Geoscience Data and Collections National Resources in Peril (2002) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
5 Regional Centers: A Model for the Future
5 Regional Centers: A Model for the Future
Pages 70-79
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 70... ...
Administrators of several well-managed geoscience collections have learned that user-defined groups or committees of interest are particularly qualified to define policy concerning access and sampling of specific data types, and to advise on accession and deaccession of materials. This is exemplified at the National Ice Core Laboratory (NICL)
|
From page 71... ...
F = Feature is considered a negative. aAs used here, access represents assumptions regarding ease and cost of travel to a location for users.
|
From page 72... ...
The committee assumes that multiple, regional repositories would evolve over time to serve smaller or larger regions, depending on the interests of the user communities, volume of geoscience data and collections, and support within the region for multiple facilities. Consequently, one of the key features of the multiple, regional facilities approach advocated here is that it allows participation by a larger number of existing facilities than would a single, national repository.
|
From page 73... ...
Private repositories that hold electronic data typically either acquire publicly available data in non-electronic form, then convert them to electronic data, or purchase or otherwise acquire electronic data, which they own. These companies also allow access to data either on a fee or subscription basis.
|
From page 74... ...
The committee became convinced that a uniting theme of the successful centers is direct involvement of an external science-advisory board. Such boards, composed primarily of users of the facility, help establish priorities for geoscience data and collections acquisition, in addition to facilitating maximum utilization of the data and collections by the widest possible range of clientele.6 Given the success of analogous centers with NSF input, and NSF's support of external science-advisory boards, the committee was convinced that NSF is an appropriate federal agency to award federal funds for the proposed regional centers.
|
From page 75... ...
The cost estimates are based on discussions with Ronald Broa&ead, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources, George Bush and Douglas Ratcliff, Bureau of Economic Geology, Robert Shafer, C&M Storage, Inc., and Guenter Wellman, Alberta Core Research Centre, Canada. All cost estimates are in 2001 dollars.
|
From page 76... ...
ft. $ 9,000,000 $ 75,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 1,500,000 $13,575,000 $ 2,000,000 $34,450,000 $31,500,000 $ 2,100,000 $33,600,000 $ 3,000,000 $50,175,000 aCosts based on information provided by Ronald Broa&ead, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources; George Bush and Douglas Ratcliff, Bureau of Economic Geology; Jimmy Denton, BP Amoco, Tulsa, Oklahoma; Robert Shafer, C&M Storage Inc.; and Guenter Wellmar~n, Core Research Centre, Alberta, Canada 2001.
|
From page 77... ...
$40-$1,000 on CD-ROM Paper, microfiche Physical access to specimens Box retrieval from storage Facility use for examination Unlimited downloads to CD-ROMs at $1,000 and up $2/report to $25,000/series Free to $0.15/screen $1.50-$10/box; no additional charge for some storage services $30-$150/day SOURCE: Fee schedules for NGDC Marine Geology and Geophysics Center, Alberta Core Research Centre, and the Bureau of Economic Geology Core Research Center, University of Texas. New Acquisitions One of the more striking revelations was the inability of those institutions that constructed new geoscience data and collections facilities to anticipate adequately the amount of time required to fill the space.
|
From page 78... ...
Here, the federal geoscience data and collections coordinating committee would work closely with the federal external science-advisory boards to determine which cataloging efforts warrant
|
From page 79... ...
are inadequate for this task, new ones should be devised. Fecleral Involvement in Regional Consortia In addition to coordination between federal external science-advisory boards and those of the regional centers, the committee anticipates that federal agencies would participate (where appropriate)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.