Administrative Notes 

Newsletter of the Federal Depository Library Program

Vol. 20, no. 05 GP 3.16/3-2:20/05 February 25, 1999 

Superintendent of Documents Update 

Remarks by Francis J. Buckley, Jr. 

Superintendent of Documents 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force 

Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 30, 1999 

Introduction 

Good morning. When I first appeared before you last year during the ALA Midwinter meeting 

in New Orleans in my new role as Superintendent of Documents, I said that I was pleased Mr. 

DiMario, the Public Printer, had asked me to be a spokesperson for comprehensive, equitable 

public access to Government information--something I have advocated throughout my library 

career. In the 14 months since my appointment as Superintendent of Documents, I have taken 

that charge to heart. I have spoken to library and information-related conferences, library 

science classes, and various professional association meetings. My most recent trip was to 

Tokyo to address a Symposium at the National Diet Library about our programs for the 

dissemination of Government information. It was a very interesting experience for cross-cultural 

exchange of information and ideas. 

In addition to this travel, I am attempting to work closely with you in the depository community, 

to ensure that the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) will be strong and viable into the 

next century, which is quickly approaching. To manage the program we appointed Gil Baldwin, 

whom many of you know, Director of Library Programs Service (LPS) this past November. Gil 

has been with GPO for over 25 years. I know that he doesn’t always like to be reminded of that 

number. Does a quarter century sound any better? However it is phrased, Gil has done much 

during his years at GPO. He started out indexing the Congressional Record and then moved to 

LPS as a cataloger. He held a number of other staff and management positions within LPS, 

including Cataloging Branch Chief and since 1994 until his recent appointment, he served as 

Chief of the LPS Library Division. 

He was the principal author of the Strategic Plan portion of GPO’s 1996 Study that outlined the 

transition to a more electronic FDLP. Most recently he has been concentrating his efforts on 

permanent access issues. I know you share my sentiments in wishing Gil well in this new phase 

of his GPO life. 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Overview of FDLP’s accomplishments 

Whether we look at this past fiscal year (which ended on September 30) or calendar year 1998, I 

can tell you that overall it was a good year for the depository program. 

In FY ’98, we provided 15.2 million copies of more than 40,000 tangible products (print, 

microfiche, and CD-ROMs) to depository libraries. At the end of calendar year ’98, we provided 

online access through GPO Access to more than 85,000 titles directly on GPO servers and we 

pointed to more than 47,000 titles on agency Web sites, making a total of over 133,000 

publications available. 

And one more statistic to share with you. As of this past Monday, January 25, 1999, there were 

1,352 depository libraries in the program. 

A major initiative in the FDLP has been the development of a policy and planning document, 

Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection, to chart our course in the transition to a more 

electronic depository library program. You’ll be hearing more about our electronic collection 

plan from Gil, who follows me, and tomorrow during the joint meeting of the GODORT 

Cataloging Committee and Federal Documents Task Force. We want to distribute it widely. In 

December the plan was shared with more than 130 individuals in the library/information 

community, including all members of the Depository Library Council to the Public Printer, the 

Inter-Association Working Group, staff and elected representatives of the major library and 

information associations, faculty at a number of graduate schools for library and information 

science, and a wide array of Federal agency officials. We have received some feedback about 

the report and would welcome more. 

We continue to be concerned about the fugitive documents problem. But, with your help, we are 

making inroads. The Depository Administration Branch (DAB) has been very successful in 

obtaining fugitive documents from a number of Executive Branch agencies, including the Civil 

Rights Commission, the Department of Agriculture, and Health and Human Services. Your 

inquiries have helped LPS staff to investigate and then acquire fugitive documents for the FDLP. 

We are pleased with the continued success and popularity of GPO Access. Between October 

1997 and September 1998, searches on GPO Access increased by 21%, while retrievals 

increased by 85%. Currently, the Web site is averaging close to 5 million searches and 10 to 15 

million retrievals per month. TC Evans will be reporting on GPO Access developments 

tomorrow. 

I also want to mention that we are continuing to work on a proposal to create a GPO Learning 

Center. We would like to establish a facility to demonstrate GPO Access and train librarians on 

using it. 

Sales Program 

In FY ’98, the Sales Program handled more than 653,000 orders and sold over 11 million copies 

of publications. Financially it appears that our expenses exceeded revenues, but final year-end 

2 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

adjustments are still being made, so I do not have specific figures. We experienced declining 

sales volumes, changes in buying patterns, reduced number of titles to sell and unanticipated 

charges for special management and financial audits and revised depreciation expenses. 

The inventory of the Document Sales Program consists of over 12,000 products offered in a 

variety of formats such as CD-ROM (over 100 titles), magnetic tapes, microfiche, and videos. 

However, the bulk of the inventory remains ink on paper, although we have been seeing a 

gradual decline in traditional printed products as more Federal agencies place their products on 

their Web sites or publish in other electronic formats. Nonetheless, GPO staff managed nearly 

5.6 million copies of Government information products at a retail value of approximately $66.4 

million in our warehouse in Laurel, Maryland, 24 GPO bookstores, the distribution center in 

Pueblo, Colorado, and some dozen Consigned Sales Agents from other Federal agencies. 

To meet the need to retain certain U.S. Government publications for long-term availability in the 

GPO Sales Program, I have appointed a committee, chaired by former Depository Library 

Council member Peggy Walker, members of the depository community and staff from LPS and 

GPO Sales to help identify appropriate titles and develop guidelines for the program. An initial 

group of titles that will not go out of print has been identified. We are developing a policy 

statement on the “Retention of Government Information Products of Historical Significance in 

the Sales Collection.” For the purpose of such a policy, a Government information product of 

historical significance is one that documents or reflects major historical initiatives or activities of 

lasting importance carried out by the Federal Government, its branches, or its agencies or is one 

of permanent reference value. This may include historical documents or works of historical 

scholarship, legal and regulatory decisions, major statistical compilations, and official reports of 

significant events or occurrences. Government information products retained under this policy 

will meet both current and future needs of customers who wish to purchase their own copies of 

such products at a reasonable price. Products listed as historically significant will be reviewed 

periodically to verify the need for continued retention as sales items. 

I am pleased to report that we are more “aggressive” about getting items into our Sales Program; 

by fashioning new arrangements and examining different ways of doing business with other 

groups, both inside and outside of Government. As an example, we have an agreement with the 

National Technical Information Service to purchase copies of the Federal Tax Products IRS CDROM for the GPO Sales Program. GPO staff has worked with the Central Intelligence Agency 

to ensure that its World Factbook is printed and included in our Sales Program. We have 

reprinted the public domain portions of the North American Industrial Classification System. 

And we have worked with agencies to publish O*NET and the Export Administration 

Regulations (EAR). We buy copies of Environmental Health Perspectives from the contractor 

for Sales. 

I would like to now mention a topic that has been brought before you a number of times in the 

past few years--the implementation of the Integrated Processing System (IPS) in the Sales 

Program. As we were preparing for this conference, the vendor (Northrup Grumman) provided 

us with their new proposed schedule which called for the critical functions of the system to be 

completed next week. All of the software has been delivered and all the modifications we have 

contracted for have been made. Now various bugs and glitches are being fixed. We expect to 

3 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

undertake a complete test of the critical functions of the system in February. The “go live” date 

would then occur after procedures and training are completed, probably mid- to late May. 

Y2K 

The January 11 issue of Federal Computer Week contained its annual “what’s out, what’s in” 

list. For 1999, it notes that Y2K deadlines are out. What’s in? Well, December 31, 1999. Also 

on the “Out and In” list is that “dire predictions of Y2K calamity” are out. That comforted me 

until I saw what was in: “the end of the world.” Well, our predictions are not dire and we do not 

foresee the end of the world for the SuDocs programs. I am pleased to note that in 1998, we 

analyzed all of the legacy mainframe applications and local personal computer (PC) applications 

to determine what steps would be necessary to ensure that the various systems and services are 

Y2K compliant. Much work on the various systems has been completed, including the 

modifications needed to ensure that the Shipping List application was ready for Y2K. 

The software for ACSIS, the Acquisition, Classification and Shipping Information System, has 

been Year 2000 tested and implemented. Twenty-five percent of the DDIS (Depository 

Distribution Information System) software still needs to be renovated, tested and implemented 

before it will be Year 2000 compliant. 

Overall, there are some 41 PCs in LPS that need to be replaced to be ready for Y2K. The 

process of replacing the computers is underway and will be completed well in advance of the 

year 2000. All of the Microsoft Office 97 software on the Windows NT network is Y2K 

compliant. 

We are preparing a transmission to the Joint Committee on Printing to request funding to 

upgrade the lighted bin system to be Y2K compliant. 

I also wanted to mention that IPS has been certified by the vendor, Northrup Grumman, to be 

Y2K compliant. 

Conclusion 

At GPO we all recognize and appreciate the partnership we have with libraries in the provision 

of access to Government information. We have a number of staff here to report on developments 

in our programs and to listen to your ideas and concerns. 

4 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Library Programs Service Update 

Remarks by Gil Baldwin 

Director, Library Programs Service 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force 

Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 30, 1999 

Good morning, everyone! I’m pleased to appear before you today in my new role as Director of 

the Library Programs Service (LPS) and I want thank Mr. DiMario and Mr. Buckley for giving 

me this responsibility. Many of you know that I’ve been part of LPS for many years--not quite 

long enough to have experienced the year 1900 problem, but at least long enough that print to 

electronic is not my first format transition. This is an exciting time to be part of the Federal 

Depository Library Program (FDLP), as we work through the changes that will carry the 

program forward. This morning I want to highlight several developments in LPS, and to lay 

some groundwork for topics that will be covered in the combined Federal Documents and 

Cataloging Committee session tomorrow. I will cover three very inter-related aspects of building 

the FDLP Electronic Collection: incorporating archiving into our processing routines; migrating 

from print media to electronic products; and a new model for partnerships. 

FDLP Electronic Collection 

As many of you know, we have developed and published a policy defining GPO's management 

of the electronic Government information products made available through the FDLP. This 

policy is contained in our paper called Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and 

Planning Document, also known as the Plan, or sometimes as the little red book. I had a few 

copies available at the San Diego fall Council meeting, but since then we’ve published it and 

distributed copies not only to every depository but also to an extensive list of Program 

stakeholders and interested parties. Naturally, it’s on the Web, too, and the URL is in our 

handouts. 

I can’t stress enough how important it is for us and the Program to have gone through this 

process. The Plan is the framework upon which we are beginning the steps to build and manage 

the FDLP Electronic Collection in a real-time working environment. 

Now LPS is engaged in evaluating how some of our earlier efforts to incorporate electronic 

Federal Government information products into the FDLP stack up against the Plan. We are 

looking for opportunities to expand the Collection and integrate functional activities and 

services. Most especially we are test-driving methods of archiving agency information products 

to make good on the commitment to permanent public access. This fall, we reviewed our family 

of cataloging and locator services, initially with an eye toward identifying and reducing possible 

areas of overlap. This process included a variety of people from LPS, joined by staff from the 

5 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Office of Electronic Information Dissemination Services (EIDS). It was a very constructive 

exercise, and we are beginning to apply the policies laid out in the Collection Plan to our 

production environment. Judy Andrews from James Madison University, who is one of our 

Electronic Transition Staff, and Laurie Beyer Hall of LPS, have been leading this effort. Laurie 

will be part of the program tomorrow morning, and she will show you in some detail how we 

envision our “life-cycle” processing. 

In the Plan, the FDLP Electronic Collection is described as having four components. As we 

developed the Plan, several of us felt that the most challenging area of the Collection is what we 

called Category 3. Not to be confused with Area 51, Category 3 includes in the Collection any 

electronic resource that we bring under some type of bibliographic control, whether through full 

cataloging or one of the locator services. We were concerned that expanding the scope of the 

Collection in this fashion, without having some degree of control over the electronic products 

themselves, could lead to difficulties in providing permanent public access to those products. 

The thrust of our internal discussions was how to “elevate” Category 3 products into Categories 

1 or 2, which include products either under the direct control of GPO or one of our program 

partners. Now we’re exploring ways to do that, by incorporating data archiving into our 

processing workflow. Initially we are testing archiving on a GPO server, but we are looking 

toward the day when FDLP electronic products will also be routinely archived at partner sites. 

New Models for Partnerships 

The third leg of the implementation triangle is the emerging new model for partnerships, one in 

which GPO takes a much more active role. To date our content partnerships either involve 

inactive agencies, or they follow the Department of State--University of Illinois Chicago (UIC) 

model. In the State/UIC partnership it’s the agency and the University which are the most active 

partners, while GPO’s role is to act as a guarantor, a safety net for the content in case one of the 

primary partners backs out. As some of you know, we have experienced problems in identifying 

other agencies that are interested in becoming active partners in the State/UIC mold, probably 

because it calls for such proactive participation from the agency. We are now looking for 

partnership opportunities that emphasize an active role for GPO and a depository institution, and 

can accommodate a less active role on the part of the agency, beyond the initial creation of the 

information product. 

What I would envision is a depository library identifying a body of Government information that 

fits that library’s collection development policy, possibly along subject lines. The library or its 

parent institution would agree to commit server space and associated resources to archive 

products from one or more agencies that fit this partnership profile. GPO would locate, evaluate, 

and apply bibliographic control to appropriate electronic products. We would advise the 

publishing agency that their product is being incorporated into the FDLP Electronic Collection, 

and establish a channel for the agency to notify us about significant changes in the product or its 

location. Then we would archive the electronic product, either at the partner site or on a GPO 

server. George Barnum of our Electronic Transition Staff has been working on a model 

agreement along these lines and we hope to have something to test soon. 

6 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

A few weeks ago, George and I did our Electronic Collection presentation for the Federal 

Publishers’ Committee and we’ve gotten a couple of interesting leads out of that. One of these is 

with NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and they’ve got some really 

interesting electronic products that they are interested in finding an archiving partner for. These 

are great products, in subject areas like meteorology, ecosystem management, oceanography, 

marine mammals, and global change. So any of you who might be interested in partnering with 

LPS and NOAA to provide permanent access for this kind of information, please let us know. 

I want to thank George and Judy for their efforts on our Electronic Transition Staff and their 

contributions to LPS. Many of their efforts these past few months reflect LPS' initial realization 

of the policies and plans for the FDLP Electronic Collection. We are now at the point when it’s 

time to get our hands dirty and make permanent access happen. With plans in hand, we’re taking 

the real world steps of the electronic transition. As in any transition period, our work is divided 

between maintaining and enhancing the traditional functions that relate to the management of 

tangible Federal Government information products, and developmental activities. But for the 

moment we’re out of the study phase and onto making permanent access work in a production 

environment. 

I’d like to put in a plug here for joining our Electronic Transition Staff for the 1999-2000 “term.” 

Once again, we’re looking for a couple of people who would like to spend a year in GPO helping 

us with the behind-the-scenes work of the electronic transition. You may have seen my 

announcement on GOVDOC-L last week, and there’s a handout here about the opportunity. So 

don’t be shy – come up and make yourself known. 

Migrating Products from Print to Electronic 

Two years ago we proposed phasing out certain FDLP titles which were distributed in microfiche 

when an official, reliable electronic version was available from the agency. Subsequent 

discussion revealed that the library community felt our proposal was premature. The principal 

reason for concern was our inability to guarantee permanent access to the electronic versions. 

Now that we are moving toward data archiving as part of our workflow, we feel that we are in a 

position to allay those permanent access issues. This is another direct result of implementing the 

FDLP Electronic Collection Plan. Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief of our Depository 

Administration Branch, will cover this in more detail tomorrow, including the criteria we have 

identified for carrying out these product migrations. I want to stress this is not product 

conversion--we are not taking a print product and using technology to produce an electronic 

version. These are cases in which there are official, essentially equivalent, versions in both print 

and electronic media, and we are selecting a version for the FDLP. These decisions are based on 

expected usage, reliability, completeness, and so on, but our decisions must take into account the 

expectation of the Congress that this program will become increasingly electronic in nature. But 

while changing the FDLP dissemination format for existing products is one issue, we also find 

products new to the FDLP, that are available both from the agency Web site and in print. In 

these cases, we will generally bring the electronic version into the program, but we are not 

attempting to secure the print version unless it is of extraordinary value. 

7 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

1999 Biennial Survey

Let me turn now to the 1999 Biennial Survey, which will take place this fall. I appreciate all of 

the effort and interest of the Depository Library Council’s Statistical Measurement Committee 

(SMC) in the Biennial Survey. With their assistance, we believe we have developed a survey 

that meets the needs of LPS and will be beneficial to the depository community as well. 

Following up on the discussions that took place at the San Diego Council meeting, LPS prepared 

a draft survey that is nearly complete. We are in the late stages of completing the Survey design 

and we will circulate a draft to the depository library community this spring, in order to provide 

you with sufficient advance notice about the Biennial Survey. 

 

The purpose of the Biennial Survey is to report on the conditions in the depository libraries. The 

draft survey is based on the questions asked during an on-site inspection and questions posed to 

depositories in the self-study evaluation process. We felt that using these tools as the basis for 

the survey is the best and most consistent way to evaluate the condition of depository libraries. 

Some questions are also asked to provide feedback to inspectors so they may better fulfill their 

advisory role with depository librarians and library directors. The new Biennial Survey will: 

 Enhance our ability to knowledgeably manage the Federal Depository Library Program 

(FDLP); 

 Assist us in carrying out our consultant role with depository librarians and administrators; 

 Allow GPO to report to Congress on the state of the FDLP; and 

 Reduce the reporting burden on individual depository librarians in their variety of 

institutional settings. 

 

While not all of the questions in the draft discussed in San Diego were incorporated, we believe 

that the intended results of those questions can be derived from this revised instrument. Most 

importantly, this survey is answerable by all types of depository libraries with any type of 

organizational configuration. 

Some problems and possible negative ramifications for individual depositories were recognized 

in responding to the cost-related questions. While we agree that those questions should be 

included in the Survey, LPS has placed them in an optional section, to be completed at the 

library’s discretion. This approach should provide LPS with data on the financial contributions 

to the FDLP made by individual depositories, but it will not force any library to divulge financial 

information that the library feels may jeopardize its continued participation in the FDLP. 

FDLP Internet Use Policy Guidelines 

Last fall there was considerable discussion on access issues, particularly with Internet use 

policies and how local library policies relate to the free access requirements of the FDLP. In San 

Diego we presented draft FDLP Internet Use Policy Guidelines. The draft has been reviewed by 

Depository Library Council and our General Counsel, and I’m please to announce that these 

Guidelines have just been published in the January 15 issue of Administrative Notes, and are 

included in our handout package. The new Internet Use Policy Guidelines build upon the 

Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic 

8 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Formats, published last September, and the 1998 Recommended Specifications for Public Access 

Work Stations in Federal Depository Libraries, published last June. 

In general, our position is that all depository libraries must offer the general public free access to 

online Federal Government information provided through the Federal Depository Library 

Program (FDLP). This follows the same principle of free access that governs the use of 

traditional depository materials, as provided in Section 1911 of Title 44, United States Code. 

Depository libraries should have a written access policy that addresses the issues regarding 

obtaining FDLP information on the Internet. One thing articulated in these new Guidelines is 

that all depository libraries are expected to provide access to the products in the FDLP Electronic 

Collection. This of course includes everything on GPO Access.

Access to online Federal Government information provided through the FDLP must be available 

to any library user free of fees or other restrictions, such as age, residency status, or filtering 

software. This is the same principle of free access that governs the use of traditional depository 

materials. I hope that this policy statement will be helpful to you in working through access 

issues in your local setting. 

Many Improvements Made to GPO Access; More to Come 

Remarks by T.C. Evans 

Assistant Director, Office of Electronic Information Dissemination 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force and 

Cataloging Committee, Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 31, 1999 

Introduction 

It is a pleasure to have another opportunity to update the library community on the current and 

future state of GPO Access. Since we last met, a tremendous amount of GPO resources have 

been devoted to improving the products and services of GPO Access. While I am confident that 

you will agree that the results represent a move in the right direction, I am also afraid that you 

will agree that there is much to be done. 

All of the hardworking individuals at GPO who make GPO Access a reality deserve a word of 

public thanks, but so do you. The time and effort put in by documents librarians to provide us 

with the essential feedback necessary to produce a more useful service is deeply appreciated. 

9 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

These efforts are paying off both in terms of utility to our users and attention for the site. GPO 

Access products and services have continued to grow and an increasing number of authoritative 

sites are linking to them. Just this past week, the Dow Jones Business Directory site included a 

review of our congressional applications stating: “This straightforward site will be invaluable for 

librarians, students, journalists and others who want to know who is in Congress and what 

transpired.” 

There are now more than 1,000 official Government databases available on GPO Access. These 

databases contain almost 100 gigabytes of data and the total is growing daily. In addition, 

thousands of other Government information products are accessible through GPO Access. In 

fact, the most recent count showed that over 135,000 electronic titles are available through the 

FDLP Electronic Collection. These titles include all of the products and services available on 

and linked to from GPO Access. 

This total is continuing evidence of the transition to a more electronic FDLP. The number of 

electronic titles has grown by more than 11,000 in the first quarter of fiscal 1999 and will 

continue to expand as more content is added to our servers, additional partnerships are achieved, 

and more titles on other sites are bibliographically controlled and linked from our site.

Usage 

GPO Access usage continues to be high, even though we are still experiencing slow system 

performance and it has been a traditionally slow time of year. While recent system changes have 

prevented us temporarily from capturing exact numbers, we can confidently estimate using the 

data available. Over 250 million documents have been downloaded from GPO Access since it 

began operation in 1994. With an estimated 45 million documents downloaded in the first three 

months of fiscal 1999, approximately 180 million documents should be downloaded this fiscal 

year. 

System performance has not yet reached desired levels because the implementation of our server 

controller array has proven more difficult and time-consuming than anticipated. The size and 

complexity of the GPO Access system presents some difficult challenges to such an 

implementation, but our Production department is working hard to get the job done while still 

providing access to the systems resources. It would be difficult to give you an exact date for 

completion of this effort, but I can assure you that it is receiving the highest possible priority. 

What’s New on GPO Access 

 

There are a number of recent changes to GPO Access that should be noted. The most important 

are: 

 An important new feature has been added to our Congressional Record Index (CRI) 

application. With this feature you can use the available hyperlinks to jump directly to the 

appropriate pages in the Congressional Record instead of having to perform a search. 

Initial user response has been quite favorable, but we would like to get additional 

feedback. 

10 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

 There is a new electronic replacement for the Dictionary of Occupational Titles. It is 

known as O*NET. Working in partnership with O*NET's publishers, the Department of 

Labor’s Employment and Training Administration, the Superintendent of Documents is 

now distributing the full range of O*NET 98 products. The principal product is the CDROM that includes the full range of O*NET products. The full suite of O*NET products 

is also available on GPO Access. Additionally, the O*NET Viewer and Database are 

available individually on diskette. The User's Guide and Data Dictionary are available in 

print. Labor has decided not to produce a printed version of O*NET, which was planned 

and developed as an interactive database rather than a text file. 

All versions are being made available to depositories. Additional information on O*NET 

is available at the GPO Booth (Booth # 2153). 

 Based on a suggestion from some of our Council members (Dr. Fred Wood and Mary 

Alice Baish), links to official Congressional Committee Web sites have been added to our 

congressional pages. 

 A prototype of an interactive GPO Access training CD-ROM has been developed. I 

encourage you to visit the GPO Booth at the Convention Center (Booth # 2153) and take 

the time to field test this prototype and give us your feedback. The evaluation process 

will take about a half-hour, so you can sign up for a time most convenient to you, and you 

will receive a GPO Access Field Tester Certificate after giving us your review. 

The CD was designed to augment our training sessions around the country. EIDS staff 

will still be providing hands-on training sessions at sponsor sites around the country. In 

fact, requests for GPO Access training sessions to be held this year are still being 

considered by LPS. 

 A new and improved list of our available CD-ROM products has been created and copies 

are available at the GPO booth (Booth # 2153).

 New pages were recently made available pulling together links to all of the materials 

from the House and Senate related to the impeachment process. 

 Daily Sales Product Catalog text files and monthly Monthly Catalog text files are now 

available on the Federal Bulletin Board. 

Compressed text files of the Sales Products Catalog or SPC (formerly the PRF, 

Publication Reference File), and compressed text files of the Monthly Catalog (MOCAT) 

in USMARC format are now available on the Federal Bulletin Board. Both files are 

available in the SPCMOCAT directory from: <http://fedbbs.access.gpo.gov>. The 

cumulative Sales Product Catalog text file is updated daily. This file serves as a guide to 

Government information products currently offered for sale by the Superintendent of 

Documents, and is arranged by GPO stock number. The SPC includes citations to 

forthcoming Government information products as well as to titles which have recently 

been superseded or gone out of print. 

11 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

The cumulative Monthly Catalog text file will be posted on the Federal Bulletin Board 

the Monday following the last Saturday of each month. The new file will contain every 

record created, produced, or updated during that month on OCLC by GPO catalogers. 

The data set in each file appears as a continuous stream of unedited USMARC records 

(i.e. no line breaks separating one entry from another), and of records from previous 

months that have been revised and updated that month on OCLC. The records will be 

ordered by OCLC number. 

There are help documents in text and PDF format for the SPC and MOCAT files. The 

GPO Access User Support Team is available to answer questions that concern 

downloading and other technical matters from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, 

Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). You can reach the User Support 

Team via e-mail at gpoaccess@gpo.gov, or by phone at (888) 293-6498. 

 The List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) is now available on GPO Access.

What’s on the Horizon for GPO Access 

As always, work is under way to add more content to GPO Access and to refine access to the 

materials already provided. Some key examples of current efforts are: 

 Export Administration Regulations from the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of 

Export Administration is being added to GPO Access. This new availability will take 

two forms. A browse feature has been released that will enable users to freely download 

any section in ASCII, PDF, or WordPerfect form. A searchable database will soon 

follow. 

 Based on valuable feedback received through focus groups, suggestions, and personal 

contacts, the GPO Access Web Committee is hard at work on a new GPO Access home 

page. This will include some eagerly awaited features such as a site search mechanism, 

quick jumps to key products, and links to new pages created to reflect products available 

on GPO Access grouped into intuitive categories. 

 A new GPO Access user survey is being prepared and details on participation will be 

released through common channels in the near future. 

 Software has been successfully tested that will provide an encrypted secure environment 

to enter payment information through GPO Access when purchasing sales products. This 

new enhancement will be released as soon as the required permissions have been 

received. 

This is but one of the many enhancements being developed for the sales portion of our 

site. Current plans call for this portion of our site to be called the U.S. Government 

Online Bookstore, and a team is looking at a myriad of ways to create a more enjoyable 

and functional means of locating and purchasing Superintendent of Documents sales 

products. 

12 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

 A new CIA World Factbook CD-ROM will be released in late February. 

 A new Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission CD-ROM containing their 

decisions is being prepared. It will be released as a quarterly subscription. 

 And last, but not least, the Budget will be released tomorrow morning in print and on 

GPO Access. The CD-ROM version and the print version of the Economic Report of the 

President will be released on February 4, 1999. 

Once again, I urge you to stop by Booth 2153 and see the changes in GPO Access offerings. We 

will be happy to demonstrate any part of GPO Access. We can also provide you with 

promotional materials on what is available in the Sales Program, and as an added bonus, LPS 

personnel will be available to answer questions related to the Federal Depository Library 

Program. 

LPS Cataloging Policies for Internet Resources: A Review 

Remarks by Thomas A. Downing 

Chief, Cataloging Branch 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force and 

Cataloging Committee, Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 31, 1999 

Good morning. It is a pleasure to be with you to provide a review of our Internet-related 

cataloging policies and a description of how they have evolved. After my presentation, Laurie 

Hall, Program Analyst, Library Programs Service (LPS) will provide you with a summary of 

recent efforts by LPS staff to refine services and establish procedures within the context of 

developing the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) Electronic Collection. 

Recording of URLs

Our initial effort to provide access to Internet-related works published by U.S. Government 

agencies was to record URL-related data in the 530 note field of serial records. Approximately 

four years ago, this effort consisted of transcribing URL data from the pages of paper editions of 

serials to the 530 note field. During this early period, people who were sufficiently savvy could 

type this address in a browser to gain access to works that, unfortunately, were often inconsistent 

with what the records represented. 

13 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

This early form of indirect access could take users to advertisements for sales publications or to 

other inappropriate types of information unrelated to our records. Increasingly, as time passed 

and as the practices of publishers evolved, these URLs led to more relevant resources such as a 

specific issue of a serial or a clickable index or search window that led to a run of issues. 

Answering the Question: What to Do with Internet Resources? 

Faced with an increasing number of works in paper, both serials and monographs, that contained 

URL data that reflected evolving practices of publishers, we began looking at options for 

providing access to such works. During a Depository Library Council meeting held in 

Washington, DC in April, 1996, we presented a proposal for providing access to Internet-related 

works. We proposed creating very brief records that consisted of a title, series (if available), 

SuDocs class number, and hot-linked URLs. 

Our proposal was intended to provide people with low-cost access as an alternative to more 

expensive AACR2 cataloging. Our concerns for low-cost access were based upon the then alltoo-frequent practice among agency webmasters of removing works from agency servers very 

soon after posting. We reasoned that the costs of cataloging exceeded the benefits of such shortterm access. 

People responded to this proposal by expressing the view that AACR2 cataloging for such works 

was essential and should take precedence over cost-related concerns. It appears that this advice 

was based upon an underlying principle that access to the many important Internet-related works 

should be available in the context of library online public access catalogs, or OPACs, in 

preference to specialized resources that are maintained independently as “stand alone” 

applications. Understandably, we appreciated this advice, respected these perspectives and 

continued to provide an indirect form of electronic access to Internet-related works via URL 

information in the 530 note field of our Monthly Catalog records. 

The initiative to provide short form electronic access was set aside in favor of a traditional 

approach. Our efforts to develop “non-traditional” approaches to providing access to Internet 

resources have resulted in the suite of Pathway Services, which provide browseable access and 

GILS (Global Information Locator Service) access. 

Role of CONSER (Single Records and 856 Field) 

Fortunately, at approximately the same time that we affirmed our initial approach to providing 

Internet-related information in Monthly Catalog records, members of CONSER (Cooperative 

Online Serials) and OCLC personnel were developing policies and practices that provided a 

national level context for Internet-related cataloging initiatives. For their part, CONSER 

members advocated the use of a “single record” approach as an option to creating separate 

records for Internet resources. As members of CONSER, we were authorized to use a single 

record option for providing access to works that had been published in paper, microfiche, and 

other physical formats. 

14 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Use of a single record for Internet purposes was consistent with our well-established policy of 

using a record for a work in paper to also represent microfiche reproductions. In effect, LPS 

does not catalog most FDLP Internet works (in the sense of creating unique separate records for 

them) but makes them accessible via the recording of hot-linked PURLs/URLs in the 856 field of 

records that represent works in physical formats. 

CONSER’s “single record” option which allows CONSER institutions to record URL/PURL 

data in records for physical formats or, conversely, to use a record for an Internet-related work 

for representing physical forms of such a work, helps to promote access without requiring 

institutions to produce separate records. From my perspective, the lower costs of this approach 

and the value this approach has for eliminating the need to produce separate records for works in 

different formats of the same title are sufficient reasons to follow this policy. 

A second contribution of CONSER was to advocate the use of the 856 field of OCLC records to 

provide direct access to electronic works. The hot-linked 856 field saves users the trouble of 

producing a printout or copying an address and then typing an address into a browser. The 

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

Cataloging Committee approved use of these policies has done much to support our Internetrelated cataloging operations. 

Role of OCLC and PURLs 

Although useful, our application of CONSER policies alone are insufficient to provide costeffective electronic access to Internet-related works. OCLC’s freely available PURLs, 

(Persistent Uniform Resource Locators) software, which was developed several years ago, 

provides institutions with a seamless redirect function in which users click on a PURL in the 856 

field of a bibliographic record and are routed through a server which connects the PURL to the 

most active URL at a Web site or archive. PURLs servers are easier to maintain than frequently 

changing URLs in bibliographic records. 

More importantly, our efforts to maintain electronic access through the use of PURLs means that 

librarians will not need to change URL addresses in GPO-produced records within their local 

OPACs. OPAC users are directed to our PURL server which then re-directs users to, in most 

instances, valid URLs. PURLs were designed specifically for cataloging operations and provide 

institutions with an environment that supports efforts to maintain electronic access. 

Recognizing that LPS PURLs applications are on a very large scale (currently more than 2,000 

PURLs), OCLC worked with LPS personnel to upgrade its PURLs software. Machine-generated 

assignment of PURLs and improved reports modules have made it possible for LPS staff to use 

PURLs as an important tool that supports efforts to provide electronic access to an increasing 

number of Internet-related works. 

As you can appreciate, maintaining accurate URL information in PURLs records is quite a task. 

PURLs are not perfect and PURLs are not magic. Our maintenance of PURLs now requires the 

assistance of approximately two full time equivalent LPS personnel. Our personnel are engaged 

with several important tasks that include choosing the best available URL to a resource for initial 

15 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

association with a PURL, reviewing exceptions reports that indicate broken links, attempting to 

locate new URLs for resources with broken links, and assuring that the re-connected resource 

represents an official version of what had initially been identified. 

As can be seen, maintaining PURLs requires considerable human intervention and professional 

judgement. In the future, it is possible that additional improvements to PURLs software may be 

made or that other successor software will provide improved support for access. 

PURLs and LPS Operations 

Our PURLs applications currently support electronic access to Internet-related works via both 

Browse Electronic Title (BET) entries and Monthly Catalog records. In a sense, BET entries, 

which are not integrated within OPACs, represent what had been our initial proposal for shortform records for Internet-related titles. Monthly Catalog records at the GPO Web site provide 

users with OPAC-based electronic access for many Internet-related works and, through the 

locate function, the shelf locations for thousands of physical form works that have been 

cataloged and distributed. 

Current Cataloging, Indexing, and Locator Service Policies and Operations 

Now I would like to provide a summary of Internet-related cataloging policies and operations. 

When electronic works have been cataloged as physical forms (paper, microfiche, CD-ROMs, 

etc.) prior to becoming available electronically, we upgrade many existing records by adding an 

electronic availability note (often, “Also available via the Internet”) and an LPS PURL to the 856 

field for electronic access. Our use of existing records to record Internet-related information, use 

of the 856 field, and addition of an electronic-related note are consistent with CONSER 

guidelines. These policies also reflect the approval of the ALA GODORT Cataloging 

Committee. 

When no suitable record for a physical format version of an electronic work is available to be 

upgraded, we produce an “electronic only” record as the means of providing access. In some 

instances, records representing works that existed only in electronic form and were cataloged 

initially as “electronic only” are upgraded by the addition of physical description data to reflect 

subsequent publishing of paper and other editions. Thus, a record for a work cataloged as 

“electronic only” may itself be upgraded to reflect the availability of later physical form editions. 

Our most recent cataloging policy initiative is to create “collection level” records for providing 

access to related, multiple electronic works accessible from a single main address. This policy is 

consistent with AACR2 and its use was authorized by the ALA GODORT Cataloging 

Committee. This policy was implemented in 1998 and provides users with reasonable access to 

works, through OPACs, as they are actually accessible at agency Web sites. Collection level 

records contribute to our efforts to provide access to electronic works even as we continue to 

catalog and, through the locate function of the Monthly Catalog Web edition, provide locations 

for physical format works distributed to depository libraries. Application of our collection level 

record policy gives LPS the flexibility to provide aggregate cataloging records for Internet sites 

16 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

and products that are valuable to users but cannot reasonably and cost-effectively be “dissected” 

and cataloged at the “piece” level. 

With responsibility for managing the national Cataloging and Indexing Program for U.S. 

Government publications, we make concerted efforts to work with the Depository Library 

Council, the ALA GODORT Cataloging Committee, and CONSER to assure that our Internetrelated cataloging policies meet national standards and provide access to electronic works for as 

many libraries as possible. In doing so, we have worked through several phases in an 

incremental manner to consult with people, to test concepts, and to establish increasingly largescale operations in the context of FDLP services. Our Internet policies are available for review 

at the FDLP Administration Web page. As with our operations, these policies evolve as they are 

applied and tested against real world conditions. 

Services in the Context of an Evolving FDLP Electronic Collection 

To assist with efforts to enter a new evolutionary phase of services in the context of an FDLP 

Electronic Collection, we have asked Laurie Hall, LPS Program Analyst, and Judy Andrews, 

Electronic Transition Specialist, to work with librarians and technical staff from areas within the 

Library Programs Service and the Office of Electronic Information Dissemination Services. This 

group was formed several months ago to advise LPS management on issues associated with 

electronic FDLP services and to review policies and procedures. This group also was asked to 

investigate how more efficient operations could be established in the context of an electronic 

collection that incorporates archiving as a service. Our staff members have worked to advise 

LPS management on various matters. As such, Laurie’s presentation reflects current thinking 

rather than new policies that have been firmly established, although, as you will hear, some 

experimentation and testing is underway. 

We look forward to hearing your comments concerning the substance of Laurie’s presentation. 

We at LPS recognize that, as in the past, our future initiatives and proactive efforts to move the 

program towards an increasingly electronic FDLP benefit from hearing your comments and from 

consulting with many of our program’s stakeholders. 

As always, it is a pleasure for me to be here to meet with colleagues from throughout the United 

States. I appreciate this opportunity and look forward to your comments. I hope this 

presentation has provided a useful context for Laurie’s presentation. 

17 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Putting the Collection Management Plan into Effect 

Remarks by Laurie Beyer Hall 

Program Analyst 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force and 

Cataloging Committee, Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 31, 1999 

Good morning! Today I am going to talk about the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) 

Electronic Collection. Specific cataloging practices, such as the application of PURLS and the 

use of the 856 field that were just discussed, must be examined within the broader context of 

LPS mission, goals and the vision for building the FDLP Electronic Collection. 

In mid-November, I was given the task of 

overseeing the analysis and development of 

procedures that reflect the policies described in 

the collection management plan, Managing the 

FDLP Electronic Collection, published in October 

1998. (Copies were distributed to all libraries and 

it is also available for download from the FDLP 

Administration page.) In other words, I was 

tasked with preparing to, "make it happen" in 

LPS. 

http://www.access.gpo.gov/ 

su_docs/dpos/ecplan.html 

Managing the FDLP Electronic 

Collection: 

A Policy and Planning Document

For those of you who don't know me, I usually don't attend conferences. I'm behind the scenes. 

I do all sorts of different things. In LPS, I've been a cataloger, a supervisor in Cataloging, 

temporary chief of the Cataloging Branch, and currently I'm the systems/program analyst for 

several LPS systems. Before coming to LPS in the mid-80's, I worked in a corporate library, a 

public library and two academic libraries, one in the Federal Depository Library Program. 

Before this project began, I was the voice behind askLPS and I've worked on a variety of 

projects from the Web applications for item selections to WEBTech Notes. So I guess Gil 

Baldwin thought I have enough experience to handle such a task. We shall see. Building the 

FDLP Electronic Collection is a very daunting yet exciting prospect because for the first time in 

many years, GPO will actually have a collection to build, manage and care for. 

To jump start the project, I began talking to LPS staff to try to get a handle on all of the issues 

involved and soon realized that I could not handle this project alone. I cajoled Gil into allowing 

Judy Andrews, Electronic Transition Specialist, to be my partner in this endeavor. One of Judy's 

assignments since she came to LPS this past summer has been to evaluate existing Pathway 

Services. 

18 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Judy and I began assessing prior attempts by LPS to bring electronic resources into the FDLP. 

The piecemeal approach that LPS developed over the last few years had its problems. 

Attempting to manipulate the existing workflow, which was developed for tangible products, 

created inconsistencies and bottlenecks. It soon became apparent that we needed to look at 

electronic resources from a "holistic" approach, through the life cycle of each resource. We 

gathered together a team comprised of LPS and Electronic Information Dissemination Service 

(EIDS) staff to discuss how to identify, evaluate, acquire, catalog, and provide ongoing access to 

the electronic resources that would become part of the FDLP Electronic Collection. 

Working together with catalogers, classifiers, 

technology types and just plain librarians, the 

group recognized there were three important goals 

that would guide the building of the electronic 

collection. These were: 

Workgroup Goals for Building the 

FDLP Electronic Collection 

 Provide permanent public access to 

Government information 

 Recognize the reference needs of our 

user community 

 Provide quality bibliographic control of 

Government information

1. the need to provide for permanent public 

access to Government information; 

2. the recognition of the reference needs of 

our user community: and, 

3. our historical role of providing quality 

cataloging for Government information resources. 

The goals the team identified follow the policies 

outlined in Managing the FDLP Electronic 

Collection, and are reasonable extensions of the 

authority mandated in Title 44, Chapters 19, and 

41, the GPO Access law. 

Policy and Law Framework 

 Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection 

 Title 44, Chapters 19 and 41, U.S. Code 

The FDLP Electronic Collection 

Consists of: 

 Core legislative and regulatory GPO 

Access products which will reside 

permanently on GPO servers 

 Other remotely accessible products 

managed by either GPO or by other 

institutions with which GPO has 

established formal agreements 

 Remotely accessible electronic 

Government information products that 

GPO identifies, describes and links to 

but which remain under the control of the 

originating agencies 

 Tangible electronic Government 

information products distributed to 

Federal depository libraries 

The team is investigating a wide variety of issues. We will be exploring archiving technologies, 

building decision matrixes and discussing possible changes to online products and services. We 

will be experimenting with a lot of approaches, so be patient as we work through this project. 

This collection is unique and some of the standard techniques we have employed in providing 

information to the depository community in the past do not work as well as they should. We 

have to be inventive. And in this dynamic 

environment it's difficult to agree on the best 

approaches to take. 

THE FDLP ELECTRONIC COLLECTION

What made our task a little bit easier is the fact 

that we were not building a collection from 

scratch. The collection, as defined in the 

management plan, consists of four categories. 

Two of the four major components of the FDLP 

Electronic Collection are already well established: 

category one , the core legislative and regulatory 

GPO Access products, and category four, the 

tangible electronic Government information 

19 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

products distributed to Federal depository libraries. 

Recognizing that these portions of the collection exist, we chose to focus our efforts on the 

remaining two components of the collection. These are category two, the remotely accessible 

products managed by either GPO or other institutions which GPO has established formal 

agreements, and category three, remotely accessible electronic Government information products 

that GPO identifies, describes and links to but which remain under the control of the originating 

agencies. Even though LPS is focusing primarily on these two parts of the collection, the team is 

cognizant of and discussing the other major issues relevant to the other parts of the collection. 

PROPOSED DIRECTIONS

Here are some of the tasks the team and other LPS staff will be working on in the months to 

come: 

1. Enlarge and improve communications 

2. Refine criteria for selection 

3. Refine criteria for analyzing resources selected for the collection 

4. Test processing decisions 

5. Investigate storage options 

6. Evaluate locator services 

7. Investigate collection management implications 

COMMUNICATIONS

One of the major factors influencing the effective management of the collection is 

communications. Because so many parties have a vested interest in the FDLP Electronic 

Collection, the task of facilitating effective communications is critical. To organize this effort, 

the LPS team have identified four groups of constituents where our communications efforts will 

be focused in the coming months. They are: 

1. FDLP depository community; 

2. publishing agencies; 

3. peer institutions such as the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and 

the National Libraries; and, 

4. internal GPO offices. 

FDLP Depository Library Community:

Communicating with the FDLP depository library community about our plans for the electronic 

collection is the reason we're here today. We want to continue discussions about the electronic 

services LPS and GPO currently provide through feedback from focus groups, askLPS and 

conferences, including the Federal Librarians Round Table (FLRT). We welcome your 

suggestions and comments concerning our plans for the electronic collection as outlined here. 

And we always encourage active participation in our endeavors such as Browse Topics, 

partnerships and other proposed electronic initiatives including archiving electronic resources. 

20 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Agencies:

Our outreach activities with agencies will help us better manage the resources that make up the 

FDLP Electronic Collection. By establishing contacts with the agency management personnel, 

we can explain the importance of providing permanent public access to agency electronic 

resources and investigate arrangements that will make the goal possible. We plan to become 

more active participants at conferences hosted by the Institute of Federal Printing and Electronic 

Publishing, the Federal Webmasters Group and the Federal Publishers Committee. We hope this 

participation will broaden our knowledge. It will assist us in our evaluations of GPO Web 

services and enable us to articulate the concerns that we hear from the FDLP community. We 

are investigating system applications that will allow us to automatically notify an agency when 

we select an electronic resource for the collection. 

Peer Institutions:

We continue to be in contact with peer institutions such as the National Agricultural Library 

(NAL), National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the Library of Congress (LC), 

and the National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Staff of LPS and ETS continue 

attending meetings dealing with NAL electronic initiatives, LC systems technology activities and 

most recently , the GPO/NTIS partnership. By attending and participating in such initiatives, a 

great deal of information can be gleaned and shared with the team. New insights can positively 

influence our work as we build the electronic collection. 

Internal:

We are also enhancing communications with other organizations inside GPO. We continue to 

interact with staff from EIDS, GPO Production and the Office of Information Resources 

Management (OIRM) concerning technology issues. Team members are discussing issues 

related to software for archiving, authentication and server platforms for storing electronic 

resources in the collection. 

Preliminary Criteria for Selection: Preliminary Criteria for Selection 

 Title 44, Chapter 19 U.S. Code 

 Official, authentic Government 

information 

 Presents a major activity of the agency, 

or is a product of a major activity of the 

agency 

 Not selected:

 Official Use Only 

 Administrative Use

As our communications efforts continue, our team 

is also developing the criteria for selection. The 

first step in determining what will be included in 

the collection is to assess the legal authority that 

guides our selection of resources. As with 

collection development plans that libraries 

develop for tangible products, electronic 

resources are selected if they meet the goals and 

operational mission of the institution. In the case 

of the FDLP Electronic Collection, the acquisition of online resources is guided by the mission 

and goals of the FDLP as outlined in Title 44, Chapter 19, U.S. Code, Section 1902. 

“Government publications, except those... required for official use only or for strictly 

administrative or operational purposes... shall be made available... for public information.” 

21 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Evaluation includes analyzing the resource to determine if it meets the basic tenets of Title 44. Is 

it official, authentic Government information? This is usually defined by a .gov, .mil, or .fed.us 

domain, but occasionally may be an .edu or .org domain, if information found on the site 

indicates an official relationship. Does it present a major activity of the agency, or is it the 

product of a major activity of the agency? Reviewing the resources one by one tests both the 

item and our selection criteria. 

Non-selection:

Most collection plans allow for the non-selection of materials that do not meet the scope of the 

institution. In the case of the FDLP, Title 44 provides guidance for allowing the exclusion of 

official use only or administrative material. The LPS team has identified some items that we will 

not include in the FDLP Electronic Collection. These items are: 

1. events/announcements; 

2. biographies; 

3. job announcements; 

4. some news releases; 

5. organizational charts; 

6. sales/promotional literature; 

7. posters; and, 

8. items of low informational content. 

We may expand this list as we continue to review new online resources. 

Preliminary Criteria for Analyzing Resources 

Selected for the Collection:

Preliminary Criteria for Analyzing 

Resources Selected for the FDLP 

Collection 

 Is this resource an important product for 

the FDLP user community? 

 Is this suitable for the FDLP user 

community? 

 What level of bibliographic control would 

best fit this resource? 

 What locator service will be best suited 

for this resource?

Once the selection has been made, the team 

examines the item's presentation and content. At 

our team meetings we always ask a lot of 

questions. Oftentimes, we may e-mail the 

webmaster or call the agency for additional 

information. We try to determine how valuable 

and useful this product is to the FDLP 

community, and which current locator service 

would best provide the bibliographic control for 

this resource. One thing the team agrees on is that some form of bibliographic control will be 

provided for all resources selected for inclusion in the FDLP Electronic Collection. 

Processing Decisions:

After selection analysis is complete we continue by questioning how a resource will be 

processed. We are in the initial stages of building a decision matrix, based on our answers to 

these questions. This matrix will expand and grow as the team continues to evaluate online 

resources. We will be using actual resources to work through the matrix to see if the results are 

22 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

satisfactory. Beginning with the 1999 "New 

Additions" list on Browse Electronic Titles 

(BET), entries have been processed using this 

preliminary decision matrix. All the processing 

decisions have yet to be made. We plan to have 

the matrix more complete by the April Federal 

Depository Library Conference. 

Processing Decisions 

 Is this in scope for the FDLP? 

 What type of product is this? 

 Should this be in GILS? 

 Should this be in Browse Topics? 

 Should this be on BET? 

 Should this have a PURL?

 Should this be archived? 

 How should this be cataloged? 

 New or adapted? 

 Level of cataloging 

Evaluating Locator Services: 

Examining a resource throughout its life cycle 

includes listing it in the most appropriate locator 

service. LPS staff is brainstorming and we are 

currently examining the potential merger of 

several tools. This may entail changes in format 

and presentation for the services we continue to 

maintain. Our major goal is to provide the 

services that are easy to use, easy to maintain, and 

give the best possible access to the electronic 

resources in the collection. We are currently 

focussing on BET and Browse Topics. 

Evaluation of Locator Services 

 Goal: Provide a limited number of tools 

that are easy to use, easy to maintain 

and give the best possible access to the 

electronic resources. 

 Address issues presented by focus 

groups and community feedback 

 Examine ways to merge and consolidate 

 Test format and presentation changes 

 Solicit partners 

BET:

After hearing user input from various focus groups, we are working on some major 

improvements to the BET. Users want the ability to browse, but also the ability to search all the 

entries on the BET. We plan to create a database of electronic resources. We are playing with 

several names: 

 CORE - Current Online Resource; 

 NET - New Electronic Titles; and, 

 SCORE - Searching Current Online Resources. 

Let us know what you think. We will continue a browsable list of new additions to the 

collection, but instead of maintaining a long list by agency, you will be able to search a database. 

We plan to use the same OpenText software that we currently use for WEBTech Notes. The 

database will include previous BET entries and will be updated weekly. Look for 

announcements on the BET site. 

Browse Topics:

We are also investigating additional ways to present Browse Topics. We are talking with 

depository librarians who currently provide a topical approach to Government electronic 

resources. Maintaining Topics is very labor intensive for LPS staff. We are open to developing 

a partnership arrangement for Topics and welcome any suggestions from the community. 

23 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

Storing the Collection: Storing the Collection 

 GPO Access 

 GPO Archive 

 Agency Resources 

 Partners 

We've selected it; we've processed it, and 

found a way for a user to find it. Now how do 

we make sure it's still there when you need it? 

The team envisions the collection being stored 

using a combination of server space at GPO, at 

agency sites and at institutional partners' sites. 

We are currently investigating the possibility of permanently capturing selected agency online 

resources and archiving them on GPO servers or partnership sites. We are testing archive 

software and exploring server capacities. At this time, we are considering have the PURL direct 

users to the agency version until the agency link is broken and cannot be reestablished. Then 

users will be directed to the archived version stored on GPO servers. This might be an answer to 

part of the challenge of providing permanent public access. Other questions we are currently 

asking are how to organize an archive, how users will be assured that the archived version is 

authentic and what potential maintenance issues we will face as the collection grows. 

Managing the Collection: Managing the Collection 

 Hire a Collection Manager 

 Future Decisions for Collection Manager 

and Staff: 

 Personnel 

 Maintenance 

 Resource Allocation 

 Promote Cooperation with Partners

The team, in these short few months, has 

identified a multitude of tasks and proposed 

directions for LPS to take. These initial efforts 

are essentially preparing a foundation for 

building, organizing and managing the 

collection. This work has been accomplished 

using existing GPO personnel. An electronic 

collection manager is needed to coordinate these 

diverse activities. LPS is taking steps to fill the 

position of Collection Manager. This will be a key position for the FDLP Electronic Collection. 

The manager will need to address personnel, maintenance, resource allocation issues and 

promote cooperation with partners. Certainly a challenge! 

The Work Continues:

Where do we go from here? We have a lot of work to do as you can see. Gil and other LPS 

managers, Tad and Robin, whose staff is part of the team, continue to support the team and its 

work. 

In the months to come, the LPS team will continue to pursue:

1. Better communications with all concerned stakeholders; 

2. Work towards consistent internal processing procedures; 

3. Create locator services that are easy to use and manage; 

4. Pursue permanent public access to the FDLP electronic collection, and finally, 

5. Investigate the feasibility of installing an integrated library system at LPS! 

24 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

I want to thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you this morning about this 

new endeavor. Be sure to give us your input. Judy and I will be discussing our progress in April 

at the Federal Depository Library Conference at the Holiday Inn-Bethesda in Bethesda, MD. 

We'll see you there. 

DAB Highlights 

Remarks by Robin Haun-Mohamed 

Chief, Depository Administration Branch 

Before the Federal Documents Task Force and 

Cataloging Committee, Government Documents Round Table 

American Library Association 

Philadelphia, PA 

January 31, 1999 

Good morning! I usually like to begin with highlights and work into the more routine material. 

Today I am going to switch the formula and begin with everyone’s least favorite topic, 

depository microfiche. In many ways the microfiche products are the “great unsung heroes” of 

the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). When I was a depository librarian I disliked 

having to process microfiche. As a depository library inspector, I hated having to bring up the 

topic (but I always found the rubber bands on that one piece in the cabinet!). As Chief of the 

Depository Administration Branch, I find microfiche are often the best solution to the fugitive 

document problem, but are not well liked by those in the depository community. 

Let me give you some figures dealing with microfiche and the number of titles associated with 

physical products distributed to the Federal depository libraries to get a feel for the role of 

microfiche in the FDLP. 

 In FY 1995, LPS distributed 45,000 titles, 60% in microfiche format. 

 In FY 1996, LPS distributed 30,000 titles, 49% in microfiche format. 

 In FY 1997, LPS distributed 30,300 titles, 54% in microfiche format. 

 In FY 1998, LPS distributed 39,000 titles, 65% in microfiche format. 

In light of these figures, I would like to take some time now to explain the acquisition process 

associated with microfiche titles, the conversion process as performed by the full-service 

contractors, and the administration of the microfiche conversion process. 

Recently we have seen and heard much discussion about the requirement for Federal 

Government agencies to provide material for distribution through the FDLP. While in theory 

25 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

this is a very straightforward process, in practice it often is a catch-as-catch-can process. Many 

agencies routinely send their material to GPO for printing and replication, and we add the 

Federal depository library requirements to these orders. This is the process by which we obtain 

most material distributed in paper and CD-ROM formats. We often refer to this process as 

“riding the requisition.” FDLP appropriated funds pay for these copies to be produced for 

distribution to the libraries. 

Some agencies have the authority to do printing outside of GPO either under authorized waivers 

or through “direct deal” contracts with GPO-approved printing contractors. Title 44 puts the 

responsibility on the agency or publishing entity to provide the copies for depository distribution. 

Agencies routinely use the “Notification of Intent to Publish” form to advise GPO of upcoming 

publications and to determine the quantity of publications needed to meet their FDLP 

requirements. So far, so good. 

Next, let’s review the problem of when agencies do not provide publications for the FDLP for 

any number of reasons, including funding limitations, cooperative publications, agency format 

preferences and software requirements, failure of agency staff to know about the Title 44 

requirements, and the most common reason, “oops, I forgot to notify LPS.” 

Once a product has been published, it is very difficult to obtain, say 560 copies for distribution to 

the libraries in a physical format. The approach we use most often is to ask for multiple copies 

of the product in paper or tangible format. Then when the publishing entity is unable to meet our 

request, we can act like the good cop and settle for one copy when we feel confident the 

publication is suitable for microfiche conversion. When we obtain the one copy, we review it for 

microfiche conversion as the first option. If it has many color pictures, color charts, or is likely 

to be a reference title, we then must decide if we should go back to press or replicate the 

publication on either a quick turn-around contract or on an in-house high-speed copier. 

The costs of going back to press for products produced outside GPO can be very high. First a 

copy of original negatives and artwork must be obtained. Then this material is sent out on a 

contract to one of GPO’s many print contractors. The negatives then must be received from the 

contractor and delivered to the originating agency. Often agencies no longer have the negatives 

or are unwilling to lend them to us. At this point we must reproduce the publication on a copier 

or convert it to microfiche. 

Some of the factors we take into account when making these decisions include: 

 The cost of going back-to-press if we have the negatives. 

 The cost when we do not have the negatives and must pay for mastering and set-up 

costs. 

 If the publication is black and white, we can use the high- speed duplicator. 

 The cost of converting to microfiche. 

Once the decision is made to microfiche the product, the material is sent to the Microfiche 

Control Section where it is prepared for conversion under one of the 15 microfiche contracts 

currently in place. Similar titles are gathered and sent to the microfiche contractor, who 

26 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

produces the original microfiche shipping lists, films the publications for microfiche conversion, 

and duplicates and distributes the microfiche to the libraries according to each library’s item 

selection profile. 

Currently we have four microfiche contractors who do microfiche conversion for LPS. A fifth 

contractor, Lake George Industries, filed for bankruptcy last fall. They have not yet returned all 

of the material sent for conversion. LPS identified and re-acquired all but three of the missing 

titles and these have been resubmitted for microfiche conversion to another contractor. We are 

still trying to obtain copies of the missing titles. 

Once the material has been converted and the duplicates made, the material is sent by the 

contractors directly to the libraries in weekly batches. The contractor is responsible for filling 

any valid claims made within 60 days of the date on the shipping lists. They must also return to 

GPO for inspection a box of material which includes the original cut-up publication(s), a camera 

master (first generation silver microfiche), a second generation silver microfiche, and a diazo 

copy for each publication sent for conversion. The contractor is also responsible for providing us 

with a diskette containing the item number, class number, title and shipping list information for 

each title sent for conversion. Other receivables due from the contractors are the original 

shipping list, 25 copies of the shipping lists, and various management reports. When this 

material is received at GPO, we inspect a percentage of the jobs for contract compliance. 

I am sure many of you remember the contractor defaults of the late eighties where the microfiche 

conversion titles were essentially all sent to one contractor. One of the results of that experience 

was to break up the material into several contracts, thus allowing some of the smaller contractors 

to bid on contracts and setting up a mechanism to insure there are multiple contractors providing 

conversion service for LPS. Thus, we now have the four contractors, and before any contracts 

are awarded to new contractors, they must pass extensive pre-inspection tests. 

The bid process for contracts follows Government regulations, with low bidder generally being 

awarded the contract. Many new microfiche contractors bid too low, not realizing all the 

requirements of the contract and the time and resources it takes to do the conversion. Another 

problem you often see today is the lack of companies capable of doing microfiche conversion. 

We do not have microfiche shipping list information available from our acquisition system. This 

system, called ACSIS (Acquisitions, Classification, and Shipment Information System), not to be 

confused with GPO Access, has the classification information for all products distributed to the 

libraries since 1992, and for many of the older products back to 1976. But it does not and may 

never have the microfiche shipping list information added to the product records. The 

microfiche processing component of ACSIS was to be worked on after the initial implementation 

of the system. Our ACSIS system is not yet complete, but additional enhancements to legacy 

systems are on hold pending resolution of the Y2K issues. 

When we receive a request for microfiche shipping list information for products received in 

libraries, we must look them up by print order. A few minutes ago I said similar material is 

joined together to prepare for conversion. This means each day’s material sent to a contractor on 

one of the specific programs is done on a print order. The title, item number, and class number 

27 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

are generally not included on the print order and even when they are included on the print order, 

they are not in a searchable field. The process to respond to these requests is to look through the 

print orders for the days around when the product was classed. As there is no appreciable 

backlog in the Micrographics Control Section for print products to be sent to the microfiche 

contractors, we can generally locate the information. But it is not easy and it is time consuming. 

Microfiche Shipping List numbers are assigned by GPO and given to the contractors as the 

material on each print order is prepared for conversion. Recently we began posting the 

microfiche shipping list numbers and contractor information on a Web page on a monthly basis. 

This is also a good place to check if there are cancelled shipping lists, as in the recent situation 

with Lake George Industries and the bankruptcy problems. You can easily locate this Web page 

from the Tools section of the FDLP Administration page. 

Material distributed in microfiche format also places responsibilities on staff in the depository 

libraries. The same check-in requirements for paper products apply to the microfiche products. 

Material must be checked-in to the piece level. There must be adequate viewing equipment 

available for library patrons to read the material. The microfiche must be stored in a suitable 

area. Claims for missing microfiche must be made within the required time frame from the 

official microfiche shipping lists. 

I feel one final issue should be addressed under the libraries’ responsibility for microfiche 

material. I often hear librarians say the microfiche material is not used and therefore the 

librarian decides to deselect all item numbers associated with microfiche format. And while this 

may be the goal of the librarian, you may not be successful because you will still receive 

occasional microfiche titles from the resolution of fugitive document problems. This is a 

disservice to your community. Many publications are available only in this format, whether by 

agency choice or because of the many reasons I have already gone through. The material may 

not be highly used now, but it may be needed a few years down the road. Please carefully 

consider the content before deciding against an item simply because it is available only in 

microfiche format. 

Because of the many recent problems we have been having with the microfiche conversion 

process, we are putting additional resources into the area to review the current processing 

procedures and adding an additional microfiche inspector. This inspector will not only inspect 

the microfiche, but review the receipt of all deliverables required under the current microfiche 

contracts. We are also adding to each microfiche contract the requirement for the contractor to 

access an anonymous FTP site on a weekly basis to pull down each library’s current item 

selection profile. About half of the contracts already have this requirement in place and we will 

build this requirement into all of our 15 contracts as they come up for renewal. 

OK, so if you have fallen asleep, or your neighbor has, please wake up! In the DAB Update 

handout located in the back of the room we have included the usual what’s new of interest and 

what’s coming up on the horizon. To tempt you I will give you a few quick highlights. The 

1999 U.S. Industry and Trade Outlook is expected from NTIS sometime this month. Both 

O*Net and the 1998 World Factbook were distributed to libraries in early January. The first 

release of the IRS Tax Forms on CD-ROM will be shipped out early in February. There has 

been quite a bit of interest in the 1997 edition of Crime in the United States. We have received 

28 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

the publication, but due to contractor error we are over 250 copies short. We have already 

notified the contractor to obtain sufficient copies for distribution to the libraries. And from the 

Census Bureau, the American FactFinder database, perhaps more familiar to depository 

librarians as DADS, is expected to roll out this month. 

There are a few other pieces of information dealing with classification and acquisitions. As Gil 

noted in his remarks yesterday, LPS is also beginning to implement the policy of disseminating 

new Government document periodical titles only in electronic format. When we determine that a 

new periodical title is available on a Web site and meets the criteria listed in the handout titled 

Migration of Physical Format Products to Online Distribution, we are not obtaining the 

duplicative tangible products, but are pointing libraries directly to the newly discovered online 

site. Only when the material is of exceptional value, such as a reference resource, will LPS 

obtain tangible copies for distribution to the libraries. 

Another project we are working on in DAB is the development of a database for superseded 

information. We have over 30 volunteers who will review the current paper Superseded List and 

the supplements in the Administrative Notes Technical Supplement. We will also be focusing 

specifically on the tangible electronic products to determine which supersede on a regular and 

irregular basis. 

On behalf of the Electronic Transition Staff (ETS), I have been asked to bring you up-to-date on 

the NTIS-GPO Imaging Pilot Project: Phase One. In October, the 22 participating libraries 

received a packet of information from NTIS on the project. Since October, NTIS has completed 

the entry screens to access the database and set up a discussion list for the project participants. 

In January, the participating libraries should have received a packet with the user ID and 

password information required for the library staff to access the database. I have been fortunate 

in that I was allowed to go into the database to give it a try. Depository access for the pilot 

project participants is straightforward. The searching is easy to do. All in all, it is a cool service. 

Look for more on this project at the upcoming Federal Depository Library Conference in April. 

I always like to close on an upbeat note. We have had positive results recently from agencies 

when we request materials in response to askLPS and GOVDOC-L inquiries. For example, we 

expect to receive copies of Natural Resources Inventory Data on CD-ROM later this year. We 

have also requested copies of the President’s Own, a ten disc CD-ROM set celebrating the 200th

anniversary of the President’s Marine Corps Band, and the multi-volume Drug Court Survey 

Report for microfiche conversion. 

29 
AN-v20-#05-2/25/99 

30 

Table of Contents 

Superintendent of Documents Update / Buckley, ALA, 1/99 ...................................................... 1 

Library Programs Service Update / Baldwin, ALA, 1/99............................................................. 5 

Many Improvements Made to GPO Access; More to Come / Evans, ALA, 1/99........................ 9 

LPS Cataloging Policies for Internet Resources: A Review / Downing, ALA, 1/99 ................. 13 

Putting the Collection Management Plan into Effect / Hall, ALA, 1/99 .................................... 18 

DAB Highlights / Haun-Mohamed, ALA, 1/99.......................................................................... 25 

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 via World Wide Web at URL: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/dpos/adnotes.html 

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