Mr. PHILIP B. YEAGER, AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION, INC., New York, N.Y., August 8, 1966. Counsel, Committee on Science and Astronautics, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. YEAGER: This will supplement my letter to you of July 21st. We have reviewed the Statement of Purpose for the Act, and the Act itself, and we believe that it serves a worthwhile purpose in facilitating a critical evaluation of scientific data. It will be a large task to undertake and accomplish. One point in the Bill concerns us: Section 7. In this Section 7, standard reference data is virtually made Federal property not to be used without the permission of the Secretary of Commerce. This seems to be an unnecessarily cumbersome device for the protection and identification of the compiled data. The net result would be that the use of the data may be unduly restricted. Would it be possible for the Secretary of Commerce to develop a symbol or mark which could be used exactly as is a registered trademark? All data which would be taken from the NBS compilation would have to be identified with such symbol or mark but would not require the permission of the Secretary of Commerce. Thus, all data taken from the NBS compilation would be properly identified and the credit inferred therefrom and its accuracy attested to thereby, but the use of the data would be unhindered. We feel that this is certainly a worthy endeavor. Cordially, W. R. SARNO, Director, Utilization Bureau. 177 Mr. PHILIP B. YEAGER, INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA, Counsel, Committee on Science and Astronautics, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. YEAGER: At your invitation, I am pleased to comment on H.R. 15638, a bill to provide for the collection, compilation, critical evaluation, publication and sale of standard reference data. The objective of the bill to provide for the compilation and positive identification of scientific data which has been validated by a critical review is worthy of full support. It would appear, however, that paragraph (b) of Section 7 is unduly restrictive in preventing any reproduction of any "data compilation bearing the Standard Reference Data symbol or mark adopted pursuant to section 6 of this Act." As tables of scientific data are now widely published in college textbooks, technical magazines, scientific papers, manufacturers' literature, technical society journals, and standard scientific reference works not published by the Department of Commerce, the flow of valid technical data could be impeded by a strict enforcement of paragraph (b) of Section 7. Presumably, the validated data contemplated under the act would be data which would come into general use and the restriction that it could not be reproduced except by written prior authorization of the Secretary of Commerce would place an unnecessary restraint upon the dissemination of technical information. As this data gathering and validation process would be paid for from tax dollars, and as it has been the custom not to place copyright restrictions on publications so developed in the past, it would appear unwise to make an exception to this broad general policy in this specific case. On the other hand, the association of the Standard Reference Data symbol with the validated data should be controlled. It appears that this is the purpose of Section 7, paragraph (a). To clarify paragraph (a) of Section 7, the wording should be made more precise, i.e. : (a) associate the Standard Reference Data symbol or mark adopted pursuant to section 6 of this Act with any data compilation provided for in this Act. Paragraph (b) of Section 7 should then be eliminated entirely. Very truly yours, DOUGLAS C. STRAIN, Director, Measurement Standards Instrumentation Division. Hon. EMILIO Q. DADDARIO, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ALAMOS SCIENTIFIC LABORATORY, Chairman, Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development, Committee on Science and Astronautics, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. SIR: In response to your request for comments on H.R. 15638 I have the following to say: The explosive growth of quantitative knowledge in the physical sciences during the past twenty years is revolutionizing technology and thereby all our lives. In some technologies, for instance nuclear reactor design, the demands for evaluated data to be used as input to complex calculations has been so pressing that the quantity and quality of nuclear data has prolifereated tremendously beyond what might have occured under a lesser stimulus. The large volumes of this data and the complex computerized methods of utilizing it have necessitated systematic bibliographic, compilational and evaluational activities to be instituted which have given us a practical foretaste and painful experience in a segment of this problem which can be expected to permeate much of the physical sciences in the forthcoming future. It is thus timely, if not already somewhat late, to be taking steps on a coordinated national basis which will prepare us for the future utilization of scientific data in a practical and rational way. The Bill H.R. 15638 appears to lay a suitable foundation for this activity. Many practical problems of great complexity must be overcome and indeed must be continuously worked on to achieve the long-range ends of such a system. It is therefore worthwhile to consider briefly what some of these ends are since unfortunately various expedients will have to be used in the immediate future to get started on the task of catching-up with mountains of data already in existence. It is my belief that in a generation the technological demand for scientific data will be so great both in quantity and rapidity of access that the timehonored system of publication in the printed form will be considered primarily archival. In the past, major users of new scientific data have been the scientists themselves and the conventional publication system was eminently satisfactory, but today even the academic scientists often have urgencies requiring more rapid and complete access to scientific information than through the traditional channels. The future thus clearly points toward computerized methods of data handling in particular for storage, rapid access, rapid revision and insertion and for direct use in many varieties of calculational problems. And thus the need for centralized approaches to a National Reference Data File is easily discernible even including its rather probable future configuration. The proposal to utilize to the maximum extent those data compilation efforts already existing and to encourage further compilation to be started by experts in the various disciplines is a most desirable starting point. The direction of the National Standard Reference Data System (NSRDS) should however be so oriented that it can exert strong guidance in certain areas. This should be possible because of its central position. For instance, bibliographic work precedes a great deal of present day data compilation; much of this kind of work does not require professional scientists to carry out (although competent scientific direction must exist). At present many different compilations of data in specialized portions of a particular subfield begin with literature searches of precisely the same literature and often by scientists. This wasteful procedure can certainly be rectified to a large extent particularly if centrally guided. Similarly, the problems of converting the data to the appropriate computerized form and the details of the computer systems themselves should be standardized to the greatest extent compatible with the requirements of the system. The Bill and the Plan of Operation of the NSRDS should make it possible for adequate advice to be obtained on such details. There is, however, one area of scientific data activity in which it is impossible to avoid the detailed attention of those scientists who are expert and specialized in the particular data in question. This area is "evaluation" and lies at the very heart of the requirements of the NSRDS. For instance, the NSRDS has as one of its major outputs data on some physical quantity which it maintains is today's best value with an assigned error as determined by certain expert evaluators in the field. This evaluation function clearly cannot be by-passed for the purposes in mind and is not amenable to computerization since it will usually be derived by painstaking value-judgments to many experimental contributions by an expert in the field. A further example of "evaluation" of a different kind is the supplying of interpolated or extrapolated information where experimental data does not exist; again highly capable scientific experts are essential to provide this information. It would appear that the basic requirements for a working NSRDS are being set up by H.R. 15638 and by the existing efforts in the field. It should be remembered that this effort must be a continuing one and that full support should be given to it by the scientific, technologic and engineering communities. This will occur only if firm recognition and fiscal support is provided by the Congress not only through the Department of Commerce but also through those other Federal Agencies participating in the system. Success in the attainment of the objectives of H.R. 15638 will be a major contribution to our nation's eventual technologic strength and position. Very truly yours, R. F. TASCHEK, Physics Division Leader. THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, Hon. WESTON E. VIVIAN, Congress of the United States, DEAR DR. VIVIAN: Thank you for your letter of June 28 and for the information in regards to H.R. 15638. I have read through the bill and the amplifying comments and would submit to you my reactions. 1. There is no doubt a very definite need for such standardization of scientific and technical reference data. I have had occasion in my work to use a number of publications which have been put out by the Bureau of Standards and have found them most helpful. In particular I have used NBS Circular 500, "Selective Values of Chemical Thermodynamic Properties" and have found this a most useful and valuable document. I can, however, think of a number of other areas in which such standardization of data would be most helpful and useful. Therefore, I am basically in support of this bill. 2. It seems to me that it should be firmly established that it will be possible for those writing textbooks, handbooks, etc., to have permission to reproduce reasonable amounts of the data in the appendix of such books. In the two thermodynamic books which I have written, I included a brief summary of certain data which was included in NBS Circular 500 and felt it greatly enhanced the value of the book to the student, and served effectively to introduce the students to such data and by appropriate reference and acknowledgment would lead the student to a basic source of additional data. It would seem to me imperative that provision be made for permission to include summaries of such data in various textbooks and handbooks. 3. I believe it will be immediately evident when such a program is launched, that there is a need for experimental work to provide accurate data which is not at present available. We are currently engaged in measurements of such data and in our Thermodynamics Laboratory in the Department of Mechanical Engineering. Consideration should be given to funding and the means by which these funds can be appropriately distributed to insure that work can be done to provide necessary data which is not now available. 4. It would seem to me that some advisory board, which would include an appropriate balance of representatives from Government, industry, and the University, ought to be established to guide in the formulation of policy by which the intent of this bill will be implemented. I would be pleased to testify in these matters if it would appear to be desirable. However, I'd be very happy to leave these suggestions with you, and have you handle them as you see fit. Again many thanks for bringing this to my attention. |