This is a committee of Council.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Audit and Legal Affairs Committee is charged with providing assistance to the Council in fulfilling its fiduciary responsibilities relating to accounting and reporting practices and in maintaining, by regularly scheduled meetings, a direct line of communication for the exchange of views and information between the Council and the independent accountants. The committee also has responsibility for the oversight of major litigation. The duties include:
This committee is also charged with maintaining an overview of the Union's legal affairs through an annual review of current and potential legal issues facing the Union and with regularly evaluating the performance of AGU's legal counsel and recommending adding or changing counsel if appropriate.
The Council, or the Executive Committee between Council meetings, will decide when to initiate or cease any major litigation. They will establish the overall objectives and any general conditions that are to govern the litigation process.
Before AGU undertakes significant litigation, either as a plaintiff or as a defendant, the Executive Committee will charge the ALAC with oversight of the specific legal activity. At his/her discretion the AGU President, in consultation with the ALAC, may appoint individuals from the membership who have applicable technical expertise or experience to augment the ALAC in its role with respect to management of a specific litigation. These additional members of the ALAC will not assume any of the other responsibilities with which the ALAC is charged.
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The Audit and Legal Affairs Committee is responsible for undertaking programs to achieve the objectives in the approved plan, for making regular reports on progress, and assisting with the development of the next Union-wide plan.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the William Bowie Medal, which is awarded for outstanding contributions to fundamental geophysics and for unselfish cooperation in research. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences as a Union medal. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No member of the Bowie Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Bowie Medal.
Clarification of the term "unselfish cooperation in research" is found in a letter of June 18, 1952, from Richard M. Field who was instrumental in establishing the Bowie Medal. He wrote, "...the Medal should not be awarded to outstanding geophysicists, as such, but to those who had promoted and used Geophysics in named departments of the Earth sciences other than their regular job or field of research."
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Bowie Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's web site. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Walter H. Bucher Medal, which is given for original contributions to the basic knowledge of crust and lithosphere. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevent. The medal should be given when appropriate, but not more than every other year in even-numbered years.
No member of the Bucher Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Bucher Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Bucher Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee should include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the Committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Budget and Finance Committee is charged with oversight of the Union's financial health. This Committee contributes to the long-term strategy for success of the Union by assuring that the resources available to AGU and, thus, its ability to serve its purposes, continually grow to meet new needs. It reviews and reports on the financial aspects of all of the Union's activities and takes action or makes suggestions to staff, committees and the Council in accord with existing practices and policies. The Budget and Finance Committee focus is on assuring that funds are available to meet the current programmatic objectives of the Union and that the Union remains financially strong.
The Committee is responsible for development of the annual budget and for presentation of this budget to the Council, usually at the Fall Meeting. The Committee is also responsible for monitoring performance against the established budget, understanding deviations and suggesting corrective actions as appropriate. Preliminary budgets, regular and special reports and other supporting materials are prepared by the staff at the request of the Committee. The committee will participate in implementing the Union objective for the full range of AGU activities to develop 3-5 year plans and budgets that matches the Union's resources to the minimum viable programs of the Union and, for additional programs, to help define their priority and identify sources of external funding.
The Committee is to maintain a continuing review of the performance of AGU's invested funds and suggest or make needed changes in their management in accord with the policies approved by the Council. It is also responsible for making recommendations to the Council on changes in investment and other financial policies.
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The schedule for maintenance of the plan requires a continuing review of AGU's finances, global financial trends, and the implications of potential change for the Union. The Budget and Finance Committee is responsible for undertaking programs to achieve the objectives in the approved plan and for making regular reports on progress.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Development Board is responsible for leadership and oversight of AGU's fundraising programs and for ensuring that such activities meet the needs of the Union. The Board recommends policies to the AGU Council, the Union's elected governing body, and works with Council leadership, the Executive Director, and Development Director to implement fundraising strategies. The Board serves as an influential network of informed advocates who are committed to maintaining and advancing the financial health of AGU.
AGU operates under the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The Development Board will determine how to best achieve fundraising objectives included in this plan. The Board's primary focus will be on increasing endowment and raising project funds for outreach and other non-revenue producing programs identified in the strategic plan. The Board will also ensure that a case statement for supporting such endeavors is in place at all times. Board members agree to assume the following ongoing responsibilities:
Charge for 2004-2006
The AGU Committee on Education and Human Resources (CEHR) is charged with promoting increased understanding and appreciation of science in general, and the Earth and space sciences in particular. CEHR contributes to the long-term strategy for success of the Union by fostering a planet-wide network of individuals in the geophysical sciences that epitomizes unselfish cooperation in research. CEHR implements and/or supports programs to improve science education at every level for students, for established scientists, and for the public at large. The Committee promotes the Earth and space sciences by gathering information about career opportunities and trends for scientists in these fields and by disseminating that information, in appropriate forms. These activities will help AGU achieve its long-term goals of increasing worldwide public support and appreciation for Earth and space science by informing and educating the public, and maintaining sufficient numbers of new scientists to achieve the Union's goals.
In support of this goal, CEHR initiates and implements programs that are aimed at the objectives laid out for the committee in the current AGU Plan:
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. CEHR will participate in implementing the Union objective to develop a 3-5 year plan and budget that match the Union's resources allocatable to outreach to a core (minimum viable) Education and Human Resources program and other outreach areas. Ultimately, AGU intends to fund this core program using endowment funds. Projects that go beyond the core program now and in the future will require external funding. New programs requiring funding or extensive staff support or that deviate significantly from past AGU practices must be approved by the Council.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Maurice Ewing Medal, which is given for significant original contributions to the scientific understanding of the processes in the ocean; for the advancement of oceanographic engineering, technology, and instrumentation; and for outstanding service to marine sciences. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences as a Union medal. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No member of the Ewing Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Ewing Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Ewing Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nomination packages could be improved.
Charge as amended December 2005
This is a committee of Council.
The Executive Review Committee is responsible for reviewing the effectiveness, economy, and suitability of the headquarters operations, providing advice to the Executive Director, and reporting in writing to the Council on its findings. From time to time the Committee may arrange for a visiting committee to assist it in assessing headquarters operations. The Executive Review Committee also has responsibility for reviewing the performance of the Executive Director and for maintaining a review of and establishing the compensation and other terms of employment for the Executive Director and for developing, maintaining, and executing plans for dealing with emergency transition or planned succession of the Executive Director. The Executive Review Committee will serve as the Search Committee for a new Executive Director when needed. The membership of the Executive Review Committee is President, President-elect, General Secretary, International Secretary, and Immediate Past-President of the Union and three other Council members designated by Council.
Charge for 2004-2006
This committee is charged with selecting a recipient for the Charles S. Falkenberg Award, which is awarded to recognize a scientist under 45 years of age who has contributed to the quality of life, economic opportunities and stewardship of the planet through the use of Earth science information and to the public awareness of the importance of understanding our planet. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this award broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the Earth and space sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The award is given not more often than annually.
The award is given jointly by AGU and the Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP). Members of the Falkenberg Award Committee or of the Executive Committee are ineligible for consideration as a candidate for the Falkenberg Award.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos, on AGU's website, and through ESIP publications. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their report to the AGU Executive Committee the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged, in the Union's bylaws, with selecting, from among the membership, those individuals who should be honored with the designation of Fellow in recognition of their acknowledged eminence in the geophysical sciences. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration but not a criterion. The number of Fellows elected each year shall not exceed 0.1% of the total members. The number is based on the total membership at the end of the year preceding the year Fellowship is conferred.
The election of Fellows should be complete, and new Fellows notified, no later than three weeks before the abstract deadline for the Joint Assembly held in the Spring so that those participating in the ceremony at that meeting will have time to plan for their attendance.
The deliberations of the Fellows Committee are confidential and must remain so except to the extent feedback to the subcommittees of nominations is authorized so as to improve future submissions. The selections are also kept confidential until approximately two weeks after the Fellows Committee meeting when the President will have completed notification to the new Fellows of their election. A breach in confidentiality prior to that notification can detract from the honor. Failure to handle these matters with discretion would be damaging to the Union's reputation and members could lose confidence in our ability to handle other decisions with sensitivity.
The Committee of Fellows is to determine its own policies and procedures so as to best meet its charge and goals within, and consistent with, the Union's bylaws and overall Union policies, procedures, and practices. This committee will make recommendations for the adoption of Union-wide policies and for enhancing the effectiveness of the Fellows program through the Committee on Honors and Recognitions.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the John Adam Fleming Medal, which is given for original research and technical leadership in geomagnetism, atmospheric electricity, aeronomy, space physics, and related sciences. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences as a Union medal. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No member of the Fleming Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Fleming Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Fleming Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This committee is charged with selecting, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Edward A. Flinn III Award, which is awarded to recognize those individuals who personify the Union's motto "unselfish cooperation in research" through their facilitating, coordinating, and implementing activities that have greatly strengthened the infrastructure on which our research depends. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this award broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The award is given not more often than annually.
This Flinn Award is for the unsung heroes who provide the ideas, motivation, and labors of love that build and maintain the framework without which our science could not flourish. It is likely that the fruits of the work of a nominee for the Flinn Award will be far more widely known and recognized than the individual.
Members of the Flinn Award Committee or of the Executive Committee are ineligible for consideration as a candidate for the Flinn Award.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their report to the Executive Committee the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, recipients for the Excellence in Geophysical Education Award, which is awarded in recognition of an individual, team or group of individuals that has made a significant and lasting contribution to education at any level in the geophysical sciences, and in so doing, have played an important role in furthering our knowledge of Earth and its environment. This award is given not more often than annually.
No members of the Award for Excellence in Geophysical Education Committee and of the Executive Committee are eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Award.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts.
The Committee should include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the Committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of the committee and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient of the Harry Hess Medal which is given for outstanding achievements in research of the constitution and evolution of Earth and other planets. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No members of the Hess Medal Committee and of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Hess Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Hess Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This committee has the responsibility for fostering a focus for the history of geophysics within AGU. It is also charged with building interdisciplinary interaction, and educating AGU members about the nature and importance of the problems and issues in the history of geophysics.
The History or Geophysics Committee is specifically charged with maintaining a continuing review of AGU's existing history programs such as articles, book reviews, and news items in Eos related to the history of geophysics and obituaries of notable AGU members; the publication of studies on the history of geophysics; and coordination of interest in the history of geophysics among appropriate organizations.
The committee should work with the program committees for the Joint Assembly, Fall Meeting and other AGU meetings to develop special sessions that would advance the history of geophysics and should consider opportunities for Chapman Conferences and other interdisciplinary and specialized meetings that would support its goals. It should also consider the role of the AGU publications program in this area and actively encourage the development and enhancement of publication services that serve the needs of its constituents and other AGU members.
The History of Geophysics Committee should build and maintain productive working relationships with other appropriate scientific organizations, both national and international.
The History of Geophysics Committee must report its activities to the Council in the Spring of odd-numbered years and provide a report to the Executive Committee in January of even-numbered years. The report to the Executive Committee must outline Committee achievements during its current term and proposed directions for the next term. The magnitude and success of these endeavors will be considered in deciding whether to continue the Committee. Recommendations as to the continuation of the Committee and/or any changes in its focus also should be made in that report. Specific contributions to the Union goals are important to highlight in support of continuing the Committee. These reports will be forwarded to the Council for information. Reports are also welcome at any other time and will be included with background sent to all Council members and committee chairmen.
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The schedule for creating the plan assures that committees have an approved plan to work with during the first year of their tenure, while they are assisting with the development of the next Union-wide plan. The History of Geophysics Committee is responsible for undertaking programs to achieve the objectives in the approved plan and for including reports on progress and regular annual reports.
The Committee may request action by the Executive Committee or Council just as Sections, Focus groups, and other committees do. Care should be taken that all appropriate Sections, Focus groups, and committees have an opportunity to review proposals before they are put forward for action. New programs requiring unbudgeted funding or extensive staff support or that deviate significantly from past AGU practices need to be approved by the Council.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Committee on Honors and Recognitions is charged with maintaining oversight of the Union's honors and recognition programs at all levels Union, Section, Committee, etc. and recommending changes to the policies that will enhance the effectiveness of these programs in meeting the various objectives set for them as well as the traditional objectives of such programs. This committee contributes to the long-term strategy for success of the Union by assuring that the AGU Honors Program is superior in all aspects and by fostering a planet-wide network of individuals in the geophysical sciences that epitomizes unselfish cooperation in research.
Some of the kinds of activities the committee may wish to undertake in their oversight role are to assure that the objectives of the medals and awards are well defined; review the honors ceremony and supporting or related activities and to suggest enhancements that would increase their effectiveness; review the policies and procedures for the nomination and selection of Fellows, medalists and awardees and make recommendations to assure that the Union and Section programs are coherent and that sufficient and appropriate nominations are received; assure that medals, awards and certificates for medalists, awards, Fellows, section and other awards are appropriate and current; review Section and Committee awards and recognitions; review proposals for new recognitions and suggest other recognition possibilities. The Committee will also help assure that Earth and space scientists are nominated for appropriate external awards.
During the 2004-2006 term, the committee is charged with meeting the objectives laid out for Honors and Recognitions in the AGU Strategic Plan:
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The Committee on Honors and Recognitions will participate in preparing the plan and will report on progress made towards the objectives in the plan.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Robert E. Horton Medal, which is given for outstanding contributions to hydrology. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No member of the Robert E. Horton Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Horton Medal.
The Horton Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Information Technology Committee is charged with exploring, studying and proposing ways in which AGU can better use computer and electronic communication technology to enhance services to members and to the geophysical sciences community as a whole; and to facilitate and encourage the use of computers in the geophysical sciences and in communication among geophysical scientists worldwide. This committee contributes to the long-term strategy for success of the Union by assuring that the technological resources of AGU continue to grow to meet new needs and that they help make and keep each AGU program and service superior to its competitors.
The Information Technology Committee advises other committees and staff on technical aspects of the uses of computers and electronic communication in meeting AGU goals and objectives. Proposals made by this committee for publications, meetings, and other programs are reviewed by the appropriate program committee. The primary focus of the Information Technology Committee is the medium and technology.
The committee may establish under its umbrella operational groups to deal with the special concerns or specific activities. Presently it has a subcommittee that is to maintain an overview of all aspects of the AGU web presence (Union, Sections, programs, outreach, etc.) and advise on and support continuing improvement in that area. It should assure that this subcommittee has appropriate communication in the Section webmasters group, perhaps through overlapping membership.
Additionally a newly established Committee on Data will operate as a subcommittee of both the Publications and Information Technology Committees. You will have at least one overlapping member with the Data Committee and its chair will be invited to participate with you as he feels is appropriate.
The Committee also has some specific responsibilities to contribute to AGU's strategic plan. The schedule for maintenance of the plan requires a continuing review of the outlook for technology and the implications of potential change for the Union. The Information Technology Committee is responsible for undertaking and or overseeing programs to achieve the objectives in the approved plan and for including reports on progress and regular annual reports. For the 2004-2006 term these objectives are:
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Inge Lehmann Medal, which will be given for outstanding contributions to the understanding of the structure, composition, and dynamics of the Earth's mantle and core. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal should be given when appropriate, but not more than every other year in odd-numbered years.
No member of the Inge Lehmann Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Lehmann Medal.
The Lehmann Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts.
The Committee will include in its letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, as well as the numbers of candidates who were nominations from the general call and who were actively solicited by the Committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept any or all of the recommendations based on its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. The Executive Committee does not have the authority to introduce new candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval by the Executive Committee, recipients of the James B. Macelwane Medal, which is given in recognition of significant contributions to the geophysical sciences by a outstanding young scientist (less than 36 years of age). Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the very broad interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. Recipients must be less than thirty-six years of age on January 1 of the year of presentation (e.g., born after January 1, 1967, for the 2003 medalists).
The Committee may recommend as many as 3 Macelwane Medalists in any given year. Under exceptional circumstances, and by unanimous vote of the Committee, up to 5 Macelwane Medalists may be recommended in a given year.
Members of the Macelwane Medal Committee are ineligible for consideration as a candidate for the Macelwane Medal.
The Macelwane Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
Nominations are solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. However, the Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should generate candidates through its contacts. Each section is strongly urged to submit at least one nomination.
The report of the Committee to the Executive Committee should describe the Committee's process in sufficient detail to assure the Executive Committee that appropriate practices and procedures have been followed in selection of the medalists and that contributions of those receiving the medals maintain or enhance the standards set by previous committees. Should more than three candidates be recommended, the report must explain the circumstances that drove the committee to that decision and how those circumstances affected the choice of the individual candidates selected.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. The Executive Committee does not have the authority to introduce new candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of an award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nomination packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Meetings Committee is charged with maintaining a continuing review of the entire meetings program of AGU to assure that meetings are superior in all aspects and they support the Union's long-term strategy for success.
Specific near term objectives, from AGU The Strategic Plan, for the Meetings Committee include:
Other Responsibilities of the Meetings Committee are:
The Meetings Committee regularly evaluates the scope of existing meetings and the need for new series. The Committee is expected to stay alert for opportunities to promote the Joint Assembly objective and to include other societies and related sciences, as appropriate.
The Committee must be conscious of the need to retain a sound financial base for the meetings program. The Committee will regularly review the finances and other trends that can impact attendance at meetings.
The Committee is charged with setting policies and guidelines under which all program committees operate. The program committees, not the Meetings Committee, are responsible for the scientific content of individual meetings of the Union. The Meetings Committee may be asked to review or respond to broad issues or concerns for individual meetings coming from meeting participants or the program committee.
The Meetings Committee acts as the Selection Committee for the Chairs of the program committees during the year when a term expires. The strength of individual meetings depends on high caliber volunteers as program committee chairs. The Committee is critical in identifying and attracting suitable candidates to serve the Union in these important positions. The Committee should make recommendations on improving this process so that highly qualified volunteers are in place to provide a smooth transitions from meeting to meeting.
The Committee should establish a network of corresponding members to advise on international aspects of AGU meetings.
The Committee evaluates and analyzes participant attendee satisfaction for all meetings to determine whether goals are met and suggests improvements for subsequent meetings.
The Committee recommends and/or approves venues for appropriate meetings based on the policies set forth by Council and the AGU Executive Committee.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Nominations Committee is charged with proposing a slate of candidates for the offices of President-elect, General Secretary and International Secretary. At least two candidates are required for each of these offices. The term of the President-elect is two years followed by two years as President. The term of the Secretaries is two years; each may serve up to four consecutive terms; both are eligible for renomination. No member of the Nominations Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for Union office.
The proposed list of candidates together with letters from the selected individuals agreeing to their candidacy must be received at AGU headquarters by 1 May 2005. The Committee is to present these proposed nominees to the Council for consideration at its Spring 2005 meeting. The Council has the authority to add or delete names from the proposed list prior to giving its approval.
In selecting nominees, care should be given to assure that there is representation of the Union's diverse disciplinary interests on the Executive Committee and that the offices reflect, over time, a reasonable balance of these interests. In addition, consideration should be given to representation of the worldwide distribution of AGU members.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the David Perlman Award for Excellence in Science Journalism - News. The award recognizes excellence in science news reporting, defined as work prepared with a deadline of one week or less. The award is offered annually.
No member of the this Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the David Perlman Award during their tenure.
The Committee will consider how effectively each submission meets one or more of the following criteria: brings new geophysical information or concepts to the public's attention, identifies and corrects misconceptions about geophysical sciences, or makes geophysical science accessible and interesting to general audiences, without sacrificing accuracy.
In its letter to the Executive Committee, the Committee will state where the winning entries were published, how many entries it considered, and which media were represented.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations. The Executive Committee does not have the authority to introduce new candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal, award or fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Publications Committee is responsible for a continuing review of the entire publications program of AGU to assure that the various components are responsive to the current needs of the scientific community and other users and to anticipate and prepare for future needs. The Publications Committee serves as the overview committee for the Board of Journal Editors, Books Board, Library Advisory Board, direction and review committees, and publication task groups. The Publications Committee also maintains contact with the various editorial boards for journals, books, and news publications, and with Editor search committees. Working with the various boards, committees, and other concerned members, the Publications Committee develops or revises, as necessary, the policies that govern the publications program and individual publications. The Publications Committee also recommends, for Council consideration, changes to the program.
The Publications Committee regularly reviews the scientific scope of existing journals and the need for new journals. When such needs are identified, the Committee develops with the interested constituency a proposal for Council consideration. The Committee is expected to stay alert for opportunities to enhance the AGU journals program.
The Editors, not the Publications Committee, are responsible for the scientific content of the publications and for assuring that the quality of accepted materials meets the standards of the Union. The Publications Committee is responsible for investigating complaints in this area and reporting to the President as needed.
The Publications Committee must be conscious of the need to maintain a sound economic base for the publications program. The Publications Committee regularly reviews the financial performance and other trends that may have an adverse effect on the ability to serve the community and proposes actions or policies required to maintain the strength of the program.
AGU operates with the guidance of a three-year plan adopted by Council. The schedule for creating this plan assures that committees have an approved plan to work with during the first 12 months of their tenure, while they are assisting with the development of the next Union-wide plan. The Publications Committee is responsible for undertaking programs to achieve the objectives in the approved plan and for making regular reports on progress.
Specific areas for Publications Committee attention and action during the 2004-2006 term include:
Charge for 2004-2006
The AGU Committee on Public Affairs (COPA) is charged with enhancing the use of scientific knowledge as a base for establishing public policy and in its implementation. COPA contributes to the long-term strategy for success of the Union by promoting the application of Earth and space science to solving some of the problems facing society. Roles for the Committee include increasing the involvement of members in public policy activities and providing relevant scientific information to decision makers, their staff, and members of the public. These activities support the long-term goal of continuously increasing worldwide public support for geophysical research through successful efforts in advocating its relevance to society and in informing and educating the public.
In support of this goal, COPA initiates and implements programs that are aimed at the objectives laid out for the committee in the AGU Strategic Plan:
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. COPA will participate in implementing the Union objective to develop a 3-5 year plan and budget that matches the Union's resources allocatable to outreach to a core (minimum viable) program in public affairs and other outreach areas. Ultimately, AGU intends to fund the core program using endowment funds. Projects that go beyond the core program now and in the future will require external funding. New programs requiring funding or extensive staff support or that deviate significantly from past AGU practices must be approved by the Council.
COPA members participate in the process by which AGU's official positions on public policy are formulated and COPA implements programs for the advocacy of adopted positions. It also serves as the selection committee for the AGU Congressional Science Fellow and makes recommendations on the continuation and/or development of the program.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Public Information Committee (PIC) is charged with recommending policy and developing programs that assure that AGU meets its goals in promoting public understanding of the Earth and space sciences. The committee provides a continuing review of the entire public information program of AGU, evaluates the success of its various components, and anticipates and prepares for future needs and opportunities.
In support of this goal, PIC initiates and implements programs that are aimed at the objectives laid out for the committee in the current AGU Plan:
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. PIC will develop a 3-5 year plan and budget that match the Union's resources to the Public Information program. AGU intends to fund the core program using endowment funds. Projects that go beyond the core program require external funding. New programs requiring funding or extensive staff support or that deviate significantly from past AGU practices must be approved by the Council.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Revelle Committee is charged with selecting, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for this medal which is to be awarded annually. This medal is awarded for outstanding contributions in atmospheric sciences, atmosphere-ocean coupling, atmosphere-land coupling, biogeochemical cycles, climate, or related aspects of the Earth system. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The committee is requested to consider candidates across the full range of atmospheric science and climatology interests that the medal is intended to cover. The final selection must reflect the spread of interest to be covered without making any compromise in the worthiness of the candidates. The medal is given not more often than annually.
No member of the Revelle Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Revelle Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Revelle Medal, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts but it is inappropriate for members of the committee to submit nominations. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Waldo E. Smith Medal, which is awarded for extraordinary service to geophysics. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The medal should be given when appropriate, but not more than every other year in even-numbered years.
The Smith Medal is intended to honor individuals who have played unique leadership roles in such diverse areas as scientific associations, education, legislation, research, public understanding of science, management, and philanthropy, and whose accomplishments have greatly strengthened and helped advance the geophysical sciences. The nominees for this medal should be individuals whose contributions in service are at the level and of the extent that had those contributions been in science they would have earned them consideration for the Bowie or another research medal of the Union. Nominees need not be scientists nor be working in the scientific community.
No member of the Smith Medal Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Smith Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Smith Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts but it is inappropriate for members of the committee to submit nominations. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee should include in their letter to the Executive Committee the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
This committee is charged with selecting, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Athelstan Spilhaus Award. The Athelstan Spilhaus Award recognizes members of the American Geophysical Union who have demonstrated an extraordinary ability and record of success in conveying the excitement, significance, and beauty of the Earth and space sciences to the general public. Nominees for this award are motivated by their unselfish desire to share their enthusiasm for scientific discovery with the broadest audience.
The Committee is to interpret the scope of this award broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. The award is given not more often than annually.
Members of the Athelstan Spilhaus Award Committee or of the Executive Committee are ineligible for consideration as a candidate for the Spilhaus Award. Recipients of the Spilhaus Award must be AGU members both when the activity being honored occurred and at the time the award is made.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions are likely to be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee will include in their report to the Executive Committee the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee. The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal, award, or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Charge for 2004-2006
It is the responsibility of this Committee to assure through regular review that the Statutes and Bylaws of the Union are up-to-date and responsive to the needs of the membership. Changes and additions that appear appropriate to the Committee may be suggested by the Council at any time. All changes to the Statutes and Bylaws proposed by others must be reviewed by this Committee and presented to the Council with recommendations. Additionally, the Committee is to review the organizational and governing documents of any section or region that might form and all changes to such section and committee documents and suggest changes if appropriate.
In addition to the regular reviews, the 2004-2006 the Committee will review changes to bylaws to allow for election of officers for newly developed sections and in cases of vacancies between regular elections. The Committee will also address issues raised that include the possibility of membership on the Council for the Chair of the Development Board and at-large members.
AGU operates with the guidance of a strategic plan adopted by the Council. The schedule for creating the plan assures that committees have an approved plan to work with during the first year of their tenure, while they are assisting with the development of the next Union-wide plan. The Committee on Statutes and Bylaws is responsible for undertaking programs and activities that would fall under its purview and are required to achieve the objectives in the approved plan.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient for the Walter Sullivan Award for Excellence in Science Journalism - Features, which is awarded to recognize and encourage excellence in science feature writing, defined as work prepared with a deadline of more than one week. The award is offered annually.
No member of the this Committee or of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Walter Sullivan Award during their tenure.
The Committee will consider how effectively each submission meets one or more of the following criteria: brings new geophysical information or concepts to the public's attention, identifies and corrects misconceptions about geophysical sciences, or makes geophysical science accessible and interesting to general audiences, without sacrificing accuracy.
In its letter to the Executive Committee, the Committee will state where the winning entries were published, how many entries it considered, and which media were represented.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations. The Executive Committee does not have the authority to introduce new candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal, award or fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified.
Charge for 2004-2006
The Tellers Committee is charged with reviewing and approving the procedures for elections, the ballots and their distribution, and with certifying the final count.
Charge for 2004-2006
This Committee is charged with selecting, subject to approval of the Executive Committee, a recipient of the Charles A. Whitten Medal, which is awarded for outstanding achievement in research on the form and dynamics of the Earth and planets. Unselfish cooperation in research is a consideration in the selection of the medalist but not a criterion. The Committee is to interpret the scope of this Union medal broadly and in the context of the interdisciplinary nature of the geophysical sciences. Section affiliation and specific disciplinary distinctions are not relevant. It is to be awarded no more often than every other year in odd-numbered years.
No member of the Whitten Medal Committee and of the Executive Committee is eligible for consideration as a candidate for the Whitten Medal.
The selection criteria have been established by precedent and custom and are best determined by looking at previous recipients.
The Whitten Medal, when awarded to a member, carries with it automatic designation as an AGU Fellow, if the medalist is not already a Fellow.
Nominations will be solicited from the membership through announcements in Eos and on AGU's website. The Committee should not depend solely on outside nominations but should be proactive by soliciting nominations through their own contacts. If at least 3 nominations of viable candidates are not available, questions may be raised as to whether the field of potential candidates was adequately considered.
The Committee should include in their letter to the Executive Committee for approval the number of candidates they considered, how many candidates were holdovers, how many candidates were new, and whether the new candidates were nominations from the general call or were actively solicited by the committee.
The Executive Committee has the responsibility to accept or reject the recommendations of the Committee on the basis of its judgement of the process and its knowledge of the candidates. Members of the Executive Committee have agreed not to nominate or support specific candidates for any medal or for fellowship.
All deliberations of medal and award committees and their recommendations are and should remain strictly confidential. The Committee will be informed by the President of the approval of any award immediately after the awardee is notified. Within this framework of confidentiality the chairman may authorize feedback to nominators on possible future eligibility and on how nominations packages could be improved.
Return to Inside AGU
