ML20212L148
Text
(
~,
Distribution APR 2 21976 LWR #3 File ELo DPAllison RCDeYoung g
ODParr RSBoyd i
EHalman HDenton RMaccary RHeineman een C. Rusche, Director, Office of auclear deactor segulation g
1% is. M. EWMAnK'S REVIEW OF Tdd DIABLO CANYON SEISMIC DESIGH i
Our memorandum of Haren 11, 1976 proviaed our opinion that there is no conflict of interest or app *arance of a conflict of interest in Dr.
I Newmark's review of tne seismic design of tne Diaolo Canyon facility.
Since then we have revised our evaluation somewhat, recognizing tnat, on the surface, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest due to Dr. Newmarx's consulting worx for Bechtel. Nevertheless, we have l
evaluated the facts of the situation.and' concluded that, since tne wor.c l
that Dr. Newmark will be doing for the staff is different from the work he is doing for bechtel, there is no significant, actual conflict of I
interest, and the appearance of conflict is acceptable considering tne remoteness of the relationships and toe preeminent stature of Dr.14ewmarx wnich makes his efforts on behalf of the staff in tne public's best
- interest, i
Our revised evaluation is' provided in the enclosure.
Criginalsigned by Roger S.Boyd R.~S.
Boyd, Director Division of Project rianagement Office of Nuclear Reactor' Regulation' OriginalSiped by M. R. Denten I
H. R. Denton, Director i
Division of Site Safety and l
Environmental Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
s i
Original sige.ed by l
Robert E. Heineman 8608230227 e60001 R. E. Heineman, Director PDR FOIA HOUCH36-391 PDR Division of Systems Safety Office of Nuclear Reactor RegLlation l
\\
$L'[ J / / V/df/J f$dl0 N f0 A l N f//0 U
,1g, $
coxc m sxas. cawas n oao ec:
E. G. Case 9,,g., g,
j[y[
M
. En ih rdt M
oselton__ggg.
oa;4t.I 4 so pp' e._._ ondh
.Ho
-ei-zHm n
..u. V<ia!ns
- wns
- <nins '
hi@s
<w,s
.,t 4 >. un9 s,.
Peum ABC41s (see. Ms) AacM esoe
- u. se oeven eesmer esummme erwieme eers.see.see.
, gg.
A-5 o
(
(
s s
Distribution RCDeYoung LWR #3 File RSBoyd AM 2 21976 DA11ison HDenton ODParr RHeineman EHalman RMaccary ELD Sen C. Muscae, Director, Office of Suelear Reactor Rei;ulation Dit, n. d. 3441AdK'S R: VId.J OF Idd DIAoLO CANYON ddIsi1C ur 51GN Our memorandum of Haren 11, 1976 provided our opinion tnat there is no conflict of interest or appearance of a conflict of interest in Dr.
aewmarx's review of the seismic design of the Diaolo Canyon facility.
Since then we have revised our evaluation somewnat, recognizing that, on tne aurface, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest due to Dr. New. nark's consulting worx for 13acutel. Navertheless, we nave evaluated tne facts of tne situation 'and' concluded that, since tne work that Dr. Newmark will be doing for tha staff is different from tne work ne is coing for Sacntel, there is no siGnificant, actual conflict of interest, and the appearance of conflict is acceptable considering the remoteness of tne relationships and toe preeminent stature of Dr. Uedmarx wnich makes hia efforts on beDalf of the staff,in the public's best interest.
I vur revised evaluation is provided in the enclosure.
0$$CIi.;wJ yy
^
&$i.S.Bayd R. S. Boyd, Director pe*%W Division of Project Management I
Office of Nuclear Reactor Hegulation o
M 1
Odginal signed by
- u. am H. H. Denton, Director Division of Site Safety and Environmentat Analysis
~ - -
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
Original signed by Robert E. Heinw,on R. S. Beineman, Director Division of Systems Safety Office of Nuclear Heactor Regulation
Enclosure:
dvaluation i
O I
cc:
E. G. Case 4Ec7 N H. Grossman
'RMaccary 'I h
&#ENTS O f
T. Engelhardt_4/16/76 / 4/ /76 l
h*
or ie =
- DlH:
J3.
. ELD..:
DPMi
/R..._.. 3R4
.,_DSSITA
_pSS -
V. Stello W
=u l
n/0P c_ [ M 0 t ng
.RSBoyd-HDenton RHeinenan
= a a -
- 4/._ 6,&;
4/s20/76.'
4/)(.476 9:
4/ /76 4/ /76 4f./76... _l'
.nsk Perus ABC 518 (Rev. 9 53).LECM 9244 pu.s.e..
s
_. Passmere oppiese iera.see sse-
s
(
(~
ENCLOSURE Dr. Newmark has been a staff consultant for many years. He performed the principal review of the Diablo Canyon seismic design at the con-struction permit stage of review. In the past he reviewed the seismic design of many plants. This practice was discontinued in 1973 as the workload increased and the staff's capabilities were expanded. Since that time, however, Dr. Newmark has continued consulting to the staff on a variety of matters.
Tne staff has now retained Dr. Newmark as a consultant on the seismic h
/[
design of Diablo Canyon and ne is currently reviewing tnis matter.
The plant's owner, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, is performing
/
the design and construction of Diablo Canyon. Dr.Newmarkhasnever) consulted to Pacific Gas and Electric.
At the present time, Dr. Newmark is consulting to Bechtel Power Corporation as well as the NHC staff. For this reason the staff's current practice is to employ him only on plant cases or problems which are not related to Bechtel jobs.
Bechtel is performing structural design work for Pacifi as and Electric on the Humboldt Bay facilities (which include ossil fueled plants and one nuclear unit).
In Dr. Newmark's work for Bechtel he j
discusses problems and questions concerning various Bechtel jobs with Bechtel personnel. In this context he has performed consulting work for Bechtel on generic matters; some of these matters apply to Bechtel's Humboldt Bay work. Bechtel is not in any way participating on the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
We have reviewed this situation in order to determine whether Dr. Newmark's consulting to Bechtel raises any conflict of interest which could tend to bias his recommendations or advice to the staff due to any possible interest which he could have in supporting recommendations or advice which he has p'ovided to Bechtel. We recognize that, on the surface, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest.cf thir tp. Never-
[' "
theless, we have evaluated the situation and determined that there is not a significant, actual conflict of interest. Therefore, due to Dr.
Newmark's unique qualifications (description attached) we have concluded that the staff's employment of Dr. Newmark's consulting services in resolving the difficult question involved at Diablo Canyon is clearly in the public interest.
@ k 1**
Dr. Newmark is a world renowned authoritYon, spismic de He h s publishedover200papersonthesubjectdIt,Isr%sona eTp therefore, that tne standard methods of seismic ; design of. nuclear power plants contain many aspects which are results of Dr. Newmark's contribu M.
tions to the field. Accordingly, any applicant for a nuclear power i
plant license 'will likely be utilizing the results of Dr. Newmark's
}, {.
/ work (as well as the work of others) to the degree that
-c standard metnods of seismic design. However, such standard methods I%
and Dr. Newmark's contributions to them have been publisned, silbjected f
I 9-FoIA %-SW A-5a
(
(
. to critical review by other workers in the field and independently reviewed and approved by the staff. Acceptable standard methods are publicly documented in regulations, regulatory guides, standard review plans or staff positions.
They are used to some extent by all applicants.
Although the standard methods described above rest to some extent on Dr.
Newmark's contributions to the field, there is no actual conflict of interest in his reviewing a proposal to use such standard methods since they have already been defined as acceptaole by the Commission and these findings are publicly documented.
With regard to Diablo Canyon, Dr. Newmark's work for the staff involves considerations wnich are unique.
The staff has for some time been fin-ished with its review of Diablo Canyon's original design which was based upon four postulated earthquakes originally proposed during the construction permit review.
The staff is presently considering the effects on the plant of another earthquake which is more severe than those for which the plant was originally designed.
Dr. Newmark is addressing the' question of how to represent, for design purposes, the ground motion due to a certain type of earthquake of magnitude 7.5 at a distance of about 3 1/2 miles from the Diablo Canyon site. There is general agreement that the standard methods for specifying a ground motion may not be appropriate at this distance from such a large eartnquake. Determining what is appropriate consists of original work based on novel considerations. The technical nature of this subject makes it different from the subjects on which Dr. Newmark has been consulting to Bechtel, different from the approaches used on other nuclear power plant applications and different from the standard M
methods of seismic design.
r Furthermore, in Dr. Newmark's consulting work for Bechtel, his involve-ment with Humboldt Bay has been limited to listening to presentations by Bechtel personnel and then providing comments on their methods for demonstrating that a fossil fueled power plant at the site would not collapse into the nuclear plant. The design and design criteria for the fossil fueled plant at Humboldt Bay are significantly different than those of the nuclear power plant at Diablo Canyon.
This draws a further technical distinction between Dr. Newmark's work for the staff on Diablo Canyon and his work for Bechtel as it relates to Humboldt Bay.
Dr. Newmark's qualifications are virtually unique, making him a preeminent expert in his field. His efforts on behalf of the star a,re there fore,
considered to be in the Government's best interest k M & '%
A4%e 1k -
=14 ad. kg d.4 6
..?i m ed. w In light of the foregoing, we have concluded, as previously stated, that 0#sC# **
Dr. Newmark's work as a staff consultant in connection with Diablo Canyon, pwo64hw does not creat~e conflicting roles which might bias his recommendations jhu4[
or advice nor give him an unfair competitive advantage and, therefore, g
i n p-
(
(
. does not create an actual conflict of interest.
e have further concluded that the appearance of conflict of interest wnich exists because of his relationship with Bechtel is remote and inconsequential and, therefore, is acceptable, particularly considering the overriding (government interest in retaining his services for this effort.
t e
u
~
i f.
i x
~_......w.m_,
,m,.._,,
, ~..., _,,,,
(
(
ENCLOSURE s
Dr. Newmark has been a staff consultant for many years.
He performed the principal review of the Diablo Canyon seismic design at the con-struction permit stage of review.
In the past he reviewed the seismic design of many plants. This practice was discontinued in 1973 as the workload increased and tne staff's capabilities were expanded. Since that time, however, Dr. Newmark has continued consulting to the staff on a variety of matters.
The staff has now retained Dr. Newmark as a consultant on the seismic design of Diablo Canyon and he is currently reviewing this matter.
The plant's owner, Pacific Gas and Electric. Company, is performing the design and construction of Diablo Canyon.
Dr. Newmark has never to our knowledge consulted to Pacific Gas and Electric.
At the present time, Dr. Newmark is cons 61 ting to Bechtel Power Corporation as well as the NRC staff.
For this reason the staff's current practice is to employ him only on plant cases or problems which are not related to Bechtel jobs.
Bechtel is performing structural design work for Pacific Gas and Electric on the Humboldt Bay facilities (which include two fossil fueled plants and one nuclear unit).
In Dr. Newmark's work for Bechtel he discusses problems and questions concerning various Bechtel jobs with Bechtel personnel. In tnis context he nas performed consulting work for Bechtel on generic mattees; some of these matters apply to Bechtel's Humboldt Bay work.
Bechtel is not in any way participating on the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, b""""#
We have' reviewed this situation in order to determin'e whether Dr. Newmark's consulting to Bechtel raises any conflict of interest whien could tend to bias his recommendations or advice to the staff due to any possible interest which he could have in supporting recommendations or advice which he has provided to Bechtel.
We recognize tnat, on the surface, there is an appearance of a conflict of interest. Nevertheless, we have evaluated the situation and determined that there is not a significant, actual conflict of interest. Therefore, due to Dr.
Newmark's unique qualifications (description attached) we have concluded that the staff's employment of Dr. Newmark's consulting services in resolving the difficult question involved at Diablo Canyon is clearly in the public interest.
Dr. Newmark is a world renowned authority on seismic design. He has published over 200 papers on the subject.
It is reasonable to expect, therefore, that the standard methods of seismic design of nuclear power plants contain many aspects which are results of Dr. Newmark's contribu-tions to the field. Accordingly, any applicant for a nuclear power plant license will likely be utilizing the results of Dr. Newmark's work (as well as the work of others) to the degree that he employs standard methods of seismic des-ign. However, such standard methods and Dr. Newmark's contributions to them have been published, subjected FOD4 5.-39/'R-!@
('
-2 to critical review by other workers in the field and independently reviewed and approved by the staff.
Acceptable standard methods are publicly documented in regulations, regulatory guides, standard review plans or staff ' positions. They are used to some extent by all applicants.
Although the standard methods described 'above rest to some extent on Dr.
Newmark's contributions to the field, there is no actual conflict of interest in his reviewing a proposal to use such standard methods since they have already been defined as acceptable by the Commission and these findings are publicly documented.-
We have been informed that Dr. Newmark co-authored a book on seiamic design of reinforced concrete structures with Dr. J. Blume wno is now a consultant to Pacific Gas and Electric Company on the seismic design of Diablo Canyon. The book was - blished in 1961.
In 1961 Dr. 61ume had not yet done any consultin5 work, foe Pacific Gas and 61ectric and the design of Diablo Canyon had not yet been started.
Dr. Newmark also co-authored a paper in 1973 with Dr. Blume and Dr. K. Kapur of the NHC staff.
The paper dealt with seismic design spectra for nuclear power plants.
It concerned the results of two separate research projects wnich had been carried out independently by Dr. Newmark and Dr. Blume for the Commission. We have concluded that the book and paper do not give rise to an actual conflict of interest in light of the nature of the efforts involved as well as tne considerations, discussed previously, which are generally applicable to Dr. Newmark's contributions to the field of seismic design.
With regard to Diablo Canyon, Dr. Newmark's work for the staff involves considerations which are unique. The staff has for some time been fin-IU0EEN inhed with its review of Diablo Canyon's original design wnich was based upon four postulated earthquakes originally preposed durin6 the construction permit review. The staff is presently considering the effects on the plant of anotner earthquake which is more severe than those for which the plant was originally designed.
Dr. Ne:tmark is addressing the question of how to represent, for des 16n purposes, the ground motion due to a certain type of earthquake of magnitude 7.5 at a distance of about 3 1/2 miles from the Diablo Canyen site.
There is general agreement that the standard methods for specifying a ground motion may not be appropriate at this distance from suen a large earthquake.
Determining what is appropriate consists of original work based on novel considerations.
The technical nature of tnis subject makes it differert from the subjects on which Dr. Newmarx has been consulting to Bechtel, different from the approacnes used on other nuclear power plant applications and different from the standard methods of seismic design,
e j
., - - -,, - - -. _.. - -, - - - ~., - - ~ ~ _ _. -,
(
(
Furthermore, in Dr. Newmark's consulting work for Bechtel, his involve-ment with humboldt Bay has been limited to listening to presentations by Bechtel personnel and then providing comments on their methods for demonstrating that a fossil fueled power plant at the site would not collapse into the nuclear plant. The design and design criteria for the fossil fueled plant at Humboldt Bay are significantly different than those of tne nuclear power plant at Diablo Canyon. Tnis draws a further technical distinction between Dr. Newmark's work for the staff on Diablo Canyon and his work for Bechtel as it relates to Humboldt Bay.
Dr. Newmark's qualifications are virtually unique, making him a preeminent expert in his field.
His efforts on behalf of the staff are, tnerefore, considered to be in tne Government's.best interest and in the public's best interest in assuring that 'the most capaole minds are brought to bear on problems of significant complexity.
In lignt of the fcccgoing, we have concluded, as previously stated, that Dr. Newmark's work as a staff consultant in connection with Diaolo Canyon, does not create conflicting roles which might bias his recommendations or advice nor give him an unf air competitive advantage and, therefore, does not create an actual conflict of interest. We have further concluded that the appearance of conflict of interest which exists because of nis relationsnip with Bechtel is remote end inconsequential and, therefore, is ccceptable, particularly considering the overriding Government interest in retaining his services for this effort.
W.
o D
e
w so
,e L.
1 ClihIM4hh.JnDa ForDr. Net, mark, tid.ataffwould
.[F l '. -
2' orfor tc etipulate,that Dr. Meunark would stato he is the 3
av. thor cf his biographical da'er..
.At this time, houeur,
'g.,
4 the staff uculd also indicate that Dr. Uc :Inrk has som3 rr.<13.1-j 5
tions or corrections which it raight be proforable to ha ru f
6 6
Dr. Netr.r. ark, at this timo, e.dd..
And I trauld nok him if La l'
i 7
has any niiditionn or corrections he wishes to mako to hin I:
l 8i profeccional que.lificationa.
i' 9
MITNESS IIEMET.rd':
I hava one correction.
I-10 On page 2, the firct lino of tho' third pttragraph, the nuuber
[
11 "160 " chould ha 200. "
i 12 And~ then t.n additica to tho biotiraphical date 13 is offered c.s follows:
.In Novc=ber 1972, Dr.1:encark waa awacded an honorary dr. gree Srem the National. Civil Sngincoring '
14 WuuWad 15 Labcrctory of Lisbon, Portugal.
j i
16 In Septerdvar 197 3, Dr. Now.rk rec t.gned au hat.._
17 of the Department of Civil Engineering and boccne profesco.e to of civil engineering and profesrcr in the Center for ?.dynnced 19 Studico at the University of Illincia at Urbana-Chex:paip2.
t l
r j
20 In 14ay 1974, Profencor Nctinnrh becace Chaire.an of the liational Tccde.my cf Engineering, National Academy of l
21 6
Ccicncou sutd National Rocc' arch Council Cor::littoc cn Naturo.S.
22 t-l 23 Hazcrds.
24 Dr. Netmark's public.tions an of thic dato include over 200 papera and chapterc in $. sveral books, incitrling
).
25 I.; ;l
,4 l
.eK W
y..
, er%.
d I
,v-A -s'c l
. m r-I f
Chaptor lf, "Curre
- Trond in the Scismic An.?/ sis cr.d l~
~
Design cf Iligh Rico Struct.r.os in Earthquc.ke Engineering,"
z 3[
published by Prentiss-Uc.ll, Inc.crporated, in 1970.
-l Chaptcr 4, Saicnic Analyaic in Precaure 'Iessels g
1 and Piping Design and Analysis," published by the American j
5 t'
i S ciety of Mechanical Engincers in 19'i2, and others.
,l 6
He is tha co-P.uthor of tt;o bcoks on carthquake ll 7
eng neer ng, neludhg" Design of Multi-Story Reindcrced 8
i Concretc Buildi.'ss for Earthqucho Motion," V:ith John A.
l Blinno and Leo Corning, ptiblished by the Scrticnd Ce.::cnt g
l g
Association in Chickgo in 1951, and "Fu:.dementals of Ec.rth-11 quaho Engineering," with Amalio Rosenbluth, publiched by i
Prentisc-!!all, Incorporatad, in 1971.
Recent consulting work includen hic activitien as principal seisr.ic ' consultant on the Trans -Alcshan Pipelino 15 W
Syntem, and on the Canadian Ges Arctic Pipoline.
For f-hc e
16 past two years he has hcd un cecociation with the Bochi:cl Corporation on ceismic,'st:ructural and goodyncmic y::abic:.is.
Dr. Netnni:rk it alro Chairntan of Tank Grot p 2, 19 part of an 3G-r.an group casembled by the Supply Technology Council under the aucpice: of the National Science Fotaidation and National Dureau of Etc.ndardu to preparc reccumndationc
- 22 I
for a national building code for =cicmic design.
n As Chairnan of the Tack Group Coordinating 24 l
Committcc and the Executivo Pc:.21 of that orgcnisatien, he
't
$b
~
1.'y
.23 w -- -
-_,..f,,
, "drw...
e
8G.1.0 l
.i.
,1 ; h2 ha3 the. Princ( respcnsibility for the t[.nical content
! and format of the preposed ccde.
2
,f 3
Those are my, papers.
t.'
d MR. GRAY:
With thoce additienc and corrections, j.
5' the staff would. further offer to stipule.te that nr. Meinnark 9
6 would testify that his biographical data is true and conrcet l.
7
'to the ).'ert of his knculedge; 8
MR. DIGNAN:
So stipulched.
l 9
CHAIIGLM UNJ.D:
Mr. Fleischaher?
10 MR. FLEZECHMEP.:
That is acceptchic.
i 11 CHAIP2AM HEAD:
lis. flainhold?
I i
11 MS. WEII: HOLD:
That in ccccotable.
I
~
t 13 CHAIIGIAN HEAD:
The Eocrd vill approve the 14 stipulation cnd incorporate Dr. Harr.ork's qualificaticas
~
15 into the record as if road.
M' i
16 (Document followa.)
i 17 18 19 20 i
21 f
e l-u J.
05 h
... ~..
~
f.
('
(
~
'.. ~
NATHAN M. NEWMARK 3
Biographical Data l
.i l-Nathan M. Newmark, Professor and former Head of the Department
- of Civil Engineering.at the University of Illinois has been a
{.
member of the faculty at Illinois since 1930.
He has been engaged in research and instruction in structural engineering
^
and structural dynamics for his entire career.
~
He was born on 22 September 1910 in Plainfield, New Jersey.
He attended Rutgers University where he received the S.S. degree in Civil Engineering in June 1930.
He received the degree of Haster of Science from the University of Illinois in June 1932 tl and the degree of Ph.D. from the same instit'ution in June 1934.
1 In 1955 Rutgers University conferred the Honorary Degree of Doctor Science on him.
In 1967 he was asarded the' decree of Doctor Honoris J
Cause by the University of Liece in Belgiun on the occasion of the 150th Anniversary of the founding of that University.
~
Dr. Newmark's awards and. honors include election to membership in the National Academy of Sciences in April 1966, election as a fellow of American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1962, and election m;
as a Founding Member of the National Academy of Engineering when it was formed in Decemoer 1964.
a His medals include the Vincent Bendix Award for Engineering Research from the American Scciety for Engineering Education 'in June 1961, the Norman Medal of the American Society of Civil Engineers in 1958 L
and the Ernest E. Howard Award f ASCE in the same year.
He received o
also from ASCE the J. James R. Croes F.edal'in 1945, the Moisseiff Award
[_
in 1950, and the Theodore von Karman Medal in 1962.
In 19L50 an award from the Concrete Reinforcing Steel Institute in recognition of his o
contributions to the field of reinforced concrete research.
In 1965 Dr. Newmark was awarded the Order of Lincoln of Achievement in the
[
j field of technology and engineering by the Lincoln Academy of Illinois.,,
e' Dr. Newmark was elected to Honorary Membership irithe American Soci' ty of Civil Engineers in 1966, and to Honorary Mecbership in the American j'
Concrete Institute in 1967..He is a Fellow of ASME, of the, AAAS, and
~;
of the American Geophysical Union.
h
- 1 T
.i
- r. -
m--.m -:,
4
--r-p w
y
+
,i---..,,,
m---r,-m
.r-w----
- - + - - --
-y%ywg9.-.g,w,,,wy,-
---,yy
-+eyww-,.-1,9-p,pg-e y
-e9%---
p
~
(
(
'i, '
t
',.s In Hay 1958 the 43-story Latinc-Americana Tower in Mexico City, l-for which Dr. flewmark was the seismic consultant, was awarded a special award by the American Institute of Steel Construction because of its successful resistance to the major earthquake of 4
A stainless steel plaque was attached to the building July 1957.
indicating the part in its design that was played by Dr. ilewmark.
During World War II Dr. flewmark was a consultant to the'itational Defense Research Comittee and the Office of Field Service of OSRD.
For this. service he was awarded the President's Certificate Following the war he has been a member of of Herit in 1948.
numerous boards and ccmittees, i.9cluding the Scientific Advisory Board of the U.S. Air Force, from 1945-49, the "Gaither Committee" I
[
in 1957, and various other groups including boards and panels for i
the Office of the Chief of Engir.eers, the Air Force Weapons Laboratory, the Defense Atomic Support Agency, the Defense Intelli-
'c gence Agency, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and other i'
groups.
Aco l
Professor liewmark is the author of over 3D papers in the fields of
(
structural analysis and design, applied mechanics, numerical methods of stress analysis, and eff.ccts of impact, shock, vibration, wave He has been a con-action, blast and earthauakes on structures.
sultant to a great many industrial organizations and agencies, and WMmm has been associated with studies of the seismic design for the San
' Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit System, various nuclear reactor 9
projects, and Le Chateau Chamolain, a multi-story hotel building for the Canadian Pacific Railways in i'ontreal.
i He is a registered Illinois professional and structural engineer, and a registered Civil Engineer in California.
Dr. iiewmark is editor of a series of texts in Civil Engineering and Engineering t'achanics for Prentice-Hall, Inc.
I Dr. tiewmark is active on a number of national comittees and boards including: the Comission on Engineering Education, of which he has i
been a member since its inception in 1962; the Comerce Technical 1963-64; Advisory Board of the U. S. Department of Commerce, during the flational Science Foundation's Advisory Panel on University Com-puting Facilities', from 1964 to 1966; and the flational Science
. i.
Foundation *s Advisory Comittee for Engineering', from 1966 to 1969.
j,
/
- 0.
~
9 9
I
!'e.
~t:
- lb
.... t$ h L
, " ~ - -
l; r.
f
(
!-[ '
H'e In February 1965 Professor Newmark was select of Civil Engineers of Great Britain, in London.
F In June 1968 he was selected as cne of twelve living engineer
[
I edu.cators for the ASEE Hall of Fame.
i In January 1969 Dr. Newmark was awarded the 1968 National of Science by President L. B. Jchnson.
the 46th recipient of the Washington Award.
Also in January 1969'Or. Newmark was elected an Honorary Fello of the International Association of Earthouake Engineering,,and in Juhe 1969 he was awarded the Honorary Degree of Occtor o' 1
Laws from the University of Notre Dame.-
'I In August 1970, Dr. Newmark was made a Fel.lcw of the Argen Academy of the Exact, Natural and Physical Sciences, and in Harch 1971, he was awarded the outstanding Civilian Servic
.I' the Department of the Army.
In December of 1971 Professor Newmark was made an Hono j
of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
~
i i
m
't
~
- b%9
.p 5
I
.t_
i e
f sN +tg lt'.-
3
.,1,.
g.
j FoIA % sei-!
A-@