Selection, Appraisal and Retention of Digital Scientific Data

1. Selection, Appraisal and Retention of Digital Scientific Data Presented at Workshop on Strategies for Permanent Access to Scientific Information in Southern Africa: Focus on Health and Environmental Information for Sustainable Development By John Faundeen Archivist, U.S. Geological Survey September 2005 - Pretoria, South Africa

2. Outline • Context • Selection • Appraisal • Retention • Case Study • Proposal • Summary

3. Context • U.S. Geological Survey • Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science • Land Applications • Satellite and Aerial Remote Sensing • Topography • Land Cover • Earth Observation Holdings • 2.8 Petabytes from 1972 to Present (1 TB/day) • 110,000 Film Rolls from 1937 to Present (4 types)

4. Context

5. Context • Scientific Data • Observations • Experimental Outputs • Models • “Long-Term” Preservation “A period of time long enough for there to be concern about the impacts of changing technologies, including support for new media and data formats, and of a changing user community, on the information being held in a repository. This period extends into the indefinite future.” - Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems

6. APPRAISAL RETENTION SELECTION

7. Selection “The process of identifying materials to be preserved because of their enduring value, especially those materials to be physically transferred to an archives.” - Society of American Archivist Glossary

8. Selection • Inventory (verb) • Magnitude • Breadth • Political • Daunting • Time-Consuming • Necessary

9. Appraisal “The process of determining the value and thus the disposition of records based upon their [informational/scientific] use.” - Society of American Archivist Glossary “The process of determining the value and thus the final disposition of Federal records, making them either temporary or permanent.” - U.S. National Archives and Records Administration - http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/initiatives/appraisal.html

10. Appraisal • Judgmental and Subjective • Organizational Mission Alignment • Agreements or Legislative Mandates • Collection Policy • Continuing Value • Secondary Uses • Science Data Interdependences • Future Research Use … Predicting

11. Appraisal • Reproducible? At what Cost? • Chain of Custody • Authenticity • Reliability • Integrity • Usability • Advisory Committees • Funding • Lifecycle • Creation, Maintenance and Use, Disposition

12. Appraisal - Criteria • U.S. National Archives and Records Administration • How significant are the records for research? • How significant is the source and context of the records? • Is the information unique? • How useable are the records? • Do the records document decisions that set precedents? • Are the records related to other permanent records? • What is the time frame covered by the information? • What are the cost considerations for permanent maintenance of the records?

13. Appraisal - Criteria • U.S. Department of Energy Sandia National Laboratories (Questionnaire to archives extracts) • Who really needs this spatial data (who is the intended user group of the spatial data sets in the archives)? • What are the purposes for keeping this data? • How do you intend to use the data (general science based, legal reasons, basic reference)? • Does the data really need to be digital? • Are the data indexed in any way? • Are the data stored by date, sensor type, geography, theme or project or in a combination?

14. Appraisal Criteria • U.S. National Research Council “As a general rule, all observational data that are nonredundant, useful, and documented well enough for most primary uses should be permanently maintained. Laboratory data sets are candidates for long-term preservation if there is no realistic chance of repeating the experiment, or if the cost and intellectual effort required to collect and validate the data were so great that long-term retention is clearly justified. For both observational and experimental data, the following retention criteria should be used to determine whether a data set should be saved: uniqueness, adequacy of documentation (metadata), availability of hardware to read the data records, cost of replacement, and evaluation by peer review. Complete metadata should define the content, format or representation, structure, and context of a data set.”

15. Appraisal • Process Flow for USGS EROS • Appraisal Requested by Archivist, a Program, our Science Council or the Director of EROS. • Appraisal Team Assembled • Archivist • Records Managers • Relevant Scientists • Appraisal Conducted and Documented • Appraisal Tool Utilized • Recommendations Briefed to Requestor and Director of EROS • Physical Transfers Reinforce Appraisal Criteria • Requirements & Checklist

16. Appraisal – USGS EROS Tool • Over 70 Categorized Questions • Mission Relevancy • General Policy (ISO Standard) • Physical (Media) • Metadata • Cost / Benefit http://edc2.usgs.gov/government/RAT/tool.asp

17. Retention [Period] “The length of time, usually based upon an estimate of the frequency of use of current and anticipated business, that records should be retained….before they are transferred to archives or otherwise disposed of.” - Society of American Archivist Glossary

18. Retention • Records Schedules • Draft USGS Geography • For Long-Term Preservation • Archival Media Studies (Fiscal Year 2004) • Near/On, Off-line, Off-site = Objective • Cost • Disposition • Preparation • Transfer • Destruction • Cost

19. Case Study • Committee on Earth Observation Satellites • 1999 Working Group Meeting in Nairobi, Kenya • Developing Countries Support Workshop • Environmental Agencies Around Kenya • Aging 9-Track Tapes • Contained Satellite Observations • Requested Data Rescue Effort • Desired Data on CDs • Transfer and Copy Process Developed • 53% Success Rate

20. Proposal • USGS Willing to Extend The Effort • We Best Know Satellite Data • Willing to Attempt Other Data • Case-by-Case Basis • John Faundeen • faundeen@usgs.gov • Fax 707-222-0223 • U.S. Geological Survey, EROS, Sioux Falls, SD 57198 USA

21. Summary • Selection, Appraisal & Retention Work Together • Appraisal is Subjective, But Must be Done! • Retention Leads to Dispositions • May Result in Transfers, not Just Destruction • Critical to Institutionalize these Processes • Start Small, But do Start!

22. “The collections of scientific data acquired with government and private support are the foundation for our understanding of the physical world and for our capabilities to predict changes in that world.” - U.S. National Research Council

23. References • Gutmann, M., Schurer, K., Donakowski, D., Beedham, H., “The Selection, Appraisal, and Retention of Digital Social Science Data.” in Data Science Journal, Vol. 3, December 30, 2004, pp. 209-221. • Pearce-Moses, R., “A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology.” Society of American Archivist, Chicago, IL, 2004. • Bellardo, L. J., Bellardo, L.L., “A Glossary for Archivists, Manuscript Curators, and Records Managers.” Society of American Archivists, Chicago, IL, 1992. • National Archives and Records Administration (2003) Strategic Directions: Appraisal Policy. Retrieved on August 4, 2005 from the National Archives and Records Administration site: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/initiatives/appraisal.html. • National Archives and Records Administration (2003) Appraisal Policy of the National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved on August 4, 2005 from the National Archives and Records Administration site: http://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/initiatives/appraisal.html • Esanu, J., Davidson, J., Ross, S., Anderson, W., “Selection, Appraisal, and Retention of Digital Scientific Data: Highlights of an ERPANET/CODATA Workshop.” December 15-17, 2003, Lisbon, Portugal. • International Standards Organization, “Information and Documentation – Records Management.” ISO 15489-1:2001(E), Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.

24. References • Eastwood, T., “Appraising Digital Records for Long-Term Preservation.” in Data Science Journal, Volume 3, December 30, 2004, pp. 202-208. • Faundeen, J., “Interdisciplinary Case Study 2: Earth & Environmental Sciences U.S. Geological Survey/EROS Data center Archiving Perspective.” Presentation to the ERPANET/CODATA Workshop on the Selection, Appraisal, and Retention of Digital Scientific Data, December 15-17, 2003, Lisbon, Portugal. • Anderson, W. L., “Some Challenges and Issues in Managing, and Preserving Access to, Long-Lived Collections of Digital Scientific and Technical Data.” in Data Science Journal, Volume 3, December 30, 2004, pp. 191-202. • Bleakly, D. R., “Long-Term Spatial Data Preservation and Archiving: What are the Issues?” Sand Report 2002-0107, Prepared by Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM January 2002. • National Research Council, “Preserving Scientific Data on Our Physical Universe: A New Strategy for Archiving the Nation’s Scientific Information Resources.” Steering Committee for the Study on the Long-term Retention of Selected Scientific and Technical Records of the Federal Government, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 1995. • ERPANET, “ErpaTools: Digital Preservation Policy Tool.” Electronic Resource Preservation and Access Network, September 2003. Retrieved on August 4, 2005 from the Electronic Resource Preservation and Access Network site: http://www.erpanet.org/guidance/docs/ERPANETPolicyTool.pdf • Consultative Committee for Space data Systems. “Reference Model for an Open Archival Information Systems (OAIS).” Retrieved on August 4 from the Consultative Committee for Space data Systems site: http:www.ccsds.org/CCSDS/documents/650x0b1.pdf

25. Backup Slides

26. Retention • ERPANET Digital Preservation “Areas of Coverage” • Authority and Responsibility • Conversion and Reformatting • Appraisal, Selection and Acquisition • Storage and Maintenance • Access and Dissemination • Implementation • Standards • Procedures • Quality Control, Auditing and Benchmarking • Cooperation • Technical Infrastructure

27. Landsat MSS 1972 Landsat TM 1985 Landsat ETM+ 2000 Declassified 1973 Pretoria, South Africa area images. EO-1 Hyperion 2002

28. Case Study • Process Developed • UNEP Collected Tapes from Environmental Agencies • UNEP Shipped Tapes to USGS • USGS Cleaned and Copied Tapes to CDs • CDs Sent Back to UNEP for Redistribution • Old 9-Track Tapes Destroyed

29. Case Study • 448 Tapes Received

30. “DO RIGHT BY THE RECORDS”