The EPD currently has around 206 sites listed as ‘restricted’ (see below, I'll try and get it in a better format). Almost all of these restrictions have been in place for anywhere between 7 to 16 years. The EPD protocol states that restrictions on data expire after 3 years unless the contributor expressly requests an extension to the restriction (renewable every 3 years). The protocol also states that the contributor should be reminded just before the 3 year term expires. As far as I know this reminder process has not been taking place, and therefore data has remained restricted even though the contributor may now wish for it to be unrestricted.

I would therefore like to propose the following:

1. All contact details for data contributors holding restricted data should be checked and these details updated if necessary. I suggest asking the relevant country representatives to do this.

2. Contributors of restricted data should be contacted by email and reminded that the 3 year term has expired (in almost all cases, many years ago). Contributors should be reminded of their right to extend this for a further 3 years. A no-reply would elicit a further reminder after 4 weeks, followed by a further 4 week period, and then finally the data would be made unrestricted by the database manager by default. You may want to argue that the default should be to keep it restricted when there is no reply.

3. I would also propose a slight rewording of the protocol to remove current ambiguities so we don’t have this problem in future. At present the data defaults to unrestricted after 3 years, but contributors also expect to be contacted with a reminder before this happens. I suggest we keep this default, but put the obligation on contributors to keep their contact details up to date. This would mean the EPD is not responsible if the reminder did not reach the contributor because of a change of address for instance.

4. I also noticed that the original protocol seems to state that all data whether restricted or unrestricted should be included in the database and therefore made public. This means all users can access the restricted data, with the onus on the user to obtain permission to use it. This is not how the EPD operates now or has operated in the past, whereby only the database manager had access to the restricted data, and only unrestricted data is in the public domain. I suggest that the protocol is followed and that the restricted data is made public (with appropriate warnings). This would have the following advantages: a) the user can assess how useful the data is before applying for permission from the contributor b) the data would be subject to the same community-based quality control checks that have been going on with the unrestricted data c) it would create less work for the database manager

5. Could someone post or link a copy of the most upto date protocol on the EPD wiki

..and by the way, you may notice I have a few restricted sites in the list below.

Many thanks,

Basil

Dr Basil Davis ISTE, ARVE Group Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland

I found the following links for EPD protocol details:

Bordeaux 2003 meeting; http://www.cricyt.edu.ar/paleo/epd/epdprotocols.html

Wilhelmshaven 1990 meeting; http://www.chrono.qub.ac.uk/inqua/news7/nl7-jldb.htm