fj^Ssist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 ACTION GROUP REPORTS DATA ARCHIVE REGISTRY Canada- Lisa Lasko, Canadian Consortium for Social Research, Institute for Behavioral Research, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Downsview, Ontario M3J 1P3 Europe- Joseph Bonmariage, Belgian Archives for the Social Sciences, University of Louvain, SH-2, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium United States- John Kolp, Regional Social Science Data Archive, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Report of the Joint Canadian-United States Action Groups on Data Archive Registry Meetings in Toronto, May 11-12, 1977 (PAR AG) Submitted by Lisa Lasko Institute for Behavioral Research York University Members Present Canada Lisa Lasko, Institute for Behavioral Research, York University Sharon Henry, Data Clearing House for the Social Sciences Gerald Prodrick, University of Western Ontario Jana Prokop, University of Toronto The Canadian Data Archive Registry Group made substantial progress when it met for a working session at the Canadian lASSIST meetings. May 11 and 12, in Toronto. The working sessions were attended by four Canadian lASSIST members. No American members were present. The first issue that was addressed by the group was whether or not the Data Archive Registry Group still held a viable mandate. The presence of two new data archive directories— the upcoming 1977 September edition of Vivian Sessions' Directory of Data Bases in the Social and Behavioral Sciences and the Unesco sponsored Directory of Data Services now underway under the direction of Jean Meyriat, Secretary General of the International Committee for Social Science In- formation and Documentation (ICSSD) forced consideration of this issue. In ad- dition, the Canadian Group had to consider that the Data Clearing House for the iBiSsist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 Social Sciences intended to produce a hard copy Directory of Social Science Data Centres for Canada. The group agreed that the first two directories were less than satisfactory, but that the soon-to-be-produced directory of the Data Clear- ing House posed a real conflict. Sharon Henry, Executive Director of the Data Clearing House, reported that although she had to have the Directory published by the end of the current year, in fact, no work had yet been started on the pub- lication and no questionnaire had yet been designed. It was suggested that a formal liaison between the lASSIST Data Archive Registry Group and the Data Clear- ing House be established to produce the directory. More specifically, the ques- tionnaire utilized for surveying Canadian data centres would be jointly designed by both groups, and the data elements covered in the questionnaire would allow the results to be used by both groups for their various needs. One publication, the Directory of Social Science Data Centres , would be published cooperatively by the Data Clearing House for the Social Sciences and the lASSIST Data Archive Registry Group. However, it was clearly understood that when and if an lASSIST Internation- al Data Archive Registry did get underway, the relevant Canadian entries would be pulled from the data base for inclusion in the lASSIST registry. The Canadian directory, then, was to be viewed as a pilot project for the international lASSIST data archive registry. It was agreed that in order for this joint activity to work, a formal representative from the Data Clearing House for the Social Sciences should become a permanent member of the lASSIST Data Archive Registry Group. Once this basic issue was resolved, the group immediately started to work on designing the questionnaire. Both the Session's questionnaire and the Meyriat questionnaire were consulted. By the end of the two days, most of the necessary elements had been agreed upon and Pierre Lacasse, coordinator of the Data Acqui- sition Group, made some valuable suggestions for elements concerning acquisition policies of archives. However, as work on the questionnaire did not get com- pleted, it was decided that Lisa Lasko and Jana Prokop would meet in Toronto to complete it, after which time, a meeting would be held with Sharon Henry to dis- cuss it further. The group spent a substantial portion of its time compiling a list of broad subject headings to be used for describing categories of data in the questionnaire. During the conference, it was pointed out that the lack of a controlled vocabulary for descriptions of categories or holdings of data, was a major factor in the lack of good subject access to data archives. The group felt that its work in this area would be a significant and important contribution to useful descriptions of data archives. The group built upon the list of 105 subject headings compiled by David Gerhan and Loretta Walker, and also consulted with Vivian Sessions' 26 broad subject categories. In addition, unique Canadian subject terms were chosen. The final version differed substantially from the aforementioned lists, and, as it was still very rough, Lisa Lasko and Jana Prokop agreed to refine the list further at a later date in Toronto. Sue Dodd, Coordinator of the Classification Action Group, generously offered to assist in the compilation of subject terms. It was agreed that the refined list would be sent to Sue Dodd for comments and suggestions as soon as possible. _ To summarize, then, the Data Archive Registry Group made significant headway in designing the questionnaire and developing a controlled vocabulary to be used for descriptions of data archive holdings. However, further work is' still required to complete both the questionnaire and subject heading list. For this reason, Lisa Lasko and Jana Prokop both agreed to meet in Toronto in the next few weeks to take care of any work still outstanding. ^Ssist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 CLASSIFICATION Canada- Mohan Sharma, Humanities S Social Science Library, University of Alberta, Rutherford North, Edmonton, Alberta Europe- Ekkehard Mochmann, Zentralarchiv fur Empirische Sozialforschung, Bachemer Strasse 40, 5 Koln 41, Federal Republic of Germany United States- Sue Dodd, Data Library, Insitute for Research in Social Sci- ences, Manning Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill , North Carolina 27514 Report of the Joint Canadian-United States Action Groups on Classification (C AG) Submitted by Sue A. Dodd, University of North Carolina Members Present Canada Martha Amschutz, Canadian Radio-Television Commission Krystyna W. Dynowski, University of Western Ontario Sue Gavrel , Public Archives of Canada, Ottawa Katrin Horowitz, Library of Consumer & Corporate Affairs Hans G. Schulte-Albert, University of Western Ontario United States Sue A. Dodd, Ch, University of North Carolina Gertrude Lewis, Rutgers University Mimi Schade, Brookings Institution Philip Sidel, University of Pittsburgh Agenda topics : Current problems and associated tasks within the mandate of the Classification Action Group include developing (1) examples and guidelines for bibliographic references for social science numerical data files, (2) a "cata- loging-in-production" scheme for major producers of social science data files, (3) a more "universally based" classification scheme for social science data files; and, reviewing (4) the cataloging efforts to date and discussing any or all related problems and (5) existing printed thesauri in the social sciences in terms of their future applications to data files. The primary focus of the C AG at the Canadian Working Conference centered around the first problem of how to cite properly a social science numerical data file in the published literature. Ji^sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 Problem : Currently, there are no standards or guidelines for compiling such bibliographic references and the quality and amount of information provided when citing social science data files varies greatly among individual scholars. In many cases, the information is not sufficient to allow for direct access, and consequently, an interested party has to spend a considerable amount of time determining additional information that could easily be provided by a full bibliographic reference. Complicating this problem is the American National Standards Institute's forth- coming work entitled "American National Standards for Bibliographic References." This ANSI Standard will provide detailed information on the theory, principles, and definitions underlying the technique of preparing bibliographic references for both print and nonprint materials, including machine-readable data files (MRDF). The problem with this forthcoming document is that it does not include examples of social science numerical data files which make up the vast majority of MRDF; nor does it attempt to be compatible with the forthcoming second edi- tion of the Anglo American Cataloging Rules (AACR II), which also deals with bibliographic standards for MRDF. Role of lASSIST C AG : The Classification Action Group, in its continuing role to encourage uniform standards for MRDF and to see that social science data files are represented in the best possible light will provide a written cri- tique on the forthcoming ANSI Standard, and at the same time provide more ser- viceable examples of how to cite social science numerical data files in the published literature. The C AG does not intend to create a new standard but rather to work within the framework of the ANSI Standard. The intent is to supplement it and recommend revisions where it is viewed as either necessary or helpful . The critique will focus on the omission of social science numerical data files and the lack of compatibility with other standards and related terminology dealing with the same medium. Arguments to be presented in the paper are: that outside the field of quantitative research, social science numeri- cal data files are probably the least understood category of MRDF and, consequently, are in tfie most need of attention and clarification; that the terminology and definitions used to describe MRDF are confusing and often misleading and, therefore, a uniform standard for this medium is necessary; that social science numerical data files make up the largest on-going collection of MRDF and, consequently, this body of information is in immediate need of bibliographic control; that social science numerical data files are cited more frequently in scholarly journals than the two MRDF examples listed in the ANSI Stan- dard (i.e., computer programs and bibliographic data files), and there- fore, the need for relevant social science examples seems justified; that this justification is magnified by the fact that the manner in which social science data files are cited in the literature plays an important role both in terms of access and in terms of secondary an- alysis; and, that the two examples given (i.e., computer programs, and bibliographic data bases) are significantly different from the characteristics of social science numerical data files as to be less than helpful. rai$sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 The first draft of this paper was reviewed by the participants of the Canadian Working Conference and will likewise be reviewed by those C AG participants who were unable to attend the conference. The final work will be reviewed by the C AG's Standards and Quality-Control Review Board. The resulting critique, along with an accompanying letter signed by the appropriate officers of lASSIST, will be sent to the American National Standards Institute, Inc. in New York and beyond that, it is hoped that the recomnended revisions and resulting examples would be accepted by this body. It is also hoped that relevant examples could be sent to the editors and publishers of the various social science journals, who in turn can begin to implement conventions on the use, style and content of bibliographic references. Tasks of C AG participants : (1) read and review the draft of the critique of the ANSI Standard, providing any comments, suggestions, or additions, etc.; (2) read an abbreviated version of the standard prepared by Ellis Mount and which appeared in the Journal of the American Society for Information Science ; (3) prepare a list of the necessary and descriptive bibliographic elements (e.g., title, author, edition, imprint, etc.) for social science data and at the same time indicate those that would be essential , recommended , or optional ; and, (4) utilizing the list of rated bibliographic elements, begin to compose biblio- graphic references of the respective data files. Results of this task at the Canadian Conference : The first draft of the critique was reviewed and comments accepted. The beginnings of a list of bibliographic elements was compiled. Each element was grouped and rated (i.e., essential, rec- ommended or optional) according to its importance in identifying a data file. Finally, some eleven examples were compiled by the participants, including the samples listed below: Title- Mexico's naturalized citizens, 1828-1931 [Machine-readable data file], first: Harold Sims; Susan Sanderson; Philip Sidel , principal investigators. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, 1975-76. 1 data file (8066 logical records). Author- Shanas, Ethel. The health of older people [Machine-readable data file]: first: A social survey: public attitudes on older people. NORC rev. ed. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, 1957 [producer and distrib- utor]. 1 data file (2567 logical records) and accompanying codebook (166 p.). Swidzinski, Susan. Syllabication [Machine-readable data file]: a drill and practice lesson. Bloomington, MN: Control Data Corporation, 1976. On-line program lesson available only via the Plato System. Henry, Neil. MAXCLS.BAS [Machine-readable data file]: a program for maximum likelihood estimation of parameters of unrestricted latent class models. Lafayette, IN: Gary Income Maintenance Experiment, 1974; Pittsburgh, PA: Social Science Computer Research Institute [distrib- utor]. 1 program file (95 statements, BASIC) and accompanying manual (53 p.). The work at the Canadian Conference on this task was an important first attempt towards achieving the goal of providing relevant and acceptable examples of bibliographic references of social sciences data files. However, these examples should be viewed as only first attempts and not as the final recommended examples of bibliographic references; and, any and all comments are welcome. 10. i^aksist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 DATA ARCHIVE DEVELOPMENT Canada- Laine Ruus, Data Library, Computing Centre, University of British Columbia, 2075 Wesbrook Place, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1W5 Europe- not activated United States- Alice Robbin, Data and Program Library Service, 4452 Social Science Building, University of Wisconsin-Madison Wisconsin 53706 Report of the Joint Canadian-United States Action Groups on Data Archive Development Meetings in Toronto. May 11-12, 1977 (DAD AG) Submitted by Laine Ruus, University of British Columbia Members Present Canada Laine Ruus, Ch, University of British Columbia Marilyn Berry, University of Victoria Peter Clinton, Memorial University of Newfoundland Judy Demaine, University of Guelph Ed Hanis, University of Western Ontario Alan Kirby, Queen's University Elaine Kozak, Data Clearing House for the Social Sciences United States John Heddesheimer, National Archives and Records Service, Washington, D.C. Alice Robbin, University of Wisconsin-Madison Judith Rowe, Princeton University Ed Vickery, Research Triangle Institute, Chapel Hill, NC Objectives of the meeting: (a) to revise and redefine the outline of the Guide to providing social science data services ; (b) to elaborate and expand on tHe contents of the separate sub-sections of the Guide ; (c) to finalize arrangements for contributions from the other action groups to relevant sub-sections of the Guide , and set deadlines for abstracts and full-text contributions; (d) to allo- cate responsibility for contributing remaining sections and sub-sections of the Guide to persons or groups with relevant expertise. The first priority of the action group was to write abstracts of those sections of the Guide to be contributed by other action groups, so as to afford them a chance to consider more fully, during their meetings, their contributions and react to them. On the basis of these reactions, some sub-sections of the out- line will be redefined, and some responsibilities reallocated. 11. Ji^sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 Specific responsibilities for remaining sub-sections of the Guide were allocated to such persons of expertise in relevant areas as could be identified by the mem- bers of the action group, both within and outside the action group itself. Those who could not be contacted during the course of the conference, or who had not previously been contacted, will be solicited for their collaboration immediately. A deadline for contribution of abstracts of all sections was set for June 30, 1977, and deadline for full -text for December 31, 1977. In addition, a system of readers, for the several sections of the Guide , was es- tablished to provide a pre-editorial review of input, and to ensure that foci of the sections include minimal as well as maximal levels of service. It was further decided that preliminary copies of the glossary should be dis- tributed to all contributors and readers for comment and ammendment, to ensure that all vocabulary necessary is included, and that definitions in the glossary agree with usage by the contributors. Based on reaction from members of the Data Organization and Management Action Group, it was found to be necessary to further refine and amplify the defini- tion of the target audience, especially in terms of levels of expertise. A fuller redefinition will be distributed to all collaborators. The final order of business was a decision on a topic for the DAD-AG symposium at the February 1978 meetings. Various topics were considered, and the final choice was 'networking', as a topic of some immediacy for data archives/librar- ies. Consideration will be given to a definition of 'networking', and its im- plications for all machine-readable data service units. PROCESS-PRODUCED DATA Canada- John DeVries, Social Science Data Archives, Department of Sociology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario KIS 5B6 Europe- Paul Muller, Institute for Applied Social Research, University of Cologne, Greinstrasse 2, 5000-Koln 41, Federal Republic of Germany United States- Donald Harrison, National Archives (NNR), Washington, D.C. 20408 12. sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 Report of the Joint Canadian-United States Action Groups on Process-Produced Data Workshop in Toronto, May 11-12, 1977 (PPD AG) Submitted by John DeVries, Carleton University Members Present Canada John DeVries, Ch, Carleton University Bill Bradley, Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa Hy Burshtyn, Carleton University Tony Falsetto, Public Archives of Canada, Ottawa Richard Guttormson, Ministry of State for Science and Technology, Ottawa Pierre Lacasse, Centre de recherche en amenagement regional, Sherbrooke, Que'bec United States Harriet Dhanak, Michigan State University Shirley Gilbert, Princeton University Elizabeth Powell, LEAA/NCJISS, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Ed Vickery, Research Triangle Institute, Chapel Hill, NC We continued our discussions on the Directory of Catalogues which list Machine Readable Data , which we had determined to have the highest priority for our AG. Although we did not meet our self-imposed deadline (which expected us to produce a first draft of this proposed document at this meeting), some progress has been made. We have obtained copies of several existing catalogues and propose to con- tinue this collection phase. We developed a listing of minimally required elements of information, which we hope each entry in a Catalogue of Data Files would provide. The listing which follows was based on an examination of existing catalogues. The essential items, we feel are: a) File name, catalogue number or reference number (if any); b) A short description of the data. This description should especially indi- cate the time-span and the geographical area covered by the data; c) Medium on which the data are held (e.g. magnetic tape, cards); d) Size of file (number of records); e) References to available documentation and other publications pertaining to the file (e.g. a listing of reference numbers for working papers); f) The degree of accessibility (we propose: unconditional, conditional, never); g) Cost of acquiring the file (if the file is accessible); h) Department or agency where the raw data originates; i) The position of the person to contact for further information. i)3i$sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 On the last-mentioned item, we felt that the name of the person, and the telephone number, were additional items of importance. Given the high degree of turnover of personnel, we felt that the position would generally be more enduring information than the name of the incumbent at a given point in time. We envision the eventual document — still planned to appear in February 1978— to be an annotated bibliography of Catalogues, where the annotations are based on our proposed set of minimal information requirements. The bibliography would also state these requirements, and would, finally, contain a listing of governmental departments and agencies which, to our knowledge, have not (yet) produced a cata- logue of their machine-readable data files. We are proposing to circulate our initial findings to the members of our AG before August 31, 1977. At this point each AG member will be asked to produce the anno- tations for a specified set of catalogues. We expect to review the eventual set of annotations at the projected lASSIST meeting for February 1978. With regards to our second priority: the Inventory of Existing Guidelines in Use by the Originating Institution or Archival Institution , we decided that little could be done at this stage, until we had an opportunity to examine the Catalogues of Data Bases. In addition, Tony Falsetto will mail out (again) a package con- taining various documents related to the documentation and preservation of MRDF by the Machine-Readable Archives Division of the Public Archives of Canada. We discussed the issue of communications between national governments and the com- munity of researchers using process-produced data. We agreed that there is a great need for improvement and propose the following strategy: (1) Comments, suggestions, queries and complaints about process-produced data would be sent to an lASSIST member who is at the same institution as the person requiring the information (or in a nearby institution). In short, we would pro- pose that lASSIST endorse a network of "Official Representatives". (2) Such questions, etc. would then be passed on to the appropriate AG coordin- ator (i.e., the U.S. Coordinator if one were dealing with U.S. PPD, the Canadian coordinator in the case of Canadian PPD). (3) The AG coordinator would convey the question to the appropriate government agency and would be responsible for channeling the response back to the user (or, if the information were of wider relevance, to submit an item to the lASSIST News - letter ). The AG also discussed ways in which other organizations working on related problems could be contacted to prevent any duplication of effort regarding process-produced data. We agreed that the two coordinators would get in touch with the chairman of such groups as the Association of Public Data Users, the Committee on Population Statistics of the Population Association of America, and so on. 14. ^ssist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 DATA ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Canada- Greg Morrison, Social Science Data Archive, Department of Sociology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario KIS 5E6 Europe- Eric Tannenbaum, Social Science Research Council Survey Archive, Uni- versity of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, P.S. Box 23, Colchester, Essex, England C04 3S0 United States- William Ganrnell , Social Science Data Center, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06268 Report of the Joint Canadian-United States Action Groups on Data Organization and Management Meetings in Toronto, May 11-12, 1977 (DOM AG) Submitted by Greg Morrison, Carleton University Members Present Canada Greg Morrison, Ch, Carleton University Clement K. M. Chan, McMaster University Janet Chan, University of Toronto Rachel Des Rosiers, Data Clearing House for the Social Sciences Robert Logan, University of Guelph Paula Mitchell, University of Western Ontario Richard L. Schnaar, Public Archives of Canada, Ottawa Terry Stewart, University of Waterloo Richard Wolfe, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education United States Bill Gammell , Ch, University of Connecticut Barbara Aldrich, University of Wisconsin Gary M. Grandon, University of Connecticut Pnina Grindberg, Columbia University Sheldon Laube, C. M. Leinwond Associates Barbara Noble, University of Illinois Sharon Poss, Duke University Richard Roistacher, University of Illinois Phil Sidel, University of Pittsburgh During the Toronto sessions, members of the Data Organization and Management Group engaged in a reassessment of how various sorts of activities might best be carried out. It was felt that some kinds of projects will have to be done essen- tially by individuals or small sub-groups, in accordance with their particular areas of interest and expertise. Draft documents, papers, proposals and the like will then be sent to the co-ordinators of the Group, who will circulate them to Group members for reactions and comments. After a review of possibilities, var- ious activities were taken on by individual members. 15. sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 (a) The most important activity of the Group during the next year will be the writing of sections of the Guide to Providing Social Science Data Services . In consultation with a member of the Data Archive Development Action Group, eleven people agreed to draft material, and another two volunteered as sub-editors. (b) The development of a list of recommendations, addressed to potential re- searchers and data collectors, concerning study design as it relates to data man- agement (the "Do's and Don'ts List"), first considered during the Group's sessions in Florida, has now been assigned to Rachel Des Rosiers and Terry Stewart. (c) The proposal for an Inventory of Software relating to data management, also initiated in Florida, has been rather drastically revised, in view of the existence of other groups outside lASSIST who are reviewing social science soft- ware, the need for clearer definition of what kinds of functions and programs ought to be included, and the formidable amounts of time, energy and other re- sources required for a comprehensive job. It seemed wiser to adopt an incremen- tal approach and start with two clearly delineated projects: a survey of the pro- grams used at one institution (Columbia University), to be undertaken by Pnina Grinberg as a pilot study; and an investigation of methods and available programs for cleaning multi punched data, to be done by Bill Gammell, Gary Grandon and Greg Morrison. Other such narrowly-focused efforts may be undertaken in the future. (d) The Group felt it would be useful to gather information about the areas of technical expertise of the members of lASSIST, and to organize and publish the results. The aim would be to facilitate the use of the lASSIST membership as re- source people or consultants for each other on technical problems. As a by-prod- uct, a profile of the members could be produced. The best procedure for obtain- ing the required information is under discussion. Gary Grandon and Sheldon Laube will be carrying out this activity. (e) Another area of interest is the holding of workshops. Sheldon Laube will consider possibilities for organizing workshops at future lASSIST meetings, while Bill Gammell will investigate possibilities for regional workshops. (f) Consideration of the Inventory brought home to the Group the importance of establishing communication with other organizations working on related problems. The co-ordinators. Bill Gammell and Greg Morrison, v/ill conduct these external re- lations. In addition to the above projects, for which individuals have taken on respon- sibility, two other issues were discussed. The first was the problem of informa- tion dissemination and exchange, crucial in the area of data organization and man- agement, where relevant literature appears in a very wide range of publication from many different disciplines. We feel that this problem is particularly amenable to action by all lASSIST members, whether or not they are affiliated with the AG. We urge lASSIST members to send the co-ordinators of the Data Organization and Manage- ment Action Group and/or the Editor of the lASSIST Newsletter relevant bibliographi- cal references to any material which relates to data handling, broadly defined. These references could be to published articles or unpublished papers, to books, technical reports, computer programs, items in newsletters, and so on. The refer- ence should include a standard bibliographical citation, information on where to obtain the item if not found in readily available sources, and preferably an anno- tation or abstract. This information will then appear in the Book Notices section of the Newsletter . Also welcome would be short technical notes, resumes of proce- dures, documents, etc.; these ought to be sent to the co-ordinators for scrutiny and possible publication in the Newsletter . Ji^sist NEWSLETTER vol. 1, no. 3 The second general issue discussed was that of lASSIST endorsements. While the Group could see the value of lASSIST lending its support to projects in prog- ress, it was not clear whether or not this should come as an official action and if so what process should be followed in determining what to endorse. A distinc- tion was drawn between endorsements of good practices and endorsements of particu- lar products; the latter possibility raises questions which might be considered by other Action Groups or by the Steering Committee. Short, however, of formal en- dorsements, members can provide feedback for the originators of projects, and en- gage in lobbying activities on an individual basis on its behalf. DATA ACQUISITION Canada- Pierre Lacasse, Centre de recherches en amenagement regional, Universite de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec Europe- Marcia Taylor, Social Science Research Council Survey Archive, Univer- sity of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, P.O. Box 23, Colchester, Essex, England I C04 3S0 United States- [No report submitted.] DATA DOCUMENTATION Canada- Dave L. Salley, Management and Central Services Group, Standards Division, Statistics Canada, Tunney's Pasture, Ottawa, Ontario KIA 0T6 Europe- Cees Middendorp, Steinmetzarchief , Kleine-Gartmanplantsoen 10, Amsterdam-C. Netherlands United States- John Grasso, Office of Research and Development, Center for Appalachian Studies and Development, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506 [No report submitted.]