Home > Documents



Interim report & supporting documnets presented to the Mānoa Faculty Senate on August 31, 2005 & on September 21, 2005 as informational items

Supporting Documents

Introductory & Background Information Regarding the Proposed University Affiliated Research Center


The Senate Executive Committee has convened an ad hoc committee to gather information about the proposed University Affiliated Research Center (UARC) to help UH Manoa Faculty have an informed discussion about this proposal before it is brought again to the Board of Regents. The ad hoc committee requests documents, opinions, weblinks that will help faculty arrive at an informed opinion.

The committee will strive to make available to the Manoa campus, in a coherent form, as many of the facts and opinions on this issue as possible, and represent the current state of collective knowledge. To that end, we invite faculty to share information and opinions about the UARC. Send your views to srutter@hawaii.edu or post to the Senate Discussion List at uhm-faculty-senate@hawaii.edu, to have that information linked to this MFS page.

Members of the committee: Danielle Conway-Jones, Jon Osorio, Calvin Pang, Tom Ramsey (SEC Liaison), David Ross, Sara Rutter (Chair), Roy Wilkens, Jim Tiles (SEC Liaison)

President McClain's recommendation to the Board of Regents, February 16, 2006, see link for full-text:

  1. Accept Chancellor Konan's recommendation.
  2. In its place, and in the tradition of our EPSCoR and P-20 grants and contracts and the Maui High Performance Computing Center itself, approve the establishment of the UARC as an administrative unit attached to the UH System.
  3. Provide that the UARC will perform no classified task orders during its first three years of operation. This simplifies the administration of the UARC during its initial years, and addresses the "environments" issue profiled above.
  4. Provide that the UARC will retain the option to terminate a task order should the research involved become classified after the task order begins. This approach mimics Stanford University's approach to research that it finds is classified in mid-stream and gives UH additional flexibility, over and above current practice of moving projects off campus, in this area.
  5. Provide that UH will evaluate the UARC during its third year in terms of the financial and research returns received, and the costs and risks incurred, including the administrative burden associated with managing the UARC. If the UARC receives a favorable evaluation within UH, the university would invite the U.S. Navy to exercise its option for renewal of the contract for an additional two years. If the UARC did not pass the UH evaluation, or if it did and the U.S. Navy elected not to exercise its option, UH would discontinue the UARC.

Chronology of UARC Related Events


Background Information