nation's 1.5 million scientists, engineers and technicians, the calculation gives $150,000,000 annual economy in time saved alone. Substantial additional savings would accrue through avoiding of errors incurred by the use of unevaluated data. Other approaches to estimating the savings that can be expected were outlined in Dr. Hollomon's initial statement to the Committee on June 29, 1966.

4. On page 8 of your prepared statement you say that the narrower goals of NSRDS "is probably within the capability of available manpower in the United States." This being the case, where would the Bureau get the manpower for the broader goals which you describe?

The broader goal described would extend the range of the system to a much wider scope of materials and properties. We would recommend against such expansion in the immediate effort. It may become necessary to consider such expansion eventually, and manpower for the work would come from two sources: (a) growth of the technically trained manpower resources of the U.S. and (b) development of an international program which would utilize competent scientists all over the world.

(Whereupon, at 12:30 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned to reconvene at 10 a.m., Thursday, June 30, 1966.)

A BILL TO PROVIDE A STANDARD REFERENCE

DATA SYSTEM

THURSDAY, JUNE 30, 1966

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND ASTRONAUTICS, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, RESEARCH, AND DEVELOPMENT,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10:25 a.m., in room 2325, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Emilio Q. Daddario (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. DADDARIO. The meeting will come to order.

Our first witness this morning is Dr. Frederick Seitz, President, National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Seitz, we want to welcome you here this morning. We are pleased to have you before us again.

STATEMENT OF DR. FREDERICK SEITZ, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

Dr. SEITZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; it is always a pleasure to appear before your committee.

I have a prepared text. However, I will deviate from it at times in view of some of the previous testimony.

The National Academy of Sciences is thoroughly in accord with the objectives of the Standard Reference Data Program at the National Bureau of Standards. We feel strongly that the program should be expanded and strengthened since further advances in science and technology will depend heavily upon the availability of reliable quantitative scientific information, particularly that which can be identified as critical tables of standard reference data.

Certainly the most notable example of an effort to provide critical tables of standard reference data is the International Critical Tables of Numerical Data of Physics, Chemistry, and Technology. Preparation of these tables resulted from discussions begun at the 1919 Conferences of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry at London. The United States was assigned financial and editorial responsibility for the project and the National Academy of SciencesNational Research Council accepted the executive, editorial, and financial responsibilities for the United States.

The entire enterprise was made possible by the cooperation of the American Chemical Society and the American Physical Society, together with essential support from industry, which contributed funds totaling $200,000. This famous collection of numerical data was the result of cooperative efforts by some 400 scientists in 18 differ

ent countries. Seven volumes with a total of approximately 3,500 pages were published in the years 1926-30, constituting the largest single compilation of critical data in the history of science up to that time. These volumes provided scientists and engineers with a compact set of authoritative tables giving them the data needed in their research, development, and engineering activities.

The Academy established a Committee on Tables of Constants in the early years of World War II. Although this Committee considered it desirable to have a revision of the International Critical Tables, it saw no ready solution to the problems created by the steady growth in the quantity of such scientific and technical data. In 1955, the Committee concluded that there was no hope of repeating the work of the International Critical Tables as a single compilation. This conclusion resulted from the following considerations:

1. The fields of chemistry, physics, and engineering, as well as other disciplines, had expanded greatly in size and in their requirements for quantitative data of all kinds.

2. Both precision of measurements in science and the precision of manufacturing in industry had been pushed to new levels in the intervening period, requiring more accurate data of even greater precision. 3. Rough estimates indicated that an adequate and complete revision and extension of the International Critical Tables would be 100 to 200 times as great as the original task.

4. Any new undertaking of this kind should provide for continuity. 5. By 1955 a number of large data-compiling projects operating on a continuing basis had come into existence in the United States, involving total annual expenditures of about a million dollars.

Recognizing the need for central planning, the National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council created in 1957 the Office of Critical Tables with the following responsibilities:

(1) The coordination of existing compilation projects:

(2) The stimulation of new projects;

(3) The establishment of a directory and index service for projects;

(4) The encouragement of uniform editorial practices and other items that go into the expression of quantitative data (e.g., use of approved nomenclature, symbols, units, fundamental constants, the adoption of suitable publication forms for compilation of numerical data, et cetera); and

(5) The establishment of communications in this area, to the extent practicable, with scientists in other countries.

The formation of this Office by the Academy was greeted with enthusiasm and hope by the scientific community. It succeeded in making progress with most of its aims. But, in the all-important task (item (2) above) of encouraging the creation of new centers for the evaluation, consolidation, and compilation of standard reference data, it failed because no agency, government or private, was able at that time to provide the necessary funding. The establishment in 1963 of the National Standard Reference Data Program at the National Bureau of Standards, with the full backing of the Academy, marked the beginning of a strong central coordination and management center which, hopefully, would receive adequate funding.

The evaluation of data is an international problem. The leadership of the United States is, by its example, encouraging other countries to assume a part of the scientific and financial burden for data collection, evaluation, and compilation. The Academy, with the cooperation of scientific organizations in 5 other major countries and of 10 international unions adhering to the International Council of Scientific Unions, has recently created an International Coordinating Committee for Data in Science and Technology. This Committee will stimulate programs in other countries which will both complement and supplement reference data activities in the United States.

The President of the Committee is Frederick D. Rossini of the University of Notre Dame who is also Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Office of Critical Tables of the Academy which as one of its functions supplies advisory services to the Standard Reference Data Program. Dr. Rossini spent many years at the National Bureau of Standards in the early part of his career and is well known to the Bureau.

The United States must continue to be active in this area of international cooperation and must bear its share of the costs for the international committee and its supporting staff.

Now, turning to the bill before us, I can state that the Academy and the scientific and technical community it represents are in full agreement with the overall purposes of the bill. We are delighted with this evidence of an effort on the part of the Government to strengthen the Standard Reference Data Program.

The cooperative nature of the program must be emphasized. Many of the data to be evaluated are produced in nongovernmental research laboratories, both university and industrial, in the United States and abroad. These data are to a large degree published first in journals. of the scientific societies which are almost without exception privately controlled, although they operate on a not-for-fee basis. In part they become the subject matter of many handbooks and data compilations in the United States and in other countries. Many important data are produced by private industry in the course of new product and engineering development and enter the regular channels of science and technology. In view of these facts we wish to express some concern about the wording of sections 7(a) and 7 (b) of the bill. Section 7(b) appears to place a copyright on products of the Standard Reference Data Program, whatever their origin, contrary to the usual practice with governmental publications. This restriction could, if not watched, serve as a deterrent to a free flow of scientific data. We should like to point out also that copyright problems are under review at this time in both the executive and legislative branches of the Government.

Mr. DADDARIO. What is your recommendation as to this section? Should it be eliminated or would you suggest other terminology?

Dr. SEITZ. I would say the following: I am in general accord with the concept that the Bureau of Standards should receive some fair remuneration for the sale of some of its work. This, in addition to reimbursing the Government, at least in part, would make it possible for the Bureau to keep up the program, to provide special services. and to make sure that the compilation remains current.