the 4th year review of NRSP-5 and the recommendations of the administrative advisors.  Two positions will be created:

  1. Information Specialist I – 0.5 FTE; 12 month appointment. A new position to prepare documentation for distribution highlighting NRSP-5 activities, the success of the NRSP system, and for maintaining a web-site containing the current status of public varieties in the program, and information on virus management in tree fruits. This person will also facilitate record management to improve tracking capabilities.
  2. Research Technologist I – 0.5 FTE: 12-month appointment. A new position to perform and coordinate on a regular basis the new molecular tests that are required for the safe and rapid import and export of propagation material.

** We have sought and received a portion of the funds necessary for infrastructure improvement and program enhancement (about $250K of the requested $500K). These funds will be used to introduce the biotechnology testing procedures into the program on a routine basis, and to improve our ability to produce and maintain virus-free fruit tree accessions.

Project Accomplishments and Proposed Activities:
A complete description of the accomplishments of the project over the past five years, and the activity proposal for the coming five years can be found in NIMSS as project NRSP_temp101. This document also contains the proposed budget for the next five years of the NRSP-5 project.

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Wynne/Weidemann, contingent on approval of the new project, a level funded budget of $247,786 was approved subject to the caveat specifying that the budget will change as Hatch funds change.


Agenda Item 15.5
NRSP-6: Introduction, Preservation, Classification, Distribution and Evaluation of Solanum Species
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: Bob Westerman

Status: NRSP-6 terminates 9/05.

NRSP-6: Introduction, Preservation, Classification, Distribution and Evaluation of Solanum Species
Description MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING
Authorized FY02 Authorizeda FY03 Proposedb FY04 Authorized FY03 Proposedc FY04
Salaries $98,287
(3.3 FTE)
$100,253
(3.3 FTE)
$102,258
(3.3 FTE)
$147,145
(3.1 FTE)
$150,087
(3.1 FTE)
Fringe Benefits
(salary only)
30,685 31,299 31,925 58,754 59,929
Wages
(+ wage fringe)
7,616 7,768 7,924 0 0
Travel 1,331 1,331 1,331 6,000 6,120
Supplies 16,233 16,233 16,233 0 0
Maintenance 7,423 4,691 4,691 0 0
Equipment/Capital
Improvement
0 0 0 0 0
UW Contribution
(est.)
0 0 0 66,700 68,034
TOTAL $161,575 $161,575d $164,362 $278,599 $284,170

a 2.0% salary increases
b 2.0% increase for salaries
c estimated 2% increase
d unrealistic figures for travel and supplies required to balance authorized budget

The need is increasing. The size of the collection and associated labor, supplies, and upkeep are rising rapidly. This combined with the flat budgets we have received in the past several years mean we are “losing ground.” We ask that this problem at least be partially offset by a 2% increase for salaries in FY 2004 to redress FY 2003 attrition.

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Westerman/Jones, a level funded budget of $161,575 with caveat was not approved by vote of 6 to 7.


Agenda Item 15.6
NRSP-8: National Animal Genome Research Program
FY04 Budget Request

Presenter: Jerry Cherry

Status: NRSP-8 terminates 9/03. (See request for new project, NRSP_temp022 , in NIMSS.)

NRSP-8: National Animal Genome Research Program
Description MRF FUNDING OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING
(Matching Funds/Cost Sharing)
Authorized FY02 Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04* Authorized FY03 Proposed FY04
Salaries $109,263
(3.60 FTE)
$112,905
(3.46 FTE)
$
( FTE)
$187,256
(2.52 FTE)
$
( FTE)
Fringe Benefits 29,645 29,907 42,625
Wages 20,000 28,740 3,000
Travel 61,700 58,000 1,000
Supplies 95,122 86,178 38,500
Maintenance 2,000 2,000 2,000
Equipment/Capital
Improvement
10,000 10,000 15,000
Other Direct Costs
and Non-Reimbursable
Overhead
52,270 53,270 166,400
TOTAL $379,164
(3.60 FTE)
$379,164
(3.60 FTE)
$400,000
( FTE)
$455,781
(2.52 FTE)
$
( FTE)
* Allocations to species are: cattle ($50,000); swine ($50,000); poultry ($50,000); sheep ($40,000); equine ($40,000); and aquaculture ($40,000).
Allocations for database: $130,000.
** Other Direct Costs includes: genome database development, newsletters, publications, conducting workshops, preparing DNA samples, primers and probes, telephone, fax and copy costs.

This project has traditionally split the funding to 5 locations for species’ coordinators, but has restructured the coordinator positions in the new project. A database coordinator has been added to centralize the vital database functions and allow for efficient cross-species comparative mapping. In addition, an aquaculture coordinator has been added. In order to keep these coordinator positions closely aligned with project needs, several specific protocols are in place:

  1. The coordinators report directly to technical committees made up of project members at the annual meeting. This report includes programmatic and financial accountability.
  2. Coordinators are selected in an open application process. This process utilizes the CSREES advisor, AAs from all four regions, and chairs of the species technical committees who vote on the candidates. This process is currently underway.

Without coordinators designated at the present time, the budgets are impossible to detail at the requested levels. Note that the amount for each species coordinator is drastically cut in order to allow for the additional database coordinator. How the incoming coordinators will adjust to this cut is unknown at this time. Thus we are unable to detail the categories of spending or the matching funds/cost sharing.

Action Requested: Approval of requested budget.

Action Taken: On motion/second by Drs. Cherry/Watson, contingent on approval of the new project, the budget request of $400,000 was approved subject to the caveat specifying that the budget will change as Hatch funds change.


Agenda Item 16
New NRSP Guidelines and ED Report

Presenter: Eric Young

Background: The Executive Director will discuss the proposed changes in policy and procedures for NRSP projects (see NRSP Guidelines document) and report briefly on his activities over the past six months.

In-meeting report: The ED reported on the following items:

  • ED notes are distributed periodically as updates on national activities.
  • All campuses will have been visited within the first year.
  • Working with the MRC and role of ACs.
  • Working with SSRC on Expertise Mapping Project.
  • Working on numerous ESCOP Committees.

Action Requested: For Information.


Agenda Item 17
SAAESD Leadership Award

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: The first SAAESD Leadership Award will be presented. The purpose of this award, according to the Standards are: “To recognize those who have served the Southern Experiment Stations, SAAESD, and the national Land-Grant System with exemplary distinction. Through this person’s leadership he/she shall have personified the highest level of excellence by enhancing the cause and performance of the SAAESD in achieving its mission, the vision for the Southern Agricultural Experiment Stations and the Land-Grant ideal.”

Action Requested: For information.

Action Taken: Dr. James R. Fischer, Clemson University, was presented with the first SAAESD Leadership Award.


Agenda Item 18
Report from the Chief Operating Officers’ Meeting

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: A brief report will be given on discussions and actions taken during the Chief Operating Officers’ Meeting.

In-meeting report:The following items were reported:

  • The registration fees for future SAAESD spring meetings should be set to cover the meeting expenses.
  • Dr. John Jenson, Auburn, agreed to host the 2004 spring meeting.
  • Executive Committee will explore a joint meeting in spring 2004 with the NorthCentral association.
  • A joint meeting with Extension could be held every other year – the next one in 2005.
  • Funding for the SSRC will be phased out and moved to a case-by-case basis.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 19
IPM Grants Program

Presenter: Fred Knapp

Background:

The Southern Region IPM Grant Review Panel, which consisted of a twelve (12) member panel and one (1) ad hoc, met on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 at Lexington, Kentucky to review and discuss the proposals. The review panel consisted of agronomists, entomologists, nematologists, plant pathologists, and weed scientists. At the meeting, each proposal was reviewed, discussed, and ranked based on conformance to goals and objectives of the program, scientific and educational merit, and appropriateness of budget. The primary reviewer for each proposal then prepared a written summary review for each proposal using the information from the secondary reviewers, ad hoc reviewer, and discussion from the peer panel.

Ninety-two (92) letters of intent were received, but we had a total of only 67 proposals submitted for funding: two (2) were for Joint Research/Extension, seven (7) were for Extension and the remaining were Research proposals. No Joint Research/Extension proposals were funded due to these not having been scored highly enough to recommend funding . Funds for this area were therefore allotted to fund other projects with the next highest ranking. Therefore, of the 67 proposals twelve (12) Research and three (3) Extension proposals were recommended for funding for 2003, plus the Administration and Evaluation of the Southern Region IPM proposal. The 15 projects totaled $1,030,000: $917,728 for research activities, $92,272 for extension activities, plus $20,000 for administration. (See attached table for list of funded proposals.)

Southern Region
Integrated Pest Management Grants Program
Projects Funded 2003
Land Grant University System and
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Proposal
No.
Title
State(s)
Investigators
Amount
Funded
2003 Extension Proposals
E-06 Multi-State Training for County Agents Utilizing Handheld Computers and Geospatial Technology for Pest Management Decisions AL-SC-GA van  Riessen, Mask, Flanders, Zehnder, Chapin, Kvien, Brown
46,750
E-02 Evaluating Sampling and Management Strategies for Wheat Insect Pests and the Introduction & Demonstration of “Glance n’ Go” Sequential Sampling for Greenbugs in Winter Wheat Ok Royer, Karner
15,600
E-07 Integrating IPM Strategies in On-Farm Stored Wheat in Tennessee and Kentucky TN-KY Buschermohle, Patrick, Pordesimo, McNeill, Johnson, Montross
29,922
TOTAL
$92,272
2003 Research Proposals
RBC-33 Development of an Integrated Control Program for Stable Flies LA-FL-AR Foil, Hoggette, Szalanski
88,793
RB-15 Improvement and Field Validation of an Attract-and-Kill Bait Station for the Indianmeal Moth OK Nansen, Phillips, Dillwith, Dunford
82,433
RD-50 IPM Cost-Benefit Analysis Tool for Schools TX Merchant, Hurley, Bennett
32,517
RD-55 Incorporating Beneficial Insects in Treatment Decisions for Cotton Aphid AR Kring, Studebaker, Lorenz, Greene
57,466
RD-43 Development of Improved Monitoring Techniques and Decision Tools for the Dogwood Borer,Synanthedon scitula Harris, in Southern Apple Orchards VA-NC-WV Bergh, Walgenbach, Leskey, Zhang
91,622
RA-03 Economic and Environmental Assessment of an Integrated Pest Management Program for German Cockroach Control in Public Housing VA Miller, Norton
66,125
RD-39 Management Strategies for the Stink Bug/Plant Bug Complex in Low Insecticide Input Cotton Production Systems SC Turnipseed, Khalilian, Sullivan, Han, Dodd, Hamming
46,960
RB-27 Impacts on Pest Arthropods of In-House Manure Composting in Commercial High-Rise Layer Houses GA Hinkle, Webster, Merka, Thompson
43,560
RD-57 Improved Scouting and Decision Making Tools for Weed Management in Field Crops NC Wilkerson, Jordan, Price
114,884
RB-25 Management of Cucumber Mosaic Virus and Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus in Pepper and Tomato Using Biological Preparations and Reflective Mulch AL-NC Murphy, Reddy, Louws, Taylor
76,588
RB-13 Stacking Biological Seed Treatments in an IPM Program for Control of Soilborne Pathogens and Insect Pests of Tomato and Bedding Plants TN-NC-FL Canaday, Ownley, Lentz, Gwinn, Benson, Elliott, Mannion, Broschat
102,705
RB-32 Development and Evaluation of Integrated Disease Management Tactics for Armillaria Root Rot of Peach GA Scherm, Taylor, Beckman
114,075
TOTAL
$917,728
Administration and Evaluation of the Southern Region IPM Program KY University of KY
$20,000
TOTAL FUNDS COMMITTED:
Administration
Research
Extension
Joint
TOTAL
$    20,000
$  917,728
$    92,272
$             0
$1,030,000

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 20
Protecting U.S. Agriculture From Bioterrorism Attack

Presenter: Dr. Marjorie A. Hoy

Background:

Highlighting research of the host institution is a tradition during the SAAESD spring meeting. This year, the Florida Agricultural Experiment Station has invited Dr. Hoy, an Eminent Scholar in the Department of Entomology and Nematology, to share her research.

In-Meeting Information: Dr. Hoy was a member of the Committee on Biological Threats to Agricultural Plants and Animals which published a report entitledCountering Agricultural Bioterrorism. A brief summary of this report is available on the National Academies of Sciences website athttp://www4.nationalacademies.org/nas/nashome.nsf. Directors can request a complete report from the site.

Action Requested: For information.


Agenda Item 21
Cotton Winter Nursery Support

Presenter: Eric Young and Johnny Wynne

Tecoman Winter Nursery Support Proposal
February, 2002

GOAL:

Expand and Maintain the Infrastructure for Cotton Germplasm Characterization and Evaluation.

NEED:

To ensure that new and unique germplasm is available to cotton breeders in a timely manner, the cotton germplasm needs to be characterized and evaluated, the information needs to be publicly available, and the germplasm needs to be readily available.

  • The genetic diversity of US cottons needs to be expanded. The cotton germplasm collection represents the source from which the US upland cotton varieties originated; yet these varieties represent only about 1% of the potential genetic variability.
  • The primitive germplasm needs to be characterized to provide directed evaluation and selection of improved traits. Fiber quality traits are derived from the primitive cottons, and they have been selected and enhanced through breeding. Fiber quality traits remain hidden in the primitive germplasm. Disease and pest resistance, smooth leaf, nectariless, glandless, stress resistance, boll types, and early maturity were derived from the primitive germplasm, yet rigorous evaluations have not been made to improve or expand desirable traits for cotton improvement.

OBJECTIVES:

  1. Increase cotton germplasm to ensure adequate seed is available for research community.
  2. Maintain the Cotton Winter Nursery as a resource for increasing and distribution of cotton germplasm and provide a second-generation increases for breeders.
  3. Maintain CottonDB to provide real-time data release and information availability to the cotton community.
  4. Develop DNA markers (SSRs) that are publicly available, polymorphic, and mapped to known locations in the cotton genome.
  5. Characterize cotton germplasm with core DNA markers.
  6. Evaluate cotton germplasm for pest and agronomic traits.

EXPECTED RESULTS:

  1. Increase genetic diversity of cotton cultivars
  2. New fiber and seed quality traits
  3. New sources of biotic and abiotic stress resistance
  4. Improved productivity and yield stability.

BUDGET REQUEST:

Permanently assigned funds:
Cotton Winter Nursery Operations and Germplasm Increases $ 300,000
Germplasm Characterization and Marker Development $ 300,000
Cotton Database (CottonDB) Support and Expansion $ 300,000
Pass-through funds for Cooperators:
Characterization and Evaluation $1,008,000
TOTAL $1,908,000

Tecoman Winter Nursery Financial Report
Fiscal Period July 1 to June 30
December 31, 2002

FY 2001
2000-01
FY 2002
2001-02
FY 2003 TYD
2002-03
Beginning Balance July 1 ($32,940.00) $4,736.36 ($84,143.41)
Beg. Balance Adjustment 0 32.75 0
Corrected Balance ($32,940.00) $4,769.11 ($84,143.41)
Expenditures
Salary/Social Security $76,662.96 $79,159.15 $40,072.03
Pension & 401K 7,428.39 2,465.51 1,865.52
Life/Disability Insurance 1,489.59 1,609.42 760.22
Hospitalization Insurance 3,958.79 3,085.77 1,546.30
FUTA & SUTA; W/C & Liability Ins. 1,071.30 1,418.00 0.00
Per Diem – (Hotel, Meals, etc.) 6,846.00 6,804.00 3,234.00
Auto Insurance/Operating 18,657.53 17,315.71 6,126.54
Telephone 889.47 1,034.80 753.86
Equipment, Maintenance & Supplies 33,224.40 26,725.01 8,108.16
Travel 7,543.96 8,008.78 1,554.68
Labor 208,795.64 215,328.20 77,645.68
Freight 5,829.96 6,378.39 1,707.57
Freight Paid in Memphis 15,939.48 13,264.52 0.00
Miscellaneous 9,789.74 5,797.96 721.15
Total Expenditures
$398,127.21
$388,395.22
$144,095.71
Income
Fees $384.553.57 $165,719.96* $236,220.20*
USDA Grant 0.00 100,000.00 164,000.00
Cotton, Inc. 51,250.00 33,762.74 0.00
Total Income
$435,803.57
$299,482.70
$400,220.20
Ending Balance / Available Funds
$4,736.36
($84,143.41)
$171,981.08
*A portion of 2001-02 fees were not collected until 2002-03. Total fees for 2001-02 were $210,302.00 and estimated total for 2002-03 is $230,500.00.

Action Requested: Determine if there is interest among the Directors in developing a mechanism for annual support of the Tecoman Cotton Winter Nursery from the southern region experiment stations.

Action Taken: The Executive Director (ED) was asked to look at the possibility of 1) formation of mechanism to use Multistate Research Funds; 2) asking faculty who use the program to absorb costs with increased fees; and/or 3) raise University contribution in SY costs. ED is to present options at the fall meeting.


Agenda Item 22
Stakeholder Advisory Group

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: Individual Land Grant Colleges of Agriculture are required to have a process for stakeholder input on uses of formula funds by the 1998 Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education Reform Act. The SAAESD has discussed previously the potential benefits of an advisory group composed of representative stakeholders from the region to provide input on the use of multistate research funds. The purpose of this agenda item is to revisit the need for continuing those discussions and/or further appropriate action.

Action Requested: For discussion.

In-Meeting Discussion: The discussion on how to engage a stakeholder advisory group in future SAAESD activities included numerous issues and suggestions:

  • Dimensions of an advisory group are two-fold: 1) awareness, and 2) advocacy (support) for multistate activity.
  • Use ad hoc advisory groups on issue basis rather than a general Advisory Group.
  • Each spring meeting could have an agenda item for which an industry advisory group could be invited. (Examples: IP, Cotton Nursery, etc.)
  • Budget issues will be a factor. Who will pay for advisory members travel expenses?

Action Taken: Chair appointed a committee of Jim Fischer, Richard Jones, Vance Watson, and Eric Young to recommend a strategy for involving stakeholders.


Agenda Item 23
Future Funding of SAAESD Spring Meetings

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: In recent years, the host institutions for the annual spring SAAESD meetings have incurred considerable expenses beyond those reimbursed by participant’s registration fees. Dr. Scifres will lead a discussion on how to deal with this situation including possibly changing meeting length, location, social activities, tours, etc.

Action Requested: For information.

Action Taken: The Chief Operating Officers discussed the issues involved and determined that future registration fees should be increased in order to cover all meeting expenses.


Agenda Item 24
Resolutions Committee

Presenter: Roland Mote and Clarence Watson

Background: Resolutions for retiring SAAESD members will be presented.

Action Requested: For approval.

Action Taken: The following resolutions were approved in the form of round of applause:

  • Fred Knapp – retiring June 2003
  • Neal Thompson – retiring June 2003
  • Kriton K. Hatzios – posthumously (see Resolution below)
  • Florida Meeting Hosts

Resolution In Memory of

Kriton K. Hatzios

Whereas, Dr. Kriton K. Hatzios, faithfully served the Southern Association of Agricultural Experiment Station Directors from November 1, 1997 to the time of his death on February 20, 2003; and

Whereas, Dr. Hatzios was a valued member of the Association lending his reasoned thought and clear vision to numerous issues; and

Whereas, all members of the Association were greatly saddened by his untimely death;

Now therefore be it resolved, that the Association members gathered at its annual meeting in Duck Key, Florida on April 2, 2003 stand for a moment of silence to honor the memory of Dr. Hatzios; and

Be it further resolved, that the Association forward a copy of this resolution to the Hatzios family in recognition and appreciation of Dr. Hatzios’ service and friendship and in deepest sympathy on his passing.


Agenda Item 25
Announcements, Future Meeting Plans, etc.

Presenter: Charles Scifres

Background: Announcement, future meeting plans, and any unfinished business will preceed adjournment.

Action Requested: For information.


Updated