NSERC Strategic Network on Innovative Wood Products
and Building Systems (NEWBuildS)

Wood Science and Technology Centre
University of New Brunswick

1350 Regent Street

Fredericton, New Brunswick
CANADA E3B 6C2

Tel: (506) 453-4507

Fax: (506) 453-3574

Tel: (506) 453-4507 Fax: (506) 453-3538

Minutes of NEWBuildS Board of Directors Meeting #3

January 18, 2011

Radisson Hotel Vancouver Airport, Richmond, BC

AttendanceAffiliation

Ms. Lynn Embury-Williams (Chair)

Mr. Andrew Harmsworth GHL Consultants Ltd

Mr. Erol Karacabeyli(morning only)FPInnovations

Mr. Graham SavageBusiness New Brunswick

Mr. Grant Newfield(morning only)Read Jones Christoffersen
Ms Helen Griffin Canadian Wood Council

Ms. Jyotsna Dalvi Industry Canada

Dr. Ian Hartley University of Northern British Columbia

Dr. J. Daniel Dolan Washington State University

Dr. Morad Atif NRC Institute for Research in Construction

Mr. Robert Jones Natural Resources Canada

Dr. Roger Cheng University of Alberta

Dr. Shaheer Mikhail(Network Officer)NSERC

Dr. Y. H. Chui (Scientific Director)University of New Brunswick

Mr. Kenneth Koo (NLM)FPInnovations

Joined by Conference Call

Ms. Denise Evans (morning only)Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing, Ontario

3.1 Welcome and Opening Remarks (Embury-Williams)

Chair Embury-Williams welcomed NEWBuildS Board members and thanked all for attending this Board Meeting. A special welcome was extended to new Board members Graham Savage and Denise Evans for agreeing to serve on the BoD. Also recognized and thanked was Ardith Armstrong, NEWBuildS Assistant to Dr. Chui, who would be taking today’s minutes. Ms. Embury-Williams congratulated Dr. Chui and Mr. Koo for a very successful workshop held yesterday. She noted that Dr. Don Wright, President of BCIT, gave a very interesting talk at last night’s BoD’s dinner.

There were seven (7) voting members present (total of eight (8) Voting members), which satisfied the requirement of a quorum (majority or 2/3).

3.2Adoption of Agenda

MOVED by Harmsworth, seconded by Dolan, that the Agenda be adopted as presented. Carried.

3.3Approval of Minutes of December 1, 2010, and Review of Action Items.

Action items from last meeting were reviewed as follows:

Page 1 of 5

Tel: (506) 453-4507 Fax: (506) 453-3538

  • Action Item A2b-1: Provide definition of “Associate Member” category by next BoD meeting

A definition of an “Associate Member” was provided in the meeting package and will be discussed under agenda item 3.8a.

  • Action Item A2b-2: Network Agreement must be signed by all network members.

All, with the exception of University of Waterloo, have already signed the first version of the Network Agreement. Several partners are yet to sign the amendment. Dr. Chui will ask UNB Research Services to contact those who have not yet signed within the next couple of weeks. He will try to get all signatures by end of January/beginning of February. Dr. Mikhail reminded that the second year instalment will not be released until the Agreement is signed by all parties.

  • Action Item A2b-3: The Chair will send letter of invitation to Ms. Evans and Mr. Savage to join the Board and attend the upcoming meeting on January 18th, 2011.

Letters were sent and both Ms. Evans and Mr. Savage accepted. A thank-you was extended on behalf of the BoD.

  • Action Item A2b-4: NEWBuildS will request all presenters at the January workshop to provide a one-page summary and prepare their presentations using the provided PP template.

All complied with this request.

  • Action Item A2b-5: The titles of the Workshop Sessions should be revised.

Titles were revised.

  • Action Item A2b-6: Passwords for Member Only Area will be sent to all BoD, SSC and researchers.

Done.

  • Action Item A2b-7: NEWBuildS will request NRC/IRC to provide the project management template for review as a possible tool to monitor progress of network projects.

Request was made but NLM is yet to receive the template from NRC-IRC.

MOVED by Harmsworth, seconded by Atif, that the Minutes of the December 1, 2010, meeting be accepted as presented. Carried.

3.4Scientific Director’s Report – Year 1 Activities

Dr. Chui gave an indepth report on Year 1. He discussed at length the role played by the Scientific Steering Committee in reviewing and approving projects. Also given was an overview of external networking with stakeholders. He announced that 25 projects had been approved for Year 1. By theme, the numbers of projects were: Theme 1 (5); Theme 2 (10); Theme 3 (5); and Theme 4 (5). His report is presented in its entirety on pages 7-11 of the meeting documents.

Mr. Karacabeyli expressed concernregarding the process of reviewing and rating the research proposals. He questioned whether there could there be a conflict of interest by committee members. Chui noted that one of the main goals of the review process was to provide feedback to the researchers for improving the projects. Chui stressed that none of the planned projects was declined, and most of them received valuable comments from the SSC as part of the proposal review process. Mikhail reminded the Board that the research projects included in the NSERC application have already been subjected to a peer review by the Site Visit Team. He further commented that strategic research networks usually have an independent expert panel to provide an arms-length review of the scientific quality of the research and that such a panel can be used to review new project proposals if necessary.

Action Item 3.4.a. Create an independent expert panel to evaluate the projects and new proposals

After a lengthy discussion it was agreed that a task group be struck to review the terms of reference of the Scientific Steering Committee and develop terms of reference for an independent expert panel. The task group will also identify issues in the proposal review process and develop a process to alleviate any potential conflict of interest. Board members who agreed to serve on this committee were Dolan (Chair), Atif, Karacabeyli and Harmsworth.

Chair Embury-Williams extended congratulations to Ken Koo for his work on the web site.

3.5 Review of Project Progress

3.5.a Summary of project progress reports

A summary of the progress of research project activities during Year 1 was reported by Koo and Chui. Please refer to pages 17 and 18 of the meeting documents for complete details.

Koo noted that only a few projects actually reported progress in research activities (summarized on pages 17 and 18), because the majority of the projects only recruited students/PDFs in either September, 2010, or January, 2011. Chui sought comments from Board members regarding the format for summarizing project progress for the Board. The Board generally felt that the level of information given in the tables shown on pages 17 and 18 is appropriate. Mikhail suggested that a one-page summary sheet be prepared for each project as a means of communicating projects to external stakeholders. He distributed an example copy to Board members.

Action Item 3.5.a: A one-page summary be prepared for each project

Action Item 3.5.b:Create an external panel to evaluate the project progress

3.5.b Policy for recalling funding and cancelling of projects

Chui provided an overview of the proposed policy. The proposed policies are given on page 19 of the meeting documents. He indicated that there is need to have separate policies for new and continuing projects. After some discussion the Board suggested the following changes to the wording of the policy for new projects.

SCC will assess the relevance of thesis or PDF project and the needs of the Network and recommend to the Board of Directors one of two options:

  • The project be cancelled and funding be redirected to an existing research project, or
  • Research proposal on a specific topic be solicited from the research community.

The policy statements were approved with the above changes.

3.5.cYear 2 Projects

Dr. Chui presented a list of proposed projects for Year 2. He indicated that the list is basically a continuation of Year 1 projects. Funds to support Year 2 activities will only be released if satisfactory project progress is achieved and that expenditure level for Year 1 funds reaches 60%. After discussion, it was –

MOVED by Hartley, seconded by Savage, that Year 2 projects be accepted as presented. Carried.

3.6Financial Information

Dr. Chui reviewed the funding allocation and projected actual expenditures for Year 1. It appears that there will be a surplus of $50,000 brought forward into Year 2. After considerable discussion, it was –

MOVED by Dolan, seconded by Harmsworth, to approve 2nd Year budget with the stipulation that the forms presenting 1st and 2nd year budgets be revised to show carry forward of committed and uncommitted funds from start-up, and also carry-over from the shell funding. The expected major milestones/deliverables will also be summarized for Year 2. Carried with one abstention.

Action Item 3.6a: Chui to provide revised budget presentation to Board members that will include carry-over from Year 1 for each project and carry-over from the shell funding. Key project deliverables for Year 2 should also be provided.

3.7 Sub-committees of Board of Directors

3.7.aNomination Committee

Chair of Nominations Committee, Andrew Harmsworth, presented the revised Terms of Reference for the Nominations Committee which were developed by the Committee. See page 24 of the meeting documents for full details. It was --

MOVED by Atif, seconded by Cheng, that the Terms of Reference for the Nominations Committee be accepted as presented. Carried.

3.7.bOutreach Committee

Appendix D – Governance Document of the Network Agreement contains the Terms of Reference for Outreach Committee, which was reproduced on page 25 of the meeting document. Chui, in his presentation, suggested that the Outreach Committee can provide guidance to the following outreach activities: 1) organization of annual workshop; 2) web site; 3) newsletter; 4) archiving and sharing of test data and other research outputs; 5) Best Practice guide document: identification of research results that can be implemented by Codes and Standards Committee. Some Board members expressed concerns that the expected deliverables of the Outcome Committee, as outlined in the Governance Document, are unrealistic. Mikhail reminded the Board that implementation of research results so that they can be applied by industry and design community, was expected to be the responsibility and obligation of the industrial partners, FPInnovations and Canadian Wood Council.

Griffin confirmed that CWC is willing to play a major role in the implementation of the research results. After some discussion, it was agreed that Griffin, Karacabeyli, and the four FPInnovations theme leaders form a group to identify the envisioned mandate and possible activities of this committee. Chui and Koo will also participate. Griffin agreed to lead and coordinate this group.

3.8Discussion Items

3.8.aDefinition of Associate Network Member Category

At the last Board of Directors meeting, it was suggested that a new partner category be created to recognize organizations that provide significant in-kind contributions or cash contributions to the Network. Cui presented the proposal definition of a new category, known as Associate Network Partner. The proposed definition is given on page 26 of the meeting documents. After discussion it was agreed to adopt the proposed definition of Associate Network Partner with the following modification (strike out text):

“Associate Network Partner” means a company, association, government agency or department that directly supports Network Research or other activities of the Network, but is not bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement and will have no claim to ownership of IP nor direct access to results arising from Network Research, unless otherwise stated in other agreements, NEWBuildS and an Associate Network Partner may enter into a separate agreement.

It was suggested that a letter be sent by Chair of BoD to CMHC International to thank them for their contribution.

Action Item 3.8a: Chair Embury-Williams to send a letter to CMHC International to recognize their cash contribution andofficially notifying them of their status as Associate Network Partner.

3.8.bNetwork News Bulletins

A sample of the envisioned NEWBuildS Bulletin is shown on page 27 or the meeting documents. It was suggested that each issue features a story on a selected project. Dr. Atif agreed to help distribute the newsletter through the NRC-IRC system.

3.8cArchiving and Custodian of Research Output

Chui presented two possible approaches to address this issue. He called them Custodian and Inventory respectively. There was no decision on which represents the better approach. Chui suggested that in the short term, the NEWBuildS web site can provide the platform for researchers to post data and results that can be accessed by collaborators. A discussion ensued on how and where test data should be stored. The custody should be undertaken by an organization that has the capacity to provide such storage. Chui suggested that the issue of long-term storage of research data be considered by the Outreach Committee at a later date.

3.10Next BoD meeting and Workshop

After discussion it was decided that the next face-to-face BoD meeting should take place at the same time next year immediately after the Network Workshop so the budget for Year 3 could be approved. In addition it was felt that the workshop should be extended from one day to two days to allow ample time for participants to properly present their research. It was also agreed that Vancouver would again be the best place to hold the meetings.

3.11Other Business

No other business was identified.

3.12Adjournment

Meeting adjourned at 2:55 pm

Page 1 of 5