STICG Meeting Information from October, 1997

Click here for the meeting minutes

Agenda

Scientific and Technical Information Coordinating Group

October 23, 1997

8:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.

Room 5A-092, Forrestal

MINUTES

The Scientific and Technical Information

Coordinating Group (STICG) Meeting

October 23, 1997

Room 5A-092, Forrestal

ATTENDEES:

Opening Remarks: Dr. David Nelson, Associate Director for Computational and Technology Research, stated that the Department of Energy is very much in the information business, since information is the principal product of the Department's R&D programs. He pointed out the Departmental emphasis on scientific and technical information (STI) as a key deliverable of research and development, and that the alignment of the Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) into the Office of Energy Research is entirely appropriate. STICG members were encouraged to view OSTI as a resource and service.

He challenged members to bring their various perspectives, experience, and knowledge to STICG. STICG was also challenged to make information more visible. He stated that, unless DOE's science and technology is used and praised, DOE's reason for being will suffer.

The establishment of the Scientific and Technical Information Program (STIP) focused on the Department-wide information enterprise. Development of the STIP Strategic Plan was just the first step. It was noted that STICG will be the "steerers" for STIP, and the "rowers" are those who are implementing the STIP goals across the DOE complex.

Dr. Nelson challenged OSTI and STICG: (1) To provide information, not information about information; and (2) To use modern electronic information technologies to make information delivery faster, cheaper and better (time increasingly used as a metric). Benefits of a distributed environment are timeliness, local management of own information, and alleviating impossibility of centrally collecting all of it.

Dr. Nelson also stated the twofold purpose of STICG: (1) To bring a Departmental focus to STI activities, policies, practices, and issues; (2) To provide guidance and advice on the actual implementation of the STI Program.

STIP Strategic Plan: Dr. Walter Warnick, STICG Chair and OSTI Director, described the STI Program (STIP) as a DOE-wide collaboration. The Strategic Plan was established by participants from various Program Offices, Operations Offices, laboratories and other facilities. STIP represents new thinking: to obtain consensus agreement on goals and strategies, with emphasis on collaboration to achieve results by working together.

STIP Vision: The critical contribution that DOE STI makes to the welfare of the nation and the world is recognized by the U.S. citizenry, as well as, the global community.

STIP Mission: Create, collect and share scientific and technical information through collaborative and innovative programs by all Departmental elements using state-of-the-art technologies that are cost-effective and allow maximum use of the information.

OSTI has been collecting and disseminating STI for 50 years. New technologies present both an opportunity and a challenge to provide access and dissemination faster, better, and cheaper. For example, on September 5, 1997, the DOE Information Bridge was opened to DOE and DOE contractors with over 21,000 full-text R&D reports.

A discussion ensued on methods for indexing the information within Information Bridge. The use of scanned images and the difficulties associated were discussed in detail. All speakers agreed that tremendous efficiencies would be achieved by having DOE reports generated in a format that facilitated electronic exchange. Labor, computer memory, and data transfer requirements would drop dramatically. It was suggested that one issue for STICG to address is electronic exchange formats which would improve the effectiveness of Web access systems.

Role of STICG: Dr. Warnick reiterated the purposes stated by Dr. Nelson. He further noted that re-establishment of STICG is a means to coordinate/unify STI activities across the Department and to follow through on issues raised by the Inspector General's report on the Department's STI process. STICG provides STIP with a forum to: provide oversight and coordination for various activities; represent programs which provide guidance to the field, especially in relation to STI performance measures; and steer STIP Goal Working Group activities for the Department's overall benefit.

Charter Approval: Chuck Morgan led a section-by-section review of the Draft Charter, with the following changes adopted.

Purpose: It was suggested that an authority sentence be included, to address who has given us authority to be the STICG. DOE Order 1430.1D (copy distributed) provides authority and foundation. STICG also was requested as a steering body by the developers of the STIP Strategic Plan.

Membership: The Group agreed that Headquarters R&D programs and organizations that affect policies, as reflected in the meeting memorandum distribution list, are the right representatives.

The number and types of field offices and contractors was a concern. The group recognized the need to ensure views are represented, yet be efficient and conscientious about meeting costs. STICG agreed to have two additional contractor representatives serving on a rotational basis to ensure both weapon and non-weapon perspectives as well as multiprogram and single program laboratories. STICG also agreed that one DOE field representative serving on a rotational basis could adequately represent the perspective from Operations, Field, and Area Offices.

After discussing whether external representatives (from outside the Department) should be included to broaden perspective, it was agreed that officially designated members should be DOE and DOE contractors only. OSTI's role in the interagency group CENDI was noted as one method of staying abreast of other agencies' programs. STICG agreed that external perspectives would be added by inviting outside guest speakers who could provide STICG with updated information. Guest speakers could include other government agencies, universities, and private sector. STICG may also bring in advisors from time-to-time on specific topics.

Responsibilities: State that decision-makers for STI will be the R&D Council; findings will be reported to them. Add responsibility to coordinate with similar councils in other agencies.

Frequency of Meetings: Stands as is.

STI Performance Measures: Chuck Morgan, OSTI Manager, discussed the various points at which STI measures are beginning to appear, such as the DOE Strategic Plan, the STIP Strategic Plan, and the Business Management Oversight Process. He reported that in the Headquarters Oversight of Field Federal Activities pilot, agreements for STI Performance Measures have been signed with six sites and three more agreements are in process. The measures developed in that process were reviewed and discussed. It was noted that the STI measures are for the initial pilot and relate to the four STIP goals; it was suggested that, in future, the measures should somehow reflect the goals set forth by Nelson.

Performance-Based R&D Contracts: Gwen Cowan gave a status on the recommendation in the IG audit of the Department's STI process regarding inclusion of STI measures in performance-based contracts. There was discussion on what the perceived problems are and how the process works. For direct procurements, deliverables need to be clearly defined in order to close out a grant or contract. For M&Os, there is a need to look at life-cycle tracking and to close the loop on work authorizations. It was noted that "deliverables" may need to be redefined, e.g., journal publishing is a venue of choice that is not accounted for currently. Better understanding is needed of the process. Ms. Cowan suggested that a flow diagram of the R&D process be developed to show roles of program managers, contracting officers, technical information officers and others, including the relation to STI.

Data Regulations: Paul Gottlieb provided a summary of the draft Data Regulations currently under review. In general, DOE is adopting the Federal Acquisitions Regulations language regarding computer software. It will liberalize the ability of University grantees doing basic research to copyright software subject to a limited government license. It keeps the five-year rule for lab software but allows for periods longer than five years for good cause (e.g., commercialization efforts). Definitions were updated to include electronic use and to state that the content of databases is technical data.

STIP Goal Working Groups: Because one of the duties of STICG is to 'steer' the STIP Goal activities, Sharon Jordan (STICG Executive Secretariat) provided a status report on the four goal working groups. It was pointed out that the four groups are working together on an inventory of STI practices, collections, and other information across the DOE complex. The goal leaders with several OSTI staff have formed an integration team to coordinate activities across the four groups. The Issue Resolution Process was reviewed and agreed to; issues are to be resolved at the lowest point possible, but decisions will be documented and published through the STIP Home Page. For cross-cutting and highly visible issues (or issues that meet certain other criteria), the ultimate reporting is from STICG to the R&D Council; reporting may involve other bodies as appropriate. STICG members noted their interest in having Goal working group leaders present findings or results of their activities at future meetings. STICG was informed that various STIP information is available through a STIP Home Page at: www.osti.gov/stip. STICG will also be added to the STIP Home Page.

Summary/Next Steps: Walt Warnick summarized actions from this meeting and discussed future plans. The next meeting is scheduled for end of January or early February 1998, to coincide with a STIP meeting being planned for that timeframe. Until next meeting, e-mail will be used to produce and implement tasks such as the flow diagram, minutes approval, etc.

At the end of the meeting, the on-line R&D Project Summaries and DOE Information Bridge were demonstrated to members as means to identify both projects and the STI reports that result.

02/10/04