Administrative Notes

Newsletter of the Federal Depository Library Program

Vol. 22, no. 13 GP 3.16/3-2:22/ 13 September 10, 2001

Summary, Spring 2001Depository Library Council Meeting

San Antonio, TX

April 1-4, 2001

Sunday, April 1, 2001, Council Working Session, 7:30 p.m.

Council Members Present

Charlene C. Cain, Louisiana State University; Maggie Farrell (Chair), Montana State University–

Bozeman; Linda Fredericks, King County Library System, Bellevue, WA; Cathy Nelson 

Hartman, University of North Texas Libraries; Sharon A. Hogan, University of Illinois at 

Chicago; Dena Hutto, Reed College, Portland, OR; Paula Kaczmarek, Detroit Public Library; 

Donna Koepp, University of Kansas; Greta E. Marlatt, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, 

CA; Mary Redmond (Secretary), New York State Library; Andrea Sevetson, University of 

California, Berkeley; John A. Stevenson, University of Delaware Library; Dr. Fred B. Wood, 

National Library of Medicine

Robert A. Hinton, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, was excused.

Remarks by Francis J. Buckley, Jr., Superintendent of Documents

Superintendent of Documents Francis Buckley was the first speaker. He reported that GPO is 

continuing its day to day operations while awaiting the transition to a new administration. When 

a new Public Printer is appointed, current Public Printer Michael DiMario and Buckley will be 

expected to resign.

In Congress, members have not been appointed to the Joint Committee on Printing. The 

Appropriations Committee will address GPO’s budget request next month. The General 

Accounting Office (GAO) is about to issue its report on the transfer of the Superintendent of 

Documents to the Library of Congress (LC); the National Commission on Libraries and 

Information Science (NCLIS) has issued the second volume (legislative proposals) of its study 

on government information. GPO is keeping a close eye on the appointments to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

2

The NCLIS report has been sent to the President and to Congress. At OMB’s direction, the 

report includes a disclaimer that this is not an official administration-endorsed proposal. GPO 

will ride the appropriation and have paper copies of the report sent to depository libraries. At 

this point, GPO does not know how many of the study’s proposals will be adopted by 

Congressional committees.

The Public Printer has responded to the first version of the GAO report. He and his staff have 

also relayed to GAO 109 points they think need to be corrected, and are awaiting GAO’s 

response.

GPO believes that the GAO study does not show what benefits there may be, either to the public 

or for internal administration, of transferring the Superintendent of Documents to LC. The

Library of Congress also mentioned the lack of a cost benefit analysis and the reliance on old 

data.

The Library of Congress requested that any implementation of the recommendations be delayed 

until after LC completes the planning process for development of a master plan for digital 

information preservation. But they are confident they can take on this responsibility if required 

to do so (with additional appropriations).

Buckley said that GPO is continuing to work with LC on the strategic plan, as well as on 

FirstGov TM and operational activities. He is looking forward at this session to focusing on 

operational issues since nothing concrete has happened yet. GPO wants to see how the studies 

are used before reacting to them.

Chair Maggie Farrell told Council that their job is to listen to depository librarians with respect 

to what GPO should do in light of the issues (especially electronic issues). Members should 

circulate, attend the coffees, and meet new people during the lunch breaks.

Committee Reports

Preservation Committee. Donna Koepp reported that this committee took responsibility for 

Recommendation 4 from last fall. Members of the working group were chosen after the fall 

conference and met at ALA Midwinter. Members decided to look at existing preservation 

models.

GPO has incorporated a further charge in their response to Recommendation 4. They have asked 

Council to look at the recent upsurge in activity with special attention to local and consortial 

projects to digitize older information. The Preservation Committee will do that and will report at 

this meeting.

Operations Committee. Linda Fredericks said that not much had happened (in terms of 

committee issues) since the completion of the Superintendent of Documents statement on 

“Dissemination/Distribution Policy for the FDLP” (SOD 71). There is no other pending business 

from the last meeting.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

3

The committee activity at this meeting depends on what comes along. Possibilities include the 

basic collection revision, askLPS, and the Biennial Survey. There might also be audience 

concerns about the physical condition of items arriving in depository shipments.

Cataloging and Locator Committee. Dena Hutto reported that there are three issues on their list: 

1) discussion of GPO cataloging priorities as outlined in the GPO response to last fall’s 

Recommendation Number 1, 2) the possibility of cataloging partnerships between GPO and 

other institutions, and 3) PURLs on GPO Access for hearings. Maggie Farrell suggested that 

Council also talk to GPO about what the depository community wants to see in the projected 

GPO Integrated Library System.

Information Exchange/Communications Committee. Sharon Hogan said that the Public Printer 

had asked for a letter on what the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) should look like 

in the future. The committee will write the letter to the new Public Printer. The letter will be 

held until the new Public Printer is appointed.

Working Group Reports

Costs/Value of a Depository Collection Working Group. Mary Redmond posted a message to 

GOVDOC-L with various sources in January. She now has some updated information. If 

Council approves, she will get this information to GPO to post to the Council Web site.

E-Competencies Working Group. Charlene Cain reported for Working Group Chair Robert 

Hinton. At issue is whether the working group should continue to work on the issue or let the 

American Library Association Government Documents Round Table (ALA/GODORT) and 

others do it. She advocates an open forum at the fall 2001 Council session to see if the 

discussion can generate input for the structure of guidelines.

GODORT Chair Ann Miller pointed out that ALA round tables cannot promulgate guidelines. If 

Council can come up with guidelines, GODORT could have programs on the subject.

Existing guidelines, e.g., by the American Association of Law Libraries, are very general. It is 

hoped that Council guidelines would be useful for letting library directors know what kind of 

training needs to be provided.

Sharon Hogan chairs the ALA Task Force on Core Competencies. There is a general core set 

(seven items), a kind of “umbrella.” The ALA divisions have more specific guidelines. Maybe 

there can be general competencies for government documents which are somewhat, but not 

excessively, specific.

There is still uncertainty if this is a topic appropriate for an advisory group to GPO. The issue 

will come up again on Monday afternoon during working group meetings.

Other Reports

Permanent Public Access. John Stevenson said that November 2 was the date of the last 

Permanent Public Access (PPA) Working Group meeting hosted by GPO. The summary of that 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

4

meeting is not yet available on the GPO Web site. He hopes that GPO will continue to moderate 

and assure PPA.

Council Manual. Paula Kaczmarek has new materials. The manual will be ready before the 

newly appointed members begin their terms. Andrea Sevetson suggested that an updated list of 

recommendations and commendations be added after every conference to help avoid repetition 

of recommendations.

GPO Access. Council will see what happens on this topic on April 2. Some issues might be 

response time and speed of transmission.

Fall 2000 Recommendations and Responses

The Group reviewed GPO responses to the Fall Recommendations.

The Preservation Committee will work on the additional charge that GPO has added in its 

response to Recommendation 4 (digitization of older materials). GPO’s Gil Baldwin says that 

George Barnum (also of GPO) is ready to work on it when Council is ready.

Charlene Cain asked about the official status of online bills and the security afforded by public 

key infrastructure (PKI) technology. T.C. Evans will discuss the subject at tomorrow’s session. 

Cain is concerned about the possibility that judges will still require a paper document.

Maggie Farrell commented that she is glad that Council is working with GPO on solutions. She 

added that this is the fastest that Council has ever reviewed recommendations and responses. 

Paula Kaczmarek said that the work had already started at the last meeting.

Council adjourned at 9:00 p.m.

Monday, April 2, 2001, 8:30 a.m. Plenary Session

Council Members Present

Charlene C. Cain, Maggie Farrell, Linda Fredericks, Cathy Nelson Hartman, Sharon A. Hogan, 

Dena Hutto, Paula Kaczmarek, Donna Koepp, Greta E. Marlatt, Mary Redmond, Andrea 

Sevetson, John A. Stevenson, Dr. Fred B. Wood

Opening Remarks

Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief of Depository Services at GPO, welcomed a record-setting 

number for a Council session outside of Washington, D.C. She gave introductory remarks and 

outlined logistical details for the next three days.

Maggie Farrell, Council Chair, called the meeting to order. She asked Council and GPO staff to 

introduce themselves to the audience.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

5

Farrell said that the emphasis at this meeting will be on operational issues, especially how the 

transition in Congress will affect GPO. Council wants to lay the foundation for a strong 

relationship with the new Public Printer. There will be opportunities for the audience to observe, 

talk, and give suggestions to Council.

Charlene Cain gave a summary of Council’s Sunday night working session.

Remarks by Francis J. Buckley, Jr., Superintendent of Documents

[See Administrative Notes, v. 22, #7, 5/1/01]

Remarks by Gil Baldwin, Director, Library Programs Service

[See Administrative Notes, v. 22, #7, 5/1/01]

Remarks by T.C. Evans, Director, Office of Electronic Information Dissemination Services 

(EIDS)

[See Administrative Notes, v. 22, #7, 5/1/01]

FDLP Electronic Collection Update: George D. Barnum, Electronic Collection Manager

[See Administrative Notes, v. 22, #7, 5/1/01]

Questions from Council:

Charlene Cain asked George Barnum to elaborate on the statement that some information is 

disappearing from the Internet but it is not an everyday occurrence.

Barnum replied that link checking is a very “person centered” operation. It shows only that a 

link has been broken, not why. Staff are not finding an overwhelming number of irreparably 

broken links.

Sometimes links “fix themselves” or need only minor changes to redirect a URL. Not 

surprisingly, serials are the hardest to figure out.

Cathy Hartman asked T.C. Evans about the public key infrastructure. Is it only for legal 

resources or for all resources?

Evans said that the hope is to extend it to all GPO online resources. The first projects will be 

submission of notices for the Federal Register and Congressional bills.

Fred Wood asked Evans about referrals to GPO Access from the Library of Congress and other 

Congressional sites, and if these figures account for more referrals than FirstGov TM.

Evans responded that there are sizable referrals from THOMAS, House and Senate sites, and 

more and more from Congressional committees (for example, there were 12 thousand referrals 

from one committee in a month). Congressional referrals are far more numerous than those from 

FirstGov TM.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

6

John Stevenson asked George Barnum if URLs from the Catalog of U.S. Government 

Publications (CGP) are link checked.

Barnum said no; that is why GPO wants to get them rounded up and archived.

Tad Downing, GPO, added that people report broken links and GPO brings resources under 

PURLs. This is going well.

Audience Questions

Duncan Aldrich, University of Nevada at Reno, asked if GPO is thinking of partnering with 

FirstGov TM or Google TM Uncle Sam to replace the former Pathway Indexer.

Francis Buckley responded that GPO is anticipating working more with FirstGov TM staff. The 

initial FirstGov TM publicity presented it as if it were the only service for people to use; now 

there is more interest in cooperation. Buckley sees FirstGov TM as a complement to GPO 

services to replace the Pathway Indexer.

T.C. Evans mentioned four things; 1) he and Gil Baldwin have discussed Pathway Indexes; 

exciting things are happening and FirstGov TM is one; 2) products are being “Akamaized”, 

expanding the routing of GPO Access files previously only accessible by direct connection to 

GPO-centralized servers; 3) people are comfortable with whatever they use; some of these are 

getting better; 4) some paid ads are masquerading as hits and inflate the figures returned by 

commercial search engines.

Ann Miller, ALA/GODORT Chair, mentioned that there is a small subgroup of GODORT’s 

Government Information Technology (GITCO) Committee to advise FirstGov TM. The subgroup 

is chaired by John Hernandez (New York University) and would be happy to hear from Council.

Sharon Partridge, Jefferson County Public Library (Colorado), said that there seems to be a large 

discrepancy between the pre-PURLs (2500), URLs (2000), and the total number of 100,000. 

George Barnum will investigate; perhaps some are covered in other agreements and/or are serial 

issues.

Nan Myers, Wichita State University, asked about possible eventual additional products from 

OCLC, especially for assistance with discovery. Do GPO and OCLC have a timeframe? Also, 

will OCLC give an assurance that there will be free Permanent Public Access?

George Barnum said there is that assurance, and added that GPO would not enter into an 

agreement without a provision for free access. OCLC will be seeking other partners. They need 

to make sure that this product is marketable to other OCLC members in case of the very remote 

possibility that the product won’t meet GPO’s needs. The project is divided into three parts: 1) 

initial (basic CORC functions “plus”) in July 2001, 2) function specifically related to the OCLC 

archive (October 2001-January 2002), and 3) “everything else”, including discovery (early 

2002).
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

7

Council member Andrea Sevetson had a comment for Barnum. She pointed out that the OCLC 

archive will be free to the public but not free to GPO. There might also be other public access 

through channels that are not free. She also mentioned the field work on a list of serials by 

agencies with time periods of retention on the issuing agencies’ Web sites. The short “life” of 

serials (in some cases only three to six months) brought home the need to archive.

Barnum said that GPO is still in contact with Paul Arrigo (Washburn University) who did that 

project.

Julia Wallace, University of Minnesota, suggested that the discrepancy in the PURL figures 

mentioned by Barnum might be explained by documents in multiple formats. The smaller 

figures might be documents in electronic formats only. She also asked if there is something that 

we can do as a group or through consortia to leverage the money going to the Library of 

Congress and participate in efforts.

Francis Buckley said that GPO has expressed to LC and the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA) the role that GPO can play in archiving of, and access to, government 

records. GPO can be a NARA affiliate for these records.

Council member Donna Koepp added that the Cartographic Users Advisory Council (CUAC) 

has talked to the Library of Congress Geography and Map Division about CUAC’s interest in 

preserving spatial and demographic data.

Lily Wai, University of Idaho, wondered if LC will be offering grants (similar to the National 

Science Foundation grant program) so that interested institutions can apply to participate.

Buckley answered that the emphasis of the legislative charge to LC is on projects in cooperation 

with other entities. LC has to raise $75 million in non-federal funds. He thinks that LC will be 

coming up with projects to get those funds.

Wai commented that this project seems like a good opportunity for the Federal Depository 

Library Program (FDLP) community to participate. Buckley says LC has to plan the project 

before dealing with the details of fund expenditures.

Barbara Levergood, University of North Carolina, commented that the “discovery” issue is 

fundamental in the process. Everything depends on this; information will be fugitive if not 

discovered. She asked what plans are in place regarding this issue.

Tad Downing, GPO, explained that GPO is working on improving the discovery percentage. 

LPS is cross training Cataloging Branch librarians in discovery, classifying, cataloging, PURLs, 

and archiving for things already in the program. They hope to expand this to more people. 

Discovery is a huge workload but does require a one-on-one partnership. Former Council 

member Diane Eidelman has organized a group of librarian volunteers to identify online 

documents for inclusion in the FDLP. The volunteers will evaluate titles and determine if there 

are records in OCLC for some format of the titles before submitting lists to the Cataloging 

Branch for inclusion in the FDLP.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

8

Sharon Partridge, Jefferson County Public Library, thanked Julia Wallace for the suggestion 

about the URL discrepancies and thinks that this accounts for the vast majority of “missing” 

electronic documents. She also requested that GPO’s Library Programs Service (LPS) prepare a 

list of questions to “askLPS” that have not yet been answered to avoid submission of duplicate 

questions.

Gil Baldwin said that GPO is checking Helpdesk software for use with “askLPS.” He also asked 

that questions not be sent to individuals in LPS but rather through “askLPS.” With a new 

system, we might be able to get answers ourselves and not have to ask GPO to search internally.

Duncan Aldrich, University of Nevada at Reno, asked who the GPO contact person is for 

libraries interested in volunteering for partnerships, and if GPO is actively soliciting for new 

potential partners (libraries and agencies).

George Barnum (gbarnum@gpo.gov) is the contact person. Currently there are more libraries 

with an interest and ideas than there are agencies.

Council member Fred Wood asked Francis Buckley about OMB efforts to update and revise 

OMB Circular A-130.

Buckley replied that OMB staff will be looking at OMB A-130, section 108 within the next 12-

18 months. There will be an opportunity for public comments. The Paperwork Reduction Act 

(PRA) reauthorization requirement is also coming up. GPO is also watching with interest the 

developments in the nomination of John Graham to the OIRA within OMB.

Fred Wood followed up by mentioning that the depository library community has been an 

important player in past OMB A-130 efforts. He hopes the community will track upcoming 

events closely and avail themselves of the opportunity to be heard.

Council Chair Maggie Farrell outlined the agenda for the afternoon Council session.

The morning session recessed at 12:00 noon.

Monday, April 2, 2001, 2:00 p.m. Plenary Session

Continuation of Morning Plenary Session Question and Answer Period

Council member Charlene Cain asked T.C. Evans if the PKI (public key infrastructure) 

technology security will prevent hacking.

Evans replied that it is secure from the user side, i.e., once installed, the downloaded reader will 

know if anything has been changed from the original version. In response to Cain’s question, 

Evans stated that it will not be possible for a hacker to make the reader say that every file is 

corrupted.

Council member Andrea Sevetson asked if people who have not downloaded the free reader onto 

their machines will be able to access the files.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

9

Evans responded that they will be able to access the files but will not have the security aspects.

Council member Cathy Hartman asked if documents with multiple file types, e.g., HTML, etc., 

will all be accepted. The answer is yes.

Stevenson mentioned that not all versions of Congressional hearings on the GPO server are the 

same. Because the text file versions of hearings generally lack any content presented to the 

committee in non-electronic formats, he asked about what is considered the official version.

T.C. Evans said that the testimony for hearings is submitted in many different formats and not 

always electronically. This is different from other GPO Access materials. GPO is working with 

committees and publishers to assure accuracy.

Cathy Hartman noted that Congressional bills and Federal Register notices have been selected as 

the first materials for this technology. She asked if GPO would like depository library input on 

what the libraries would like for priorities.

Evans said that GPO always welcomes input. GPO has to start now to meet the Congressional 

deadline of 2003 so they are going ahead with the first two applications.

At this point the members of Council left to begin their 2:15 working session.

Monday, April 2, 2001, 2:15 p.m. Council Working Session

Election of Secretary

Cathy Hartman nominated, and Charlene Cain seconded, Greta Marlatt for Council Secretary for 

the 2001/2002 term. Marlatt was elected by acclamation.

Discussion of Preservation Models

George Barnum, GPO, gave an overview of LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe) out of 

Stanford University. It is a Linux-based system focusing on journal articles. There is a central 

point and other cooperating libraries with copies.

After intake, copies of articles are distributed to caches at each remote site. All the caches check 

against each other and the original site. Caches can “overwrite” others if the content is different, 

e.g., if Cache Number 7 of 10 is different, the other 9 can overwrite. There have to be controls 

so that the other 9 can’t “overtake” the publishing sites (this is more of a problem when the 

publishing site disappears). Barnum thinks the best possibility for LOCKSS is in serials for 

materials not already covered by GPO Access.

Another model discussed is a project to preserve Texas state electronic documents. The Texas 

State Library and Archives Commission (TSLAC) and two state depository libraries have a $1 

million grant to capture electronic Texas documents, preserve them, and make them available to 

the public. The issuing state agencies now enter Dublin Core elements for their electronic 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

10

documents into a database, and a system will then harvest the documents for preservation and 

permanent public access.

The State Library examines the documents and provides archival access, not directly to the 

public, but through participating libraries. The records are available to all depository libraries.

The TSLAC examines the documents for authenticity, adds preservation and access metadata, 

provides archival storage, and distributes the documents to the two depository libraries. Free 

public access is offered through the depository libraries. MARC records for all the documents 

are available to all Texas depository libraries.

Council’s Preservation Committee is looking at a number of models to address the six issues 

identified for study in Recommendation #4 from fall 2000. They will use the information to 

create a model to meet GPO goals. Preservation Committee Chair Donna Koepp will check to 

be sure that all issues are covered. The real issue in all of this is authenticity.

Committee and Working Group Reports

Committees and Working Groups met throughout the afternoon. Chairs reported back to the full 

Council. They continued to discuss the issues laid out during the Sunday night Council working 

session (see minutes of Sunday, April 1 for details).

Adjournment

Council adjourned at 5:00 p.m.

Tuesday, April 3, 2001, 8:15 a.m. Plenary Session

Local Strategies for Ongoing Access to Electronic U.S. Government Information: Possible 

Solutions

George Barnum, GPO, introduced the next three speakers. Each discussed local solutions for 

making electronic government information available. Their experiences might serve as models 

for electronic transition.

University of Colorado Electronic Reading Room

Tim Byrne, Head of Government Publications at the University of Colorado, described his 

institution’s program for providing ongoing electronic access to information about the Rocky 

Flats Nuclear Weapons Facility near Denver. This was accomplished by means of a 120 

gigabyte Snap! server for network storage. Almost 300 reports in over 750 files have been made 

accessible. Byrne et al. are exploring future projects, including publications from Colorado State 

government, the Rocky Mountain Arsenal, and other Colorado Superfund sites.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

11

Oregon State University: Redisseminating Government Data on the World Wide Web

Carrie Ottow, Government Publications Librarian at Oregon State University (OSU), talked 

about the OSU Government Information Sharing Project. According to the Project’s web site, 

the “original goal of the Project was to demonstrate improved access to electronic government 

information, especially for remote users (such as rural Oregon residents) and the general public. 

Beginning in 1995, the Project developed World Wide Web access to a variety of Federal 

statistical information issued on CD-ROM and distributed through the Federal Depository 

Library Program.” <http://govinfo.kerr.orst.edu/aboutus.html>. Contents include information 

from the 1990 Census and other sources. Additional information about the history and 

technology of the project is available in D-Lib, The Magazine of Digital Library Research, May 

1996.

Indiana University Floppy Disk Project

Louise Malcomb, Head of the Government Publications Department at Indiana University 

(Bloomington), shared information about the Center for Instructional Cooperation (CIC) 

Government Publications Task Force Floppy Disk Project (FDP). The Project web site 

<www.indiana.edu/~libgpd/mforms/floppy/floppy.html> says that the Project “is designed to 

provide a central location through which Federal Data, made available on floppy diskettes, can 

be located and downloaded... FDP enables libraries to either fill in gaps to their collections, or 

provide immediate access point for patrons... the collection represents over 200 entries... A 

search will retrieve a title list from which individual titles can be ‘clicked’ and down-loaded.” 

For more information, see the Project web site URL cited above.

Remarks by the Public Printer

Michael DiMario started by saying that he is a “holdover” awaiting word from the White House. 

According to an agreement between the White House and the new President’s transition team, 

agencies headed by a statutory appointee can keep at least one such appointee until a new 

appointee is nominated, confirmed, and appointed. DiMario has no idea of the timeframe.

Meanwhile, GPO will continue its work, consistent with Congressional mandates to reduce 

agency size and to move to a more electronic depository program.

Thirty-two million publications a month are downloaded from the GPO website. This is part of a 

successful partnership with the Federal Depository Library Program community. Both GPO and 

depository libraries have used the partnership for the country’s betterment.

GPO has lost $1.9 million in the program, including cataloging and indexing. There has been a 

7% loss from the previous year and a 13% decrease in total funding over the last five years.

DiMario expects the downward funding trend to continue. The President has asked for a 4% 

across the board reduction, while Congressional committees want to increase their budgets by 

11%. This will probably continue to squeeze GPO. GPO has asked for an increase in the 

forthcoming budget but the President’s budget is embargoed until April 5.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

12

Elsewhere in GPO, the sales program is losing money (more than $1 million per month) although 

the agency as a whole came in the black last year by a very small margin. DiMario has put 

together a letter with his comments on the General Accounting Office (GAO) report on planning 

for the transfer of the Superintendent of Documents to the Library of Congress; he understands 

that his letter will be printed in the report.

On another issue, the House of Representatives is now receiving direct funding for 

Congressional printing. GPO hopes that the House will choose to continue to use GPO to 

produce its publications.

In Congress, matters are complicated by the even split of the Senate. The Joint Committee on 

Printing will be chaired by the Senate this year. Senate representation on the Committee will be 

increased to six; the House will also ask for two more members.

Appropriations hearings will be held in the House in May (no date yet) and in the Senate on May 

10.

DiMario announced the appointment of the following new members to the Depository Library 

Council: Paul Arrigo, Dan Barkley, Barbara Ford, Barbara Levergood, and John Kavaliunas.

The Public Printer ended by thanking staff and member libraries in the FDLP. He also added 

thanks to depository library directors and Council members for their contributions.

NCLIS Assessment of the Federal Government’s Public Information Dissemination Policies 

and Practices: Update

Judith C. Russell, Deputy Director of the National Commission on Libraries and Information 

Science (NCLIS), updated the audience on the status of the NCLIS Comprehensive Assessment 

of Public Information Dissemination Reforms.

NCLIS is an independent advisory agency to the President and Congress on the information 

needs of the American people and how to meet them. The Commission was asked in June 2000 

by the Senate Commerce Committee to conduct a review of broad reforms necessary for Federal 

Government information dissemination practices. The charges included: propose new or revised 

laws, rules, regulations, missions and policies; modernize organizational structures and 

functions; revoke National Technical Information Service (NTIS) self-sufficiency requirement; 

strengthen key components of the Federal information dissemination infrastructure. The 

deadline for the study was January 2001 (extended from December 15, 2000).

Volumes 1 and 2 of the report are in paper (sent to Federal depository libraries) and in electronic 

form. Volumes 3 and 4 are electronic only. Various study documents are on the NCLIS web site 

at <www.nclis.gov/govt/assess/assess.html>.

The report and the legislative proposal represent the opinions and recommendations of the 

Commission in its statutory role as an advisor to the Congress. There was not a consensus of 

stakeholders, and the report is not the position of the current or former Administration. The 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

13

Commission recommendations are not the only way to reform but they are, in its view, the best 

way. The Commission hopes its recommendations will be the basis for meaningful discussion 

that will culminate in reform that benefits all Americans.

Strategic recommendations:

1. Affirm that public information is a strategic national resource, owned by the people, held in 

trust by the government, that should be permanently available to the people except where 

restricted by law.

2. Establish the Public Information Resources Administration (PIRA) in the Executive 

Branch—consolidating NTIS, the Superintendent of Documents and other information 

dissemination responsibilities.

3. Include explicit public information dissemination responsibility in all government 

establishment missions and major programs.

4. Implement an Information Dissemination Budget to ensure funding for dissemination of 

public information resources—establish a Reserve Fund for dissemination of R&D results, 

especially STI.

5. Enact the Public Information Resources Reform Act of 2001 (Appendix 11).

6. Establish the Congressional Information Resources Office (CIRO).

7. Establish the Judicial Information Resources Office (JIRO).

8. Extend key provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act to the Legislative and Judicial 

Branches—comparable to 44 U.S.C. 3506(d) on information dissemination.

Other Recommendations

27. Develop a comprehensive inventory and database of public information resources –National 

Bibliography of Public Information Resources; National Database of Public Information 

Resources.

29. Partner broadly, in and outside government, to ensure permanent public availability of public 

information resources.

30. Identify the public’s most critical unmet requirements for public information resources.

33. Ensure coordination between PIRA and the National Archives and Records Administration 

(NARA)—Lower barriers to agency compliance by making one transfer serve for PIRA and 

NARA.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

14

Next steps include obtaining feedback from stakeholders (inside and outside of government); 

working with the Administration to assist with development of its position; working with 

Congressional Committees to schedule public hearings; identifying congressional champions; 

working with the Judiciary to assist with development of its position; working with the 

Department of Commerce and the Congress on resolution of the NTIS status; and identifying 

relationships among the Government Paperwork Elimination Act (GPEA), the Government 

performance and Results Act (GPRA), E-Government initiatives, Paperwork Reduction Act 

reauthorization, and FirstGov/other portals.

Audience Questions

Penny Kyker, Indiana State University, asked Judith Russell why the Public Information 

Resources Administration is not envisioned in the legislative rather than the executive branch.

Russell replied that there has been tension from having the printing responsibility in the 

legislative branch. The Commission does not see much likelihood that the National Technical 

Information Service (NTIS) will move to the legislative branch, and believes that OMB would 

never approve a proposal that included moving NTIS to GPO.

Council member Fred Wood noted that while centralization is one point, it is also counter to the 

concept of checks and balances.

Russell answered that this proposal is intended to set up a coherent program so that agencies are 

not “pulled” by many different laws. Each agency will have responsibility for information in its 

mission, but there has to be something that pulls everything together.

Bernadine Abbott Hoduski asked if there was any study of the relationship between the national 

libraries’ role in bibliographic control and how they could work better with the Superintendent of 

Documents.

Russell said that there had been discussion with the Library of Congress and other libraries.

Pre-Break Announcements

Prior to the morning break, Council Chair Maggie Farrell thanked the local arrangements 

committee for the Monday evening reception at the San Antonio Public Library. She added that 

Council would be continuing in a working session (open to all) at 10:45 a.m. in another room.

Tuesday, April 3, 2001, 10:45 a.m. Council Working Session

Council reconvened to begin working on recommendations.

Basic Collection Proposal

Council discussed GPO’s Basic Collection Proposal. There was agreement on the currently 

available titles that depositories should select, but there was some uncertainty about the purpose, 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

15

the relationship of this list to the core collection, and the meaning of the phrase “otherwise make 

available” (as in “select or otherwise make available”) for electronic information. There was 

also a suggestion that the list be reviewed regularly.

Cataloging/Preservation Joint Project Concerns

There is interest in the cataloging community in working with GPO to share cataloging with the 

rest of the FDLP community. Rather than copy cataloging things one by one, it would be 

preferable to offer access to whole groups of records.

Further discussion ensued on points including setting up procedures for such cataloging projects, 

moving on to pilot projects in the future, and looking at existing partnerships in ongoing 

electronic access as models for this program.

Council recessed for lunch at 12:00 noon.

Tuesday, April 3, 2001, 2:00 p.m. Council Working Session

Council reconvened for its afternoon working session.

Gil Baldwin, GPO, provided a list of Depository Library Council meeting sites from 1973 to 

2003.

2001 Biennial Survey

GPO has added several new questions to the 2001 Biennial Survey, e.g., Internet filtering.

Because there were so few responses to the optional questions on the 1999 Biennial Survey, 

Council discussed the possibility of recommending their omission in 2001. Council decided to 

recommend that the optional questions be tried one more time to see if the response rate 

improves now that institutions have had an opportunity to plan ahead and keep the appropriate 

statistics.

E-Competencies

Council would like to see a session at the Fall 2001 Depository Library Council on suggested 

baseline proficiencies for public service to government documents electronic resources. 

“Faculty” for this session might include a library science professor, a seasoned documents 

librarian, and a GPO inspector. Such an approach would eliminate the need for Council to come 

up with a program but would facilitate discussion in the depository community.

Judicial Information

Council had an extensive discussion of access to judicial information in electronic form. A draft 

recommendation regarding access to judiciary decisions was proposed but Council decided that 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

16

the recommendation was premature and would consider such a recommendation in the future if 

developments warranted.

Overview of Issues

Council went over the list of issues and worked on draft language for resolutions, 

commendations, and action items. Council adjourned for the evening; members will examine the 

drafts overnight and come prepared to edit the language on Wednesday morning, April 4.

Wednesday, April 4, 2001, 8:30 a.m. Council Working Session

Recommendations, Commendations, and Action Items

Council completed editing of the language; copies will be distributed at the afternoon Plenary 

Session.

Assignments and Deadlines

Council Secretary Mary Redmond will send the draft minutes to members; members will return 

their comments to her by Monday, May 17.

Redmond will also send the information on the cost of replacing a depository library collection 

to GPO by May 1.

Maggie Farrell will send a letter of condolence to the husband of Debbie Ellis, former secretary 

at GPO; Farrell will also send the commendation of former GPO staff member Sheila M. McGarr 

to the editor of Documents to the People (the journal of the American Library Association 

Government Documents Round Table).

Greta Marlatt and Andrea Sevetson will share comments on the “otherwise make available” 

question by June 1.

Committees

The Depository Collection Replacement Cost and the E-Competencies work groups will be 

dissolved.

Cathy Hartman will take over as Chair of the Preservation Committee, incoming Council 

member Barbara Levergood will join the Committee, and Mary Redmond will switch from 

Preservation to Depository Operations.

Incoming Council member Dan Barkley will also join the Depository Operations Committee.

Dena Hutto suggested that non-Council members, including people in technical services 

operations, be added to the Cataloging and Locator Committee.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

17

Fall 2001 Meeting Plans

There was discussion of the logistics of this meeting and plans for the fall 2001 meeting in 

Alexandria, VA. Council feels that a Sunday tour of GPO would be preferable for the new 

members rather than taking them out of the deliberations. The Sunday night dinner is useful for 

preparation. The timing of the San Antonio plenary and work sessions was good.

2:00 p.m. Plenary Session

Introductory Remarks

Council Chair Maggie Farrell thanked GPO staff for all the work on the confe rence. Special 

thanks went to Robin Haun-Mohamed and to Willie Thompson for their work with the hotel. 

Farrell also thanked the speakers and reminded attendees that Haun-Mohamed is looking for 

ideas for topics at the fall 2001 conference. The Chair reiterated the audience's gratitude to the 

San Antonio and Texas librarians for their hospitality at the Monday evening reception and 

throughout the meeting.

Farrell announced the election of Greta Marlatt to serve as Council Secretary for 2001/2002. 

The Chair thanked Mary Redmond for her service as Secretary during 2000/2001.

Recommendations, Commendations, and Action Items 

Council members read their recommendations, commendations, and action items aloud. The 

audience was invited to submit questions or comments.

Audience Questions

Jim Veatch, Library HQ Site Source, mentioned that there has been interest about the proposed 

GPO Integrated Library System (ILS), and wondered if Council had discussed it.

Council member John Stevenson said that Council was monitoring developments and would 

advise GPO where appropriate.

Council member Andrea Sevetson added that there had been a Council resolution on the ILS in 

Spring 1999.

Veatch asked if the next year’s GPO budget request would include an item for the ILS.

Council Chair Maggie Farrell said that Council had not asked for that type of input. GPO has 

asked for Council's help in articulating what should be in the Request for Proposal (RFP) and in 

reviewing specifications. At this point, there is not yet anything for Council to recommend.

Daniel Cornwall, Alaska State Library, expressed concerns about Recommendation #3 and made 

a plea for item-level cataloging. He is concerned that simply pointing to GPO Access is not 

enough. He believes that GPO should catalog down to the item level because customers want 
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

18

immediate results and if they have to go to a finding aid/search engine, depositories will lose 

customers.

Andrea Sevetson said there had been a lot of discussion about what libraries are evaluated on in 

inspections and the meaning of "select or otherwise make available.” Some libraries don't 

catalog government documents; it is hard to come up with a single process that will work for all 

depositories.

Cornwall asked if this recommendation referred just to the basic collection or if it was a 

wholesale project. It is just for the basic collection.

Bernadine Abbott Hoduski asked Council what they had in mind for cooperative cataloging.

Council member and Cataloging/Locator Committee Chair Dena Hutto said that the intention 

was to have libraries share their work on projects with other libraries. Council would like to see 

if it would be possible and worthwhile for GPO to distribute cataloging records created by 

partner libraries. Hoduski asked whether records created by partner libraries would be 

distributed as part of GPO’s regular cataloging record output or distributed separately. Hutto 

responded that while Council had discussed inclusion in regular record distribution, separate 

distribution would be another possible option.

In response to Hoduski's question on how long GPO expects it will take to respond, Tad 

Downing answered that GPO hopes to have something for people to consider at the fall Council 

meeting.

Maggie Farrell added that the audience can contact the lead person for each recommendation if 

there are further questions. Council expects to deliver the final recommendation texts to the 

Public Printer in early May.

Closing Remarks from the Superintendent of Documents

Francis Buckley thanked Council members and all participants for the close working 

relationships between GPO and libraries for the benefit of all.

Closing Remarks from the Public Printer

Michael DiMario thanked all for their participation. Council and GPO staff work together to 

formulate the way the FDLP operates as a vital service to the American public. He hopes the 

program continues to survive and that the funders listen to the voices advocating for funding.

There might be more efforts to cut funds. Depository librarians and their customers might be 

called upon to defend the program.

DiMario presented certificates of thanks to the outgoing Council members: Fred Wood, Donna 

Koepp, Paula Kaczmarek, and Maggie Farrell. He gave a special thanks to Farrell for her 

leadership, wisdom, and sage advice as Chair of Council.
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

19

Farrell responded that it has been a pleasure to serve on Council. The relationship between 

Council members and GPO staff is built on trust and on work as equal partners in serving the 

American public.

Transition to New Leadership

Maggie Farrell passed the gavel to incoming Chair Andrea Sevetson.

Status of Committees and Work Groups

Committee chairs identified themselves, the titles of their committees, and committee projects.

Dena Hutto said that the Cataloging/Locator Committee is looking for non-Council members 

with cataloging management/technical services background. They do not have to attend Council 

meetings but can work via e-mail.

Cathy Hartman, Chair of the Preservation Committee, said that there will be more followup 

investigation on models for distribution of government publications. People who are interested 

in this topic should let Hartman know.

Sharon Hogan said that the Information Communications Committee will monitor activities and 

will lead if GPO asks for comments on the GAO report.

Linda Fredericks, Depository Operations Committee Chair, explained that her committee 

monitors GOVDOC-L between meetings. Issues also come to the committee from GPO staff.

She invited the audience to inform her of any concerns they wish to have addressed.

Two work groups are being dissolved. The E-Competencies Work Group will work on a session 

for the fall conference on proficiencies. The Work Group on the Replacement Cost of Federal 

Document Depository Collections will get its report to GPO for inclusion on the Council 

website.

Final Audience Remarks

Bernadine Abbot Hoduski thanked the Public Printer and the Superintendent of Documents for 

their commitment to open meetings and the inclusion of educational sessions. It is unusual for a 

Public Printer to attend so many Council meetings. It has been many years since there has been 

such a close relationship between GPO management and Council.

Jim Veatch, Library HQ Site Source, thanked Council and GPO on behalf of the audience.

The session adjourned at 3:00 p.m.

Mary Redmond, Council Secretary
AN-v22-#13-9/10/01

20

Table of Contents

Summary, 2001 Spring Council Meeting ......................................................................................1

Administrative Notes is published in Washington, DC by the Superintendent of Documents, Library 

Programs Service, Government Printing Office, for the staffs of U.S. Federal Depository Libraries.

It is published on the 15th day of each month; some months have additional issues. Postmaster send 

address changes to: The Editor, Administrative Notes

U.S. Government Printing Office

Library Programs Service, SLLD

Washington, DC 20401

Internet access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/adnotes/index.html

Editor: Marian W. MacGilvray (202) 512-1119 mmacgilvray@gpo.gov